Guerilla?

[K.J.H.]

Were are the guerilla forces of Civ 2 in Civ 3?
I liked it 'when the patrizans went to the hills'

[DarkCloud]

I really hope they are downscaled in the game... A partisian could destroy a rifleman or engineer for heavens sake! :bugeyes: :P

[Alex 14]

No s**t.

A guerilla could destroy an airport.

Guerillas sabatage, they dont go into hand to hand combat, a guerilla could sabatage a rifleman, no problem.

Nevertheless, when a rifleman attacks a guerilla it should be instant death.

Guerillas have to be in!

[JosefGiven]

Guerillas were cool. I especially enjoyed mowing them down with my jet squadrons after taking a city.

Were are the guerilla forces of Civ 2 in Civ 3?

Was it Snapcase who did a graphical analysis of all the units in Civ III? (I am too damn lazy to check for myself).

I am sure there's a partisan unit in there somewhere.

A partisian could destroy a rifleman or engineer for heavens sake!

What's wrong with that? The engineer is unarmed, and would not stand a chance. Statistically speaking, the rifleman does win more often than not, if he is the attacker.

Perhaps the partisan's knowledge of the local terrain/resources would give him a massive advantage, too. Like in Vietnam.*

*Not an attempt to wind up our friends across the Atlantic.

[squid]

Rifleman were US Civil War era units in Civ2...they came with conscription ("drafting"), and were made obsolete by "Alpine Troops". Though Alpine Troops are too rare of a thing to make sense in the game, it is important to remember what sort of Rifleman we are talking about.

The Rifleman probably had a black powder weapon.

The Partisan, on the other hand, comes with the advent of "Guerilla Warfare" or Communism if someone else has found "Guerilla warfare". Noting the era of the Communist rise to power and the Guerrilla insurgences in Central America, the Partisan is probably armed with an automatic weapon.

So, take your Civil War rifleman (Napoleonic tactics, black powder) if you like...but he should *not* be able to handle a Partisan (Smarter warfare tactics, automatic weapons such as M16 or a real sniper's rifle).

[Urban Ranger]

They need to have some kind of partisan units in the game. Perhaps one that's light, fast, lives off the land, and blends into the terrain.

[Sabre2th]

First of all, there were no guerillas in civ2. They were called partisans. While some might say that's insignificant, using the correct name will allow people to answer questions better.

Originally posted by Alex 14
A guerilla could destroy an airport.

Guerillas sabatage, they dont go into hand to hand combat, a guerilla could sabatage a rifleman, no problem.

Those were spies, not guerillas or partisans

[kolpo]

I think that Guerilla untis should be made more powerfull!

The Germans had in WWII lot's of problems with Russian Guerillas, the Russians lost against them in Afghanistan, the Americans lost against them in Vietnam, the old Cuban regime lost against the communistic Guerilla, lot's of governments in South America have big problems with Guerilla(mainly because grounds are divide in an unfair way),...

In all those cases was there 1 similar thing: the majority of the farmers and common people supported them so I think that only popular(maybe combination happyness and culture to determinate that) leaders should be able to get Guerilla units if one of there cities is conquered.

Conquering an nation where the people hate you and the common people support Guerilla should be as close to impossible as it is in real live.

[M. le Comte]

Originally posted by kolpo
I think that Guerilla untis should be made more powerfull!

Conquering an nation where the people hate you and the common people support Guerilla should be as close to impossible as it is in real live.

I don't agree.

Guerilla is not about popularity of a leader.

Guerilleros stand up when their ideal has been attacked, whichever is the ideal. It can be their Nation (Russia invaded by France at the end of the Napoleonian wars), communism (Viet Nam for example), Monarchy (Vendean in France, who fought against the Republic during the Great Revolution) and so on...

In 1939-1940, Albert Lebrun, President of the French Republic, was not very popular. He was fired by Philippe Pétain, who began to collaborate with the Nazis. And then Guerilleros, the French Resistance "went to the hills". Some fought for Liberty, some for Communism, some for their Nation. But they did not fight for Albert Lebrun !

[Christantine The Great]

Partisans aren't necessary anymore. Now your former population isn't nice to the invaders and can actually cause the city to revert back to you if its culture was high enough. I remember reading that somewhere but I don't feel like looking for it. Anyone else see it? I wouldn't want to cause a rumor.

[Rommel393]

I think partisans should be more like spies and less like military units. Partisans don't engage in open warfare, they plant an ambush here and there, and sabotage things. Partisans should have no combat values but should be able to sabotage and have the ability to bring more partisans into the war as long as they survive (perhaps every 5 turns 1 survives another partisan unit springs up around the city the original unit came from.... this would show the prolonged effort of guerrila warfare). Also, they should be invisible on land like a sub, but would be sighted when they move next to an enemy unit or city. They should also have a movement of 2, and move at 1/3 a point every square.

