 |
|
Faeelin
|
|
Tau Ceti
Oct 2001 time: 05:17
|
|
Everyone knows that airpower is at the apex of victory. Look at history. Aside from Vietnam (which was the most poorly fought war in modern history) airpower has been useful in diestroying the enemy. It happened in WW2. It happend in the korean war, the gulf war, the limited action of the falklands, did damage in the balkans (not great, but it was hurting) and most recently, in Afghanistan. If airpower can let the US win a battle in a frozen mountainous wasteland, I think it can sink a bronze age galley.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Tolkien
|
|
Anywhere but here
Oct 2001 time: 22:17
|
|
It's all true. And I'm pretty upset about nearly all of the combat models in the game...just last week the AI killed my infantry unit with a spearman--pretty dumb if you ask me.
oh well, I don't play single player campaign anymore, now that I finally got the civ3 editor working, I use it to play all my games. that's what I would suggest to you. This is what I tweaked:
1. units - I tweaked most of their stats, so the combat is more realistic.
2. Governments - I tweaked nearly all of them, and added Socialism.
3. Corruption - I greatly reduced it so that under all of my governments, the corruption level is lower. I also added "reduces corruption" to 2 or 3 more city improvements.
4. In single player campaign, I would almost never get above +20 gold per turn. So I changed the citizens, now, each laborer (default citizen) gives +1 gold. I tested it, and right now I am getting +850 per turn, because of my sprawling empire, I don't have to worry about damn corruption.
5. I also changed the huge world size from 180 x 180, to 256x256. I like playing on big maps.
I am playing with these changed right now, and I am having alot more fun than I used to.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that I changed the techs too, so now I get them alot faster, I minimized them to 2 turns, and maximum to 20 turns. This has helped alot, I am only at 1600 AD, and I'm half way through the industrial age, I expect to be blasting my enemies apart with tanks and bombs by the time the constitution is born. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
The Kaiser
|
|
Stoke-on-Trent, England
Dec 1999 time: 05:17
|
|
If anything airpower is a little too powerful, particulary in its ability to flatten all your terrain improvements if you have poor air defenses. Airplanes bombing bridges YES, irrigation NO.
Also the fact that a sea unit cannot be totally destroyed is a good thing because in past Civ games it made sea invasions virtually impossible once flight had been discovered.
Think about it, the Transport or Destroyer unit actually represents a fleet of ships of which no Air Power in history has been able to totally destroy without a few ships escaping, although perhaps heavily damaged.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Faeelin
|
|
Tau Ceti
Oct 2001 time: 05:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by The Kaiser
If anything airpower is a little too powerful, particulary in its ability to flatten all your terrain improvements if you have poor air defenses. Airplanes bombing bridges YES, irrigation NO.
Also the fact that a sea unit cannot be totally destroyed is a good thing because in past Civ games it made sea invasions virtually impossible once flight had been discovered.
Think about it, the Transport or Destroyer unit actually represents a fleet of ships of which no Air Power in history has been able to totally destroy without a few ships escaping, although perhaps heavily damaged. |
Umm.... damn. How about the US attacks on Japanese convoys?
In any case, your arguement is flawed. If I send 40 planes after 1 galley, the damn galley should die. You know it, you're trying to rationalize Firaxis' lassitude.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
codemast01
|
|
quote: Think about it, the Transport or Destroyer unit actually represents a fleet of ships of which no Air Power in history has been able to totally destroy without a few ships escaping, although perhaps heavily damaged. |
Air power was unable to stop the invasion at Normandy. However you must remember that the German air force was severely limited by their loses vs. the RAF (Royal Air Force) and the lack in fuel for their planes. No one has been able to have a naval invasion vs. an air force at full strength.
However this is besides the point. CivIII only has basically one unit that can defend against air attack (Jet Fighter). Other units are defenseless. Why not give the AEGIS Crusier and some other units ablities similar to the AS mission a fighter has. The result would be similar to not allowing the sinking of ships. Some ships will be destroyed but most likely not all. As it currently is, not only do all transports survive, all the troops also survive uninjured.
Also something to think about :
If a transport represents a fleet of ships, then why doesn't a F-15 represent a fleet of jets?
