05-03-2002 05:09									#1
	Rating Special Units Enter the AD-FREE zone

The local bar has been shut down for health code violations, so I thought I'd share some thoughts on the unique units. Yes, I know it's been done before...hopefully my thoughts are somewhat original. In any case, please don't expel me from your territory!

Jaguar Warrior

With the combat system as it is (read: f-ed up completely) a 1/1 unit with retreat is more powerful and annoying than it probably should be. This guy excels at harassing the enemy. On the down side, there's the early golden age issue, and the rather quick obsolescence.
C+

Impi

See above for Attack 1 plus retreating commentary. Even so, inhanced move on a unit with little attacking ability isn't terribly useful, baring a "raider" role. Call me crazy, but I'm not big on pillaging enemy terrain. After all, that territory will soon be mine anyway. On the plus side, good defensive support for a mobile (horseman?) ancient offensive. The negative is the early golden age issue, and the dubious usefulness of scortched earth campaigns in the early game.
C

Hoplite

In my opinion this fellow comes closer to being a "broken" unit than the overrated expendable, er, immortal. Do the math: a middle age strength unit available in 4000 B.C. with no resources needed. When I draw the Greeks as an early opponent I want to put my fist through the screen, because an early conquest is almost out of the question. On your side, these guys are great for city defense (really?) and also screening offensives. Useless fact: Socrates and Plato were hoplites, as well as philosophers and such.
A


Mounted Warrior

I like this unit. Retreat, the same attack as Swordsmen, and only horses needed to build. A pretty good mix, in my opinion. Great for conquest. Only the Greeks (see above) are likely to stand for long against a sustained Mounted Warrior offensive. The lack of defense is less of an issue in a unit with retreat.
A

Legionairy

Swordsmen are the best ancient attacker, and any improvement on an already strong unit is welcome. The added defense of the Legionairy makes it versatile enough to be the only unit in your army. Rules open territory, and does well in the attack role. A good deal. Writing self-congratulatory histories of your victories and declaring youself "dictator for life" is optional.
A-

Immortal
It's a good unit, but this talk of it being "broken" is pretty silly. The attack bonus is moderate compared to the bonuses afforded Hoplites and Mounted Warriors. Still only a "2" defender with one for movement, so horsemen can beat these guys in open territory. The strong attack is quite useful of course, but I don't see this unit as being too powerful. Give me Mounted Warriors vs. your Immortals in Multiplayer (assuming it existed) and see who's left standing. Still, an excellent unit, especially for warlike types (98% of us, probably).
A-

War Chariot
A slightly early horseman, that still requires horses. Pinch me.
Yes, it does have all the benefits of the horseman, which is a good early unit, but anyone can build those. In fairness, it is cheaper, which can be a difference maker. Still, it doesn't tickle me with a feather. I picture Yul Bryner in that ridiculous helmet leading his men into disaster. "Onward! Into the temporarily parted sea!"
C-

Samurai
All the knight replacements tend to blur in my mind, quite honestly. Samurai are good for those without horses, and the added defense is nice as well. Certainly not a huge difference maker, but a good unit anyway. No hara-kiri option is available when you're dishonored, which is a bit of a disappointment.
B

Rider
Another knight knock-off, with the benefit of added move. Added move would mean more with a blitz ability, which this unit of course does not have. It's still useful, but I want multiple attacks!
B+

War Elephant
It's all about the resources. Freed of concerns for strategic resources, when you pick the Indians you know you're guaranteed there knight stand-ins. Unless, of course, my mounted warriors overrun you before Chivalry Also good for carrying an invasion into enemy territory and unconnected conquered cities. If you are in iron/horse poor territory this unit is
A+++, otherwise B .

