Tweet
I’ve been thinking about why advanced armour is being added to Civ3. The question has come up in another thread. I think the reason relates to game play rather than a desire to add a cool unit.
One problem/blessing in Civ2 was that in the late modern era, the howitzer is the ultimate attack weapon. Once you have the howitzer, you can cut through the other civs like a knife through butter. The AI rarely ever manages to stop a massed assault of howitzers Tanks become effective obsolete because there is no reason to build these units for offensive reasons, at least not on the scale of howitzers. Defence is left to mech infantry.
In Civ 3, the howitzer is apparently going to become even more powerful with the added ability of bombardment. That could unbalance the game play if left unchecked.
Adding a new advanced armour unit will put the game back on an even keel. The adv. armour will likely have attack strength equal to a howitzer, defence equal to or stronger than mech inf, movement of three or four, but it will be more expensive to build. My bet is that the advanced armour will be a 12-6-3 unit.
Making the attack strength equal to howitzer would match existing model where the ordinary tank has an attack of 10, the same as artillery. Matching the defence of the mech infantry would ensure that mech inf remain useful. The Mech infantry’s cheaper price would still keep it as a viable unit.
The howitzer would still be useful since the cost of building it would be lower than building an advanced armour. And of course there is the benefit of being able to bombard.
So the question then becomes, assuming adv. armour is a 12-6-3 unit, is this a good thing? Would you prefer to keep the howitzer strong so that you can easily cut through other civs, or do you want the howitzer’s role diminished?
One problem/blessing in Civ2 was that in the late modern era, the howitzer is the ultimate attack weapon. Once you have the howitzer, you can cut through the other civs like a knife through butter. The AI rarely ever manages to stop a massed assault of howitzers Tanks become effective obsolete because there is no reason to build these units for offensive reasons, at least not on the scale of howitzers. Defence is left to mech infantry.
In Civ 3, the howitzer is apparently going to become even more powerful with the added ability of bombardment. That could unbalance the game play if left unchecked.
Adding a new advanced armour unit will put the game back on an even keel. The adv. armour will likely have attack strength equal to a howitzer, defence equal to or stronger than mech inf, movement of three or four, but it will be more expensive to build. My bet is that the advanced armour will be a 12-6-3 unit.
Making the attack strength equal to howitzer would match existing model where the ordinary tank has an attack of 10, the same as artillery. Matching the defence of the mech infantry would ensure that mech inf remain useful. The Mech infantry’s cheaper price would still keep it as a viable unit.
The howitzer would still be useful since the cost of building it would be lower than building an advanced armour. And of course there is the benefit of being able to bombard.
So the question then becomes, assuming adv. armour is a 12-6-3 unit, is this a good thing? Would you prefer to keep the howitzer strong so that you can easily cut through other civs, or do you want the howitzer’s role diminished?
Comment