 |
|  |
 |
|
ZargonX
|
 |
Space
Sep 2002 time: 00:23
|
|
That, of course, assumes you found them not to be useful to begin with. As for myself, I saw in them the potential to be a good unit, but one that had not been unleashed as of yet.
Taking in to the editor, I decided that the in-game guerillas should function more like real-life guerillas. So, what do guerillas do in the real world? They are hit-and-run units, sneaking through jungles and hills, staying one step ahead of their more powerful foes.
Thanks to the new PTW editor, we can set units to ignore the move cost of certain terrain. So, with a few clicks, my guerillas now ignore jungle, mountains, and hills. Now, that doesn't do much good with just a move of 1, so we bump that up to 2.
Viola! Suddenly, a mediocre unit takes on whole new dimensions! Now the guerillas can swarm in quickly from unexpected directions, tearing up roads and picking away at slower moving units. The 2 move allows them a retreat option, so hit-and-runs are much more viable. And, to top it off, they're cheap. They probably won't win you any wars, but they sure can tear it up behind enemy lines!
Anyone else made any modifications to them worth sharing?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ducki
|
|
You may be missing the most useful feature of Guerrillas.
They are the culmination of the new Warrior chain.
No longer are swordsmen a "dead-end" unit.
Warriors(1/1)-Swordsmen(3/2)-Med.Inf(4/2)-Guerrilla(6/6) IIRC.
If you're a Horseman purist, this doesn't really affect you.
If you're a Swordsman rusher, this is huge.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ghengis-Sean
|
|
You know, a better way to go with swordsmen would be to have them uprgrade to riflemen and then use the guerilla as a stand alone unit. Or how about this, how about cavalry uprgading to Guerilla? If you're going to give the guerilla better movement it makes sense.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
kgoodrid
|
 |
Ann Arbor, MI
Nov 2001 time: 05:23
|
|
I think we need to decide what the Guerilla is being modeled after. Is it an elite commando? It is a poor stand in for Infantry?
I intepret the Guerilla as a VC type unit. If that is the case, it should be cheap, available without resources, and unable to last in a stand up fight.
No visible nationality: would be nice because it would simulate the difficulties faced by the US in identifying the enemy in Nam. However, on the large scale, it would make them more like covert ops, which Guerillas are not. So, I would say 'no' to this option.
Extra movement: No. Guerillas lack the massive supply trains of large units, but they also lack any mobilized transport, which even leg infantry can sometimes get.
Move with Roads: Yes. Similar to the old Partisan unit. This allows them to swiftly move around tough terrain that would slow large units. This make them faster in rough terrain than tanks, but slower on roads, as is appropriate.
ADM: This is the tough part. They should be weaker on the attack than Infantry, and perhaps even weaker than Riflemen. This would simulate their poor equipment and supply. I would say attack of no more than 5. Defense is very tough. They should be strong when dug in rough terrain, but still not able to slow a large enemy unit. Defense no more than 6.
The Guerilla should be a good unit for poor nations to deploy to harass stonger, more advanced enemies. It should not be something that an advanced nation produces. Covert Ops / Special Forces units are too small to be simulated outside of the Espionage options.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
problem_child
|
 |
State of the Animal
Mar 2000 time: 05:23
|
|
I agree with kgookrids points, except (playing Civ3) i have made Guerilla units that Use-All-Terrain_as-roads, to simulate their light-mobility, their knowledge of local territory, they carry little food and ammo coz they have dumps scattered around the area and the support of local villagers, but this only apoplies in their own country. As an invasion force operating in foreign territory, they only move one square per turn, and are very weak to boot (6.6.1 or something)
Also experimenting with letting them bombard adjoining squares, to represent sabotage, booby traps etc, bombard damage is very light, canon-strenth, and experimenting with Zone-of-control (they'll definately keep ZOC). Of course they are invisible too.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zurai
|
|
quote: Originally posted by problem_child
Really? damn, what is the difference then between ATAR and just giving a unit 3 moves per turn then, seems to me to be a duplication of function. |
Something with 3 movement will only move one square through mountains or jungle, and only two through hills or forest. An ATAR unit will move 3 squares through anything. Also, a unit with 3 movement will retreat from combat, but a 1 movement ATAR unit will not. They're completely different things.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DrFell
|
|
It would probably make sense giving guerillas 2 moves rather than all terrain as roads though - that way they could 'retreat into the hills' after failed combats. Just give them the ability to ignore terrain movement penalties.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23. Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|