15-11-2001 09:52									#1
	4 Unique units I'd like to see Enter the AD-FREE zone

The F15 for for the US unique is a bit light. I'd have rather seen a unique aircraft carrier. one that has an extremely high defence and greater range.

for the Chinese, i would have preferred a crossbow man. first to invent one. low range, 4 on offence but available right after warrior code.

The Chinese rider represents the fact the the stirrups were invented by the chinese but chinese armies were rarely noted for the blitzkreig style of attack the mongols were famous for. Where are the Mongols? They ruled China for crumb's sake!

As unappealing as this might be, a cool modern unit for the Japanese could be the kamikaze. cheap and expendable, decent air to air offence but can be used as a missile when attacking cities or carriers or when it attacks cities, it destroys the coastal defence only. yeah, that's would work!

I think a cleric that walks around and coverts enemy troops to join the Indians would be a formidable force.

Where are the Spanish conquistadors?!!

What was more dominant, the German Panzer or the German U-Boat? Was the U-Boat THE enemy for the longest time? That would be a killer industrial period unit.

Would a Persian fanatic unit be too unsensitive?

	15-11-2001 10:31									#2
	Increase Your PM Length

It is kind of difficult to give the Americans a unique unit because of its short history as a nation and the fact that it has never, until recently, had superior military hardware. In worldwar 2, German tanks generally outclassed American ones. It was really material superiority that won the war.

I agree however that in the area of naval superiority, the United States of America's unique unit should be there. It has essentially ruled the seas since World War 2, with American ships outclassing the other two major naval powers of the time, Japan and England. And of course, we all know the devastating toll the US Navy inflicted on the Imperial Japenese Navy.

Coincidentally, PBS is running a show called Warships, and it noted that symbol of American naval power were the massive battleships of the World War 2 era.

Yea, so a special carrier or battleship would have been more appropriate and more useful.

	15-11-2001 16:30									#3
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Well, I would rather like to see the Russians have MIG-24 than the cossacks. I agree the Chinese needs some other unique unit. I also like the idea of kamikazes, I actually have the kamikaze's as a unit in my own mod pack for civ2. I also would like to see more naval unique units.

	15-11-2001 17:32									#4
	Re: 4 Unique units I'd like to see Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by chocoballs Would a Persian fanatic unit be too unsensitive?

Extremely unsensitive and not accurate. Why do people keep suggesting this?

First of all it's a religious UU not a cultural UU, and this game is about units that represent the technologies of the civ to make a better unit than the one currently being used by the rest of the world.

Second - what does a "fanatic" replace?

Third - Since when are Persians fanatics? If anything it would be an arab UU but it shouldn't be since not all Arabs are fanatics, and on a greater note, not all Islamics are fanatics.

	15-11-2001 23:48									#5
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by dexters It is kind of difficult to give the Americans a unique unit because of its short history as a nation and the fact that it has never, until recently, had superior military hardware. In worldwar 2, German tanks generally outclassed American ones. It was really material superiority that won the war. I agree however that in the area of naval superiority, the United States of America's unique unit should be there. It has essentially ruled the seas since World War 2, with American ships outclassing the other two major naval powers of the time, Japan and England. And of course, we all know the devastating toll the US Navy inflicted on the Imperial Japenese Navy. Coincidentally, PBS is running a show called Warships, and it noted that symbol of American naval power were the massive battleships of the World War 2 era. Yea, so a special carrier or battleship would have been more appropriate and more useful.

No, I would have wanted something like a B-2. That's a UU. The americans have sold/given f-15 to their allies for years! something like a b-2 which is actually unique is more appropriate.

P.S. You're wrong about German tanks outclasing American tanks. At the beginning of the war, yes, Nazi tanks would have blown US tanks to smitherenes but germany and america did not engage ;on land until the final years of teh war when the American sherman and others were the finest on the field.