Cossack
Cool graphic and concept. Less cool bonus. A very moderate defensive edge, especially compared to the larger (% wise) ancient bonuses. How often does a three move unit defend anyway? The "+1 ability cap" creates a certain sense of design cohesion, but it also cheats the more modern units somewhat. It's all about ratios. Still, it's fun to imagine spreading rapine and suffering with these guys, at least if you have a very sick mind.
C-

Man-O-War
No, not the racehorse. When was the last time a game was decided by naval power. If you answered "Never" you're right. Add to this the fact that this unit is quickly obsolete with the arrival of Monitors/Merrimacks and you have a doubly sad unit. The British deserved better. Why not Commodores (inhanced paratroopers) or Spitfires (fighter) or even Anzacs! Sun never sets...yeah, right.
D-

Musketeer
If Dumas had these units for heroes, most of those overdone action novels would not have ended happily, I would think. Let's give a minor attack bonus to a one move defense specialist. I really hope someone got fired for that. The graphic is the only good thing, got to love that blown kiss and flamboyant outfit! Bonjour, you surrender monkeys!
D

Bowman
Nearly forgot him, and he is, in fact, rather forgetable. Added defense creates a "poor man's legion." A nice early unit, with all the attedant negatives (early golden age, early obsolete). Nice to see the more "old school" civ2 archer stats back, though.
B-

Panzer
Before I comment on game play issues, I'd like to point out the early WW2 German "blitzkrieg" armor was in fact inferior to Russian, British, and even French armor. They won with superior tactics and the use of combined arms. The Panzer simulates this with the added move ability. It's a great bonus, and allows for some fun late game offensives. I do kind of wish they'd called this unit the Panther or Tiger and picked a more appropriate graphic, but those are minor quibles, mainly illustrating my bizarre personality more than anything else.
A

F-15
Air units lost their teeth, so a special air unit is about as exciting as a special sea unit now. If you haven't locked down victory by the time the F-15 arrives, it's not going to be the silver bullet that wins the game for you. Why aren't marines specific to the USA?
D-

Well, I feel much better now. Reactions? None of this is gospel, and most of it is light hearted fun, so don't tear into me too badly. I'm just trying to improve the "purity of the game."

Last edited by Rotten999 on 13-03-2002 at 08:38

	06-03-2002 04:24									#2
	Support Apolyton

I like your writing and I kind of agree with your stats, although I've never experienced big successes with jag.wariors yet:
most of the time they are obsolete very fast.
Pillaging you say?
When my adversary is strong, you may be sure that he'll kill my jag when it crosses the border (roads you know...).
Of course mil and rel traits are a good combination. If I just could identify myself more with Japanese people, I would choose them most of the times. Meanwhile I'll take the Egyptians.

(as Belgians weren't and probably will never be mentioned in a game ...)

AJ

	06-03-2002 13:02									#3
	Got spare money?

I would put the Jaguar Warrior at no less than an A-
More likely an A+

This guy can set you up for the rest of the game with a lightning-quick assault on your nearest neighbour, doubling your territory while most other civs are still struggling to found their initial defence forces.
Add to that their ability to explore the map as fast as other civs with explorers. And the ability for your exploring units to defend themselves.
Obsolete too soon?? Bah!! These units don't go obsolete!!
At the beginning, they are your main attack and explore units. Once pikemen appear, the JW hordes lose their role of primary attacker and become a pillager/disrupter. Along with your standard invasion force, send JWs everywhere to disrupt trade routes, cut off strategic resources, force the enemy to waste attack units removing cheap 10-shield JWs from their territory, and even pick off obsolete enemy units and capture workers.

Also if you really wanted to, you could use JWs to completely wipe out a civilization at any stage of the game. I remember someone once just built warriors and triremes until sometime into the 1500's. Then he invaded the main continent and wiped out the other civs, despite their massive technological advantage.

At only 10 shields and with an ability to retreat, these little guys are extremely useful and very easy to replace. They are the quickest army to be built without pop-rushing.

	06-03-2002 13:29									#4
	Re: Rating Special Units Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

My opinions...

Jaguar Warrior - A-
Impi - B-
Hoplite - A-
Mounted Warrior - A+
Legionairy - A-
Immortal - A
War Chariot - C+
Samurai - B-
Rider - A-
War Elephant - B+
Cossack - D
Man-O-War - D-
Musketeer - D
Bowman - B-
Panzer - B+
F-15 - D

	06-03-2002 14:10									#5
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Sorry, no time now to write a longer essay, but I disagree with many points. I've also fought a modern age war as America, and saw F-15 planes useful there. Some more objections, too...

	06-03-2002 20:03									#6
	Got spare money?

Skanky Burns: The point about Jaguar Warriors is well taken...the idea of a 1/1 unit being effective makes me wince, though. That's the combat system for you. Do you think the weakened retreat ability in the new patch moves them more toward the "average" score? I don't know...I haven't played them since before the patch changed the rule.

