10-02-2004 23:59									#91
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I just played the Age of Discovery scenario again, and I realized that those privateers were really nice. The one particular unit I never built in Civ3 original, or PTW.

I used a 5 unit stack of privateers to hunt for undefended carracks between my Portugese coast and the Caribbean, which I sometimes captured and got the contents. Sometimes it was a treasure! And such is what you get both 200 gold and 1000 VP for.

Also, the viking Longboat in the Medieval scenario is very useful as it's fast and also has a 4 unit cap. By loading 3 of these full of Berserkir you rule the coast. Amphibious and high attack value rule as they may heal in the boats. Poor England.

	11-02-2004 00:01									#92
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

oops.. DP

	11-02-2004 00:20									#93
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by AroSch Oh, sorry, I don't own CtP2. I never bough it, becouse I was disappointed about CtP. I know, many things are fixed now, but there are still many features, wich I personally don't want in a Civ game. For example I don'tlike very much future age, space(?)- and oceanic cities or some of the unit abilities.

I'm actually working, as we speak, on the code for "BuildClasses" for CTP2.

That'll allow players to select optional age ranges (so the game ends now, the near future, or far future,) when they start the game... which would allow for different tech trees, and end games. That's only an example of their application.

*SNIP*

quote: Yes, they fixed the thumb AI, and some other things too, didn't they? May be CtP2 is now (with mods) a cool Civ game, but when Civ3 relased I bough it and liked it (apart from some smaller design mistakes). Now I'm hoping for a Civ4 with some more flavour.

The Apolyton community did.. so I guess that should be "we" fixed it.

CTP2 with a decent mod, like Cradle, is well worth a play. There are some exceptionally balanced and polished Mods (easily as polished as Civ3 IMO) available. I wouldn't play the game as released, either.

	11-02-2004 00:56									#94
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by MrBaggins I'm actually working, as we speak, on the code for "BuildClasses" for CTP2. That'll allow players to select optional age ranges (so the game ends now, the near future, or far future,) when they start the game... which would allow for different tech trees, and end games. That's only an example of their application.

Well, sounds interisting for any CtP2 owner. I'm sure you and the comunity did a great job, I guess, for civ3 never will be started such a project.

quote: Originally posted by MrBaggins The Apolyton community did.. so I guess that should be "we" fixed it.

Uh, I didn't take no notice of that. Sorry, if I had tough about a little more, I should have seen that. But since I don't own CtP2, I don't visit CtP section here ore in other forums. Looks like you really do a great job.

Are there - in your opinion - any further CtP1/2-ideas wich should be implemented in Civ4 especially for naval combat ore generally for the Civ4 Navy?

	11-02-2004 01:08									#95
	Remove this text

Active air and sea defense (so when a unit of that particular movement type moves within a definable range, the active defender gets a free strike.)

CTP2 also allowed you to specify that carried units (like fighters on an Aircraft Carrier) are necessary to implement this.

Allows you to implement layered defenses for modern BG's.

	11-02-2004 01:24									#96
	Got spare money?

Hm, actually I don't see the point. In Civ3 bombard units (f.e. Man-O-Wars) have a "free shot" if attacked. I'm not sure if activating ZOCs for naval units in Civ3 editor will give naval units also a free strike if enemys (only) pass (and don't attack). Hm, how different ist the free strike in CtP from that one in Civ3?

	11-02-2004 02:25									#97
	Inflate your Upload Space

Active Air defence, for example, allows for air superiority.

	11-02-2004 03:44									#98
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Agathon Yeah, but that would take up a lot of processing power.

It didn't in GalCiv - there's just a little automated unit that follows a predetermined path.

	11-02-2004 06:15									#99
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by AroSch Hm, actually I don't see the point. In Civ3 bombard units (f.e. Man-O-Wars) have a "free shot" if attacked. I'm not sure if activating ZOCs for naval units in Civ3 editor will give naval units also a free strike if enemys (only) pass (and don't attack). Hm, how different ist the free strike in CtP from that one in Civ3?

Oh it's very different, since the units are not stacked in the same way. So in CtP ranged unit on the 2nd line will fire free shots as the combat rounds go. while the first lines attack or defends, and enemy 2nd line units also fire free shots. As long as 2nd line units have the ranged cap. it will give many more "free shots" than civ3.
ranged units are automatically placed in 2nd line so they do no melee combat until the 1st line die.

