November 20, 2001, 20:19
|
#1
|
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 09:12
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Seattle WA
Posts: 57
|
Your battle has created a Great Leader - Kevin Bacon?
Has anyone seen this bug? All of this happens during your turn. You do a recon mission, from a carrier and lo and behold you find a battleship just out of range of your carrier. So you send a bomber, the bombing run is unsuccessful.... AND THE BATTLESHIP TOTALLY DISSAPEARS! But wait, I still got 4 more bombers! Then you send out another fighter and recon the same area... Still gone. Then you send in a destroyer. BOO! It's back. 
It's the undocumented hollow man wonder!
|
|
|
|
|
November 20, 2001, 21:08
|
#2
|
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 17:12
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 68
|
Oh that? That's the Philadelphia Experiment in action. Its a major wonder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 20, 2001, 21:41
|
#3
|
|
Deity
Local Time: 03:12
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: In a tunnel under the DMZ
Posts: 12,273
|
Its the Bermuda Triangle 
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 20, 2001, 22:42
|
#4
|
|
Warlord
Local Time: 09:12
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Laguna Hills, CA
Posts: 175
|
A few cute replies, but obviously the BB is hiding behind a sub that's in the same square. We all know that only the AI can ever see subs (and of course they can _always_ see subs), so of course the BB seems gone if you catch it at the wrong time. 
__________________
I'm not giving in to security, under pressure
I'm not missing out on the promise of adventure
I'm not giving up on implausible dreams
Experience to extremes" -RUSH 'The Enemy Within'
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 20, 2001, 22:45
|
#5
|
|
Settler
Local Time: 17:12
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 25
|
A battleship hiding behind a sub? How realistic! It seems the makers of the game went to great lengths to bring realism to this game, and tradition. Tradition as in every single Civ game has had some sort of battle bug where the programmers forgot that they should give tanks more defense than the attack rate of the early units.
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 20, 2001, 22:51
|
#6
|
|
Warlord
Local Time: 12:12
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 107
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by ham50
Tradition as in every single Civ game has had some sort of battle bug where the programmers forgot that they should give tanks more defense than the attack rate of the early units.
|
Huh? Tanks have a defense of 8 vs cavalary and infantry attack of 6.... Seems fair to me, tanks were never meant to be employed on static defense...
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 20, 2001, 23:33
|
#7
|
|
Emperor
Local Time: 07:12
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 8,057
|
sounds like a real bug.
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 21, 2001, 00:05
|
#8
|
|
Prince
Local Time: 17:12
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oberammergau, Germany
Posts: 371
|
I'm more interested in the Philadelphia Experiment reference.
Now that would be a cool wonder. The builder gets an extra defense point on his naval units or something. Yeah, its probably unbalancing, but I like my stupid ideas sometimes.
__________________
"I know nobody likes me...why do we have to have Valentines Day to emphasize it?"- Charlie Brown
|
|
|
|
|
Posting 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
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 13:12.
|
|
