 |
|
Dida
|
|
I think you can impose naval blockade, or block a inland city by positioning military units outside the cities.
How exactly is that achieved? Do I have to physically place a unit on every single tile w/ in that city's radius, or just surround the city square with units?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dida
|
|
The little weak Germans are pissing me off my continueous bombardment of my shore cities, and repeated refusal to seek peace. My goodwill toward them came to an end when they landed and destroyed one of my less important city.
I will give them some punishment by destroying his navy, and a blockade of Berlin, everyone in that city is going to starve to death.
Is it true that if you cut off the road to their capital, their whole nation will lost all luxury and strategic resources?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Encomium
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Dida
I think you can impose naval blockade, or block a inland city by positioning military units outside the cities.
How exactly is that achieved? Do I have to physically place a unit on every single tile w/ in that city's radius, or just surround the city square with units? |
More realistically, a civ's trade and commerce SHOULD be damaged by having an enemy's civ's privateers or submarines on his trade routes. This blockade stuff is crap, and not historical.
Sid has no idea how navies work. And they do not muck about bombarding improvements in reality.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Fiji
|
|
Antwerp,Belgium
Dec 1999 time: 05:17
|
|
sure they don't.
why, because the other guy has a navy too.
In those cases where a navy owning nation went up against a non-navy owning nation, the navy did bombard (gulf war, boxer rebelion, Tripiz in the arctic circle, Guadacanal, Okinawa)
the problem is not that Sid doesn't know how navies work, it's most players who are clueless.
remember the game that put Sid's name on the map?
that might give you a clue
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dida
|
|
In my game, I doubled movement points for all ships in the ancient age, and more than doubled movement for modern ships. Now they are so fast, you can bomb your enemy and run.
In CTP, you can use your navy to pirate enemy trade route and protect your own, which is historically why navy exist in the first place. I don't think you can do this with your navy in Civ3, which really defeats the idea of navy.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Optimizer
|
 |
Stockholm
Feb 2001 time: 06:17
|
|
I agree that naval units are too unimportant in Civ 3. Much can be done with the Editor, though.
Please read my Maritime Manifesto and post your opinions.
Last edited by Optimizer on 08-02-2002 at 03:16
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dida
|
|
An very annoying thing about naval bombardment (bombardment in general rather) is that it tends to destroy city imp. rather than damaging military units. Which make an expensive navy not worthwhile
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dida
|
|
quote: Originally posted by MarkG
i think that's by design choice... |
I know it is by design choice, but that is very lame.
Why would you want to build an expensive navy if its bombardment does not really help your landing troops taking the city.
|
|
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|