Why UU will be irrelevant in a regular game

[Steve Clark]

I have said that UU will be irrelevant in a regular game but I haven't said why. Think back, if you are a good civer, haven't you found that you were typically always one step ahead of the AI? In other words, because of your superior ability (even deity) to effectively manage your city resources and climb the tech tree, your military units were always better than what the AI could throw at you? When they were charging with horsemen/phalanx, you were defending with walled pikemen. When they had Knights and Cannon, you were shooting them down with Musketeers. When they had Musks, you had Riflemen. When they had Cavalry, you were into Armor Vehicles and air units. Unique Units (UU) won't provide any more of an advantage to the AI because even if they developed a 4-4-3 Rider UU instead of a Knight, you will likely be countering with a 8-3-3 Cavalry Regular Unit.

It has been surmised that perhaps the Civ3 AI is better and "more balanced" (whatever that means). I'm sure most of the good/expert civers will not think so after a few games.

That is also why I have said that Unique Units belong in scenarios where nearly ALL units are unique or customized, and specifically tailored to a time period where you can have 6 different versions of a Chariot or Armor, for example.

While I don't think that UU will have very much strategic value, it does perhaps add flavor to the game. But instead of a civ generating one UU, I prefer to play with scenarios where everything they have are unique, not just one.

[Gramphos]

The UU maybe won't help the player, but it will help the AI.

[orange]

Steve - you're thinking in terms of Civ 2.

In Civ 3, I don't want to be one step ahead of the AI. I want to be on par or one step behind, especially on the higher levels.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by orange
Steve - you're thinking in terms of Civ 2.

In Civ 3, I don't want to be one step ahead of the AI. I want to be on par or one step behind, especially on the higher levels.

This is certainly what we hope for. Question is, will the AI be so strong, even at Deity, without cheating too openly and shamelessly?

[orange]

Only 'cheating' will take place on Deity, apparently. All other levels play fair.

[Master Marcus]

Originally posted by orange
Only 'cheating' will take place on Deity, apparently. All other levels play fair.

didn't they said instead that cheating will take place above Prince ( King and on )? Prince will be par, and on the two easiest levels the cheating advantages the player.

[Sarxis]

Sorry, Steve, that you feel that way about the UUs. But to keep this brief: I disagree with your point. The UUs may actually give the AI a great deal of advantage, especially if Firaxis has coded the AI to make use of them, and to plan on using them.

Of course, we won't know until the game is here. But until we know, you can rest in the comfort that the option to shut the UUs off is available to you.

[d_dudy]

he's not gonna think they're worthless when the zulus throw mounds and mounds of impis at him!

but really, i think the ai will be good anough to have fun above king, and i always have a small empire (perfectionist) so the ai can expand more and be more dangerous to me that way

the uu will add a new angle on strategy for human and especially ai. look for the ai to attack weak neighbors and human when he's leading at the time they get their uu.

[Steve Clark]

Anunikoba: Can you provide a hypothetical example in how an AI can have a great advantage over a human player that relates to the UU?

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Steve Clark
While I don't think that UU will have very much strategic value, it does perhaps add flavor to the game. But instead of a civ generating one UU, I prefer to play with scenarios where everything they have are unique, not just one.

Glad you included the "add flavor" admission! As someone who does not play a lot of scenarios, I will enjoy having a little spice in the regular game. I have to agree that the unique units won't add that much to strategic considerations, but it will be nice to see the different civs have something unique with which to play.

[DarkCloud]

... But in multiplayer if the UU's are not disabled, it can create problems... then again, if they are not disabled it would be good not to join that game

However, I have brought up an interesting point

[joer]

On the higher levels, the AI usually starts out with more settlers and more techs. Since it also has accelerated research and research, it usually dominated in the early game. At least in my early games. Just over time, I could build an advantage.

So I do think that early units such as legions, impi and hoplites will make quite a difference. And I think that warmongers will be very put back by ancient defence units with a defence rating of 3. Since the Greeks are my favorite civ already, I am sure those hoplites will add quite a bit of safety to my early empire when the evil enemy stands before my gates.

As for later units...bah. I don't really plan on letting the Americans live long enough for them to develop an F-15. Lots of good will a unit never getting obsolete do for them if they're dead by the time they researched it.

[Mars]

So What? So what if you are ahead of the AI every advance. What harm are the UUs doing might i ask? They weren't made all that powerful so that everyone is practically the same (game balancing) and that it wouldn't be vital to have UUs, otherwise they would be far more powerful. Why does you still being able to easily defeat them make them a bad addition. They were put there for spice and flavor not for a more diffuclt game.

[Pseud0nym]

I think they will definately help the AI. At least most of em will. The zulus and the aztecs will cover more ground with early exploration, you will have a hard time conquering the greeks in the classical era. Etc. for every unit (except that stupid egyptian chariot, what were they thinking?). Maybe you've had a different experience with civ 2, but early in the game if I had a tech edge, it wasn't by much. I never really would be terribly ahead untill near the end of the game where I would be modern while the rest were still industrial or preindustrial.

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by Steve Clark
Anunikoba: Can you provide a hypothetical example in how an AI can have a great advantage over a human player that relates to the UU?

nooooPe

[Lawrence of Arabia]

well, i dont know about you guys, but im gonna use my PANZERES to RAZE a town near you.

[Alex 14]

Civ-Specific units will proberly only give you a boost for a few battles if your a scientific nation.

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
well, i dont know about you guys, but im gonna use my PANZERES to RAZE a town near you.

New movie: "Blitzkrieg!!" -- Coming to a theater of war near you!

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Anunikoba
New movie: "Blitzkrieg!!" -- Coming to a theater of war near you!

Good one, Anunikoba!

[ndnls]

An UU really provides 2 advantages, increased basic stats and
if it wins, a Golden Age. So, if I start out with some Impis and
manage to beat up a warrior, I'll start my Golden age, get
increased production, pump out a horde of Impis an either cut
down or completely destroy a neighboring civ. An AI sniping my
explorers, Getting a GA and then come barreling down on me
is just as likely, IMHO.

[Ironwood]

Well, I think steve is right, but only for those really 133t players who can thrash the computer around at Deity due to their infinate patience. I still barely hold my own at Emperor, in Civ2, mostly because I don't have the patience to manage a huge number of cities and units, nor tweak and tweak and tweak to maximize my production. So for me, the computer's UUs just might be something to worry about.

Still, the UUs aren't that much more powerful than the regular ones. The big advantage is that you get a free GA when you use them for the first time. So what it'll really come down to is, how big an advantage is a GA?