	16-11-2001 00:12									#6
	Re: 4 Unique units I'd like to see Enter the AD-FREE zone

Sorry, choco, but I disagree with some of your choices:

quote: Originally posted by chocoballs As unappealing as this might be, a cool modern unit for the Japanese could be the kamikaze. cheap and expendable, decent air to air offence but can be used as a missile when attacking cities or carriers or when it attacks cities, it destroys the coastal defence only. yeah, that's would work!

Kamikaze fighters, however present in the pop culture, were only a minor episode in the Japan outstanding military history, even if you take into account the WWII period. Actually they started to appear only in the late war, when the Japanese cause was already lost - there were no kamikaze at Pearl Harbour btw - however the Hollywood producers would like you to believe otherwise.

Frankly speaking, I find Samurai to be just a perfect Japanese CSU - if anything, it is the one that doesn't need tweaking at all.

quote: I think a cleric that walks around and coverts enemy troops to join the Indians would be a formidable force.

He he Too much AoK. Remember that the Civ3 (and Firaxis) idea was apparently to provide each Civ with a fighting unit. There is no "conversion" concept in Civ3. Besides, why Indians should be better at conversion? Hardly any of even the British conquerors (not to mention enemies) converted to Hinduism or Buddism

quote: Where are the Spanish conquistadors?!!

This is, IMHO, another common pop-culture mistake. Tercios or Spanish galleons would serve much better as the Spanish CSU. While the efforts of Spanish conquistadors seem impressive, there was actually a handful of conquistadors out there - and it was because of the great leaders (Corez, Pizarro) that they succeeded - not any particular ability. Actually conquistadors were not special in any way other than their purpose - they conquered Aztec due to obvious technological superiority (and some dirty tricks )

quote: What was more dominant, the German Panzer or the German U-Boat? Was the U-Boat THE enemy for the longest time? That would be a killer industrial period unit.

There were many more deserving German CSU in the entire history of the German civilisation. Besides (unlike England - the only civ so far with naval CSU) Germany never was a major naval power - since the Civs apparently tend to start in locations corresponding to the historical ones (with England on shores, Egyptians near deserts and Germany landlocked) this would be not only unhistorical, but also unfair for the German player. Germany ruled on land - that's why they should have the Teutonic knight, a Founding Age infantry or - at the very least - the unfortunate (WWII Gold Age ) Panzer.

quote: Would a Persian fanatic unit be too unsensitive?

It wouldn't be as unsensitive as it would be totally inappropriate. Persia is not (at least directly) a modern day Iran - it flourished under the Achmenid and then Sassanid (sp.?) dynasty.

	16-11-2001 01:15									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

This isn't really about CIV III, but as a history major, I couldn't resist.

The American Sherman Tank in WWII was inferior to its German opponents (weaker armor, terrible main gun). It was faster than the Tiger, but because of its thin armor and weak gun it took something like a 3 to 1 ratio of American tanks to deal with a German one - they basically had to get around them and hit the panzer from behind, where the armor was thinner. Of course, since we had well over a 3 to 1 advantage, we won (that, and air superiority). But tank for tank, the German designs were FAR superior. And that's actually not saying all that much, because the real strength of the German panzers was not the hardware, but the tactics employed. Early in the war, the French and British tanks were not really outclassed by the German ones, but they were beaten because the Germans understood better than anyone how to use tanks - the French were particularly behind.. they used tanks like armored artillery. The overall best WWII tank, it has been argued many times, was actually the T34 (USSR).

We've gotten *much* better at making Tanks, though, and the Abrams is pretty mean (and Sid slipped that one in there as the regular "Modern Armor" unit).

On topic - it would be great if the American UU was the Supercarrier (the nuclear powered behemoths we have today, not the WWII versions). But consider the game mechanics... the aircraft carrier isn't an offensive weapon in and of itself. You'd have to let someone else hit it and hope it wins in order to trigger the golden age (unless you already did w/wonders).

If you think about it, we were one of the first countries (the first? I'm not sure) to come up with ironclads. So that's a possibility. Gunboat diplomacy, baby.

-Arrian

	16-11-2001 06:23									#8
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I think it's important to go with a BROAD UU. Something that is unique to that culture, and something used during the height or rise of that civ. As pointed out earlier, Kamikazes are not apparent in Japanese Military history, while the Samurai defined Japanese military during the height of their power.

