FIRAXIS: A list of EASY fixes for the next C3C patch

[Nor Me]

I've not seen it build enough mercs when it has Iron to be a serious disavantage.

If building mercs instead of archers is often an advantage, then that is likely to be more important.

It's not as clear-cut as for the other units.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Jon Miller

the only advantages the cathedral has is in culture and content faces

in every other way colloseums are better

they cost less, are avaiable earlier, and don't require a prerequisite

Jon Miller

Don't forget that you can get Sistine and double their value.

[lockstep]

Re: FIRAXIS: A list of EASY fixes for the next C3C patch

Originally posted by alexman [*]Remove the explore command from Leader, Catapult, Cannon, Hwach'a, Artillery, Radar Artillery, Settler, Worker.

And from Trebuchet.

[joncnunn]

Starting worker locations in the Rise of Rome scenario disperately need relocated out of the capitals.

Because, I just bought the Greece, Egyptian, and Persian worker as Rome on turn 1 in that game before any of them get a chance to move. (This would probably be easier to implement that the real fix of the underlaying issue which is that the AI really shouldn't be offering to sell workers at any price while they still have improvments left to perfom.)

[Jaybe]

Remove the explore command from ... Catapult, Cannon, Hwach'a, Artillery, Radar Artillery ...

I wonder, was the explore command given to these in an attempt to get them out of the cities, and into offensive use?

[korn469]

RobC

but I was asking for a flag to use in conjunction with it

[dexters]

Alex,

I'm going to push again for the suggestion for the AI navies to switch to tile bombardment. The current set-up is NOT working.

The AI has now been improved sufficiently to field large navies, and it would be a waste in the Epic games to see all these ships bombard essentially useless targets.

Tile improvement bombard were what navies used to do in Civ iii and PTW. Let's return it that way.

Edit: The alternative of course, is to increase naval bombard strength so it does more damage to units fortified in cities and make them 'smarter' at massing near cities where they are abound to land their troop stacks.

[WarpStorm]

Or to have their bombardments of cities trash infrastructure and population in addition to units.

[dexters]

WS, I think that will lead us back to the abuse scenario that ruled out Alex's initial suggestion of lethal land. While it will be harder, all you do is have a navy show up to a coastal cities, bomb for several turns to trash barracks and send in troops by land to finish it. Might as well plaster "We are the new arty exploit of the high seas" next to the destroyers.

I personally think tile bombard causes significant damage and is relatively easy to implement since this is what the AI used to do. smarter bombardment of tiles will certainly be welcome, but with top tier AI civs now easily fielding 20 destroyers, + battleships and cruisers (under Standard maps), having that fleet show up to level your tile improvements would create enough damage for the human player, while at the same time, not allowing human players to 'exploit' a gameplay mechanic, like the arty stacks of doom that have grown so popular.

In conclusion, title improvement bombard is really what will work best. The original design was correct, and BA and Firaxis should change it back. This coupled with large AI navies should make things very interesting.

[PrinceBimz]

I would like to see bombardment simply changed back to how it was in vanilla CIV3. That is with the AI attacking improvements and infastructure/garrison damage.

[Master Zen]

Some of us were quite vocal in some of these changes during the beta test. I for one was among those who advocated eliminating the hardcoded distinction between MGLs and SGLs. Same was also said about removing the hardcoded unlimited movement from railroads. Unfortunately, the answer was quite simple: those changes would require to much code change to be worthwhile. Not being a programmer myself I guess there's not much we can really do about it. So, don't want to sound like a party-pooper but this excuse might make it very likely that many of these suggestions, while very good IMO, will not be implemented.

Now that I got that out my system, here's a change I would like:

NO LETHAL BOMBARD FOR BOMBERS

Bombers have INCREDIBLE bang-for-the-buck, heck, they usually never even make Stealth Bombers necessary. To top it off, now they have lethal land bombardment?!? I remember a scenario in the beta test where my bombers would simply wait in an offshore city and pick off enemy units one by one as they came into view. I didn't even have any troops in the enemy territory and his army was decimated. How real is that for a WW2-era military unit?

How many WW2 heavy bombers sank enemy ships? How many WW2 heavy bombers destroyed army formations? This is not only unrealistic from a historical point of view, but it makes the bomber unit just TOO powerful. Yeah I b*tched about this one too during the beta...

(btw, I understand that in the WW2 Pacific scenario the lethal bombard makes the scenario more realistic but emphasis here should be on the epic game default rules.)

[Uncle Thade]

Fixes Redux...

Would like and want a fix that prevents me from playing so I can get some sleep and get to work...

...work in Film & TV, 16 hour days and dangit, I get home wanting to play.... Boooooooo Firaxis!!!!

[alexman]

This whole bombard issue is very difficult to settle, because there is no way everyone will agree on one solution. I'm afraid we will have to live with Firaxis' current implementation.

I'll update the initial post tomorrow...

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by alexman
This whole bombard issue is very difficult to settle, because there is no way everyone will agree on one solution. I'm afraid we will have to live with Firaxis' current implementation.

I'll update the initial post tomorrow...

Once people start playing with the new bomber settings you'll see just how destabilizing they are in SP games. Btw, this only applies to regular bombers. Stealth Bombers are good as they are with the lethal bombardment, after all, something better make them worth the extra cost.

[notyoueither]

I'd like to see...

Naval Air with lethal sea bombardment, and Attack Air with lethal land bombardment.

Each would have reduced bombardment values, but could kill their targets. Generic (heavy) Bombers could dish out the punishment but not kill anything.