 |
|  |
 |
|
Alfonsus72
|
|
Spain has also an aircraft carrier capable to operate with 24 SWOTL planes (and also helicopters) called "Principe de Asturias". I guess is similar to the "Garibaldi".
Spain also sold one vessel of the same class to Thailand, but I´ve read is not operative due to problem with the thailandians SWOTL planes.
Foch and Clemenceau are french carriers, bigger than those of Spain or Italy.
But I guess only the USA has carriers that could "carry" more than 80 non-swotl planes.
The problem is that "the longer the plane ranges are, the useless the aircraft carriers become". Of course USA carriers are not useless, as we could saw in the Gulf war and we can see now with the retaliation against Bin Laden. But mind that the heavy bombers were based on Diego Garcia. I mean that WW2 was the finest moment for the carriers, but with time they will lose importance, except for those with a "global strategy" like the USA.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
korn469
|
 |
Poetic Justic
Apr 1999 time: 00:15
|
|
i updated the list to include the Jaguar Warrior and the ironclad's stats, in another thread Jeff Morris from firaxis also identified the last ship under Magnetism, that ship is a privateer, he also confirmed that the list of ships was right
and is it just me or does anyone else have a problem with an ironclad and a battleship traveling at the same speed? i mean if you compared the U.S. monitor to the U.S. Missouri i'm sure you'd find a rather large speed difference
Jaguar Warrior
With such a low attack power power, this CSU isn't one to be truly feared, however on a small map the Aztecs with their extreamly early golden age could be one of the most dominant civs.
Last edited by korn469 on 25-09-2001 at 16:42
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Internationalist
|
|
Thessaloniki,Hellas
Oct 2000 time: 05:15
|
|
About the Aicraft carrier discussion, I understand Iran wanted to buy a new one from the Russians(Yeltsin as head of state).Perhaps with Putin in power that changed though..
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
korn469
|
 |
Poetic Justic
Apr 1999 time: 00:15
|
|
Shiva and DonJoel
i know that you have backed up examples of the use of elephants in india with religious examples, but i still don't think that the military use of elephants and the development of a religion with various gods are linked...i would say that elephants were used because they had military and not religious implications
how about Vaghadeva, the tiger god? tigers also probably have alot of representation in hinduism, and tigers can kill a man much easier than a horse, however the widespread military use of tigers is unheard of while elephants had little impact on most military operations, horses on the other hand proved to have worldwide military implications
i would say that a group that either believed in one god, or didn't believe in gods at all could grasp the military uses of elephants, as they could grasp the military ultility of horses or gunpowder or nuclear weapons
even more than that, we have seen various changes in the tech tree, but many people in this forum wants to hold on to the elephants/polytheism association while easily letting go of caravans, diplomats, spies, crusaders, dragoons, and cruisers...that is what i don't understand why are there people arguing that the indian war elephant still comes with polytheism while nobody is arguing that diplomats still come with writing when firaxis has made it fairly clear that neither one of those associations are true...can u explain that?
one more question, does anyone want to guess if the battleship is nuclear powered or not?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
korn469
|
 |
Poetic Justic
Apr 1999 time: 00:15
|
|
DonJoel
i don't think that tigers have ever been systematically used in war and that was my point, tigers are represented in hinduism just like elephants are, but their religious associations mean little when it comes time to devise military strategies
think abouts snakes, many religions have snakes as a symbol (even christianity) but it's not like they load ICBMs up with cobras or rattle snakes, because snake warhead would be useless, compared to a wearhead that had smallpox in it
so yes they linked elephants and polytheism in civ2, but that link isn't in civ3
EDIT:
MarkL, i added the privateer yesterday, it was the unidentified ship under Magnetism
Last edited by korn469 on 26-09-2001 at 17:45
|
|
|  |
 |
|
korn469
|
 |
Poetic Justic
Apr 1999 time: 00:15
|
|
i updated the list to include the roman legion
Legion
The legion is an upgraded swordman with the following stats 3.3.1 (attack.defense.movement). This means that the legion allows the roman player to have a capable offense along with a great defense in the early game. Because of that the Roman player can focus on building Legions for the bulk of their offensive units and all of their defensive units. The dual use of Legions will give the Romans more flexability in the ancient era than other civs. The enhanced defense of the Legion would allow the romans to use ships (triremes in particular) to land their Legions beside of enemy cities because the legions could survive attacks by the cities defenders.
Last edited by korn469 on 30-09-2001 at 00:22
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Skanky Burns
|
 |
Skanky Bastard Quartermaster
Aug 2001 time: 14:15
|
|
Thatd be strange capturing a scout. I mean, it makes sense when capturing settlers or workers. You assign 100 soldiers to 'keep them under control', not really making a big hole in the capturing army. These soldiers then guard the settlers/workers, making sure they do work for your empire.
Capturing catapults/cannons/etc also makes sense. There a few soldiers guarding this seige equipment. You kill them all, assign your own men to control the seige equipment, and thus it becomes your unit.
But capturing a scout?? The scout is a single person on a horse, who's well trained on finding their way around, making maps, etc. How could you keep control of someone like that? A military unit captures him, then offers him freedom if he works for them. The scout agrees, and sets off to the west... but returns to his home town instead.
My point is, how would another civilization keep control of a loyal scout that you built?? 
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15. Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|