	16-11-2001 06:37									#9
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Conquistadors:
Tercios:

	16-11-2001 09:23									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Arrian If you think about it, we were one of the first countries (the first? I'm not sure) to come up with ironclads. So that's a possibility. Gunboat diplomacy, baby.

The French and British had ironclads in the Crimean War, I think, 10 years before we had any.

	16-11-2001 14:34									#11
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by dexters In worldwar 2, German tanks generally outclassed American ones.

That's true. I have to underline that when the WWII began, only the Germans had tanks that were proper for battlefield. Of course we have good Russian tanks (like BT-7 and T-34) too, but the "better ones" came later during the war. The British army didn't have any tanks that would have been useful for the war; yes, that's true, the Vickers were out of date. Of course later on they received better tank models from US and invented better ones on their own too.

My personal suggestion would have been Tiger I or Panther A as the German UU, and not "Panzer".

	17-11-2001 02:12									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

I want a Water Engineer as the Dutch SU.
Changes shallow sea into grassland.

	17-11-2001 09:04									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Styria The French and British had ironclads in the Crimean War, I think, 10 years before we had any.

They had wooden ships wherein the bowes were fitted with strips of iron. By that definition, the Koreans had them centuries before. The Confederate 'Merrimack' was the same way (though it had more iron), but the Union 'Monitor' had a completely-iron hull and was nearly completely submerged. That is the true definition of an 'ironclad' ship; it needs to be more iron (actually steel) than wood. It also makes the battle of Hampton Roads (Monitor vs the Merrimack) the first battle between two 'ironclads'.

Apart from that, I think that the F-15 should have been scrapped as an American UU. Perhaps a 'Los Angeles'-class nuclear submarine with an additional attack and/or defense point; or a 'Nimitz'-class nuclear aircraft carrier with more range/ carrying capicity/ or beefed defense that could compete with a battleship.

The Panzer is fine IMHO, but if it must be tweeked, perhaps making it the equivilant of a modern tank in terms of 2 attack/round but with it's original stats. That would better reflect the general German tactical superiority when it came to armoured tactics.

	17-11-2001 18:08									#14
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Ribannah I want a Water Engineer as the Dutch SU. Changes shallow sea into grassland.

What would it replace?

	17-11-2001 19:57									#15
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Ribannah I want a Water Engineer as the Dutch SU. Changes shallow sea into grassland.

Not a bad idea, but I think all the CSU should be battle worthy. Otherwise there is no way of the winning a battle and triggering a GA. Moreover, the special units can only differ from the regular units in Attack, Defence, Movement (and resources needed). We are not able, AFAIK, add specific abilities that were not originally included in the game.

But a special Dutch unit is really an interesting question. Perhaps some fast naval unit (Caravel or Galleon?). I must admit I am not very good on the history of Netherlands, so I don't know what other unit it could be.

All in all, I think in the history of humanity, four civs/nations were really ruling the waves: English, Spanish, Portugese and Dutch. IMHO, the should be the only ones with navy CSU. (Btw, before people jump at me - US is ruling the waves right now, however due to technological development it is not so important today as it was some time ago).

	17-11-2001 20:01									#16
	Increase Your PM Length

Just had a thought about Dutch unit. Wasn't a special Dutch ship called "Fluyt"? IIRC it was a fast strong ship, good in defending convoys etc. Perhaps it could be a Frigate with increased movement and/or defense?

	18-11-2001 00:12									#17
	Increase the size of your Attachments

The Fluyt is a 17th century Merchantman, not really a warship, although the Dutch often put cannons on their merchant vessels rather than having warships protect their trade convoys.

	18-11-2001 02:16									#18
	Re: 4 Unique units I'd like to see Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by chocoballs The F15 for for the US unique is a bit light. I'd have rather seen a unique aircraft carrier. one that has an extremely high defence and greater range.

I agree except you have to win a combat with a uu to start a GA. If they could set it up somehow so it could cause a GA then I'd switch in a heartbeat. Our carriers have been something we have been noted for for almost 60 years now.

quote: Originally posted by chocoballs Where are the Spanish conquistadors?!!

