Unit's speciality

[Nenad]

I was trying to add some new units using civ3x editor. I didn't care to much about graphics yet; my problem is how to inform computer that some unit is especialy good in defense against some other, attacking unit. I can't see a flag which takes care of that.

How computer knows that spearmen are good against horsemen? Is it hard-coded?

BTW, I was thinking to make some sort of anti-tank artilery, which should be good against armour, and mashin-gun unit, which is superb in defense against pre-armour (infantry, cavalry), and sucks when the tanks appear.

[Centauri18]

They used pikes against the knights rushing in on horseback, and impaled the horses on the pikes. Then either the riders were crushed by the dead weight of the poor animals or they were finished off by the pikemen themselves.

[Nenad]

Originally posted by Centauri18
They used pikes against the knights rushing in on horseback, and impaled the horses on the pikes. Then either the riders were crushed by the dead weight of the poor animals or they were finished off by the pikemen themselves.

Hmm. I didn't know that my english is that bad.
No, really, I understand why pikemen were so good in real combat against the mounted units, I just don't realize how that information was passed to the AI.

It is evident (or it's just me), and claimed before by others, that horsemen (or knights) easier beat swordsmen than spearmen, although their defense rate is equal, so I wander was that information hard-coded or ...

So I repeat myself: How to make unit which is especially good defender against certain type of units?

[Jamski]

Can't be done.

A unit has 3 values : Attack, defence and movement. The AI uses spearmen against horsemen, as these units have a high defence value (2) and a low attack value (1) The AI know from this that the unit is good for defence. The reason that Spearmen are good against Horsemen is that Horsemen have an attack of 2, which compares poorly with the Spearman's defence which is also 2, plus any defensive bonuses from terrain, fortifications, cities etc. So more often than not, the spearman wins.

Sorry, but its not possible to make a unit better against certain other types of unit. Try Sudden Strike 2 if you want a realistic, highly moddable war game.

-Jam

[Centauri18]

Sorry, I misunderstood. And it is mostly the high defensive rating of spearmen and the relatively low defense rating of mounted units.

[Nenad]

OK, I give up.

In SMAC help it was clearly said that infantry is better when attacking bases then units with more movement points, so I hoped that some similar benefit exists in civ3.

Also, I am 100% sure that I read somewhere on these forumes (can't remember where ) that spearman better defends against mounted units than swordsman.

To be honest, I wasn't an optimist, since in civ3xedit, in unit abilities, I found no flag to suport such claims.

What can I say, too bad. Anyway, thanx to both of you.

[Der PH]

Re: Unit's speciality

Originally posted by Nenad
BTW, I was thinking to make some sort of anti-tank artilery, which should be good against armour, and mashin-gun unit, which is superb in defense against pre-armour (infantry, cavalry), and sucks when the tanks appear.

Very good idea.
I'd very much like to do this, too!

But it's not possible.

[Ozymandias]

Civ -2- had the ability to assign units a defensive benefit against mounted troops ...

... a tiny hint to Firaxis ...

IT WOULD BE BLOODY NICE TO HAVE THAT FLAG BACK!!!

... and an anti-armor flag would be nice ...

... and mobile anti-aircraft defense ...

... and an "ambush" bonus for guerilla and/or special ops units in certain terrain ...

... and putting the rivers back IN the tiles and allowing riverine units ...

... and allowing certain units, like armored trains, to be limited to RR tiles ...

*sigh*

[Nenad]

... and mine-fields...

[Jamski]

...and mine clearers...

And naval blockade mine fields

-Jam

[Optimizer]

You can always hope for those things to be in Civ 4...

[Nenad]

It seems to me that people in Firaxis are trying to avoid complications which could ruin the game play, like too many options.

Also, looks like they don't like the idea of transforming civ into something that would be too similar to a purely war game.

Now, I'm not a warmonger (maybe you've noticed that all of my suggestions was about defensive units), but I think that these additional options/units wouldn't hurt.

Since everything is automated (workers are automated, governors manage citizen moods and stuff) some additional decisions that player will have to make could only mean more fun.

[Ozymandias]

Originally posted by Nenad
It seems to me that people in Firaxis are trying to avoid complications which could ruin the game play, like too many options.

Also, looks like they don't like the idea of transforming civ into something that would be too similar to a purely war game.

Now, I'm not a warmonger (maybe you've noticed that all of my suggestions was about defensive units), but I think that these additional options/units wouldn't hurt.

Since everything is automated (workers are automated, governors manage citizen moods and stuff) some additional decisions that player will have to make could only mean more fun.

Agreed, with the following caveats--

"Too many options" -- or, rather, the complexity of options -- are already inherent in the editor. E.g., try "forcing" the AI to wind up with a particular government, and you'll begin to understand how complex things already are. Compared to these, most of what many of us crave were LOST between Civs 2 & 3 -- flags like those I mentioned above etc., as well as a so-called "WW2" AI option which would make a lot of modders very, very happy. Oh and a scripting language which could be utterly ignored, but could -- and was -- used for some extraordinarily clever things, like taking Italy out of WW2 if Rome fell, or having the continent of Atlantis sink.

Also, I couldn't agree with you more about NOT making it a wargame, but some very simple additions would add a great deal of realism. Example: a unit can already be set to ignore one type of terrain's movement effects. Mechanically, it should be simple to limit a unit to one terrain type -- my personal disappointments being rivers and railroads. In both war and peace, it is currently impossible to adequately recreate the historical importance of navigable rivers, such as the Mississippi or Nile, in both war and peace, let alone the Yangtze or those rivers which allowed the Vikings to travel as far south as Constantinople.

-Oz

[Optimizer]

The editors gives many options to create variation between different unit types.

One that I've started using recently is removing the ability to pillage from some units, restricting it to heavy infantry units like Swordsmen. This gives you a reason to move them into the enemy's lands.

[MrBaggins]

Trying to mod Civ3 to achieve special effects such as the above is like trying to paint the Sistine Chapel using a hammer.