Weakening retreat = best patch change so far. Multiple moves and fairly regular retreats is still a huge advantage.

Firedragon and I seem to be on the same page, barring my prejudices against the jaguar warrior. Panzer, also I suppose.

AJ Corp: Yup, yup, yup. Love Egypt, even if the chariot isn't that great. I find myself shouting at the screen "This is a job for a butcher, not a pharoah!" as I send my chariots and swordsmen to attack the jaguar warrior in open terrain. Then they lose due to a "bad seed number." "I'll give you anything you want Anubis, gold, grain, worship, just bring back my units from the land of the dead!"

Unrelated side note: You can play Belgium in the "Low Countries" scenario in the old "Panzer General" war game.

Solver: When you're right 51% of the time, you're wrong 49%. I have my own bizarre prejudices, most of which stem from my style of play. I suppose that makes a big difference.
I'm still not high on the F-15, though. It's so late in the game, and it gets such a minor bonus. Who knows?

I think we can at least all agree about the musketeer. To be honest, I once used him on offense when I had a tech lead, iron, and no horses (warlord). Still, a terrible idea and I really hope someone lost his job, or at least got a severe dressing-down over it.

Last edited by Rotten999 on 06-03-2002 at 22:48

	06-03-2002 20:39									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I'd rate the War Chariot a bit higher up. Since the new patch, cheapness is a much more important issue. A 20 shield unit can be built in 3 turns in a city producing 7 sheilds, or 4 turns in a city producing 5 shields. These types of cities are quick and easy to set up, and throw a barracks in there and you've got a large offensive force to be reckoned with ready to attack before 1000bc. Also, you're just 40 turns away from being able to build the chariot at the start (just set sci to minimum and wait, use the cash to buy workers off your opponents). Add on the retreat ability and you've got a powerful, flexible unit. Therefore, a rating of A seems a bit better.

I also think one thing you're forgetting about Immortals is how early you can get them. From the start you're one tech away from them (40 turns), and you can build warriors and upgrade them to Immortals when the time comes. So you can get a big offensive force out quite a bit earlier than you could do with Mounted Warriors. In multiplay assuming I started close enough, I'd go in and take you out with my Immortals before you'd got your Mounted Warrior factory up in action. If I started further away in a game with several players then you'd likely have to take on someone else first, either way I win or at least draw. Therefore, A+ seems appropriate.

Otherwise I agree pretty much, but I think you do underrate jags. Try out a jag rush (you need loads!). Combined with the militaristic trait which means more elites fighting in more battles, and you have the opportunity for more leaders. You can also upgrade to swords I believe, if you have the cash. I'd rate them B+

'the idea of a 1/1 unit being effective makes me wince, though'

What's wrong with it? It wouldn't be fair giving them a useless UU, and it's not as if they're invincible. They're not very good when attacking swordsmen etc, and do terribly against the impi.

	06-03-2002 23:35									#8
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Rotten999 ... Unrelated side note: You can play Belgium in the "Low Countries" scenario in the old "Panzer General" war game.

Yes, yes, yes ... I hope as a full equipped civ and not just as
'a passing gate for enemies'.

Thanks, will try that one.

AJ

	07-03-2002 02:32									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I mostly agree, but I must defend the Musketeer. It rates a B-, not a D. The biggest advantage is the late Golden Age. As the French, I was able to go golden just as I got nationalism. Let me tell you, having Mobilization and Golden Age at the same time is a whizz-bang way to get a huge armed forces in no time! I went from last place to first place in military in under 10 years.

Musketeers are good for one manuver only. They live inside cities because they are defenders, but unlike musketmen they can slip out of town and finish off a damaged retreated attacker. This happened maybe 4 times, but it helped turn the tide against the Chinese.

	07-03-2002 04:28									#10
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Rotten999 Skanky Burns: The point about Jaguar Warriors is well taken...the idea of a 1/1 unit being effective makes me wince, though. That's the combat system for you. Do you think the weakened retreat ability in the new patch moves them more toward the "average" score? I don't know...I haven't played them since before the patch changed the rule.

Actually, I haven't tried it either post-patch. However, I did have a game where my JW's completely lost their ability to retreat. (They were up against the Zulu's). But even then the sheer weight of numbers spelled the Zulu's doom. So what that my first 3 units all died before killing off one of their Impi defenders?? The next turn I had more than replaced that many JWs. And their 2 movement meant that they could get to the front very quickly (especially after my road was complete).

