this game needs massive improvement

[SieGermans]

After my 10th infantry man died at the hands of a ****ing longbowman and every civilization seemingly getting advances every other turn on regent and warlord levels, I have figured that this game is impossible to play unless you are on the chieftain setting. I still don't get why the **** those morons at firaxis haven't figured out that there is no ****ing way in hell a dip**** with a bow and arrow can kill a man wearing ballistic armor and carrying a high power rifle. it's like the designers give the other computer civs attack and defense bonuses against every unit you have, no matter how much more advanced or more powerful it is unless you're playing on the chieftain setting. how the hell does a ****ing ironclad get sunk defensively by a caravel? how come my infantry gets severely injured taking out a spearman only to get equally ****ed up when defending against a longbowman? how does my tank always get destroyed by enemy infantry when making an attack, but their tanks mow through my troops like a field of grass? how the **** can a galley do ANY damage to a battleship!?!?! the whole "percentage" victory **** should not be applied to every unit (or at all for that matter, it's retarded, especially since your enemy is always favored in every setting but cheiftain). if you have an industrial age unit, it should kick the living **** out of a medieval or ancient unit and get mowed down by a modern unit as occured in real life. when indians went charging into battle with bows and arrows against men armed with rifles, they fell like flies (until they got rifles themselves and made the battle even). when spearman went charging into a wall of gun fire, they got mowed down. this is how it occurs in real life, and in history, yet the retards at firaxis have failed to recognize this. I can see if your knight gets kicked by a pikeman when trying to attack because it has an attack of 4 and the pikeman has a defense of 3. but when your infantry with a defense of 10 gets killed by a ****ing knight with an attack of 4 more than the expected victory percentage (killing 4 FORTIFIED infantrymen) that can be calculated (which is 28% in this instance) it is just plain ridiculous and makes me want to go back to Civ II.

[sachmo71]

/end of rant

If these things are happening in EVERY battle EVERY time you play, something is indeed wrong.
While some seem to agree that they want firepower back in the game, what you are sacrificing at that point is your ability to possibly catch up with some of those races who are aquiring tech every other turn. It gives everyone a fighting chance, however unrealistic.

[Ironikinit]

"I have figured that this game is impossible to play unless you are on the chieftain setting."

Would it help if I posted a screenshot of my Hall of Fame?

If you're nice, we'll help you win.

I might even tell you how to evade the cuss filter.

I don't believe you about the knight that killed four fortified infantry units, BTW.

[Tuberski]

This is my first post. I have been reading these posts for weeks now and it seems to me that something should be obvious to everyone, but I haven't seen anything mentioned like this. How about this for combat. If you have a tank attacking a warrior, spearman, etc.... why not simply take the difference in the age of the troops: tank=modern age, spearman= ancient, the difference could be a combat bonus for the tank, say 1 per every technological age difference. So this would be a difference of 2, every point of difference 25%. seems like it would work and also give everybody their firepower, at least somewhat.

Oh and that ancient era spearman COULD still win, just a lot, lot harder.

Oh, I am a newbie. The combat system doesn't bother me, irritate-yes, bother to the point of quitting-no.

[ACooper]

Feel better now.



Maybe it's your computer's random number generator. You should get your computer immediately to the nearest computer store and see if they can format your HD and install a new random number generator. This might fix the problem. You might need to buy a brand new computer. One of those nice $3000 would do. But do it right away, there is no time to waste!!!!




I do smell a D/L around here though........

[Terser]

I'd like to see Firaxis make a game based on evolution. In it, Australiopithecines would be given razors, three piece suits, houses and cars so that they can never "fall too far behind" modern Homo sapiens sapiens. It would really be the only fair solution.

I don't think people expect a "Hisotrical Sim." Some of us just aren't capable of abstracting units and combat results to the Nth degree in the way others apparently are. No, those speamen aren't militiamen armed with AK-47's and RPG's. They're spearmen, just as you find today in parts of South America, Africa, and South east Asia. Those spearmen don't conquer cities, and the ones in CivIII should not, either.

