Tweet
I find the changes you have made in your mod very interesting, and will be incorporating some of them in my own tinkering. There are some ideas I'd like to share, which aren't realized yet because I've just begun tinkering with the editor and not even sure if they are at all possible.
In CIV, unit strengths are of an ordinal value. Knights outclass horsemen but are outclassed by Cavalry themselves. This is fine when there is still progress, but once progress stops, there is no reason to build anything but the best: Modern Armor. Once researched, I find myself amassing large quantities of MA, rendering all ground personnel (and other units for that matter) obsolete. For me, this leads to a very boring endgame in which whoever has the most tanks wins.
To my understanding, modern battles can be and are fought with armor, but to occupy territory one needs troops - not tanks. You don't even have to google up what happened to Russian tank columns in Grozny to realise that tanks are no good in urban settings. The strengths of armor only shine on the battlefield, not in the streets. Even the IDF, who frequently employ tanks to scare off would be insurgents, surround their tanks with many soldiers. Not because they happen to have a bunch of obsolete troops, but because they are *necessary* for dealing with angry mobs.
Thus, to tackle these two wrongs (boring endgame and historical inaccuracy), I propose that Tanks, Panzers, and Modern Armors do not contribute to Military Police.
One of the possible errs stemming from this solution that I foresee is the slower pace of conquest. To occupy newly conquered cities one would have to move his or her slow-moving infantry. I would like to see a landbased troop transport for this role, replacing Mechanized Infantry.
Make Mechanized Infantry an Armored Personnel Carrier, 6/10/3, with transport capacity of 2 or 3.
In my opinion, these two changes would diversify warfare in the Modern Age by discouraging sole use of Tanks and encouraging use of Infantry/Marines/Other.
In CIV, unit strengths are of an ordinal value. Knights outclass horsemen but are outclassed by Cavalry themselves. This is fine when there is still progress, but once progress stops, there is no reason to build anything but the best: Modern Armor. Once researched, I find myself amassing large quantities of MA, rendering all ground personnel (and other units for that matter) obsolete. For me, this leads to a very boring endgame in which whoever has the most tanks wins.
To my understanding, modern battles can be and are fought with armor, but to occupy territory one needs troops - not tanks. You don't even have to google up what happened to Russian tank columns in Grozny to realise that tanks are no good in urban settings. The strengths of armor only shine on the battlefield, not in the streets. Even the IDF, who frequently employ tanks to scare off would be insurgents, surround their tanks with many soldiers. Not because they happen to have a bunch of obsolete troops, but because they are *necessary* for dealing with angry mobs.
Thus, to tackle these two wrongs (boring endgame and historical inaccuracy), I propose that Tanks, Panzers, and Modern Armors do not contribute to Military Police.
One of the possible errs stemming from this solution that I foresee is the slower pace of conquest. To occupy newly conquered cities one would have to move his or her slow-moving infantry. I would like to see a landbased troop transport for this role, replacing Mechanized Infantry.
Make Mechanized Infantry an Armored Personnel Carrier, 6/10/3, with transport capacity of 2 or 3.
In my opinion, these two changes would diversify warfare in the Modern Age by discouraging sole use of Tanks and encouraging use of Infantry/Marines/Other.
Comment