 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
|
I feel your pain.
A high attack rating for a carrrier isn't realistic though. but if it helps maybe up it to 6. As for the ai putting planes on them. Not a chance. The only time I seem an airstrike with them is in the east wind, rain (title might be messed up) scenario in conflicts. They do successfully launch a pearl harbor attack. And the results can be impressive. But after that in the scenario most of the carriers are empty, and the ai just moves fighter from city to city.
I definately recommend upping the hitpoints and defense of carriers. I feel a carrier force can protect itself very well (assuming the unit is not one lone carrier). I put their d to 11 (just below battleships) and I think I up their hp to 4. But actually the ai seemed to use them less when I did this.
but don't count on the ai actually building them (maybe if you lower it to 20 cost ). Just assign them several at the start of the scenario. If you do lower the cost, it'd be best to make it nation specific so the human player cannot cheaply pump out carriers. I'd have to do some testing to try this out though.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
|
I posted a useful link (IMO of course) in the similar thread to this one in the CivII Strategy forum. Check it out.
Guess it's now been demonstrated why it's impractical to have identical threads running...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gatekeeper
|
 |
United States of America
Feb 2000 time: 23:12
|
|
Legman:
Yes, I was trying to increase my chances of a useful reply or two a bit by posting my query in two forums. So far it seems like the general consensus is it's impossible to get the AI to use the carrier.
BTW, I did follow the link to MWHC's thread. It was intriguing, but MWHC never specified how he wove his super carrier into the the rules.txt file. I mean, did he simply edit the existing carrier slot into the super carrier? Did he use the extra sea unit slot (with its graphic) and edit that to conformity? Or did he simply find something on the Internet, downloaded it and then appended it to the rules.text file?
Frankly, I'm beginning to think that the AI won't use the carrier because of the slot itself. I just gave the darn thing an attack power of 12, defense power of 12 and left the cost at 160 shields ... yet the AI still refuses to build it! Builds everything else under the sun (including the customized units I created with the "extra" land, sea and air slots [3 total] in the rules.txt) but the carrier. It has to be a bug or something with the slot per se, I'm thinking. Maybe I should change it so carrier doesn't become available with advanced flight ... maybe with flight or plastics or something. **sigh** I still don't think it would work, though.
Perhaps my only hope is to edit my Stingray "stealth" transport (4 holds included and 8 movement points) into a super carrier. An odd-looking super carrier, yes, as the transport looks bio-engineered thing with sails. Anyway ...
CYBERAmazon
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
what version do you have. also check out the east wind/rain scenario in conflicts of civilization. The ai decimates me with the pearl harbor attack. Although they use fighters too much in suicidal attacks (another ai problem). the only problem is after pearl harbor they hardly use them. I think it is more than just attack/defense.
and by slots try putting the carrier into the destoyer slot (the ai builds lots of destroyers). and move destroyer into carrier slot. real easy to do if you have FW edition.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gatekeeper
|
 |
United States of America
Feb 2000 time: 23:12
|
|
Zyxpsilon:
You're more fortunate than me, then. I've *never* seen the AI use carriers in a standard game. More and more, I'm thinking it's a slot error and/or something you have to specifically trigger via an event file.
CYBERAmazon
***
Dissident Aggressor:
I have the Macintosh version both standard and multi-player (albeit I only use the former as the latter's aggressive AI is too overboard).
I've lowered the cost of the carrier, gave it AEGIS ability and raised its attack power to 6. None of it matters; the AI simply will not build it. As for switching slots, I haven't done that because I fear the slots are specifically linked to icons in the .gifs file. IOW, if I put the carrier into the destroyer slot, will I end up seeing the destroyer icon being used as a carrier? And vice-versa?
Besides, I'm a bit "iffy" about switching slots in the first place. Why? The one time I changed a cosmic principle number, it made it so the game wouldn't even start (gee ... never realized a "6" to a "7" could frighten the binary out of a computer like that). Hence, I've stuck mainly to changing attributes to Wonders and units while making use of the three "extra" units and adding in more technology buffers.
In retrospect, I think the whole issue is slot-related. Perhaps some day I'll be bothered enough to actually mess around with changing slots on established units.
CYBERAmazon
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
yeah that's why I asked. the fantastic worlds has the scenario editor which is handy for changing unit graphics. I would have never changed them if it weren't for that.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lews Therėn
|
|
Dragonhold, England
Sep 2000 time: 05:12
|
|
The trick I've heard about is to move the carrier into a different unit slot, and put a unit you don't want the computer to use in the carrier slot -- swap battleships and carriers, for example.
------------------
Thus spake the Dragon
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
Here's an idea I don't have time to try...
Currently the Carrier is listed as a #2 "Sea Superiority" unit in the rules.txt. Changing this to a #4 "Sea Transport" unit, might solve the problem.
|
|
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|