UNITS (v. 1.3): hosted by JT

[VaderTwo]

Since these posts are going to be sent to Firaxis soon and just in case they ignore many of our suggestions and just tinker with the CivII model (let's face it in gameplay SMAC was CivII with a few enhancement such as a world council and borders and improved AI), at minimum Civ III needs:

an infantry unit between legions and musketeers let's call it swordsman

a realization that a great many of history's naval battles took place between 1500 and 1850 before the development of ironclads and with more than frigates involved. So Civ III needs at least:

fire galley (soon after triremes) (2-1-2) with ability to sink if ending turn offshore

roman-type ship (3-1-2)

medieval early galleon-type ship like the Great Harry built by HenryVIII with a castle-like structure on the stern (3-2-3)

Man-Of-War (5-3-3)

An U-2 type sub (6-2-2)

Downgrade the battleship somewhat to maybe (10-10-4) and replace it with a dreadnought class ship with the battleship's old statistics

Increase the carrier defense factor by 50% against sea units to reflect its air wing

If anyone knows the correct historical names for some of the described units, please post them, I don't know them.

[Ecce Homo]

Thanks VaderTwo, but the ships' movement rates should be higher - at least doubled.

Before the late 1800s, ships were the fastest means of transportation - the seas were rather connecting than separating people.

A fast ship should always be at least as fast as the fastest ground unit on a road.

[NotLikeTea]

True, but I think that this is a case of realism vs fun. Faster ships would be better in the realism department, but the AI would be able to snaek into your territory easier, expolration would be much quicker, and so forth. It took Europe a very long time to find North america (if youi leave ot the vikings) and they had marvelous, quick ships. In civ, it could be done in a few turns after you get past triemes.

[Harel]

It seems to me that increasing the scale of things in CIV III will do a world of good. Is it me, or they still program the variables in 8 bit bytes?
For example, like MotLikeTea said, a popultion unit requires much more food then one military unit.
Would it be that bad, for example, is you would reseive 30 food for a tile, and require 20 to feed someone, insteed of 3 and 2?
That would allow us to assign food supply to units.
Same thing with movement. Is it that hard, really, to create a bigger map and allow every unit to build faster and keep the movement rate more realistic?
Indeed, it's very ease fo find america in civ ii. True, we KNOW America is there, but never-the-less.
I think ( and probaly lot's of people allready said so ) that we should X10 civ III entire variable array.
Finer control on things, realism and allow us to give things smaller bonus ( not just +50%, but more subtle changes ).
Is it that hard to insert? I think not. It won't even change civ old model that much.

[JT3]

That would go in other. I like the idea, though.

------------------
CIV3 Threadmaster of UNITS
"We get the paperwork, you get the game!"

[VaderTwo]

Perhaps a way of increasing the movement of ships without fundamentally changing the unit movement points would be to create different types of sea terrain.

Current/Gulf Stream - 1/4 movement point
Shoreline - 1 movement point
Ocean (non-current and not on shoreline) -1/2 movement point

[Ecce Homo]

NotLikeTea pointed out a drawback of increased movement rates.

The AI would be able to sneak into your territory easier.

True. Ships should generate Zones of Control, which would slow the movement of enemies.

[Bubba]

I'm new to the Civ III forums so please forgive me if these are repeats:

1. IMHO all units should be supported from Gold on a civilization wide basis, as is done in CTP rather than through production shields on a city to city basis.

2. Someone mentioned that they would like a General/Commander unit that would give a def/offensive bonus when combined with a stack of units that would become an Army. Others thought that this was overkill and wouldn't add much fun to the game. A fun version of this comes from the Civ II scenarios. Their might be a Great Leader special unit/s for each civilization that MIGHT appear randomly throughout the game and that would have to effect of either a defensive bonus or offensive bonus while in a stack (like a General) or a happiness or scientific bonus for a city (perhaps like plus 5 happiness/science). These units could not be rebuilt once destroyed and would be specific to the age in which they arrived. Moreover they would last only as long as that Age to represent their life span (Modern, Renaissance etc.) Some of these could be for example, Napoleon, Churchill, Wellington, Richard the III, Gandhi, Lincoln, Hitler, Shakespeare, Newton, Einstein, Lenin, Mao etc. In some senses this would allow one to get rid of some of the Wonders that are tied to people and in some ways is like Colonization, except that enemies could try to destroy these units. This would help to make every game special.

[Bigcivfan]

I have a suggestion about the partisan military unit. I think that although the Partisan unit belongs to your civ, in the game the unit is a partisan group of an opposing civ that is being funded by your civ. Therefore, I the partisan unit should be able to attack an opposing civ regarless of diplomatic state, but there is a possibility every time they attack that the link to your civ could be discovered, and then you suffer a reputation penalty and war could be declared. The partisans should be a little weaker to compensate for this ability, as they are mainly good for destroying military supply units (another possible concept?) and small military units. All partisan units should be made a neutral color so that civ's cannot tell who is funding rebel activity on their soil....



<font size=1 color=444444>[This message has been edited by Bigcivfan (edited June 13, 1999).]</font>

[philbo]

I would like to see tethered balloons (for observation up to 3 spaces away) as early as the 1600's. If there is weather in the new model, free flying balloons with no defense and a weak offense could be interesting.

[CormacMacArt]

I realize that this is outside the present discussion, but I wanted to get my two cents in. I completly disagree with the idea of having commander units or captain units. The only thing that it adds to the game is another level of micromanagement. Units can rebel without there being a separate unit to lead them.

[Mo]

Partians:
Nice idea. To make the partisan unit more realistic the units that are created when a city is conquered should be controled by the computer even if it was your city. They should respect all of your diplomtic situations except if you make peace with their home city which is occupied.

[Kaak]

It would be nice if the game could keep track of a unit's history. I.E.: when it was created, battle history, etc...ideas?


------------------
Kaak
Tribe of the Divine

[Alexander's Horse]

I would like to have generals. They should have a range of modifying effects like diplomats. This would make more sense if there was stacked combat.

[Picker]

I think that officers are necessary, however, I think they should be integrated into the units that are already, and depending on the time period, should have a fight rating, or a strategy rating(in the olden days, low ranking officers led by example, and were ussually the in the front line, nowadays, they lead from the back). However, I think generals should be their own separate unit. Let's be honest, every army needs a chain of command. The units should also have a loyalty to thier civ, which affects the odds of them being induced into another civ, or rebelling against you.

------------------
The Notorious P.I.K.
"Read my clit, not gonna do it."