With the Spanish, not in the game.

Originally posted by chocoballs
What was more dominant, the German Panzer or the German U-Boat? Was the U-Boat THE enemy for the longest time? That would be a killer industrial period unit.
[/QUOTE]

The panzer was far more dominant and for a longer time than the U-boats short reign.

	18-11-2001 02:20									#19
	Re: Re: 4 Unique units I'd like to see Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by orange Extremely unsensitive and not accurate. Why do people keep suggesting this?

Because all people (and notice) see on tv are fanatics burning the flag and equate it that all are like that. Thing is alot of people would be surprised how many Muslims they walk past or work with every day and never even know it.

	18-11-2001 14:53									#20
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: My personal suggestion would have been Tiger I or Panther A as the German UU, and not "Panzer".

Just a note; the Panther and the Tiger tanks were "panzers"...Panzerkampfwagon Mark V and VI respectivly.
Panzer is not out of line.

	19-11-2001 00:04									#21
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I know that both the Tiger I and Panther A are "Panzers", but I wanted to be more specific than just Panzer.

	19-11-2001 00:17									#22
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Infanteer Panzerkampfwagon

A small note: Panzerkampfwagen.

	19-11-2001 00:56									#23
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by brandon749 on land until the final years of teh war when the American sherman and others were the finest on the field.

What are you talking about? The Sherman was a deathtrap, and its drivers admitted it. It took five Shermans to take down a Tiger - this was part of US Army doctrine at the time. It was too lightly armored, undergunned (short 75mm had no AP vs and German tank after the early Pzkpfw IVs), and wasn't super-fast, either. The Brits upgraded it by putting in a 17 pounder (Firefly), which could do some damage, but the Sherman survived until the end of the war in close to its original config in the US army. Not until the Pershing (M90 I believe) came out in 1945 did the US have a capable MBT. Only numbers made the campaigns of 1944 possible.

Every main power in 1944 had a better MBT than the US. Even the British...though they weren't as reliable in field conditions (a great advantage of the Sherman, especailly since the US had SCADS of spare parts and mechanics).


Anyway, back on topic,

The f15 is OK as CSU, although a naval unit would be equally appropriate. Carriers, of course, would fit best, but F15s (broadly representing US fighter tech, incl. F14s, F18s, etc.) launched from a Carrier triggering a Golden Age seems pretty appropriate.

4 attack is too strong for a Crossbowman. The idea is good, but there isn't much room at the archer level for a better yet not redundant unit. Making them cheaper is too much of an impact at that early stage. Maybe they could replace the Longbowman, and have a 5 attack, or be cheaper. That would fit the historical appearance of the unit better, as well.

Rock on.

	20-11-2001 18:39									#24
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Rasbelin My personal suggestion would have been Tiger I or Panther A as the German UU, and not "Panzer".

Mmmm, wouldn't have chosen the A model. It is the one with the bad engine and no AA weapon. I think the D or G model would have been a better choice.

	20-11-2001 19:30									#25
	Accuracy vs Popular Knowledge Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

When Firaxis assigned the names to the UU's, they went for what the commmon person knows about history and world events. Take the Panther for example. I haven't played Squad Leader in over ten years, so I do not know if the Tiger or the Greyhound or the Panzer is the dominant example of German armor might during WWII. What I do know is that everyone in Europe and America recognizes the name of the Panzer and readily identifies it. Don't even worry about the A/B/C/D evolutions either, because the Panzer like all the other weapons were upgraded as they learned from the previous models.

Another example is the Spanish UU. Conquistidors are famous because they singlehandedly changed the course of an entire continent. I know there were ony a few but they had an impact beyond their numbers. The Spanish ship is known for two things: Being sunk by burning ships in the English Channel and being sunk by pirates (Hmm should Spanish Galleons have a penalty vs. privateers?). Thats why my vote would be for the Conquistidor. Again I speak from popular knowledge and not an in-depth analysis of the units.