So while having their retreat weakened certainly takes some stuffing out of their attack, I still think they are very powerful considering their price.

	07-03-2002 10:47									#11
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by DilithiumDad I mostly agree, but I must defend the Musketeer. It rates a B-, not a D. The biggest advantage is the late Golden Age. As the French, I was able to go golden just as I got nationalism. Let me tell you, having Mobilization and Golden Age at the same time is a whizz-bang way to get a huge armed forces in no time! I went from last place to first place in military in under 10 years. Musketeers are good for one manuver only. They live inside cities because they are defenders, but unlike musketmen they can slip out of town and finish off a damaged retreated attacker. This happened maybe 4 times, but it helped turn the tide against the Chinese.

Musketmen can do that too. Its not hard to kill off 1 hit point.

	07-03-2002 19:54									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Best to have an offensive unit around to do the finishing off. Just bring one back from your army in his territory.

	07-03-2002 23:13									#13
	Support Apolyton

Wow, a musketeer apologist! It's a truism that none of the unique units are "worthless" but sometimes you don't get the bang for your buck. Our French Fop has nearly the same stats as the Roman Legion, which is available much sooner and for a cheaper cost. The Samurai, also available earlier is superior in every way (higher attack, retreat move) and only slightly more costly. The point about later golden ages is a good one though, and one of the reasons I'm not as high on Jaguar Warriors, Impis, or War Chariots.

Does anyone like the Man-O-War?

When a unit with a "1" defense beats a Swordsmen in open territory I have to wince a little, yes. I do agree with the cost effectiveness point regarding the Jaguar Warrior. I'll have to give them another shot.

AJCorp: They're fully realized in one scenario, but there chances of beating the massive German blitz are pretty much zero. It's a fun strategy game anyway, and probably dwelling in a bargain bin at a computer store near you.

Looking back, I have to admit that sheer mass is often better than quality in Civ3. The combat system being as it is, there's not a huge confidence interval, even for obvious mismatches.

Well, I'm off to play the Aztecs!

	08-03-2002 01:20									#14
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I've played the Aztecs, and found the JW to be a very nice unit in the Ancient Era. But once knights became available, the JW was history. They die in droves against strong units. Sure, you can build a zillion of them, but what's the maintenance costs on a zillion Jaguar Warriors? The Aztec AI has never done well in my games.

The Musketeer is the wrong unit for the French. They should have had an artillery unit, maybe a cannon with a range of 2. The French artillery was exceptional in Napoleon's day, and in World War I they had the best gun on the battlefield. Of course, they didn't know how to use it effectively.

	08-03-2002 13:42									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Maybe I'm missing something, but once I had networked some iron and had my (frustratingly early) Golden Age as the Aztecs, I found myself unable to build Jaguar Warriors. I could only build swordsmen; no JWs to be found anywhere on the build list. I still had a few JWs in the field, so they weren't entirely extinct. I'm using the 1.17f patch, no other mods.

Anyone else noticed this? If it's true, I'm less enthused about the Aztecs then ever before. I mean, if you can't keep pumping out the little el cheapo pickmasters forever, what's the point?

	08-03-2002 20:23									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Barchan,

if you have a network connecting iron to all of your cities, you won't be able to build warriors/ JW's. Just create some not-connected cities (no roads to import iron). You should be able to create these units then.

And about the remarks of zillion armies of JW's: as a recent poster before also concluded: i don't see much use in them in other than ancient era. I stick to what I've stated before: if they enter my territory, I will kill them (horsemen, chivalry, swordsmen, ...). ALL of them. They might be able to get away with some pillaging, but that's all.

No decisive use for the JW in medieval era!

AJ

	09-03-2002 08:05									#17
	Tired of ads?

With enough units, even a 1 attack unit can destroy a fortified mech. inf on a mountain-top fortress...

And if you are continuously at war, then you won't be paying for maintenance of all those dead JWs

However I haven't tried the Aztecs since 1.17f, and I think making them upgradable is extremely silly. They are one of the few ancient units that I would want to keep building, even if I did have iron.

I must do a test of the Aztecs again.

