Cavalry Moves Faster Than Tanks?

[Badtz Maru]

Originally posted by Venger


I'm pretty sure that speed is governed. And anything that is governed...

Venger

...is governed for a good reason, i.e. running at higher speeds for sustained periods would cause breakdown. Though I seriously doubt that it is governed, the military trains it's people to govern themselves, to know how fast they can push their vehicle for how long before it breaks down. Why are you 'pretty sure' that the top speed quoted is governed, BTW?

Anyway, that top speed listed for horses is not the speed a horse can maintain for long periods of time, but I still believe that on varied terrain mounted troops could cover more ground than most armor, especially over long periods of time, as vehicles have to maintain a supply train and be maintained on a regular basis.

[Ironwood]

Originally posted by Nemesis of the North
Well, actually, the infantry IS faster than the warrior. Take a small look at the year counter, and it moves quite a bit slower in the ages when you have infantry than when you have warriors.

The question is where all those still-existing warriors get their modern trucks from, though.

Nem

Why, they refit old VW's of corse! Or maybe they're on motorcycles. Whatever.

Exelent point, anyway. The point is really moot. By the time you've got tanks, you've got rails. Strategically speaking, they'll move where you want, when you want, regardless of their movement point value. If they're ever operating outside railroaded territory, it's *very* likely they're operating in hostile territory without refeuling stations every few miles. So I don't see a problem.

[xane]

The question I answered I took to mean a straight "faster than", i.e. from a standing start, the fact is that Cavalry _can_ charge just as fast as modern armour. The Bradley M2/M3 represents a very advanced form of Mechanised Infantry transport and it has only just got up to horse speed, something that has existed for thousands of years.

Over a year, a horse _will_ travel a greater distance than any military motorized vehicle, a horse needs minimal maintainance and can gather "fuel" from the environment. At the end of the day a mech. vehicle is only as fast as the support units that follow it.

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by morb


you show me a horse that can run at 70km/h for 12 hours straight without collapsing....

And you show me a tank that can run for a month by eating grass...

[Mawrin]

I wonder if they thought of putting some representation of lines of supply into Civ 3 e.g. tanks would have almost unlimited movement provided they were within (say) 3 squares of a city with access to oil.

[faded glory]

Guys your way out of line.


Tanks have to turn there engines every 12 hours and stop for refueling, exhaust, and tons of other maintence quirks.

This is also not about how fasy they drive...its about how far they go. In a 3 day race through roadless terrain take your average horse and your average Soviet tank. The Horse would win...no doubt about it.

[barefootbadass]

Originally posted by Mawrin
I wonder if they thought of putting some representation of lines of supply into Civ 3 e.g. tanks would have almost unlimited movement provided they were within (say) 3 squares of a city with access to oil.

Umm, well in your territory on railroads(and since you can start building rr at beginning of industrial this shouldn't be an issue) tanks have unlimited movement. Advancing beyond your supply lines IMO is represented well in this game by getting into enemy territory where the roads and railroads don't help and you don't have access to barracks to quick heal instead of the no healing or slow healing with battlefield medicine.