 |
|
Zachriel
|
 |
U.S.A.
Dec 2001
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MarkG
quote:
the crazy unlimited MP's on RR's |
something that was also a part of civ2, which was "much more close to historic reality" as i recall
|
Is that a simplification to make the pathfinding algorithm practical? The same with air range?
Last edited by Zachriel on 01-09-2002 at 01:41
|
|
| |
|
|
|
XOR
|
 |
Venezuela
Aug 2002
time: 05:21
|
|
Increasing aircraft range with the size of the map is a big mistake as everything (city radius, mobility of ground units, mobility of sea units, etc...) would stay the same or would have to change accordingly with the size of the map.
If you decide to make only airplane range be map-size dependant, airplanes would be overpowered in very large maps and in very small ones they could be crippled to the point where they cannot reach their targets.
On the other hand, if you choose to make all units movement range be map size based it could lead to panzers being able to attack 5 times or move 5 tiles of distance which means they can reach very deep inside your territory in 1 turn.
Making the value alterable/editable= yes.
Making it map size dependant by default= NO WAY.
And, I think there should be more priority on giving us a cruise missile that is more like a cruise missile and can be fired from carriers, as well as fixing submarines and paratroopers and making some other things like better thought radar towers and tone down the internet. Because, I remind you, that PtW, online, will have the default units and values that come from Firaxis and their totally useless paratroopers.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
panag
|
 |
MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Oct 2000
time: 07:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by XOR
Increasing aircraft range with the size of the map is a big mistake as everything (city radius, mobility of ground units, mobility of sea units, etc...) would stay the same or would have to change accordingly with the size of the map.
If you decide to make only airplane range be map-size dependant, airplanes would be overpowered in very large maps and in very small ones they could be crippled to the point where they cannot reach their targets.
On the other hand, if you choose to make all units movement range be map size based it could lead to panzers being able to attack 5 times or move 5 tiles of distance which means they can reach very deep inside your territory in 1 turn.
Making the value alterable/editable= yes.
Making it map size dependant by default= NO WAY.
And, I think there should be more priority on giving us a cruise missile that is more like a cruise missile and can be fired from carriers, as well as fixing submarines and paratroopers and making some other things like better thought radar towers and tone down the internet. Because, I remind you, that PtW, online, will have the default units and values that come from Firaxis and their totally useless paratroopers. |
hi ,
we should be able to set the range , and it should not dependant on mapsize !!
as for PTW , we shall be able to play with mods , ... so no problem
have a nice day
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Blue Moose
|
|
Columbus, Ohio USA
May 1999
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by XOR
Increasing aircraft range with the size of the map is a big mistake as everything (city radius, mobility of ground units, mobility of sea units, etc...) would stay the same or would have to change accordingly with the size of the map.
If you decide to make only airplane range be map-size dependant, airplanes would be overpowered in very large maps and in very small ones they could be crippled to the point where they cannot reach their targets.
On the other hand, if you choose to make all units movement range be map size based it could lead to panzers being able to attack 5 times or move 5 tiles of distance which means they can reach very deep inside your territory in 1 turn.
Making the value alterable/editable= yes.
Making it map size dependant by default= NO WAY.
And, I think there should be more priority on giving us a cruise missile that is more like a cruise missile and can be fired from carriers, as well as fixing submarines and paratroopers and making some other things like better thought radar towers and tone down the internet. Because, I remind you, that PtW, online, will have the default units and values that come from Firaxis and their totally useless paratroopers. |
I agree with the cruise missle statement, they should have at least as long a range as bombers. Speaking of which though, Bombers and the like should be able to kill off tanks and other mechanized units, but not infantry (same with artillery)...that would be much more historically accurate. At least they should be able to take out ships. Aircraft need a longer range for defensive missions against though bombers though...air power is very, very important in real life, and this needs to be reflected more.
Range changes for map sizes is fine...if on a huge map you are talking about a move 4 or 5 tank or cavalry...well, that's not that bad or unreasonable, considering how many cities you are likely to have at that point. You need ZOC like there was in Civ2 though, at least for forts and cities with ZOC units. That was you can block of your borders so a rush can't get through as effectively. Ideally RR MPs would be lessened to...to something like 1/10 or the like...maybe 1/5. It makes a lot of sense to me, at least.
-Moose
|
|
| |
|
|
|
panag
|
|
MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Oct 2000
time: 07:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by realpolitic
Air power and Marines need to come considerably before Tanks to be worthwhile. Zeplins are also a good unit. |
hi ,
marines are around in most nation for more then 200 years , so okay , maybe they need an upgrade as time passes , ...
tanks , the start of the 1900s , the first real thing around 1916 , .....
then an evolution around 1935 , ....
zeplins , they where short lived , ......so should we put them in , or use them only in a WWI scenario , ......
have a nice day
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Donal Graeme
|
 |
California
Jul 2002
time: 21:21
|
|
I have always felt the ability to easily MOD a game was one of the characteristics that made it a good game. I see no logical reason why they (they being Firaxis) hard-coded the range of airplanes and bombardment from units. It just seem stupid to me. WHY?!
Why go to the trouble to make it so that something can't be altered? One of the big advantages of Bombers over artillery is their range, and was one of the reasons the Israeli Army was so dependent on air-power for a long time. (the reason is simple: the same plane that can shoot down Egyptian MiGs one day can bomb the Golan Heights the next, while artillery has to be towed, which takes time, something the IDF didn't have.) Of course, that brings up another element: Unit cost. Units should have a variable upkeep cost. While a tank unit costs 2 gpt, a infantry should cost 1gpt, and maybe a fighter wing 3gpt, and so on. That way more expensive units are not just expensive in their contstruction, but in their maintenance as well. If Firaxis wants their game to last for as along as Civ 2 did, then they have to stop making these stupid decisions, and give more power to the MODers.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SABRA
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thrawn05
256 is good.
Now the question for me is either buy PTW now or wait for Tribunal... |
Get PTW , it is worth it .
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
28-08-2002 23:27
|