Hp > 12

GoPostal · February 29, 2004, 14:09

Is it impossible to have an HP over 12, or is this just the game editor being restrictive? I really need more of a range of HP.

our_man · February 29, 2004, 16:17

I believe if you edit via the rules.txt instead of the in-game editors it's possible. But why do you need HP > 12? It'll take ages for the outcome of battles to be resolved.

Elok · February 29, 2004, 16:41

How many separate "ranks" of units do you have? E.G., Horsemen, Chariot, Elephant, Knight, Dragoon, Cavalry, Armor=7 ranks, and those are spread over a 2 HP difference. If you want to have an overwhelming advantage between different "generations" of unit, or something like that, 1 HP more or less between different-strength units coupled with other stat gains should do the trick. So unless you plan to have thirteen progressive advancements of the same unit type or something--and that's a LOT--you probably don't need 13 HP.

GoPostal · February 29, 2004, 17:41

Sorry, I didn't think HP was that important. I am looking at the difference between torpedo boats, and a Kirov or Nimitz class Ship.

Elok · February 29, 2004, 17:57

HP is important in conjunction with the other stats; if you want a unit to be superior, ADM and firepower are probably just as important. I can't think of an example where you would need a really big HP disparity except maybe if you wanted some sort of pathetically weak but durable unit that can beat off attackers but gets significantly worn down in the process. Like an armored transport or something. For the purposes of game mechanics a little HP difference goes a long way. I don't know how tough a Kirov was compared to a torpedo boat, but look at the difference between a musketeer and an archer in Vanilla civ.

:) Smiley · February 29, 2004, 23:42

Kirovs are missile-launching battlecruisers. The last word in surface capital ships.

GePap · March 1, 2004, 01:16

Chainging HP makes a big difference, though changing firepower makes an even bigger one. a unit with HP 4 and FP 2 withXA/XD will generally, if not always beat a unit with HP 3 and FP 1 and XA/XD as well.

Though really, each jump in HP equal 10 more HP, so the difference between 2 and 6 is drastic. I can hardly see a reaosn to go above 12.

GoPostal · March 1, 2004, 03:53

thank god I heard that, the Kirov and Iowa classes have firepower in the 70s

Case · March 1, 2004, 05:12

Will all the talk of 'hitpoints that go past 12' this thread really reminds me of the classic movie This is Spinal Tap and the amplifier that goes to 11

Mercator · March 1, 2004, 11:58

HP 12 is the maximum...

GePap · March 1, 2004, 12:02

Quote:

Originally posted by GoPostal
thank god I heard that, the Kirov and Iowa classes have firepower in the 70s

I don't think you can go that high in FP, do you mean Attack power?

A unit with an attack of say 20 and an FP of 4 would utterly obliterate a unit of defense 10 and Hp 2 for example. It would not even be funny.

our_man · March 1, 2004, 12:35

There was a scenario that came with FW called USA 2010. If memory serves me right that had a few units in it with HP > 12...

It might be worth checking out.

GoPostal · March 1, 2004, 12:59

I only played 5 turns of USA 2010, then I gave it up for 2194Days. But I don't want such high HP or firepower now that my ignorance has been revealed. Thanks.

Elok · March 1, 2004, 18:30

No need to be quite so hard on yourself. And I ignored 2010 entirely, after realizing how wonky the combat mechanics were, yeah. That, and the atmosphere was about as exciting as an old Flash Gordon episode. Which goes to show you how much the big picture matters.

our_man · March 1, 2004, 18:52

For a scenario that qualified as "Best of the Net" when Fantastic Worlds was brought out, USA 2010 doesn't seem to be that popular.

I agree though. Combat was absolutely crazy in that scenario.

Elok · March 1, 2004, 19:20

Well, they also had that stupid "battle of the sexes" thing, and that wasn't best of anything at all. And I think we can all agree that "Civ-Life" sucked, whether we believe in evolution or not. The best of the net was just the worst of that CD. 'Course, the first modded scenario I ever played was Harlan's LotR, so I'm a bit spoiled.

our_man · March 1, 2004, 19:32

Battle of the Sexes. That's one I haven't thought of in a long time.

How on Earth did that manage to get in! The scary thing is that wasn't the worst!

I'm gonna have to stick up for Civ-Life though. I kind of enjoyed it.

GoPostal · March 2, 2004, 13:50

Well, I finally found a use for a cumulative frequency graph

Elok · March 2, 2004, 14:37

Civ-life? The graphics sucked, there was no real continuity (build cities with beavers or bacteria, those cities then build nukes?), and it basically failed to represent evolution at all. Or are tumors products of successful evolution? How was it fun?

our_man · March 2, 2004, 15:33

In the context of the other "best of the net" scenarios bundled with it, it was good fun. No, it wasn't that accurate a representation of evolution, but it did enough (for me anyway) to pass.

Keep in mind that for the first few years I had Civ2, I didn't have access to the internet. I made do with what I had.

Needless to say when I finally did get online, things changed. Those "best of the net" folders haven't been touched in years.

GoPostal, you found a use for what now?

Elok · March 2, 2004, 19:51

Ah, I see. And I'm curious as too what a cumulative frequency graph is...

Elok · March 2, 2004, 19:51

Ah, I see. And I'm also curious as to what a cumulative frequency graph is...

GoPostal · March 4, 2004, 15:11

Just for you, I will post it here. Also, I just got back from training, learned a lot, and the British Navy will be substantially better.

Alinestra Covelia · March 6, 2004, 15:14

I think that large hit points are useful in certain cases when you want a unit to be pretty much indestructible but to still take down things that attack it, rather than be unassailable.

In one Civ2 scen I was working on, I put barbarian trade units called "stars" in a starfield. That way, if anybody was foolish enough to fly their Star Destroyer too close to a star, it would get destroyed by the heat and graviational forces.

In the odd chance that somebody managed to destroy a star, they would get a stern note of reprimand via the events editor.

yaroslav · March 6, 2004, 18:31

And why didn't you recreate the unit via event, Alinestra

?

And although I don't understand some limits of Civ2 (the value of 12 for HP is somewhat irrational as a limit - or better say, it isn't tipical), I don't see why anyone would like to have more than 12 HP.

Alinestra Covelia · March 6, 2004, 19:00

Because that would have destroyed the feeling of achievement at actually destroying a star, with the use of a Star Destroyer.

yaroslav · March 6, 2004, 19:38

I see... that reminds me about that sci-fi book I readed... Solaris... there was related to Start Destroyer. Was the scen related to that book?

Elok · March 6, 2004, 22:54

"Start Destroyer"=Starship Procrastination?

GoPostal · March 7, 2004, 07:33

OK, well, as promised, here is what I did in relation to Cumulative Frequency. It allows you to graduate real number (ie cost in millions) over a smaller scale (ie HP 12), in proportion to standard deviation. If you didn't get that (I hardly did), don't worry.

our_man · March 7, 2004, 08:30

Alright, downloaded it and took a look. I don't get it at all.

Could you supply an explanation for those of us that are statistically challenged?