 |
| |
|
|
torsoboy
|
|
I find the changes you have made in your mod very interesting, and will be incorporating some of them in my own tinkering. There are some ideas I'd like to share, which aren't realized yet because I've just begun tinkering with the editor and not even sure if they are at all possible.
In CIV, unit strengths are of an ordinal value. Knights outclass horsemen but are outclassed by Cavalry themselves. This is fine when there is still progress, but once progress stops, there is no reason to build anything but the best: Modern Armor. Once researched, I find myself amassing large quantities of MA, rendering all ground personnel (and other units for that matter) obsolete. For me, this leads to a very boring endgame in which whoever has the most tanks wins.
To my understanding, modern battles can be and are fought with armor, but to occupy territory one needs troops - not tanks. You don't even have to google up what happened to Russian tank columns in Grozny to realise that tanks are no good in urban settings. The strengths of armor only shine on the battlefield, not in the streets. Even the IDF, who frequently employ tanks to scare off would be insurgents, surround their tanks with many soldiers. Not because they happen to have a bunch of obsolete troops, but because they are *necessary* for dealing with angry mobs.
Thus, to tackle these two wrongs (boring endgame and historical inaccuracy), I propose that Tanks, Panzers, and Modern Armors do not contribute to Military Police.
One of the possible errs stemming from this solution that I foresee is the slower pace of conquest. To occupy newly conquered cities one would have to move his or her slow-moving infantry. I would like to see a landbased troop transport for this role, replacing Mechanized Infantry.
Make Mechanized Infantry an Armored Personnel Carrier, 6/10/3, with transport capacity of 2 or 3.
In my opinion, these two changes would diversify warfare in the Modern Age by discouraging sole use of Tanks and encouraging use of Infantry/Marines/Other.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
torsoboy
|
|
Ok, that too bad I guess. One thing I'm wondering: Ships do have a attack/defence rating > 0, but do not contribute to Military Police, how is this possible?
Thanks for the reply anyhow, and sorry for barging in without doing a search.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Madine
|
|
Another thing is that adding "wheeled" to tanks makes them a less automatic choice.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sir Ralph
|
 |
Long live teh Schwampel!
Dec 2001
time: 06:36
|
|
It would make sense in a scenario, that forbids settlement on certain terrain types.
For instance, I played around with scenarios, where it wasn't allowed to settle on mountains (as it's normal), desert (except floodplains), tundra, jungle and forest (to avoid settlements on tundra forest). With Conquests, volcanoes and wetlands would to be added to that list. Since the AI doesn't chop or clean jungle or wetlands to get city sites, the player would have to restrict himself, too, and therefor I had the house rule never to chop/clean outside the radius of an existing city.
I used the 3 billion years map option. This makes vast areas of mountains, desert, tundra, jungle and forest. The map size was slightly increased, to compensate the loss of settleable land. It made up for very interesting games with large, unsettled areas, resource colonies, connection roads to be guarded against ambushes of omnipresent barbarians (who were swordsmen). Of course nobody would bother with roading/RR'ing vast mountainous areas outside his cultural borders, so except of some rare "main roads" (I called them interstates) the mountains and jungles were unroaded. This made the "wheeled" flag very meaningful throughout the whole game, and you had to make very valid tactical choices concerning the unit mix of your armed forces, not to lose control in these areas.
This is, of course, not an option for the AU mod, as it changes the game too much. I would, hovever, love to have such a PBEM game some day, among at least 5, preferably 6 players.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ducki
|
|
SR, that sounds like a very fun mod that I may have to try out for a more... er, less... uh, non-cookie-cutter game. Thanks for posting it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
Sir Ralph: I would be up for that PBEM. Are you prepared to start it anytime, or does "some day" mean "later"?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
sabrewolf
|
 |
turicum, helvetistan
Jun 2002
time: 06:36
|
|
i'd love to, but not enough time... too many PBEMs already 
quote:
and therefor I had the house rule never to chop/clean outside the radius of an existing city. |
here's a potential exploit against the AI: place city next to forrest/jungle, culturally expand borders (this would make the temple of artemis very powerful) and chop down stuff... and continue like that. city, camp, city, camp, ...CxcxCxcxC
against the AI, this would be an exploit, against humans ok if everyone knows if it's allowed or not.
maybe increasing costs of these actions (by a factor of 4?) would make this more "special"
in PBEMs tanks will unlikely ever come to play and all units before that are not wheeled (except bombarding units and chariots). it could get more interesting, if cavalry (and maybe all faster powerful units like knights) get "wheeled" too, so you really need roads for fast passage through the jungle.
btw: conquistadores are now really powerful if they can retreat back into the forrests after pillaging actions and would be safe there against all fast units 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by jshelr
ping -- sorry, just posting "properly" so the thread will tell me when there are more posts. |
All you need to do is click the "Receive updates for this thread" link at the top of the page.
Edit: congrats on the retirement!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
I would prefer playing standard rules, but for Sir Ralph's suggested changes as above. Those should make the game interesting enough.
Maybe we should discuss this in the thread Sir Ralph will be creating anytime now...
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-06-2004 17:57
|