Confession. I suck at Civ III.

[DeepO]

Originally posted by SpencerH
An interesting theory, confusing a computer

Oh, actually it's a thing I'd love to do in MP: without precise information, who is going to say that only the two cities they can see have infantry in them? I was only hoping the AI could as easily be confused as humans can be

DeepO

[Panag]

Originally posted by DeepO

Oh, actually it's a thing I'd love to do in MP: without precise information, who is going to say that only the two cities they can see have infantry in them? I was only hoping the AI could as easily be confused as humans can be

DeepO

hi ,

not bad , but what happens when the AI plants a couple spy's , ..........

have a nice day

[DeepO]

True... so it probably isn't always the right tactic. However, I do this from turn one, and without spies you only know the relative strength of a civ (in the F3 screen, purely based on numbers, not quality), and what you saw moving at your borders.

And, the advisor during negotiations does say things like "The Egyptians are afraid of your knights", so I figured I'd try to let them know my best unit in the hope it repels them. I don't know if this helps, but in general I can keep the AIs from attacking me without exuberant costs in tributes...it has to be something I do

DeepO

[Capt Dizle]

Personally, I am not telling Luke anything.

[DeepO]

I might miss a common expression, but who's Luke?

If you mean that you try to hide your military strength, of course that is the right thing to do when you want to attack someone. In that case, I'll try to keep my modern, offensive units far from borders, so the enemy doesn't know I got it. However, when you want to avoid attacks, showing off is better, no?

DeepO

[Panag]

Originally posted by DeepO
I might miss a common expression, but who's Luke?

If you mean that you try to hide your military strength, of course that is the right thing to do when you want to attack someone. In that case, I'll try to keep my modern, offensive units far from borders, so the enemy doesn't know I got it. However, when you want to avoid attacks, showing off is better, no?

DeepO

hi ,

yes and no , example , you only have a small army , no problem , but you can use it to is max abilities if you can move them around fast , when all you city's are linked be railroad , ....

have a nice day

[DeepO]

Of course, always keep a small, mobile force at hand, even when you want to stay peaceful. And, fortify units at places that prevent the enemy from reaching your cities in one turn from outside your borders, that's another obvious thing to do.

But in a peaceful game, I don't upgrade all my defensive units to the best around, in fact I only upgrade when I'm in a desperate situation (or want to go to war). Those warriors have the same effect...

In the game I finished last night (babs, nearly peaceful except a few skirmishes with Russians and Germans) over a third of my troops at the end of the game where warriors, and another third were spearman. I did build some 40 tanks, as I wasn't sure whether I wanted some action in the last turns, or not. Those peacegames can become boring...

So I finished diplomatic, with >6500 points on emperor (huge, 9(10?) civs, continents, 1605AD). It wasn't my best score, but for me it was a decent score, without major wars.

DeepO

[Panag]

Originally posted by DeepO
Of course, always keep a small, mobile force at hand, even when you want to stay peaceful. And, fortify units at places that prevent the enemy from reaching your cities in one turn from outside your borders, that's another obvious thing to do.

But in a peaceful game, I don't upgrade all my defensive units to the best around, in fact I only upgrade when I'm in a desperate situation (or want to go to war). Those warriors have the same effect...

In the game I finished last night (babs, nearly peaceful except a few skirmishes with Russians and Germans) over a third of my troops at the end of the game where warriors, and another third were spearman. I did build some 40 tanks, as I wasn't sure whether I wanted some action in the last turns, or not. Those peacegames can become boring...

So I finished diplomatic, with >6500 points on emperor (huge, 9(10?) civs, continents, 1605AD). It wasn't my best score, but for me it was a decent score, without major wars.

DeepO

hi ,

modernisation , ....

and old units lose a battle anyway , well okay , most of the time , so when you disband them in a city , its nice to get the shields , ...

have a nice day

[Solver]

You can use old units for taking shots at weak units, still. I have sent 5 Longbowmen at a 1 HP Mech. Inf. till I beat it .

[Panag]

Originally posted by Solver
You can use old units for taking shots at weak units, still. I have sent 5 Longbowmen at a 1 HP Mech. Inf. till I beat it .

hi ,

okay , but for a number of X turns you had to pay these units , ....

have a nice day

[Solver]

Yes, but I do prefer to keep older units. I can upgrade anything except Longbowmen. Swordsmen all die in Middle Ages, Cavalry remains useful more or less forever, and the Longbowmen... let them stay.

[DeepO]

Am I the only one who keeps ancient troops un-upgraded? strange...
Of course, when I go to war in the ancient period, all warriors are upgraded to swordmen, but what would be the point if you don't plan on war? It only costs lots of money.

About disbanding obsolete units in newly conquered cities: I did that for a while. But, it doesn't net you much (2 shields for a warrior), and those obsolete units could be better spent on repressing resistors and fooling the AI you have a huge army. The only units I disband are captured catapults when I have cannons, and artillery when I have lots of bombers. They are of no use anyway, so avoid paying for them all those turns.

Of course, I only keep warriors when my army is weak to the largest military civ, once you get more units there is no need for them anymore. That's the time I'm disbanding core city defenders as well, or move them to the borders.

DeepO

[SpencerH]

I upgrade all my units asap especially if I have Leonardo.

[DeepO]

Why? If you don't use a unit, why pay for it? Especially when you can keep them as a reserve, and build new units when needed. How many times do you encounter a time in which all your core cities have built all improvements, and have nothing better to do then to build units? Setting them to wealth hardly is the best choice: you generate for every 40 shields 10 golds, while upgrading a unit costs 40(or 20 with Leo) per 10 shields... you loose 160 shields on wealth per gained 10 shields on a unit... hardly favorable odds.

I agree completely that there are situations where upgrading is a must, but why would it need to be a strict rule?

DeepO

[Panag]

Originally posted by DeepO
Why? If you don't use a unit, why pay for it? Especially when you can keep them as a reserve, and build new units when needed. How many times do you encounter a time in which all your core cities have built all improvements, and have nothing better to do then to build units? Setting them to wealth hardly is the best choice: you generate for every 40 shields 10 golds, while upgrading a unit costs 40(or 20 with Leo) per 10 shields... you loose 160 shields on wealth per gained 10 shields on a unit... hardly favorable odds.

I agree completely that there are situations where upgrading is a must, but why would it need to be a strict rule?

DeepO

hi ,

many times , ......

anyway , old units are not word to keep , ..

okay , one or two , for sentimental value maybe , but that is it , ..

have a nice day