 |
| |
|
|
player1
|
 |
Belgrade, YU
Sep 2001
time: 06:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by zulu9812
I would only give lethal bombardment of any kind to late modern age units - battleships, stealth bombers/fighters. radar artillery, F15s (not Jet Fighters, since there needs to be something to make the F15 special).
You could give lethal sea bombardment to fighters and jet fighters, but not lethal land bombard: it's easier to take cover on land than at sea. Bombers? - I never use them. |
For naval & land unit I think they should not need lethal land or sea since they fire from one or 2 tiles distance.
That to far away to be enough accurate to completey destroy some unit.
On the other hand Jet Fighters for ex. bombard from very close distance (not Bombers, they bombard from safe high altitude).
Now as for lethal land for jets & F-15 & stealth fighter.
I though to make this units more specail.
Like: Bombard with bombers, then finish off with jets. (same for sea, but with fighters included too, although you could call those fighters "dive bombers")
Now don't forget that they have much lower bombard rate (2 for jets, 4 for f-15 & stealth).
Aprox. every 2rd or 3rh strike would do any damage (with ROF of 3)
So they should be maily used to finish off some troops.
It's still much more easier to kill a ship insead of land unit, since units in cities has high defensive bonuses, and have higher defense overall.
Maybe lowering their ROF to original rate of 2, if lethal land looks too much powerfull.
P.S.
Don't forget that F-15 with bombard of 4 is actually twice more effective then Jet fighter. And is excellent precision bomber.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
=DrJambo=
|
 |
Athens of the North
Jan 2002
time: 05:18
|
|
I gave lethal land/sea bombardment to:
Jet Fighters
F15s
Stealth Fighters/Bombers
BAttleships
AEGIS
Destroyers
Radar Artillery
I gave lethal land to:
Cannon and Artillery
I gave lethal sea to:
All bombarding sea vessels
Remember to label the air bombard to air units like Jet Fighters so that the AI will use them this way. And it does so very effectively too.
People really over estimate the unbalancing factor of lethal bombardment against the AI. Remember that Destroyers, Cannons and Artillery, my most questionable additions, can still reduce a unit to 1 hp effectively rendering that unit useless anyway and does actually killing it make that much of a difference?!
If you actually kill the unit you save the AI money (1 less maintenance fee) and time in returning the unit home to recuperate. Remember, in versions before 1.21f, AI ships would always run away to port once you bombarded them to red, not realising that you couldn't actually kill them outright. Human players would realise this and just keep on bombarding away, now this isn't the case. Human navies now have a reason to be scared once bombarded and a quick getaway often becomes necessary. To avoid this bring a carrier with jet fighters to protect your navy.
One thing i would advise though. Give modern ships +1 hp (AEGIS and Nuclear Subs +2) to help them a little. Also i made AEGIS have a defence of 16 and Battleships 14.
I had my navy (3 battleships, 1 destroyer, 2 subs, 1 carrier with 1 bomber and 3 jet fighers causing havoc to the Egyptians off their coast, when all of a sudden, their bombers rained in, artillery from the coast fired and a whole squad of battleships blocked their escape and are closing in... they appear to be well and truly doomed. Great excitment though as they could yet escape....!  Previously i wouldn't have been bothered as bombers and jet fighters were never a threat as they couldn't kill them and they could have just kept out of range from their battleships...
This is all incorporated into the Real_Deal v1.2 if you wish to take a peek later today when i get time to update the thread.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
player1
|
|
Belgrade, YU
Sep 2001
time: 06:18
|
|
I used modified version of my New Earth sceanrio which starts in Industrial era and is based on Patch supepstion MOD.
As far as I know, if only two known civs have tech, base price is HALVED in tech value calulations.
That new value is used as BASE value, since it also makes tech cheper to research (less science points needed).
But AI would give it even CHEAPER if that Civ B doesn't have enough money to pay FULL new (halved) base price.
That additional discount is NEVER higher then max AI tech rate setting.