Bringing back firepower or some sort of graduated combat bonus system like Tuberski mentions is a must.

Wasn't going to reply to this thread, as this really is a tired argument. But seeing y'all pounce on this newbie got my juices flowing...

[paulmagusnet]

Fighting Fools

There shouldn't be just a small chance for a spear chucker to knock out a tank, there should be NO chance. Why not give them a chance to knock out F15s, that would be balancing.

The tokens in the game don't just represent one spearman or one tank, those are armies. So there is no consideration of odd hiccup that would affect the interaction of just two individuals.

I will take a Sherman Tank vs Napoleon's whole Waterloo army any day. Even when it has shot all its ammo, it just runs around the field turning infantry squares into axel grease.

Now, take that same Sherman and match it against an M1 Abrams. There is zero chance the Sherman can hurt the M1, except possibly at point blank range up the ass. But thats not the kind of thing you count on in a mass battle.

Try those same Napoleonic troops agains one guy with an M16 on open terrain. How much of that unit do you think will survive to get within range to shoot their muskets?

There is an exception to this, and that is unsupported armor in a city. In that situation even a boy scout troop has a chance.

My objection is a basic one, doing something wrong (ignoring reality, ie lying) to achieve an end (game 'balance') is bad practice. Why give someone a chance they don't deserve? And its not necessary, civilizations and nations survive in the real world without 'balancing'.

Set the AI right and don't let IT cheat so much then you don't have the problem of trying to compete with run away AI tech advances. Then you can play with a rational strategy.

This is a strategic not a tactical game, so there are other factors more important than the fact that you have superior weapons that hold back aggressive expansion. It adds more value to the game experience if brains are used for balancing rather than lies.

Make the units rational, and let the chips lay where they fall.

etc:

The nuclear sub is severly under rated in the game, it should be a real menece and be able to attack with a chance of not being detected who did it. There should be a hidded or stealth flag for units that allows an attack of hidden origin. This could apply to land special forces units or terror units.

Tanks are faster than horses.

Monitor class boats sink in open seas.

Give the Pirate ship to the Barbarians. Every age should have a type of Barbarian typical to that age.

A special unit for each age for each culture could be interesting.

Artillary, bombs, rockets torpedos icebergs and exocets sink ships very well. I mean really, there's no place to go but down. There is no way a viking galley can find, let alone sink a 688 class sub, most Japanese fishing trawlers will agree.

Modern infanty can evade artillary fire very well, but older square formed units can not. There should be a flag for units that indicates how suseptable to artilary and what kind.

Why not adapt (and improve) the CTP type combat resolution.

[Minuteman]

Re: Fighting Fools

Originally posted by paulmagusnet
There shouldn't be just a small chance for a spear chucker to knock out a tank, there should be NO chance.

I guess that comment was for the "brothas who ain't here".

[Tuberski]

Re: Fighting Fools

Originally posted by paulmagusnet
.

Now, take that same Sherman and match it against an M1 Abrams. There is zero chance the Sherman can hurt the M1, except possibly at point blank range up the ass. But thats not the kind of thing you count on in a mass battle.

Try those same Napoleonic troops agains one guy with an M16 on open terrain. How much of that unit do you think will survive to get within range to shoot their muskets?

There is an exception to this, and that is unsupported armor in a city. In that situation even a boy scout troop has a chance.

My objection is a basic one, doing something wrong (ignoring reality, ie lying) to achieve an end (game 'balance') is bad practice. Why give someone a chance they don't deserve? And its not necessary, civilizations and nations survive in the real world without 'balancing'.



Why not adapt (and improve) the CTP type combat resolution.

Gee and why don't we add friendly fire to the list, make it mor realistic. And don't ton's of tanks and thousands of soldiers destroy any land they travel across? What about refugees? I wouldn't be staying in a city if an enemy army was approaching.

One shell through the top of an abrams and it will still be destroyed...look it up.

Only takes one musket to kill the guy with the M-16.

My point is that there are many variables to combat that aren't in the game except for the off chance your musket man destroys the Sherman once in a while.