Being a sailor in the U.S. Navy, I fully agree that either battleships or aircraft carriers should be the American UU. While the F-15 is a sweet aircraft, it is merely the latest and soon to be obsolete in the sterling line of U.S. fighters. As far as activating GA goes for the aircraft carrier, it would be when an aircraft on the carrier does a succesful bomb or intercept mission (code allowing).

Viking UU: Longship, Trireme that can go in shallow/medium water and deep water if the Lighthouse is built.

	20-11-2001 20:09									#26
	Re: Accuracy vs Popular Knowledge Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Vladimir Taltos Don't even worry about the A/B/C/D evolutions either, because the Panzer like all the other weapons were upgraded as they learned from the previous models.

Carefull here. Don't mix up Panzer and Panther.

Panzer is a general name; it means 'armor' or 'armored' in German. It designate any armored vehicle.
Panther is only the nickname of the PazerKampfWagen ('armored fighting vehicle') type 5 (or PzKw V). The same way 'Tiger' is the nickname of the PzKw VI - model B, 'King Tiger' for model E.

	20-11-2001 20:18									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

UU for the Finnish civilization (if someone decides to put it in a mod):

The Finnjävel (Swedish for "Finnish Bastard", a derogatory term for Finnish immigrants in the 60s and 70s):

* replaces the Warrior;
* is a normal 1/1/1 Warrior, unless the civilization is supplied with wine, in which case it turns into a 4/2/1 terror rivaling the Persian Immortals; cutting the supply of wine reverts the unit back to normal Warrior status.

	21-11-2001 02:54									#28
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Gaius Marius What are you talking about? The Sherman was a deathtrap, and its drivers admitted it. It took five Shermans to take down a Tiger - this was part of US Army doctrine at the time. It was too lightly armored, undergunned (short 75mm had no AP vs and German tank after the early Pzkpfw IVs), and wasn't super-fast, either. The Brits upgraded it by putting in a 17 pounder (Firefly), which could do some damage, but the Sherman survived until the end of the war in close to its original config in the US army. Not until the Pershing (M90 I believe) came out in 1945 did the US have a capable MBT. Only numbers made the campaigns of 1944 possible. Every main power in 1944 had a better MBT than the US. Even the British...though they weren't as reliable in field conditions (a great advantage of the Sherman, especailly since the US had SCADS of spare parts and mechanics).

Dead on

And the reason for this foolishness in the US army was the tank/tank destroyer split by the officers that handled procurement. During the war you had a group of war department generals whos fear of losing face and power by the TD fading away caused them to cause more trouble than the Airforces "Fighter mafia" gang ever has. Not to mention that it got alot of soldiers killed.

	21-11-2001 03:04									#29
	American CSU Tired of ads?

I still think that the most appropriate CSU should be a land based one and that the Americans and British are at a disadvantage in trying to get a GA with sea or air units (eg. I just played my last game as the Brits, I had to wait till 1900 to get a GA from building a wonder).

Which leads me to what I was going to say, whats wrong with giving the Americans a beefed up marine? They are naval units (sort of) and historically accurate. But most importantly, they could be used on land, making a GA much easier to attain.

	22-11-2001 01:38									#30
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

hey ppl! it's so cool to see so many ideas in this thread!

nehow, regarding the american CSU, someone mentioned that the F-15 is gonna be obsolete pretty soon....and he/she is right.
what i wanna know is why firaxis decided to take out f-22 outa game (civ2 stealth fighter)...i 4 one think that F-22 should be the new CSU for the Americans as soon as the graphic/animations editing becomes possible...

One thought about an aircraft carrier being USA CSU is puzzling to me: all CSUs hafta attack successfully to start golden age...an aircraft carrier relies on the plane it carries, NOT itself, to carry out the attacks. So how is it suppose to start the golden age...
and more over, even without the golden age thought, aircraft carrier's strength is judged by the planes that it carries...planes do the attacks ultimately...this is my reason for stating F-22 should be the new CSU...

Sorry if i was a bit repetitive

p.s. i'm not trying to diss neone....i apologize in advance if neone was offended