	09-03-2002 17:59									#18
	Support Apolyton

I think the diversity of opinons on the UU reflects the breadth of the game, and peoples play styles, even if some do think the combat is 'broken'. Also bear in mind that some UU are suited to different map types. After all, its less use having a multi move unit if you play on tiny islands.

I played Civ3 for three months before trying a militaristic civ, so I will address the balance from a peaceful approach.

Bab Bowmen are crap as a UU, since they have no upgrade path worth mentioning and 2 2 vs 1 2 of a spearman is bugger all use, except to sit on mountains waiting for barbarians.

Those French Mustketeers are are also bugger all use as you have better offensive units available.

Persian Immortals are damn good in my book, but their shelf life is limited by Knights.

Aztec Jag Warriors are fantastic. The Aztecs were the first Mil. civ I played, and I dominated the world by the time Knights arrived on the scenes (standard pangaea at Monarch). The key to the JW is to keep them in the mountains. Once they get to elite (which they do quickly being militaristic and being able to retreat) they are buggers to remove.

War Chariots. Bugger all use. They are NOT = horsemen as someone posted. They can't go through jungle or mountains.

Greek Holites are great to play with, 'king annoying to play against. Ditto the Roman Legions.

F15 - never let the Yanks get that far, and never been stupid enough to play them.

Man-o-war. Never been stupid enough to play the pommies either (even though I am one) and even if I did from what I have read the MOW is made obsolete almost as soon as you get them somewhere. Naval power is next to useless in CIV3, even in Archie maps, and is immensely irritating to boot.

Zulu impies have never worked for me, and the Zulus are always the first AI to go in any map I play on. If I want to be Military I will pick the Aztecs.

Mounted Warriors and Samuri are real early to mid game irritations. I haven't played either civ, but coming up against them is really painful.

Cossacks. Never played the Russians, but never found the Cossacks a major threat either.

Panzers. Like them. I am normally hanging out for tanks to provide the edge to finish off my last opponents. That 3 move is just the icing on the cake.

Indian elephants are just a joke. As an aggressive militaristic player if you don't have the appropriate resources come Knight time you are doing something wrong. Up there with the Egyptians, French, English and Americans in the Stupid UU stakes.

That's it I think.

Oh, no, I missed one. The Arabians, with the UU of OBL. This unit is able to attack any city with an airport, and negates the commercial influence of the Stock Exchange in the target city, as well as Mobilizing the target civ. Then again, maybe I just imagined that one.

	10-03-2002 06:19									#19
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

War chariots are cheaper than horsemen and only require one tech to get. Huge advantage on deity, not being able to move through jungle or mountains is a really minor disadvantage. 20 shields means you can afford 1/3 more units in the same amount of time. Believe me, they really are good.

	12-03-2002 14:01									#20
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Solver Sorry, no time now to write a longer essay, but I disagree with many points. I've also fought a modern age war as America, and saw F-15 planes useful there. Some more objections, too...

Why should a Fighter(!) with better Bombard(!) be useful? Just build a Bomber instead(same price).

The War Chariot is better than rated by most of the people in this thread. I give it a B+. It's cheap and the early GA is a plus for me.

	12-03-2002 14:12									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by DrFell War chariots are cheaper than horsemen and only require one tech to get. ... 20 shields means you can afford 1/3 more units in the same amount of time. Believe me, they really are good.

Actually 50% more.

	12-03-2002 17:34									#22
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Pius Popprasch Why should a Fighter(!) with better Bombard(!) be useful? Just build a Bomber instead(same price). The War Chariot is better than rated by most of the people in this thread. I give it a B+. It's cheap and the early GA is a plus for me.

I agree. Give the War Chariot a B+. The big advantage is that you can get to GA early, build up a decent attack force and then knock out a AI CIV that is just getting off the ground, or better yet, one that has lots of cities, but no horses.

	12-03-2002 17:59									#23
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai I agree. Give the War Chariot a B+. The big advantage is that you can get to GA early, build up a decent attack force and then knock out a AI CIV that is just getting off the ground, or better yet, one that has lots of cities, but no horses.

Just one thing to be aware of.

If using culturaly linked starting locations:

Egyptians first negnboars are Roman & Greek

Hoplites: Ouch!
Romans (if having Iron): Ouch!

Tip: Destroy Romas as quickly as possibile, avoid Greeks.


P.S.
It's still B+

	13-03-2002 08:32									#24
	Re: Rating Special Units Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Rotten999 Why aren't marines specific to the USA?

