Announcement

**Lord Nword** · April 19, 2005, 19:11

As far as I know, it's just an annoying quirk that we have to live with...

I also know it's spelled coffee, not coffe

**BlackCat** · April 19, 2005, 19:23

Could be that the misspelling is caused by either the danish version kaffepause or just the fact that english is my secondary language - your choice.

**Chaos Theory** · April 19, 2005, 19:33

Such units will stop in bases or other landing sites unless an enemy is adjacent to the landing site. It's annoying, but can be tolerated. Incidentally, this leads to odd behavior if you try to give one of these units the ability to carry air units: it will try to land on itself after every move.

**BlackCat** · April 19, 2005, 19:47

In the current situation I don't mind so much - I have 18 bases pumpinig out missiles each turn and when the flow are up, it is no big problem.

I guess that what annoys me most is the skewed movement - dragging shows one path but real movement may include a base. It's quite a ***** if a crucial unit thakes a break in a base when it is supposed to make an attack !

**Petek** · April 19, 2005, 21:16

I think I may have found a workaround for this behavior. Perhaps someone could test this technique:

A chopper was in a base and ready to move. I clicked on a square within its range. Another base was right between the chopper and the destination square. Sure enough, the chopper flew right into the other base.

After reloading the game (so the situation was the same as above), I clicked on a square adjacent to the second base. While holding the mouse button down I hit the space bar and then clicked on two other squares (hitting the spacebar each time) to form a path around the intervening base. After releasing the mouse button, the chopper flew to the designated square, avoiding the base.

The technique of hitting the space bar is the same way you set waypoints for units on patrol. It also seems to allow you to define a path for a unit to follow. Just like waypoints, you can't hit the spacebar more than three times to define the path.

I also tried this for a gravship and it worked the same way. Didn't have any missles handy.

This is admitedly cumbersome, but less so than manually moving the unit one square at a time.

Comments?

**Mead** · April 19, 2005, 21:36

Originally posted by BlackCat
In the current situation I don't mind so much - I have 18 bases pumpinig out missiles each turn and when the flow are up, it is no big problem.
***!

You have 18 bases turning out missiles each turn?

I rarely use missiles.

Usually, I would prefer to use the production effort to make a chopper. Even if it can only make one attack before it is too damaged to make an addtional attack I have the option to rest it for a couple of turns back to health and then reuse it for another attack.

With missiles, you use them (except, if you, for whatever reason, like to scout with them) only once. About the only time I would think of using missiles would be against a tachyon field/Aerospace equiped base with good AAA armour units where I know no non-blink unit would survive an attack (Usually by the time I have Blink the games over).

Mead

**Mead** · April 19, 2005, 22:08

Re: Choppers, gravships. missiles and coffebreaks

Originally posted by BlackCat

What is it with these units ? Why do they have to stop at every base in their path if you tell them to go to a specific base ?
***

I guess you have to just live with it.

I usually move the units, one square at a time, around any bases in which they might be tempted to land (Pacted as well as my own bases). It's one of the PIA factors when using them. It doesn't take too much effort. Forgetting this precaution came be unpleasnt. I have seen one ACDG turn where the turnplayer forgot about this requirement and the factions turn was diminished by the result.

Mead

**Flubber** · April 19, 2005, 22:58

Originally posted by Mead

You have 18 bases turning out missiles each turn?

I rarely use missiles.

Mead

Me either for the reasons you cited. They can however be devastatingly powerful as a self-destruct weapon as well. If its going to die anyway I'd rather damage a ton of units than kill one.

**BlackCat** · April 20, 2005, 20:39

@ my missile (ab)use.

I typically play on wet worlds so land attack isn't a real solution - you have to build the army, the transporters and the ships to protect them. This takes time and are risky compared with choppers and drop units. I don't use missiles before two things has happened : I got at least fusion and the opponent has both fusion and AAA. After the opponent get that, even choppers are endangered and therefore I use missiles to take those units out before my choppers clear the path for droppers.

Another point is that I might be a sissy. I consider choppers etc to be manned by persons witch missiles isn't, so I actually do a lot to protect such units.

**Sikander** · April 21, 2005, 02:58

To my mind the real abuse is the silly self-destruct rules that the game allows. To say that they seriously distort the combat system (which has never been the Civ franchise's strongpoint) is an understatement. It's a better game without this overpowered tactic.