 |
| |
|
|
Christantine The Great
|
|
Massachusetts
Jun 2000
time: 00:12
|
|
If the Unit Workshop is included in Civ III (Which I am sure of.) there should be a new unit chassis called the balloon. It would be the first air unit you could research. It would be pretty strong until the discovery of the airplane, which it would have a -50% of winning aganst (Like popping a...balloon!). Of course with the balloon comes the "Balloon Defence". The balloon defence would be a city improvement that would represent a ring of small balloons around a city to protect it from air attacks. The balloon defence would only work aganst planes with props so with the jet it would become obesolete. The defence would give a unit inside the city a 50% defence bonus. The only downside to the Balloon Defence is that it would have to "heal" every time it is used.
------------------
"Freedom, Trade, Christantine!"
The Viking Archives
|
|
| |
|
|
|
UltraSonix
|
|
Melbourne, Australia
May 2000
time: 15:12
|
|
I think the olden day (late 1700/1800) balloons were very hard to control - they wouldn't be very useful.
------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary... (And no, koalas don't usually speak!)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Christantine The Great
|
|
Massachusetts
Jun 2000
time: 00:12
|
|
I believe that Zeppelins were used heavly in WW I not II.
The balloon unit would cover all types of airships, from the first balloons to the huge Zeppelins. The shape would change slightly and it would get various advantages over the changes. But it would always have the weakness aganst planes. The early balloons might have a trireme effect if they get too far away from a city. But instead of the balloon being destroyed it would crash and whoever finds it would receave a damaged balloon that they would have to get to a city before it completely broke.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Harel
|
|
Ramat Hasharon, Israel
May 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
Well, Napolean used flying balloons to gather intel on troops movement... it could be an excellent recon unit ( a line of sight of 2, maybe even 3... )
|
|
| |
|
|
|
UltraSonix
|
|
Melbourne, Australia
May 2000
time: 15:12
|
|
So that's what was meant by "balloon defense"! I had thought it was defence against balloons!
------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary... (And no, koalas don't usually speak!)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Drakenred
|
|
Hou Tx
Jan 1970
time: 05:12
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by UltraSonix on 12-04-2000 04:17 AM
So that's what was meant by "balloon defense"! I had thought it was defence against balloons!
|
The question of wether or not the use of Barage ballons during WWII as a deterent to low level bombing- strafing was efective is still debatable, basicaly they did not stop highlevel bombers, and were fairly esily dispached by a few planes strafing the area prior to or while the main atack was going in, Stray rounds from dogfights above the Balloons, and even by defending AAA fire, or, if deplyed improperly, they were simply ignored by the fighter pilots.
on the other hand, Observation ballons only existed from the US Civil war untill WW1(and were aparenly being fased out during the end of WW1). Zeplins from aproximatly 1890-1918 or so befor Flak and Higher altitude aircraft could reach them routeenly, and even then a practical bomer zeplin did not apear untill after WW1 was well underway.
The US Navys Zeplins, while spectacular, did not last long, and at best were litle more than observation platforms and plublicity stunts.
however, what would posibly be the most succesflull use of Lighter than Aircraft would have to be the use and deployment of the US Navy Blimps for convoy escorts during WWII, and even their record may have been a coincidence(due to Submarine activity moving to the mid-atlantic)
(a bit of a clarification, i ment "During WWII However. . .")
[This message has been edited by Drakenred (edited December 04, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Drakenred (edited December 04, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adm.Naismith
|
 |
Milano - Italy
Oct 1999
time: 06:12
|
|
Deathwalker,
quote:
No BLOODY unit work shop, I hated it totaly in SMAC
|
I don't remember why do you hate it so much, but really the SMAC Workshop has a bad interface and a disappointing graphics for units (because of limiting choices of graphics component, that must all mix toghetert almost as LEGO (c) blocks: they should draw more components, that Workshop engine would chose more appropriately for every combo, with better results).
The whole concept must be tuned by customizable rules, especially limiting available mix for scenario reasons.
In fact, a Workshop feature needs a carefull balance of numbers for every components (reducer or enhancer for hits points, attack points, etc.), but it opens wide possibility for alternative history, what-if scenario and so on.
The Earth History should become only the standard scenario, for map, tech tree and available units combo.
------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant
|
|
| |
|
|
|
hHydro
|
|
Vancouver, Canada,
Nov 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
As I said before, if the balloon tech was granted earlier in the game than flight (as it really should be - the first manned balloon flight was in 1784) and it was a little cheaper than planes (as it should be? feedback?) then it would make an interesting unit for scouting, transport, trade, and although this never occured in OUR history, there's no reason why it couldn't be used in battle. Just give it very low health to reflect it's inability to stand against anything capable of firing at it. If the unit workshop is used, it just becomes a Chassis. Easy as pie.
quote:
Originally posted by beyowulf on 12-07-2000 01:42 PM
This would be good I think. Replace the camel with the balloon.
Also for the record I loved the unit workshop. And, if I recall correctly, it cost the same amount to upgrade from an inferior unit, as to build it straight from scratch.
|
All hail the unit workshop. If a balloon chassis was made you could just put the trade 'module' on the balloon chassis instead of the regular (mounted?) chassis if you wanted.
Separate thread on unit workshop at http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum6/HTML/001962.html?1
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Christantine The Great
|
|
Massachusetts
Jun 2000
time: 00:12
|
|
I really don't think that there should be a trading airship. The goods it might carry would probably be too heavy for a airship to carry without not being able to get off the ground. Ship travel would be cheaper (And easier).
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12.
Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-12-2000 09:15
|