ICP & Bonus Squares

[aksully]

"Complicate the obvious"! But terrain can be a plus to offensive firepower but I appreciate getting the facts straight!

A great game...so much to absorb! Love it!

[aksully]

I'm still navigating through the site and I have to say how very impressed with the knowledge here. Was wondering if any of you have "must read" references here on the site or others? Particularly applied to Conquests play?

Sully

[Theseus]

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=59216

[Aqualung71]

Originally posted by aksully
But terrain can be a plus to offensive firepower but I appreciate getting the facts straight!

No never, aksully.......terrain bonuses only go to the defending unit, not the attacking unit.

Example: Swordsman attacks a Spearman, both on a hill.....

Swordsman attack is 3
Spearman defence is 2, plus 50% for the hill, totalling 3 (or 3.5 if fortified).

So roughly it's 50% either way, but if you want to know exactly (taking into account battle experience) go use the battle calculator....there are several around

[joncnunn]

SMAC has a flag in the editor for it [artilley attack only], but 0% bonsus is normal in all non-Beta versions. Unforunately, when the manual was written it was still in Beta so the doc wasn't fixed in time.

Originally posted by Dissident

though I believe smac gives a bonus when you attack from higher terraing to lower terrain.

[joncnunn]

Terrign is almost never a plus to offensive power except at a very tactical level.

And also at a tactical level there is some terrign that's particularly bad for trying to organize an attack out of.

But usually, the way terrign is helping the offense can be more accurately stated as the terrign is not giving the defenders any favors.

Oh, and note that in Civ III, there is a defensive bonsus even on the light terriagn types. (That is highly unusals)

Originally posted by aksully
"Complicate the obvious"! But terrain can be a plus to offensive firepower but I appreciate getting the facts straight!

A great game...so much to absorb! Love it!

[aksully]

Originally posted by Aqualung71


No never, aksully.......terrain bonuses only go to the defending unit, not the attacking unit.

Example: Swordsman attacks a Spearman, both on a hill.....

Swordsman attack is 3
Spearman defence is 2, plus 50% for the hill, totalling 3 (or 3.5 if fortified).

So roughly it's 50% either way, but if you want to know exactly (taking into account battle experience) go use the battle calculator....there are several around

Thanks Aqualung...I've grabbed the calculators and run a bunch of matchups! Would like to see Civ 4 include one within the new game.

Sully

[aksully]

Want to thank everyone for their input here. I've a great deal of insight into the game play from your comments! Appreciate it alot. I'm going to post a new thread on the use of the science slider so feel free to share your thoughts on that subject!

Also, for any Conquests players that like a WWII flavored scenario....check out the one over on Civfanatics. Warning...this is a huge map with more units on the map than I've ever seen. I have a Pent 4 at 3.5 Ghz with 2 gigs of Ram and it took 13 minutes to load the scenario!! But it is incredible!

It brought back memories of a day long ago when I bought Avalon Hill's Third Reich, opened the box, spilled out the contents, and looked at it in shock! It took over a hour just to set up all those units!

Sully

[Dis]

13 minutes?

I don't think my computer is up for it. I am looking for good ww2 scenarios though.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by aksully
Want to thank everyone for their input here. I've a great deal of insight into the game play from your comments! Appreciate it alot. I'm going to post a new thread on the use of the science slider so feel free to share your thoughts on that subject!

Also, for any Conquests players that like a WWII flavored scenario....check out the one over on Civfanatics. Warning...this is a huge map with more units on the map than I've ever seen. I have a Pent 4 at 3.5 Ghz with 2 gigs of Ram and it took 13 minutes to load the scenario!! But it is incredible!

It brought back memories of a day long ago when I bought Avalon Hill's Third Reich, opened the box, spilled out the contents, and looked at it in shock! It took over a hour just to set up all those units!

Sully

I've got to wonder if we would have to wait 13 minutes if they had kept the simple top down map landscape of civ1. Is most of the lag caused by graphics or is it mostly game mecahnics?

[aksully]

Overall it is quite impressive in its scope and looks. You can see screenshots of it over at Civfanatics. It sounds like folks with older computers can wait 30 minutes or more to load! But if your machine can handle it....its worth the effort!