But I agree that it is too often.

[Dis]

I didn't read that post, but I think I got the jist of it anyways.

solution? Build more fast mobile units. Not as good as before, but still damn good.

And in order to win all you have to do is build more of these units than the ai.

[Encomium]

COMBAT BONUS FOR DIFFERENT AGES

I've posted this before and do so yet again.

What Civ III needs is a combat bonus if a military unit is of a different Age than the opponent. 25% sounds fair.

In otherwords, a longbowman attacking a cavalry unit suffers, say, a 25% decrease in combat effectiveness. Yes, I have seen a full strength longbowman destroy a full strength cavalry (with no escape route) even though the cavalry was armed with rifles.

Combat bonus, or differentials, between units of different Ages would help a lot of these problems.

[Minuteman]

Re: COMBAT BONUS FOR DIFFERENT AGES

Originally posted by Encomium
I've posted this before and do so yet again.

What Civ III needs is a combat bonus if a military unit is of a different Age than the opponent. 25% sounds fair.

In otherwords, a longbowman attacking a cavalry unit suffers, say, a 25% decrease in combat effectiveness. Yes, I have seen a full strength longbowman destroy a full strength cavalry (with no escape route) even though the cavalry was armed with rifles.

Combat bonus, or differentials, between units of different Ages would help a lot of trhese problems.

Thanks for reposting those brilliantly framed comments. We must have missed them the first 600 times you posted them.

BTW: We awarded you with the title of head DiC (Discriminating Consumer), or DiC head, if you will.

Congrats Encomium!

[Ironikinit]

Terser, I was being nice. I said I'd help him win, didn't I?

This could well be a drive-by rant, so I don't really think we need to fight over it. Nice pot shot on Enco, tho, MM.

That solution would probably work, tho. Just crank up the medieval units by 25% on A and D, industrials 50%, modern 75%. No more spearmen beating much of anything but horsemen and swordsmen. Maybe we should just let Enco answer these sorts of rants instead of offering to teach people how to play with the default rules. Of course, they better play on chieftan because if the Chinese or Japanese ever make it to chivalry while they're still using spears and swords, they're a grease spot.

[Zachriel]

Re: this game needs massive improvement

Originally posted by SieGermans
After my 10th infantry man died at the hands of a ****ing longbowman and every civilization seemingly getting advances every other turn on regent and warlord levels,

I win regularly on Monarch and many others win on even higher levels, so you probably just haven't got the hang of Civ3 yet. The combat system actually works quite well and rarely results in a "strange" result when your army is properly deployed.

Your problem is not due to the combat system. You mention that other Civs are racing ahead of you in technology. You are probably not getting a good start in the ancient era. You must expand quickly, building settlers as quickly as possible. Once the known world is settled, then you can consider whether to build your infrastructure or build your military.

Also, don't be afraid to trade techs with other civilizations. Isolated civilizations usually fall behind in technology.

Civ3 is not an easy game to master, but it is worth the effort!

[Terser]

Re: Re: this game needs massive improvement

Originally posted by Zachriel


Well I win regularly on Monarch and others win on even higher levels, so you probably just haven't got the hang of Civ3 yet. The combat system actually works quite well and rarely results in a "strange" result when your army is properly deployed.

Your problem is probably not due to the combat system. You mention that they are racing ahead in technology. You are probably not getting a good start in the ancient era. You must expand quickly, building settlers as quickly as possible. Once the known world is settled, then you can consider whether to build you infrastructure or build your military. Also, don't be afraid to trade techs with other civilizations.

If this had been the first reply then this whole thread could have died a quiet death. Nice, professional, helpful answer.

Also, SieGermans, you may have to break down and use the editor to change the hitpoints and Cost/Att/Def/Movement/Bombard Strength of the units. By increasing the number of hitpoints a unit receives for each experience level and boosting the attack and defense strengths of modern units you can effectively rid your games of anti-tank spearmen and battleship sinking galleys. It's not a great solution, but it does make the game playable (for me at least).