Artillery Bombardment: What's the problems?

Jason Beaudoin · October 17, 2001, 10:51

Was artillery in SMAC useful or a waste of money?

People seem to think that artillery was a complete waste of money in SMAC and now I've becomed concerned that this problem may exist in CIV III.

What do you think? I never played SMAC very much, so I don't know whether it was a good unit, or worthless. Tell us what you think and why.

Thanks!

Grumbold · October 17, 2001, 11:22

Artillery was absolutely vital and worked well in CtP1/2. I expect it to be properly balanced for Civ III even if it was badly done in SMAC.

Crouchback · October 17, 2001, 15:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Grumbold
Artillery was absolutely vital and worked well in CtP1/2. I expect it to be properly balanced for Civ III even if it was badly done in SMAC.

Actually I felt almost the other way.

Artillery was done very badly in CTP2 for two reasons. Firstly it was way too powerful. Two stacks of twelve cannons could take the world in CTP2, with the opposition artillery dying first without a shot in response. But you got to love the way CTP2 artillery killed non-armoured units off double quick. Though I loved the way bombarding a city killed non-armoured defenders off double quick, it didn't provide much of a challange.

The automatic counter bombard function in SMAC was much more realistic/useful and helped game play. That said, I never bothered to build bombard units in SMAC for anything but city defence and occasional nuisance value. The AI's artillery always seemed so much more effective than my weak little pea-shooters, and there were more interesting offensive units to build.

So something of the SMAC concept and nearer the power of artillery in CTP would be great.

David

Grumbold · October 17, 2001, 15:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Crouchback
Actually I felt exactly the other way. Two stacks of twelve cannons could take the world in CTP2, with the opposition artillery dying first without a shot in response. The automatic counter bombard function in SMAC was much more realistic/useful and helped game play. But you got to love the way CTP2 artillery killed non-armoured units off double quick.

They do counter-bombard but 1 vs 12 doesn't do much. With the AI mods you deserve success if you can keep 12 cannon stacks alive. With 'raw' CtP you hardly needed them

Quote:

Something of the SMAC concept and CTP power would be great.

Absolutely. CtP did overdo the lethality a bit.

The Templar · October 17, 2001, 15:22

Quote:

Two stacks of twelve cannons could take the world in CTP2, with the opposition artillery dying first without a shot in response.

It wasn't quite that bad (the Fascist unit was the worst offender of game ballance in CTP1). And in CTP2, artillery counter-bombarded (of course this too required a mod to do right

)
In SMAC, bombarding units were a complete waste of money. Hope Civ3 gets it right.

YahMon · October 17, 2001, 15:26

artillery is capturable in Civ3 which should balance their effectiveness a bit. Artillery will still be slow and vulnerable to airstrikes and missiles. I think this feature will add alot of depth to naval combat and importance since coastal forts can be built with cannons vs. battleships.

Crouchback · October 17, 2001, 15:31

Man but are you guys quick, you managed to post reponses just as I was editing my post to fully cook express my half baked ideas.

Grumbold: I never had a stack of twelve attacked in CTP2 even with the Apolyton mods or the Frenzy mod at very hard. Guess I was unlucky. And with a 2x movement The could arrive outside a city and pound it the same move.

Templar: Yeah, I forgot the mod added counter bombard, though it only seemed to work sparodically.

YahMon: Good point, and naval forts are going to be real interesting.

David