I did that in my editor. I made F-15 researchable to all civs with the Smart Weapon Tech. I move infantry to Amph Warfar and made Marines the special unit. It works nice. (I didn't replace infantry with Marines though for the US, they can build both, but only the US can build Marines).

	13-03-2002 20:55									#25
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

A++ To Samurai. Best defenders of the middle age, great golden age.

	13-03-2002 22:19									#26
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by godinex A++ To Samurai. Best defenders of the middle age, great golden age.

You too? I always felt a GA in med. ages is a good life saver. Since if I don't, I'm usualy straped for cash, even with wall street on my side.

	14-03-2002 02:05									#27
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Maybe not A++, but Samurai are certainly a solid unit, and one I avoid fighting against in the Middle Ages. But your point about timing (brought up earlier w/respect to the otherwise useless French musketeer) is really important.

I happen to agree that a golden age in medieval times is just right, given the sheer amount of stuff you have to build in that era. However, the later the G.A., the more powerful it is. If you can manage to hold off on your G.A. (while still building the wonders you want and whatnot) until Industrial times, WOW. I did that once, on Marla's map. I was the Chinese, a civ I haven't played before or since (don't like the traits). I played them for their location, not their traits, and I played them builder-style. Their start location is awesome, so I did really well, and because of their mil/ind traits, I did not trigger a golden age during medieval times (built Sun Tzu, but didn't have an industrious wonder). Then, in the industrial age, I attacked and destroyed India, and triggered a golden age using a few riders I didn't upgrade, specifically for that purpose. All I can say is OMFG! It was nuts.

I dislike ancient golden ages because they will be wasted in despotism. Trying to wait until Industrial times is hard with many of the civs, due to the Wonders that can trigger a G.A. Perhaps the best civ for waiting it out is the Egyptians (although I've never done it, I've always ended up using a war chariot in the middle ages). Industrious/Religious. The religious part obviously gets taken care of by wonders, but what industrious wonder do you really need pre-Hoover? Imagine entering a golden age after completing Hoover. That would be amazing.

Ok, enough rambling. Bowman: C-, Immortal: A-, Impi: B, Mounted Warrior: A, F15: F, Jag Warrior: B+, Man-o-war: F, Musketeer: C-, Panzer: A, Cossack: C, Legionary: B, Hoplite: B, War Chariot: B, Samurai: A- Rider: A, War Elephant: C+

-Arrian

	14-03-2002 04:05									#28
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Well, I'd have to say that Panzers are the best UU. That extra move makes all the difference. & in my last game they triggered a really nice industrial golden age.

Most of the other UU's are nice enough, but they just don't seem as nice as the Panzer. Of course, you do have to survive until you get them which can be somewhat of a trick on the harder levels of play. And if your game playing strategy is to knock everybody out early, then the Panzer probly wouldn't work for you.

The most useless UU's to me appear to be the Man-O-War & the F-15.

What I'd really like to see implemented would be a UU for each civ for each age. For some civs it might be hard to come up with four, such as America, but for others, like England or China it should be pretty easy to do. If wishes were fishes & all that...

Anyway,

	14-03-2002 08:07									#29
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Rotten999 Does anyone like the Man-O-War?

Well, I'm going to wade in and say that I found this useful once. I played the English on a small landmass archipelaego map. Naval warfare became a big thing.

For once, I was actually engaging the AI in large naval battles. I got so tied up in wars against everybody else that I was doing bare minimum research to keep my citizens happy...the Man-O-War actually gave me the supremacy to wipe out those pesky French frigate fleets.

I will admit, even with minimum researching, they became obsolete too quickly, but the damage had been done.

As for the Yanks, I won a game and never used the F-15. I've been fiddling around with them a bit, and I think the best alternate UU I've seen is a "Ballistic Missile Submarine" with carrying capacity + 1. Fun having twice the amount of missiles on hand.

Another one for novelty's sake is a "Nuclear Aircraft Carrier" which has move + 1 and capacity + 1. Got that idea from a guy on the stories board.

	14-03-2002 21:45									#30
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

F-15's can do percision strikes, just like the stealth units. Regular fighters can't. F-15's can do everything the F-117 can, plus protect the skies, and it costs less. Yeah the actual numercial bonus isn't great, but the fact that it can do things normal fighters can't, makes up for this.