I am not sure though. Long time sicne I played that one... I recall it means for quite a bit (too much) power in artillery which in Civ3 is underpowered but I guess it has been made more realistic, since both games are moddable. (can also be modded with lethal bombard for naval units)

	11-02-2004 07:10									#100
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by AroSch Hm, actually I don't see the point. In Civ3 bombard units (f.e. Man-O-Wars) have a "free shot" if attacked. I'm not sure if activating ZOCs for naval units in Civ3 editor will give naval units also a free strike if enemys (only) pass (and don't attack). Hm, how different ist the free strike in CtP from that one in Civ3?

Ahh.. I see what you're asking now.

Active air defense is a ranged effect, that.. if a unit moves into (not attacks within... moves within,) there is an active defense strike. Its unconnected to ZOC, and can be at any range.

For instance... a bomber has, say, a move of 10, and bombardment range of 1... I.E. it can bombard the very next square.

A Carrier (with a fighter to activate) has an active air defense range of 1, (say) a cruiser with an active air defense range of 2, and an AEGIS Destroyer, with an active air defense range of 3.

A bomber approaching to attack, would be subject to all three Active Air Defenses, before being able to bombard... thus could possibly be destroyed prior to bombarding, or even reaching the square to bombard.

ZOC free strikes only happen when moving past... not on approach.

	11-02-2004 13:34									#101
	Increase the size of your Attachments

@ThePlagueRat/MrBaggins
Sorry, if you didn't understand me first. English isn't my mother language and I never learnt it at scool. So sometimes it is not easy to me, telling what I want to know. And sometimes I tend to make my sentences(?) longer then it may be good for understanding it.

Well, now I see. Free strike allready on approach. It sounds interisting, but IMHO this is something "only" for modern times. Civ3's modern times naval combat is quite okay. What we really need for Civ4 is improved naval tactics/combat for ancient, mediaeval and Age of Sail times, I think. For example massive AI landing operations with more than one transport ship... Just my opinion.

	12-02-2004 21:32									#102
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

What is needed is

1: Visible, one-tile-wide trade routes (perhaps when you start trading, you can draw a line on the map) that can be easily intercepted by a warship or a privateer.

2: Double movement points for all ships EXCEPT GALLEYS

I also thought of something else. Planes CAN, and HAVE, and DO sink ships. Only in Civ3 this is impossible! To add an extra dimension to the game, there should be lethal sea bombard for air units.

AND, to keep it from becoming unbalanced, allow the ships to FIGHT BACK! So when a plane is set to bombard a ship we have a standard pitched battle, where the bombard score of the plane is pitted against the defense score of the ship! To add extra flavor, we could perhaps give support ships (destroyers, AEGIS cruisers) higher anti-air scores than battleships and carriers. Think about it!

	12-02-2004 23:01									#103
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Lethal sea bombardment is just a flag. Now thats moddable.
It's a MUST be modded! Anyway, some ships can also shoot down planes, in which can aslo be modded.

	14-02-2004 08:18									#104
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

What we should be doing is looking at historical naval strategy and designing the game around that.

There are three main figures in naval strategy IIRC: Mahan, Corbett and Tirpitz.

Mahan thought that the job of a navy was dominance of the seas and that a navy should be designed to seek out the enemy's battle fleet and destroy it.

Corbett thought that the sea was too great to exercise effective control over and developed a supplemental theory of blockade. As long as you can keep the enemy fleet in port or largely prevent it breaking past your pickets, control is yours.

Tirpitz invented the "Risk Fleet Theory" - he thought that you didn't need to fight to have an effective fleet as long as it remained in port as a threat and tied up enemy naval assets. He also thought that you didn't have to win a complete victory but only enough to threaten the enemy (in this case Britain) with losing enough to lose the ability to compete against all its potential enemies.

Corbett is the one who has most to tell us. Trade should be unrestricted by sea, but restricted to so many tiles on land. This makes the sea worth controlling. Otherwise trade works much as it does in Civ3. This makes a blockade strategy natural and also makes it worth a player concentrating his fleet in one port so as to draw a large number of enemy ships from blockading the other ports.

Blockading in this situation is effected by a ZOC.

Submarines cannot be blockaded although they can blockade enemy ports themselves. So in a hypothetical WWII scenario Britain attempts to choke Germany off by controlling the English Channel and the sea between Scotland and Greenland. Germany sends out submarines to blockade British and American ports. Britain must keep a strong fleet at home to guard against German fleet breakout and must also send destroyers after German submarines.

There - that solves all the problems without the need for trade routes.

