 |
|
MoonWolf
|
|
Maybe it's better to increase the capabilities of the F-15? I guess many players already have trigged the lethal bombardment(s) for lots of the bombardment units.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mad Bomber
|
 |
Columbus, Ohio
Nov 2002 time: 00:25
|
|
You could exchange half a dozen modern units for the American UU .
examples are; Super Carrier, Sea Wolf sub, M1 Abrams, M2 Bradley, MLRS, B-52, and numerous different fighter bombers including F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18. F-22, F-35.
The F-15 is a good choice for a UU, just the stats need to be improved in the editor.
A cruise missle as a UU? I wouldn't care for it at all. And why would you make the F-15 available to al civ's when there are only 4 countries which fly the F-15 (US, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Japan)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
CiverDan
|
|
I disagree on lethal attack for the F-15. It would allow the Americans to attack just with F-15s until all defenders are done. Kind of reminds me of civ 2 where I would simply attack units repeatedly with a stealth fighter, completely unrealistic. This unit just needs better range and bombard power, IMHO.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
arslankhan
|
|
I always thought the best UU for America would be either Rifleman or Marine (especially since the Rifleman seems to be wearing an American Civil War era uniform).
I m not crazy about machines being UUs.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Fosse
|
|
U.S.A.
Mar 2002 time: 23:25
|
|
I played for a while with a standard infantry unit that I added 2 bonus hitpoints to. I called him a Doughboy, and deleted the F15.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Kizami
|
|
this may be a stupid answer but, A supercarrier is useless with out aircraft. So i think the american UU is fine the way it is.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mad Bomber
|
 |
Columbus, Ohio
Nov 2002 time: 00:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Master Zen
I doubt a caravel could since a carrier, but a Man O' War might... 3 vs 8 makes it a distinct possiblity
Mad Bomber:
It would be cool to have an amphibious assault ship as a new unit. Ticonderogas are formidable sub-hunters I agree, however, if I give them the ability in Civ3 then there's really no reason to build Destroyers.
Carriers should have a defense of 10. I first though about modding it to 12 but if I escort it with cruisers, any attack would hit the carrier first, wouldn't it? Anyway, a defense of 8 might not be that unrealistic since a carrier, alone in the sea without aircraft, wouldn't even be a match for a destroyer. |
Not true, the game engine selects combatant units for defense over transport units, as for the defense my new ratings for modern units are as follows
Destroyer: 12.10.6
Battleship: 18.14.5
Carrier: 1.12.6 (6 unit transport)
Aegis Cruiser: 14.18.6
Submarine: 10.6.4
Nuc Submarine: 18.16.6
If you want a role for Destroyers reduce the cost a shield level or two. Still, they are cheaper and faster than BB's and it takes a lot longer to get the Aegis cruiser making Destroyers viable for a good timeframe in the game.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25. Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|