 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Stuie
|
 |
Have a beer!
Sep 2001
time: 00:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JesseSmith Land
Armies Increased combat effectiveness, greater healing capabilities, pillage w/o move cost, +1 movement, ZOC, Blitz, Radar |
I think I like armies now.
quote:
Naval
Caravel Move: 4
Frigate Move: 5, Bombard: (3/1/2)
Privateer Move: 5, Enslavement: Privateer
Ironclads 5(6)/6/3, Upgrades to Destroyer
Transport Move: 6, Defense: 2, Capacity: 6
Destroyer Move: 8, Air Defense: 1, Detect Invisible
Battleship Move: 5, Air Defense: 2
AEGIS Cruiser Move: 7, Air Defense: 3, Detect Invisible, Radar
Carrier Move: 7, Air Defense: 1
Nuclear Submarines Stealth Attack, Detect Invisible
Submarines Stealth Attack, Detect Invisible |
All still too slow for huge maps.... Oh, well; that's what the editor is there for, right?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sir Ralph
|
 |
Long live teh Schwampel!
Dec 2001
time: 06:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chieftess
a. Yes. It's got the same defense as a musketman already. Why have the AI waste gold on it? |
Thanks, but that's not the question. The question is whether it makes sense to let the Dutch UU upgrade to the French UU, or it's only a typo. My bet is that it's the latter.
quote:
b. Not really. The game looks at the Musketeer, and since the Dutch can't build it, it looks at the next unit in the upgrade path, until it reaches Rifleman. It's not too bad.  |
Thanks again, I know how the upgrade mechanism works. There's basically a long upgrade path from spearman up to modern infantry units, and it's difficult to make an exception for the Swiss Mercanary. It is not possible to let it upgrade directly to Riflemen and to skip the musket units for the Dutch, because in this case either no unit could upgrade to the S.M., or muskets would be skipped for all civs. Also, the Dutch would be screwed if they had saltpeter, but no iron. I remember a good solution concept by Warpstorm. Why has it been dropped?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
The Jaguar Warrior was IMO a fun and balanced unit in the epic (standard) game. In the MP world, however, the Jag consistently produced top finishes, regardless of player skill. Therefore I feel it was a good decision to tone it down a bit.
In SP, the Jag is now more of a scouting Warrior than an offensive tool (although that's still a possibility). This makes the Chasqui look even worse in comparison.
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
I'm almost certain that no UU design decisions were made with culturally linkage in mind. If I could venture a guess, I would say that a vast majority of players play without this option.
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dominae
I would say that a vast majority of players play without this option.
|
yes, definately. I hate knowing that I will be next to the same civs all the time. especially when its carthage, zulu, greece, and rome. blech.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Yahweh Sabaoth
|
 |
The Heavens
Dec 2002
time: 05:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by asleepathewheel
yes, definately. I hate knowing that I will be next to the same civs all the time. especially when its carthage, zulu, greece, and rome. blech. |
But the cultural linking often provides such a nice balance... and it's more historically appealing... I've never understood the desire to remove cultural linking, other than to have every game be "unique" and also perhaps to have either a super-challenge or a freshly-paved road to success (for example of the former, try playing as say, Koreans, surrounded by Zulus, Persians, Carthaginians, etc., and for an example of the latter, try playing as Chinese surrounded by Ottomans, English, etc.)
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
G'Kar
|
|
St. Louis, USA
Aug 2003
time: 23:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Terser
Will TOW infantry have some sort of anti-tank attack/defense bonus against armored units? Or will they basically just be infantry with an unusually high defense and a different strat resource requirement than tanks and mech infantry? |
AIUI (as I understant it) the TOW infantry is a powerful, no resource needed defender.
There are still no unit v unit specialized combat bonuses; and at this point in game development it would be a bad thing to add.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
sabrewolf
|
 |
turicum, helvetistan
Jun 2002
time: 06:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arrian
Jags now at 15? Ouch. I never like them anyway, though, so no biggie.
|
i guess that's to make the other 1,1,2 UU (Inca's Chasqui Scout Cost: 20) relatively speaking more less weak. but i still don't like ultra-early GAs
quote:
Gallics now at 40? YIKES
|
oh my oh my...
70 may have been a bit much... but 40????
makes it the best swordsman-replacement imho (speed over strength)
quote:
Is the "first strike" like a zero-range bombard shot (ala the "AU" mod?)? |
that's what it looks like!
quote:
The curragh is 1.1.2, 15 shields, and can carry how many units? 1 or 2? And if you're seafaring, it's actually 1.1.3, eh? So basically you've got 15 shield galleys? |
if you look a the source code of the first page, you can clearly see, that the '0' belongs to the "Trans Cap"... maybe a good idea...
general stuff:
i think the ancient cavalry is a lot more powerful that the crusader foot units. the latter are stronger, ok, but very slow... i still prefer regular knights. and getting one every 5 turns doesn't give you enough offensive power, so you'll have to get those cav's anyway.
what traits have the wonders got? there were too few expansionist wonders until now. i hope at least the knights templar is expansionist
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31.
Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-11-2003 13:34
perhaps RP had something to do with this.
|