[kolpo]

Guerilla is not about popularity of a leader.

In civ are the guerilla units after city conquest we where talking about under your control so they represent only the ones who are loyal to you, revolts is another subject. I think that only people who either love you or hate the enemy more then you(and also love you in that sense) will be willing to fight for you, without payment in while risking there live. Also in quite all examples of a real powerfull guerilla was there a big part of the population that supported them.

In Afganistan where the islamitic rulers at that moment popular and was there a deep believe in the islam and liked they there nations and leaders much more then the USSR who where atheïstic and know to have no respect for religion. Because of that support the biggest part of the population the guerilla and that gaved them there power.

The Veitnames farmers hated for example the corruption and poor live conditions for the farmers in the south and they liked the leader of the north because they thought he would stop that corrupution and make there live condition better. This is the reason why the very big majority of the supported the north and this support of quite all farmers produced a very powerfull guerilla of people who knowed the lands very well.

In WWII killed the germans many Russians for no reasons and burned there houses and farms the people loved then the red army who fought against those Nazi's who killed them and burned there farms and they saw Stalin with the help of the propaganda then as the leader of the red army who would liberate them from those Nazi's and they loved him then for that. Because of that supported the majority of the Russian people the guerilla and that gaved them much power(expect some oekraïn nationalists but that wheren't real Russians)

[Mahdimael]

Obviously none of you ever saw Red Dawn. Those kids held out for months in the mountains when the Soviets invaded Colorado.

I liked the civ2 guerillas, though maybe you should get fewer of them. I generally would win pretty easily and have 3-4 of the guys defending my city.

[JosefGiven]

Originally posted by Mahdimael
Obviously none of you ever saw Red Dawn. Those kids held out for months in the mountains when the Soviets invaded Colorado...

Ye gods, having remembered watching that film at an early age and enjoying it, I picked that 'classic' up in a sale at a shop in Exeter - In the words of Captain "Allo Allo" Bertarelli, "What a mistake-a to make-a"

"Go Wolverines!"

Indeed

[Admiral PJ]

You should get a rebel unit, which is attack 5(maybe a lot more), defend 5 and can sabotage units and cities, assasinate leaders and appear in your own country, like a barbarian unit- not just when a cities taken. It'd move over any terrain as if it was road, and have a stealth factor perhaps.
It could be a modern true Guerilla fighter, Like Fidel Castro.

Rebels: appear in your civ if population in a city dislikes your rule.

Guerilla warfare really started with the americans when they fought us english in the US war of independance, the colonists etc using skirmish/ambush tactics and small split up soldier packets to be stealthy and utilise the lie of the land properly.
I don't see guerrilas as particularly good at living off the land?
thats more a special forces trick maybe.

[splangy]

Fraxis Said (no, i dont remember where but i beleive it was in more than 1 preveiw as well) that when you capture a city pro-former goverment nationalists spring up in the city and do things to piss you off (dont work, revolt, weaken your units defence), that DEFINETLY will slow expansion. i can see it now, loosing wars just becouse that one city wouldn't shut up. that is gona rock!

[splangy]

Originally posted by Admiral PJ

I don't see guerrilas as particularly good at living off the land?
thats more a special forces trick maybe.

ya, i guess people who lived in a city all there life wouldn't know how to live off the land THEY GREW UP ON!

special forces dont know that a certain area of that particular woods has berry bushes, they dont know that a particular area has drinkable water, and they dont know how to hide in certain places to get the maximum effect of surprise. In WW2 Ukranian Nationalists fought both the germans AND the russians, partisan warfare is a big reason that Barbarossa caused 26,000,000 deaths, the partisans would kill the peasents that stayed nuetral, then the Germans and the Russians would kill the other peasents for "treason" thinking they were the partisans. This was all becouse the peasents in Ukrain, and nations around that area, were so nationalistic that they were willing to die for freadom, they lived off the land and the small villages in the area for a few YEARS, and you tell me that patisans in the game shouldn't be able to live off the land? The SS were "Special Forces" and they didn't "live off the land", infact that was one of the reasons that barbarossa failed, they needed supplies so badly and the partisans would raid supply trucks to slow them down. this pised the germans off so bad that they salted the feilds and ransacked the towns, somtimes doining things like putting the villagers in a church, locking it, and setting it ablaze. Dwight D. Eisenhower flew from Berlin to Moscow and said that he couldn't see 1 building standing...

[Grim Legacy]

I can see it coming already. There will be lots of trouble for people who want to truly 'expand' their empire through conquest.

On the other hand, people who are just interested in subjecting the enemy and leaving their former cities to rot and produce some cheap units will have a blast.

Tough choice!