 |
|
Skywise
|
 |
Samara's best friend
Jan 2002 time: 05:18
|
|
I dont understand.....On a huge map, with about 35 cities, I have 83 musketman, 39 legionairs and 147 cavalries and my military advisor says:" Compared to these guys our military is weak". Why? Is it compared to the whole planet or to each civ one after the other? I could kill anyone whenever I want!! I'm also the only one with cavalry right now. Anybody got an idea why my military is the weakest? Or, like me, you think that my advisor had one too many beers.
Spec.
Last edited by Skywise on 28-02-2002 at 21:30
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zouave
|
|
I completely ignore anything my military advisor says. The only advisor that seems to know what the hell he is talking about is the foreign advisor, and he is omniscient.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Shadow_Cougar
|
|
Dallas, TX usa
Nov 1999 time: 05:18
|
|
The numbers should just add up the Attack value of all the units and compare those. It wouldn't be perfect, but would give the AI a better idea of "relative" strength. That way England wouldn't make silly demands to me and make my tanks and MI crush their 3x as large army of calvary and musketmen.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Tarquelne
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Shadow_Cougar
The numbers should just add up the Attack value of all the units and compare those. |
The system I favor would be adding up the costs of the units.
I saw someone suggest a simpler system - the value of a unit depends on it's Age. An Ancient unit might be 1, an MA unit 2, etc. Very simple, but I think it'd still be a vast improvement.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dom Pedro II
|
 |
The College of New Jersey
Nov 1999 time: 05:18
|
|
Yes, I was playing a game as the Japanese, and the Chinese bordered me to the South. They had about 50,000 warriors and 10,000 swordsmen (hyberbole of course) and I had about 20 Musketmen, 15 Samurai, and about 20 swordsmen... well, I'd probably win a war against them... but they'd just keep annoying me perpetually with raids on mines, irrigation, roads, etc. That's where the real power of obsolete units in numbers comes in. They're an annoyance.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Andrew Cory
|
|
SF bay Area
Jan 2002 time: 21:18
|
|
One of the things that I dig about the new unit suport system is the fact that armies in my rear are an actual threat that must be dealt with before I advance. In Civ 2, I was able to just take over cities, and watch the armies dissapear...
Hmmm, here is a thought: What if armies still in the feild after the nation has been destroyed still get to stick around for the next 10-15 turns. Perhaps they would be able to "liberate" cities, alowing the civilization to come back...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dida
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Provost Harrison
64 Modern Armour, 12 Stealth Bombers, 50 Bombers, 10 Carriers, 12 Battleship, 8 Destroyers, 16 Radar Artillery, 126 Mech. Inf
I didn't think that was bad myself, enough to take on the rest of the world singlehandedly when used correctly... |
I only have 50 MA and 80 Mech Inf, but I'm already taking on the rest of the world singlehandedly.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Worthingtons
|
|
Pride Park,Derby
Jan 2002 time: 05:18
|
|
Spec,the liklehood is that you are playing against a Militaristic Civ like the Japanese or Germans, who will have like 500 outdated troops, because they dont build anything else.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Captain
|
 |
by Divine Right
May 2001 time: 00:18
|
|
I think anything more than 200 military units (excluding workers) is enough. That's pretty huge in my mind. 100 units seems reasonable. Personally I prefer to have around 60 "modern/current" units (*to hold my own in peacetime, I build more in war).
That's for normal, regent, 8 civs. Huge maps, more civs, more difficulty, you'll need more.
IMHO, I think there should be some other penalties besides just cost for having a huge military. The fact that you can support such huge armies without pissing off your populace is weird. Usually people don't like having unnecessarily large militaries in peacetime. Maybe one reason is that once there's no city improvements left to build and you've got a +ve income, all you have left to do is churn out units and go-a-conquering.
Another reason might be that there's too many cities in this game. I would prefer no more than 60 cities under my control, ideally 25-30. It just starts getting tedius too.
I quit my last few games in middle ages for that reason. I could take over another civ, but I really didn't want 10 more cities to manage over the thirty I already have. If I raze them, the AI will rebuild them. I'm also not a warmonger so I only like to go to war if I have to.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Andrew Cory
|
|
SF bay Area
Jan 2002 time: 21:18
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Tingkai
And who said CivIII doesn't mirror real life. Look at the Pentagon. The US has the largest and most advanced air force in the world and the Pentagon is crying that it needs more new and advanced fighters. |
The US does, actualy...
Think about it like this: Yes, the B52s do their job, but(!) they are getting old. Finding parts for them is becoming problematic at best. In fact, one of the brand new planes that is being built _right now_ took so much time in the design and prototype phase that the pentagon is having to stock up on spare parts because within about 5-10 years all the parts will be obsoleat...
Of course, modeling somthing like this in civ would be difficult...
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18. Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|