Sully

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Dominae

The last three traits are bleh. Expansionist is the best trait on the right maps (Huge, Pangea) and is also the best when you get a free Settler in the first 40 turns, but often you will get much less out of it (those players who swear by it are luckier than most!). Industrious is ok, but nothing to write home about. Finally, the best thing about Militaristic is the half-cost Harbors, but unortunately Seafaring does this too. Sometimes you "just win" with Militaristic because cheap Barracks and easy promotions are condusive to an early Military Great Leader, but this strat definitely does not work every game.

I'm thinking of modding expansions by making their explorer unit into a kind of settler so that they really could be about expansion instead of just faster exploration of the interior of continents.

Could this be done in a way that would provide the expansionist civs with settlers that cost as much as regular settlers and have the same population requirements as regular settlers but which treat all terrain as road? Of course in doing that I'd want it to overwrite the existing inexpensive non settler scout unit and I'd want the AI to understand that there is no point in building the slow standard version of the settler when the expansionist version is available.

Does this sound like a workable mod or would it change expansionist from one of the weakest traits to one that would make even agricultural pale in comparison?

[Dominae]

Geronimo, I've been using something similar to your suggestion in my own mod:

1. Create two new units, a "Super Settler" and a "Modern Settler".
2. Super Settlers have two MPs and may only be built by Expansionist civs. In other respects they are identical to regular Settlers.
3. Regular Settlers (stats unchanged from stock) may only be built by non-Expansionist civs.
4. Modern Settlers have the same stats as regular Settlers, may be built by all civs, and are available with Construction.
5. The upgrade path for these Settlers is: Settler -> Super Settler -> Modern Settler

Thus Expansionist civs gain a two-move Settler unit during most of the Ancient era, which is quite effective in speeding up expansion/REXing. In order to reduce the two-move Settler exploit later on in the game (which makes the blitzing rather easy), I remove this unit with Construction.

The two main drawbacks with this mod are that:

1. Expansionist civs can build a bunch of Super Settlers in the Ancient era and just hold on to them to use the blitz exploit later on.
2. Expansionist civs start with a normal Settler instead of a Super Settler, as one would expect.

Still, I quite like this particular mod.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Dominae
Geronimo, I've been using something similar to your suggestion in my own mod:

1. Create two new units, a "Super Settler" and a "Modern Settler".
2. Super Settlers have two MPs and may only be built by Expansionist civs. In other respects they are identical to regular Settlers.
3. Regular Settlers (stats unchanged from stock) may only be built by non-Expansionist civs.
4. Modern Settlers have the same stats as regular Settlers, may be built by all civs, and are available with Construction.
5. The upgrade path for these Settlers is: Settler -> Super Settler -> Modern Settler

Thus Expansionist civs gain a two-move Settler unit during most of the Ancient era, which is quite effective in speeding up expansion/REXing. In order to reduce the two-move Settler exploit later on in the game (which makes the blitzing rather easy), I remove this unit with Construction.

The two main drawbacks with this mod are that:

1. Expansionist civs can build a bunch of Super Settlers in the Ancient era and just hold on to them to use the blitz exploit later on.
2. Expansionist civs start with a normal Settler instead of a Super Settler, as one would expect.

Still, I quite like this particular mod.

I hadn't considered any sort of blitzing exploit. could you elaborate a little on how that works and the problems it causes?

Do you find that the expansionist AI civs hold back their 2 move settlers to one move per turn so they can keep them stacked with a military unit such a spearman or do they let the settlers move at their full 2 moves per turn without waiting up for the defensive unit?

[vmxa1]

Geronimo I think Dom meant human players would hold back those two move settlers, not the AI.

The settler blitz is basically where you bring some settlers with you to an invasion or attack. You raze cities and drop your own town with a settler and now have access to all tiles in its borders and can blitz to the next city.

This is a killer when you break through the defended towns and find the core nearly empty of defenders. It is more useful against humans who will leave empty interior cities.

The ai is exposed as bit as well as it will have only 2 units in most cases, but at the highest levels the better cities will have more than two. So those nice rails are now offering free move to within striking range. The ai will not often cut the roads/rails to its towns, only yours.