For expample, starting base price for tech is 1000.
Two known civs have that tech (civ1 & civ3) ==> base price 500
AI civ1 wants to sell it to civ2, but civ2 doesn't have 500gold. It has only 450 gold. Civ1, since game in monarch level makes minimum selling value 500*(100/140)=357. Since 450 is higher then minum of 357 Civ1 will sell Civ2 a tech for all money civ2 has (450). Same would happen if Civ2 had 360 gold.
But if civ2 had 300 gold, civ1 won't sell tech to him.
But lets say that some civ4 gets a tech. Then base value drops to 333.
Then civ1 could sell tech to civ2 since new minum value is 333*(100/140)=237, and civ2 has 300 gold. That way civ2 will give all of its money (300) to civ1 and get that tech. I civ2 had 400 gold, only 333 gold (which is base price) would be needed to pay the tech.
P.S.
I hope I haven't made some mistake here.
P.P.S.
Human players also use this startegy if AI gives a lot of money (but still less then full base price). They reson that it's better to sell tech for some money, instead of getting nothing for it.
P.P.P.S.
Tech rate value was 200 in 1.17f.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chiefpaco
|
|
Canada
Feb 2002
time: 00:18
|
|
alexman's theory is what I think happens too. (Is this the place to battle tech devaluation?)
Player1, IMHO, I don't think tech rate adjustments should be in your mod. It seems quite personal to how each person likes to play the game to adjust.
I also hope the AI will still use their fighters to stave off my bomber attacks!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Moth
|
|
So. Cal.
May 2002
time: 05:18
|
|
A missguided message by me to player1, continued here for open discussion.
quote:Moth
You have chosen to upgrad longbowmen to riflemen. What would it take to create a new unit, Morter Infintry? Set this unit up for a 4,4,1 (6,1,2) NO-lethal land w/ZOC for instance. This would give the bow units something to upgrade to, aswell as giving the the helocopters an artilery unit to transport . Aswell I do like the idea that =DrJambo= used with his bows by giving them the 0 bombardment, they would back up the footsolders that is historicaly accurate. Setting there original cost may be necessary.
player1
quote:
While idea for extra unit looks fine, it would need extra graphic, and further rebalanicng.
And somehow mortar units don't have so long range to have 1 tile distance bombard (at lest in my opinion). And Infantry units are supossed to have all grande-type and protable artillery-type weapons by default. |
Mortar units would come into play in the Industrial Ages probably with Replaceable Parts or at the advent of Mass Production. The unit would be, essentially, a combination between the current MI and Artillery. Your statement that Infantry squads would have these abilities by default is flawed for the time, as bazookas, grenade launchers, and even portable rocketry of today are all forms of LOS weapens. Mortar units in WWII were set up in small squads, 3-6 men normally, that could lob concussion ordinance at a coordinated or communicated position without regard to LOS.
player1
quote:
As you have already seen original name of this MOD is "Patch suggestion MOD". So I make chages which could likely be implemented in one rebalancing patch.
This is very CONSERVATIVE MOD. (if it works, don't chage, if it's broken, fix it)
|
You have a great point here! (-: This mod may be the wrong place for this unit. However, the unit, in conjuction with the archers 0 bombardment, would be very accurate and the unit would lose its effectiveness in the modern era as the bombers and MT become more prevalent. It just sounds soo good!
player1
quote:
As for bombard range 0 for Archers, while it look like interseting idea, there is one small problem.
If you give that ability to bowmen units, you'll need to give it to musketmen (for same reason), then for Infantry, Tanks, etc...
At the end all post renesance unit would have this ability.