Last edited by codemast01 on 06-01-2002 at 07:25
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Faeelin
|
|
Tau Ceti
Oct 2001 time: 05:17
|
|
Your logic is flawed. F-15's can take out tanks. Heck, cruise missiles can target individuals. So I think they could take out a galley.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Prince
|
 |
The Netherlands
Jan 2002 time: 06:17
|
|
In my very first civ game, I captured a small russian city on the east coast of south america, with marines coming from australia. I quickly built bombers and moved them to Grozny, the city I captured. 7 Bombers or so were totally flattening the russian cities in the next couple of turns, destroying improvements, lowering population points, and when my tanks were at the front gates of the next city, they greatly helped damage the defenders. I don't think air units are all that bad, the only thing that hasn't proven it's use to me yet is the (Jet) Fighter, but that's because I have never faced enemy air units yet. And then again, guys, think about it, who said this game is intended to be realistic? Sure, it's BASED on reality, but in the end, nearly half of the civs shouldn't even have the chance to build air units at all. Ever. Just because they are supposed to be *dead* before that time. Tanks vs. Spearmen is not a realistic situation, so when the Spearmen win, I don't see the point, the whole situation isn't realistic so no matter who wins it's not real anyways! And same goes for airplanes, their bombs not destroying galleys is not realistic. Bombers attacking galleys is not realistic.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Faeelin
|
|
Tau Ceti
Oct 2001 time: 05:17
|
|
Uhuh... So you're telling me that five thousand f-18's couldn't take out a galley?
Numbers aside, the fact is that they'd laugh at the galley. IT'd be strafed, bombed, torpedoed, before it got within sight of my civ3 shores. And survive.
oh, and about OBL: You know where he is, we'll get the job done. Also, 5 out of how many that were fired? Several dozen? Even if it's only 100, that means 95 percent accuracy.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Grrr
|
 |
of Hamilton, New-Zealand.
Dec 2000 time: 18:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Faeelin
Uhuh... So you're telling me that five thousand f-18's couldn't take out a galley?
Numbers aside, the fact is that they'd laugh at the galley. IT'd be strafed, bombed, torpedoed, before it got within sight of my civ3 shores. And survive.
oh, and about OBL: You know where he is, we'll get the job done. Also, 5 out of how many that were fired? Several dozen? Even if it's only 100, that means 95 percent accuracy. |
One Galley?!?!, a Galley unit represents a FLEET of galleys say 100 or so.
As for 5% inaccuracy, these are only the ones which FAILED MAJORLY, and not the ones which were a few hundred metres off target.
So when someone does find Osama Bin Laden (I don't know his whereabouts, why don't you organise 5000 F18s to bomb, strafe, and torpedo him. Good Luck!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
codemast01
|
|
Osama and the Taliban didn't fight back with galleries and spears. (If they did they would have been slaughtered) They had modern weapons like AK-47s.
quote:
Tanks vs. Spearmen is not a realistic situation... And same goes for airplanes, their bombs not destroying galleys is not realistic. Bombers attacking galleys is not realistic. |
Yes all this is true. Why not ask that something be done to fix it instead of saying that CivIII is only BASED on reality and is not suppose to be realistic. This is similar to saying a car is not suppose to provide the best protection for its driver because perfection is not the goal. No... People demand the company make a safer car. Realism and perfection might not be goals but both should be strived for.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
whosurdaddy
|
|
New York
Jun 2001 time: 00:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Grrr
YEAH RIGHT!?!
If these GREAT F15s of yours can target indivuals, then why don't they just fire a cruise missle at Osama Bin Laden. No the propoganda may say so, but in all reality, the guiding systems arent't that great. I have heard of at least 5 missiles going totally astray in the Kosovo bombing. No F15s are NOT 100% accurate, far from it! |
Ummm, if you dont think modern day laser and satelited guided weapons can target single individuals, ships, etc. then i dont know what world your living in. Oh, by the way, they have tried to fire cruise missles at osama bin laden, but missed not due to faulty technology but to due to faulty intelligence. As for a ship in the open ocean with nowhere to hide (especially without aircover or anti-aircraft defenses, such as a galley), gimme a break, they are sitting ducks for modern day warplanes. THATS WHY THE MAIN ANTI SHIP WEAPON OF THE UNITED STATES SINCE THE BEGINNING OF WORLD WAR II HAS BEEN AIRPLANES!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Grrr
|
 |
of Hamilton, New-Zealand.
Dec 2000 time: 18:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by whosurdaddy
Ummm, if you dont think modern day laser and satelited guided weapons can target single individuals, ships, etc. then i dont know what world your living in. Oh, by the way, they have tried to fire cruise missles at osama bin laden, but missed not due to faulty technology but to due to faulty intelligence. As for a ship in the open ocean with nowhere to hide (especially without aircover or anti-aircraft defenses, such as a galley), gimme a break, they are sitting ducks for modern day warplanes. THATS WHY THE MAIN ANTI SHIP WEAPON OF THE UNITED STATES SINCE THE BEGINNING OF WORLD WAR II HAS BEEN AIRPLANES!!!!!!!!! |
I admit that yes, a galley has no chance, but don't believe that it can target Osama Bin Laden.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Green Giant
|
|
Tanks the size of whole cities is not realistic.