	14-02-2004 08:20									#105
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by conananas I also thought of something else. Planes CAN, and HAVE, and DO sink ships. Only in Civ3 this is impossible! To add an extra dimension to the game, there should be lethal sea bombard for air units. AND, to keep it from becoming unbalanced, allow the ships to FIGHT BACK! So when a plane is set to bombard a ship we have a standard pitched battle, where the bombard score of the plane is pitted against the defense score of the ship! To add extra flavor, we could perhaps give support ships (destroyers, AEGIS cruisers) higher anti-air scores than battleships and carriers. Think about it!

An excellent idea. This is what happened with the discovery of aircraft, after all.

	14-02-2004 10:56									#106
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

This is also implemented in C3C

	14-02-2004 23:07									#107
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by skywalker This is also implemented in C3C

The aircraft or ZOCS?

	15-02-2004 02:33									#108
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

For aircrafts, the lethal land and sea bombardment flag is on in C3C.

In the old days it was just 'bombardissimo' so they were only good for infrastructure bombing to stop those pesky cavalry from charging in great numbers. Now air units can kill, and we like killing don't we?!

	15-02-2004 04:39									#109
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

I didn't know as I don't have C3C. I'm an EU2 man these days.

	15-02-2004 04:49									#110
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Agathon I didn't know as I don't have C3C. I'm an EU2 man these days.

Naval and air powers have been beefed up considerably in C3C to the point of actually being quite fun. And the AI uses a lot of privateers, which will eat up your galleys if not careful. And those privateers can enslave to form more privateers. On one map as the english (seafaring trait =+1 sea move) I had about 42 men o war and about 30 enslaved at the end (enslaved are regs so I used mainly bombardment, with the vets attacking). A blast. The ai is better at sea, not perfect of course.

	15-02-2004 04:59									#111
	Suffering from ads?

Also, as I mentioned, C3C has this nice Age of Discovery campaign where naval units is a must, and privateers can even rob treasures!


Well, naval power in C3C is not as well made as it is in EU2.
Between those two, EU2 rule the seas IMHO.

	15-02-2004 06:52									#112
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

What do you think about my ideas on how the game should be designed around historical strategy?

	16-02-2004 04:01									#113
	Support Apolyton

Ironclads: a historical blip, but no reason that history should be repeated. Keep the ironclad.

dreadnoughts: The historical ship named dreadnought was a European ironclad. No particular need for a separate class here.

Monitors: US ironclads differed from European models in that they were far less sea worthy (European ironclads were ocean going, fuel permitting). Perhaps make a separate class. Maybe force the player to choose ironclads or monitors with boolean tech requirements.

It might be interesting to give steam ships a fuel limit, somewhat similar to civ2 air units.

	16-02-2004 04:36									#114
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by lajzar dreadnoughts: The historical ship named dreadnought was a European ironclad. No particular need for a separate class here..

Ummm.... no. HMS Dreadnought was the first modern battleship. By that I mean an all big gun (12 inch) ship with heavy armour and turbines rather than reciprocating engines.

	17-02-2004 02:59									#115
	Inflate your Upload Space

There was another HMS dreadnought before that one. Ship names do get re-used. Check out how many military vessels there are named "Dolphin" sometime.

	17-02-2004 04:42									#116
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by lajzar There was another HMS dreadnought before that one. Ship names do get re-used. Check out how many military vessels there are named "Dolphin" sometime.

That's true, but when people refer to "Dreadnoughts" they mean turbine powered, heavy armoured, all big gun, ships. That's what was being talked about in this thread.

Ironclads are a bit of a waste of time, unless they are supposed to include all pre-dreadnought battleships, most of which were not monitors (the current civ 3 ironclad).

I've said that my objections to ironclads concern the ridiculously short time that sailing ships are worth anything in Civ 3. That definitely needs to be fixed.

	17-02-2004 06:10									#117
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

A historical naval battle system would be fine. But how do one implement that?

- One way of doing it could be by having more unit stats than att/def, and a different HP system. 0 - 100 damage rating. at about 75: incapable of fighting or support it's stack. 100 means sunk. Something that way...

	17-02-2004 06:30									#118
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I just mean that thinking about the way navies work should reflect real naval strategies, rather than just a pretty graphic with some movement points.

	17-02-2004 13:27									#119
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

ok, I've been persuaded of teh virtues of having a separate dreadnought class. Id write more, but a bycicle accident has pit my right thiumb out of action.

	17-02-2004 16:17									#120
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Agathon I've said that my objections to ironclads concern the ridiculously short time that sailing ships are worth anything in Civ 3. That definitely needs to be fixed.

I agree. That's an important point. The Age of Sail is not very well reflected in any Civgame. Ok, it has still to be discussed when a "Civish Age of Sail" should start. But IMHO it has to be much longer than now. And it has to be different.