Asterix after 'Elite': What does it mean?

[Aramis]

A chara!

Very late last night, an elite cavalry unit scored a victory thus producing a leader. I got a message: "Rename this victorious unit?" As I said, it was very late, and I was very tired, so I, in a daze, took it as a command and immediately typed in Melvin Bluenote (first thing that came to mind). Now the cavalry unit is listed as 'Melvin Bluenote--Elite*'

The war ended a turn later. Melvin has nothing to do, but if it did, does that asterix mean anything? HPs above and beyond other Elite units? A leader everytime Mel wins an engagement? Make a hit record when I get to the 1960s, thus improving my civ's culture?

Sadly I don't have enough time to spare on PTW, so Apolyton has became my main reference source. When one has questions, one asks those with answers.

Slan-- rmds

[Colonel Kraken]

* = You obtained a leader from that unit.

[notyoueither]

To be more precise. It means that you got a leader from that unit and you cannot get another leader with that unit prior to it being upgraded. If you upgrade the unit, the asterix goes away and the unit can then generate another leader once it becomes elite again.

[Aramis]

Ah! So, since the Bluenotes are cavalry and thus don't upgrade, the unit has reached its apex. I guess its the saxophone and a hit record after all.

Wouldn't it be nice if cavalry would upgrade to some kind of light armor?

[PLATO]

RMDS: I've often wondered what the next step for cavalry should be. I have thought that an upgrade to Armored Cav might be nice. It seems to important a unit to be a dead end. Has anybody experimented with an upgraded Cav unit?

[sabrewolf]

plato,
no, imho the horseman - knight - cavalry path is already a very might one and to let it upgrade would make you not only dominate ancient, medieval and early industrial age, but also later.

other civs with less horses-offense should be able to catch up after cavalry.

it's like if frigates can upgrade all the way to battleships. it just wouldn't balance the game. early leaders would have it even easier to stay strong...

but that's just my opinion

[Patroklos]

I like the dead end of cavalry, as it makes a nation rebuild it's obsolete military with the advent of armor. Sort of like the real world in the 1900-1939, when military technology changed so fast that those that had the most "obsolete" units from the past didn't nessecarily have the most power.

[Centauri18]

We need upgradable cavalry. The methods of tanks early on were very similar to the use of cavalry.

[Aramis]

Originally posted by Patroklos
I like the dead end of cavalry, as it makes a nation rebuild it's obsolete military with the advent of armor. Sort of like the real world in the 1900-1939, when military technology changed so fast that those that had the most "obsolete" units from the past didn't nessecarily have the most power.

I've thought for some time that cavalry should upgrade to tanks, then MA, just as spearmen eventually upgrade to Mech Inf. But I think now you are right. Rebuilding an obsolete military is a challenge, and challenge is what makes this game. Thanks, Patroklos.

I still keep cavalry around in the modern era--I find a use for them every now and then.

As to Harold Melvin and the Bluenotes--Elite*, I'll shuffle them off to some quiet corner where they can play the sax and dream of their glory days as a one hit wonder.

[Master Zen]

How bout upgrading to light tank or something like an armoured recon vehicle. I'm thinking on something like the M8 or M20 from WW2. Something like 8.8.3

[CerberusIV]

I decided to allow all the ancient/medieval/early industrial units to upgrade, mostly to get them out of the build list.

I tried cavalry to tank but it makes it too easy to get a massive tank force instantly so I now allow cavalry to MI. Cavalry have a limited use up to that point as they move further than tanks but I usually have few cav left by the start of the modern era.

I upgrade frigates to destroyers and ironclads to battleships. This works well even if I disband rather than upgrade because it gets obselete units off the build list as I want.

I give guerillas 1 move and all terrain as roads so upgrading explorers to guerilla also works and gets rid of another "old" looking unit from the build list.

Everything else either upgrades or I still find it useful. These changes don't fundamentally alter the game, just tidy things up a bit.

[sabrewolf]

it's a shame you can't set obsolete techs for units in civ3.
e.g. you can still build warriors in the early industrial age in far-away locations without iron. before nationalism, it can happen, that your best defensive unit is the spearman, even though musketmen are the state of the art.

imagine a country today doesn't have rubber. i don't think they'd try to build riflemen (note: these are 19th century riflemen) as defence instead of some sort of mechanised infantry...

[farstryder]

oh but they would! if you take a look at nomadic tribes and guerilla forces worldwide, the means they use for defense can sometimes be quite archaic. even cities cut off from supply lines can be forced to rely on some rather unconventional means. i think its a good feature, myself... forces a player to build and maintain his/her supply lines. which, of course, is in line with solid strategic planning.

[Cyclotron]

Let cavalry upgrade to helicopter...

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by farstryder
oh but they would! if you take a look at nomadic tribes and guerilla forces worldwide, the means they use for defense can sometimes be quite archaic. even cities cut off from supply lines can be forced to rely on some rather unconventional means. i think its a good feature, myself... forces a player to build and maintain his/her supply lines. which, of course, is in line with solid strategic planning.

yes, but guerillas don't walk around with 19th century rifles. they'll be using WW-II weapons or newer.