Health bars for military units is not realistic
A single number representing city population is not realistic
Pyramids magically puting granaries in every city is not realistic
The weather does not change, that is not realistic
There are no natural disasters, that is not realistic.
Conquering an entire civilization with 3 tanks is not realistic.
I could go on and on. Somebody please, please, tell me when Civ 3 EVER has or ever claimed to be realistic? Anyone, anyone?
You want ultra realistic combat, go play Operational Art of War. I will keep playing Civ and enjoy the balanced gameplay.
whiners
|
|
|  |
 |
|
elcapjtk
|
|
Hannable MO
Dec 2001 time: 05:17
|
|
I think you all are having logic and history recognition problems. Battle of Midway, many planes take down 4 Japanese Carriers as well as one American carrier, as well as some other support ships.
F-15's have laser guided missiles, and wood blows up and burns really really well.
Ooops owned
|
|
|  |
 |
|
korn469
|
 |
Poetic Justic
Apr 1999 time: 00:17
|
|
when was the last time people actually used galleys?
the vikings?
plus also each battle in civ3 isn't really a single engagement, it is a number of engagements, because the shortest unit of time in civ3 is one year, so desert shield would have been one turn while desert storm would have been only part of a turn
in civ3 the following US civil war battles all took place in the same turn
Ft. Henry & Ft. Donelson: Gen. Grant captures two forts on the Tennessee and Cumberland Rivers. Confederates forced out of Kentucky and yield much of Tennessee
Monitor vs. Merrimac: First ironclad battle in history ends in a draw as the Merrimac withdraws after daylong exchange of fire. Union blockade of South is maintained
Shiloh (Pittsburgh Landing): Grant overcomes Southern forces with heavy losses for each side: 13,000 Union casualties, 11,000 for South
New Orleans: Farragut seizes New Orleans for Union after boldly attacking Southern position. 11 Southern ships sunk
Peninsular Campaign (Yorktown, Seven Days' Battle, Fair Oaks): After continual prodding by Lincoln, McClellan decides to attack Richmond via the South. He moves his large army down the Potomac, marches on Richmond, and then assumes a defensive position rather than pushing for victory. Gen. Lee takes command of Southern troops
Bull Run (Manassas) 2nd battle: McClellan replaced by Gen. Pope. Lee and Gen. Stonewall Jackson defeat Union troops again at Manassas and Pope is replaced by McClellan
Antietam: Heavily outnumbered, Lee's troops face McClellan in bloody fighting. Over 23,000 casualties (more than all previous American wars combined). Lee retreats to Virginia
Fredericksburg: Gen. Burnside attacks Lee's fortified position and suffers 10,000 casualties (to Lee's 5000).
Chancellorsville: Gen. Hooker defeated by Lee, but Jackson is mistakenly shot by his own men and killed.
Vicksburg: After a long siege, Vicksburg surrenders to Grant. All of Mississippi River is now in Union control
Gettysburg: Over 165,000 soldiers participate in the largest battle in the Western Hemisphere. After three days of fighting, Lee retreats, leaving 4,000 dead Confederates. Total casualties: 23,000 Union, 28,000 Confederates
Chattanooga: Reinforced with troops from the East, Grant is able to push Southern troops back and prepare for assault on Atlanta and the heart of the Confederacy
and that is just the major battles, all of this in one turn...so draw the conclusions you want from that
Last edited by korn469 on 07-01-2002 at 11:36
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Murtin
|
|
Sweden
Dec 2001 time: 06:17
|
|
Personally, I just don't want the kind of realism people ask for when they require that modern military units should never lose to ancient units. I'll agree that it would add realism. I always get at least a little annoyed trying to figure out how that old floating wooden thingy known as a frigate could get at (and sink!) my lovely brand new nuclear sub.
I don't want that kind of realism because I don't think its real world consequences would make a good game. Civilizations don't remain standing for 5000 years fighting each other. Historically, what happens is that somebody makes some technological breakthrough and then expands all over the place, conquering or wiping out their neighbours.
And it wouldn't be fun having to suffer a humiliating defeat and then start over all the time just because your neighbour beat you to horseback riding. Or iron working. Or gunpowder. Or steampower... and so on.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17. Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|