And balancing all these units with new abilities would need a lot of time.
|
I don't agree with the correlation between bow units and musketmen/infantry or tanks. Here's the reasons: bow units, except for very brief periods in history, were not the primary assult units nor front line fighters, they were support units, ie when seigeing a castle, archers would lob arrows over the walls to try to thin out the forces inside. Footsolders, like musketmen and infantry, were the front line units and could not be used in the same capacity. While tanks became armored fast attack front line vehicles that replaced the unarmered dragoons and cavalry, they would take land but not hold it. I could see where you might even give an argument for tanks to have this ability but game balance would surely be an issue. On the other hand I could possibly see giving a 0 bombardment of some sort to Mech Infantry...
It sounds plausible.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
player1
|
|
Belgrade, YU
Sep 2001
time: 06:18
|
|
But Infantry units could be easily used in same support misssions as archers. Right?
Now I try to make thing consistent, if one unit can do it, simialar one should not be restricted. If giving ability to lots of units, then it would need A LOT of playtesting, too much for me (and don't forget that AI would probabaly don't know how to use them propely).
And Archers the way it is are not bad at all, esapcialy since pop rush shields are reduced to 20 in 1.21f patch.
As for Mortar units, idea is FINE, but if would like when my Tanks lose from Infantry to say: "Too bad, some of them had mortars and Bazookas!"
Or from Rilfemen: "Too bad, some of them have smuggled some mortars and Bazookas from my empire!"
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Moth
|
|
So. Cal.
May 2002
time: 05:18
|
|
To compare apples to apples... (-:
quote:
But Infantry units could be easily used in same support misssions as archers. Right?
Now I try to make thing consistent, if one unit can do it, simialar one should not be restricted. If giving ability to lots of units, then it would need A LOT of playtesting, too much for me (and don't forget that AI would probabaly don't know how to use them propely). |
The qualifiers and examples that I used, you have overlooked... The Primary mission of archers was to support the front line units. The primary mission of most firearm carrying infantry units, whether they are using a harquebus, M-1 or M-16, is to get into direct conflict with the enemy units. e.g. Just because B-25's flew off of a carrier durring WWII, doesn't mean that they should now be reclassified as carrier plains, they are still land based bombes. (I understand that this game doesn't distinguish between bomber types and it is not necessary for game progession) My point being, bow units are support units, primarily, and the game doesn't use them as such when it easly could.
quote:
As for Mortar units, idea is FINE, but if would like when my Tanks lose from Infantry to say: "Too bad, some of them had mortars and Bazookas!"
Or from Rilfemen: "Too bad, some of them have smuggled some mortars and Bazookas from my empire!" |
Anti-tank/bunker busting weopons were carried my most reg. infantry units in one form or another, granads or BARs being the most common however it was not very easy to to assult a tank with them. Special units, i.e. engeniers or rangers, were trained for assulting bunkers, fortifications and clearing other hazards. Their equipment would do a great job on tanks as well. Armor percing rockets like the bazooka(HE,AP), the satchal charge, and molotov cocktails were commen for these type of units and sometimes implemented in heavy infantry units aswell.
Mortars, which were not normaly carried by a reg. infantry squad, are anti-personel weopons. Their concussion and ability to arch over obsticals made them great for breaking morale aswell. The're less effective on tanks, however because they weren't accurate enough.
Mortars are used much like the English used their logbow units.
=DrJambo='s idea of using the marine would be a great compromise to see if it works. Since I have used the marine about as much as I have used the bow units it might make them all a bit more popular, that is if the AI can use these abilities aswell.
Last edited by Moth on 07-05-2002 at 12:38
|
|
| |
|
|
|
player1
|
|
Belgrade, YU
Sep 2001
time: 06:18
|
|
AI agressiveness isn't modified compared to original settings.
Now, you could try to edit agressive behavior of AIs in editor (rules chages: civilizations menu in editor), but that way they would all behave as Germans or Zulus (they have maximum agressivity), which could become boring.
Or maybe try playing with some more agressive civs: Like Zulus, Germans, Romans, etc...
Now, Civ3 v1.21f patch is used as base for changes done in MOD (v1.26), anything not chaged in this MOD, is same as in 1.21f patch.
You need that patch to play this MOD.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-04-2002 18:04
|