MOD: Patch suggestion MOD

[player1]

Originally posted by Kuratko
1. What about raising the fortress defense bonus to 100%. In the current state I find them hardly useful....

I don't think that that change alone would make people build fortress more often.

And if I'm not sure that some change would be good, then I try to keep old values.

Although there are some good uses. Like for extra defense in colony (having them both at same tile) or to guard a chokepoint.

[SIZE=1]2. Setting Privateer as a Barbarian sea unit. To me this seems a logical choice. It would make overseas expansion more difficult but still tractable using galleys (they will have 2hp, galleys with 2 hp are rather weak).

Having Pribateer with Cannons in ancient age would just kill the flavor.

Still it would be nice if barbarians could upgrade their fleet to Privateers in renesance.

But, unfortunately it's not possibile.

[SIZE=1]3. More controversial: What about improving the jungle to F/S/C=1/1/0? I know they can be cut but still it seems to me that civilizations starting in jungles are severely handicapped. Though bad luck is part of the game, jungle might be a too big penalty. On the other hand, jungles can help to separate two civs for some time which might be a good thing, I don't know, what do you think?

Would not help.
You always get disease in jungles.

[SIZE=1]4. I still have a problem with Explorer. As it is, I rarely use it as an Explorer as it comes too late. I would either move it to earlier tech (Map Making?) or rename it as I use it rather as a rapparee destroying foreign improvements and 'spying'. Moving it earlier, however, would make it too strong with movement of 2 and 'all terrain as roads' which in turn would further weaken expansionistic trait. What do you think?

There are uses, like using them for pillaging impovments behind enemy lines. And I gave them defense of 1 to help them in that task.

Alowing them earliers would make their graphic a little bit silly.

Anyway, Exapnsionistic civ already get Scout for early exploration.

[player1]

By the way, you forgot to add "no jungle" description to Radar Artillery in that PDF.

[Kuratko]

Originally posted by player1
By the way, you forgot to add "no jungle" description to Radar Artillery in that PDF.

Sorry for the omission, corrected now.

[player1]

By the way, PtW is out now.

Since I would probably not see it for couple of days (or even weeks), I have question for you who have bought it.

What version of Player1 MOD is shipped with it?
(1.33 or 1.34)

And is anything changed with it?
Like added supoport for new civs or anything else.

[lockstep]

Originally posted by Kuratko
What about improving the jungle to F/S/C=1/1/0? I know they can be cut but still it seems to me that civilizations starting in jungles are severely handicapped. Though bad luck is part of the game, jungle might be a too big penalty.

Originally posted by player1
Would not help.
You always get disease in jungles.

IMO, 1/1/0 jungles would make it worthwile to work jungle tiles while my workers are clearing these very tiles. The risk of disease is still there, but at least I'm gaining something for it - basically, it's like working floodplains in vanilla Civ3. I'd really like this tweak to be included in the PS mod.

(Actually, I already suggested this idea for the AU mod some time ago, but alexman seems to like the challenge of overcoming a jungle starting position. To me, jungles are 'too big a penalty', as Kuratko put it.)

[player1]

Here are the plans for PtW version of the MOD.

Since I don't have PtW yet, some thing would be maybe done differently.


First,
In order to make Guerrila in line with other units from this MOD, it will get attack of 7, and lower price of 80. Old units still upgrade to Riflemen, but benefit of Guerrila is to get attack of 7, when you don't have Rubber.

Second,
I realy have problem with Berserk attack of 6. These guys with big axes have as high attack as Gun-Armed Cavalry. So I'll reduce their attack to 5, but give then price of 50 shields. It's still a powerfull unit that can take out Pikemen or Musketmen.

Third,
Since in PtW, Stl. Fighter gets op. range of 8 (was 6), and Stl. Bomber gets op. range of 12 (was 8), that will be implemented in this MOD too. But also, I'll increase Bombers op. range to 8 (was 6), othervise Bombers would have TWICE lower range then Stl. Bombers, and that's way too much.

