Aaccckkkkkk!!!!!!!!

[notyoueither]

That would surprise the German general staff.

[Robert]

As said many times, the basic values that came with the game are ridiculous. They have to be Edited (modded). There are also mods available for download on this site.

nah, the values are good and ok.
It hardly happens, no, it never happens, that a healthy spearman beats a healty spearman.

The rest pherhaps once in a million times, but again, a tank can explode from the inside. A plane might crash for some reason.

Don't hang up your theories to the once in a billion times situations. I know some people like to complain though

I think it only bothers people who send 3 tanks to take over a civilization. In those cases it's indeed bad if you lose a tank. Next time when attack a complete civilization, send enough tanks.

[TacticalGrace]

the values that civ3 has "out of the box" are good for a balanced game. They are not so good for realism. If the game was realistic then obsolete units would be totally overwhelmed by more modern units. For example, a frigate should have zero chance of even doing any damage against an iron-clad. Equally an iron clad would do no damage against a destroyer*. Perhaps there are those who think that this is fine and would prefer this behaviour. This would have the effect in the game that once a civ got a little bit ahead in tech, it would zoom ahead. There would be little chance of catch up for other civs.

*interestingly an ironclad would probably have little chance of sinking another ironclad because they lacked the explosive shot needed to penetrate each other's hulls. Most battles would most realistically result in stalemate.

[Deathwalker]

The easyest way the fix is the improve the gap between states for units as they get more modern.

[ukrneal]

Really, it's quite simple. The terms cossack and tank have no meaning for the computer. Rather it is numbers. Meaning, battles are decided by numbers. As a result, it is possible for a spearman to take out 50 tanks. Modding the numbers may reduce the liklihood of some events, but does not eliminate them 100%.

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by TacticalGrace
For example, a frigate should have zero chance of even doing any damage against an iron-clad. Equally an iron clad would do no damage against a destroyer*.

Turns in the age of Ironclads last several years. The Monitor was destroyed in a storm that any frigate would have survived easily. Result: one lost ironclad.

What vessel nearly sunk the U.S.S. Cole?

Civ is a strategy game. There are many factors out of our control on the local level, decisions of the commander, mistakes by the crew, weather, morale, etc. These effects are represented by the randomizer, which has much less effect than any real-world events beyond the strategic planners control.

Here's an example of bad weather resulting in profound strategic and historical effects: The Mongol invasion of Japan in 1281.

In the year 1281 A.D., two magnificent Chinese fleets set sail for the Empire of Japan. Their purpose was to launch a massive invasion on the Japanese home islands and to conquer Japan in the name of the Great Mongol Emperor Kublai Kahn. Sailing from China was the main armada, consisting of 3,500 ships and over 100,000 heavily armed troops. Sailing from ports in Korea was a second impressive fleet of 900 ships, containing 41,000 Mongol warriors.

The Mongol invasion force was a modern army, and its arsenal of weapons was far superior to that of the Japanese. Its soldiers were equipped with poisoned arrows, maces, iron swords, metal javelins and even gunpowder.

All over Japan elaborate Shinto ceremonies were performed at shrines, in the cities, and in the countryside. Hundreds of thousands of Japanese urged on by their Emperor, their warlords, and other officials prayed to their Shinto gods for deliverance from these foreign invaders. A million Japanese voices called upward for divine intervention.

Miraculously, as if in answer to their prayers, from out of the south a savage typhoon sprang up and headed toward Kyushu. Its powerful winds screamed up the coast where they struck the Mongol's invasion fleet with full fury, wreaking havoc on the ships and on the men onboard. The Mongol fleet was devastated. After the typhoon had passed, over 4,000 invasion craft had been lost and the Mongol casualties exceeded 100,000 men.

Should the Great Khan sue Firaxis, you think?

[Robert]

obsolete units would be totally overwhelmed by more modern units.

this has been discussed before:
- in mountains a musketeer can damange a tank, why? because the tank can get stucked between stones, the tires might break, a tank is slow, a musketeer can come close and shoot into the lookhole.

- an ironclad can damage a destroyer in several ways: it can just ram against it, one shot might hit by accident a fatal part of the destroyer. It might be stormy and the destroyer will sink.

of course, it won't happen oftenly, but it is possible.
Neither does it happen oftenly in civ3.

[Arrian]

Same 'ole, same 'ole. Heh. I lost a Tank to a musketman last night, but I was actually expecting it. The musketman was a vet, fortified in size-12 Athens. He won with 1hp remaining and was promptly slaughtered by my next Tank (I brought 16 of them). I lost 2 tanks taking Athens, one to a rifleman, one to a musketman. Fair trade, so far as I can figure. They lose their capitol, the Pyramids and Sun Tzu, I lose 2 units. Works for me.

-Arrian

[Fighter]

In fact, the Monitor's and yes their were many made each one bigger than the last, well sort of. The point is that they werent sea worthy, they were immensely useful on the coast and on rivers but on the open seas they were next to useless since they had a nasty tendency to sink.