Simple Unit Building Idea

[nato]

Someone may have thought of this before, but here is a radical idea...

How about, except for settlers and workers, cities:

1. Must have a barracks to build ground units
2. Must have a harbor to build naval units
3. Must have an airport to build air units

A possible exception might be basic defender units, like spearmen, which might be able to be built by any city.

I think this might be very interesting. Even if 1 is too extreme, 2 and 3 make a lot of sense. Just an idea.

Any thoughts?

[Nym]

Re: Simple Unit Building Idea

Originally posted by nato
I think this might be very interesting. Even if 1 is too extreme, 2 and 3 make a lot of sense.

Same remark, but interesting idea, especially for 2 and 3.

[AIL]

Especially for 3 I agree... The Airport is almost useless as it is now and so you could add some sense...
I don't know if the Editor allows itto be done like that... for buildings however it is possible to have a building as requirement so why not for Units too...

[Harovan]

Good idea. But what units would they build? Veterans? Hardly, because this would narrow down the unit experience line. Regulars? This would give militaristic civs still a greater advantage in leader generation - cheap barracks and twice the sooner unit promotion.

[graeme]

Especially for 3 I agree...

I don't understand the reasoning behind 3, why would you need an airport to build aircraft? Surely they are just build in factories.

Also I think that what would be better than 2 is a new city improvement, docks. This would require the city to be next to a river before ships could be built. Or something. Haven't really thought about it too much.

Graeme

[Jethro83]

Originally posted by graeme
I don't understand the reasoning behind 3, why would you need an airport to build aircraft? Surely they are just build in factories.

I'm certain that aircraft are built in factories. But you still need a place set aside where they can take off and land safely, and maintain communications with ground control.


Anyway, I don't agree with Idea 1, about ground units requiring barracks.

As for idea 2, requiring a harbour, I don't agree with either. However, you should need a harbour in the city to carry out repairs on the ship (since the tech for harbour and tech for first naval unit are the same, it seems reasonable).

But idea 3, I definitely agree. Churning your jet fighters out of their factories is one thing, but having a hangar for them to stay in, and a runway for them to be able to take off and land safely is another.

[graeme]

I'm certain that aircraft are built in factories. But you still need a place set aside where they can take off and land safely, and maintain communications with ground control.

Thats a good point, but this relates to the control and utilisation of the aircraft rather than their manufacture.

Graeme

[Harovan]

As for the factory vs. airport discussion:

The aircraft works in Dresden, Germany were located right next to the airport. You certainly must have both. Or you will have to transport the detais via roads and must assemble them in the airfield, at least for the bigger planes, not talking about small fighters.

[Panag]

Re: Simple Unit Building Idea

Originally posted by nato
Someone may have thought of this before, but here is a radical idea...

How about, except for settlers and workers, cities:

1. Must have a barracks to build ground units
2. Must have a harbor to build naval units
3. Must have an airport to build air units

A possible exception might be basic defender units, like spearmen, which might be able to be built by any city.

I think this might be very interesting. Even if 1 is too extreme, 2 and 3 make a lot of sense. Just an idea.

Any thoughts?

hi ,

okay , BUT ; harbor for fishing , PORT for naval units , .....

have a nice day

[Sava]

Makes sense... but when does Firaxis listen to Apolytoners who have ideas that make sense?

[Apocalypse]

A barracks required seems a little extreme, and it isn't required in real life for an entity to produce a unit. Habors might be a little too much also.

The airport idea would be really nice though. I rarely build them in Civ games, and if I do it is one per continent.

[Solver]

Alas, I'm against the idea, it's a bit too radical for me. The barracks one is completely radical, but the others seem pretty much so for me, too.

[dunk]

I like the airport idea. The other two make the game too difficult. Maybe require a harbor for sail age on, but not galleys or caravels.

Maybe something like this for airplanes...

Either an airport or an airfield within its city radius will allow construction of airplanes. I mean, the plane is built in a factory, but what are you going to do with it when it's done if there's no airfield? Take off from Main Street?

[Destroyer]

Are veteran air units worth the cost of an airport?

One good thing about airports is that they can receive as many units airlifted as you have other airports.

The port in civ 2 was one of the most pointless buildings in the game.

[SultanofATL]

how about missions except for rebasing being disabled for a plane unless it is in a city with an airport. This would add a new level of strategy.