Non-PtW version will keep old op. range values, since Stl. Bomber still needs higher range then Bomber (8vs6).


Any other suggestions?


P.S.
By the way, 1.29f patch Bowmen had defense AI flag selected (offense too), while PtW Bowmen has not (according to one thread about BIC chnages).
Does defense AI flag for Bowmen work well for you (is Babylon competetive), or we should remove it too (in both versions of MOD).

[player1]

Some other non-PtW related changes I am planning.


Privateer movment increase to 4 (was 3). I doubt that it would be unbalanced since although Frigate is more expesive it has both higher defense and BOMBARDMENT ability.

Submarine will upgrade to Nuc. Submarine, and Nuc. Submarine will have price reduced to 120 (in fact it was original price in Civ3 v1.07f).

AEGIS Cruiser changes: It is Cruiser not Destoyer so it has higher attack of 14 (already done in v1.0 of MOD). Also it is AEGIS, so it must have good air defense. To reflect that, I decided to give them defense of 12 (same as Batteship, but it's cheaper, so better for pure defense missions).

Probably removing defense AI flag from Bowmen (as it is done in PtW). Since they get upgraded to Longbowmen (which has only defense of 1).

[player1]

dp

[player1]

Originally posted by player1
Some other non-PtW related changes I am planning.


Privateer movment increase to 4 (was 3). I doubt that it would be unbalanced since although Frigate is more expesive it has both higher defense and BOMBARDMENT ability.

Submarine will upgrade to Nuc. Submarine, and Nuc. Submarine will have price reduced to 120 (in fact it was original price in Civ3 v1.07f).

AEGIS Cruiser changes: It is Cruiser not Destoyer so it has higher attack of 14 (already done in v1.0 of MOD). Also it is AEGIS, so it must have good air defense. To reflect that, I decided to give them defense of 12 (same as Batteship, but it's cheaper, so better for pure defense missions).

Probably removing defense AI flag from Bowmen (as it is done in PtW). Since they get upgraded to Longbowmen (which has only defense of 1).

While I doubt that anybody would disagree with Submarine & Privateer changes, but I realy need some opinions about possibile AEGIS Cruiser change of defense.


P.S.
Some PtW feedback would be nice too.
Especily concerning op. range of Bomber.

[Gen.Dragolen]

AEGIS Combat Systems

Player1,

The US Navy has several classes of ships equipped with AEGIS Combat Systems, many of which are destroyers and frigates, since they are somewhat less expensive that larger ships to own and operate.

I agree with you thinking about changing the defensive value since their primary role is to protect ships like aircraft carriers from aircraft and anti-ship missles. They are not concerned about submarines, since that role is usually handled by non-AEGIS destroyers and firgates that have the very sensitive passive sonar equipment.

If you need more details, check out sites like Jane's, and you can get a feel for the specs they have on the system. Even the upgrades made to the New Jersey included elements of the AEGIS system, like the Phalanx guns on the bow and stern. The Phalanx system uses liquid cooled 20mm gatling guns firing depleted uranium rounds to knock down surface skimming missles.


D.

[player1]

So 14/12/6 unit would be OK.

Right?

[player1]

dp

[player1]

Batteship would still be expensive and powerfull, Destroyer would be cheap and expendable, and AEGIS Cruiser would be somewere at the middle.

I could see in late game, that players would use Destroyers less often, but considering that you get Destroyers with industrial tech and AEGIS Cruiser with late modern tech, it should not be probelm.

Still, Batteships will be used very often in any age.
(for bombard and offense purposes)
But AEGIS Cruiser would be better (cheaper) for pure escort missions.

[player1]

Or what about making them 12/12/6
(with offense same as in core Civ3)

That way you could still have usefull Destroyers (and Cruisers).

[Caliban]

What about giving the AEGIS Cruisers the ability to carry tactical missiles? That would really make them useful...