Thread Tools
Old December 4, 2001, 10:16   #1
Raleigh
Warlord
 
Raleigh's Avatar
 
Local Time: 12:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 198
Cavalry Moves Faster Than Tanks?
Forgive me if this has been posted. I know it's no use complaining about since I could just mod it anyway, but I was curious, is anyone else amazed by this and can anyone use their imagination to justify this before I go playing around with the settings?
Raleigh is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 10:19   #2
LaRusso
King
 
LaRusso's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: appendix of Europe
Posts: 1,634
yeah, i cannot believe that cavalry does not automatically pillage grasslands into plains - after all, those horses graze on something, right?
__________________
joseph 1944: LaRusso if you can remember past yesterday I never post a responce to one of your statement. I read most of your post with amusement however.
You are so anti-america that having a conversation with you would be poinless. You may or maynot feel you are an enemy of the United States, I don't care either way. However if I still worked for the Goverment I would turn over your e-mail address to my bosses and what ever happen, happens.
LaRusso is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 10:26   #3
Raleigh
Warlord
 
Raleigh's Avatar
 
Local Time: 12:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 198
That's pretty funny.
Raleigh is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 10:27   #4
Hywel Dda
Warlord
 
Hywel Dda's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Caernarfon, UK
Posts: 101
Yes, but they provide fertilizer in exchange!
Hywel Dda is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 10:29   #5
LaRusso
King
 
LaRusso's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: appendix of Europe
Posts: 1,634
oh, and their piss provides a 1-turn irrigation effect
__________________
joseph 1944: LaRusso if you can remember past yesterday I never post a responce to one of your statement. I read most of your post with amusement however.
You are so anti-america that having a conversation with you would be poinless. You may or maynot feel you are an enemy of the United States, I don't care either way. However if I still worked for the Goverment I would turn over your e-mail address to my bosses and what ever happen, happens.
LaRusso is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 10:42   #6
Venger
King
 
Venger's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Keeper of the Can-O'Whoopass
Posts: 1,104
Well I can see LaRusso is bringing his usual amount of blinding ignorance to yet another thread...

Raleigh -

It's a little strange, but I can accept it - assuming the tank unit is an early tank, they did not have a very high speed at all - think early WW2 model. A Cavalry unit could indeed outrun that tank unit.

What's truly inane however is that mechanized infantry are just a two move unit. That's nuts. Of course, I fixed that, but left the tank alone at 2, considering the modern armor gets a three move.

Venger
Venger is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 11:01   #7
UncleBeef
Settler
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 16
Cavaly Faster Than Tanks...
I don't have to use my imagination- I think I can actually use history. This is all my opinions, yadda yadda...- here goes.
Speed in Civ3 is a combination of tactical speed- how fast a thing can actually move, and strategic speed, how fast an army or unit of those things can move. For example, Panzers have a move 3 not because they were really 1/3 faster than other tanks, but because Geman strategic docterine invented Blitzkrieg. With me so far?
Anyhow, horses vs WWI tanks is no contest so I won't get into that. Vs. WWII tanks, logistically horses have a lot of advantages, mostly that they don't need fuel (other than food) and they don't get sand, grit, mud, or whatever in their mechanisms and breakdown, both of which were huge problems for all sides in WWII but esp. on the eastern front and in N. Africa.
As for top speed, I think a typical WWII tank had a top speed of 25-30 mph or so, and I think horses run as fast as that. (maybe) So therefore Cavalry = speed 3 and Tank = speed 2. Of course with Modern Armor, it's another story..
UncleBeef is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 11:15   #8
LaRusso
King
 
LaRusso's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: appendix of Europe
Posts: 1,634
Quote:
Originally posted by Venger
Well I can see LaRusso is bringing his usual amount of blinding ignorance to yet another thread...
well good that you could jump in and explain us that horses do not require fuel and spare parts and are therefore, less of a logistical drag.
__________________
joseph 1944: LaRusso if you can remember past yesterday I never post a responce to one of your statement. I read most of your post with amusement however.
You are so anti-america that having a conversation with you would be poinless. You may or maynot feel you are an enemy of the United States, I don't care either way. However if I still worked for the Goverment I would turn over your e-mail address to my bosses and what ever happen, happens.
LaRusso is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 11:17   #9
DarkMatter
Chieftain
 
DarkMatter's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: of the Land o' Lakes
Posts: 50
Yeah, I had a hard time believing that too. My modern armor now has a move of 4 and mech infantry is 3.

I really don't see how a horse can go faster than a modern mechanized infantry unit.
__________________
DarkMatter

As soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil, then their good becomes indistinguishable from the evil that they set out to destroy.
-Christopher Dawson, The Judgment of Nations, 1942
DarkMatter is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 11:28   #10
Dev
Warlord
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 130
Another day, another thread infested by La "wannabe netcop" Russo's off topic drivel.


I've wondered about that myself and I think all the modern units got to few movement points, doubling the movement points for all units starting with infantry would make sense.
Mech inf need another boost to be brought at par with modern armor though.


/dev
Dev is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 11:35   #11
LaRusso
King
 
LaRusso's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: appendix of Europe
Posts: 1,634
Quote:
Originally posted by Dev
Another day, another thread infested by La "wannabe netcop" Russo's off topic drivel.

I've wondered about that myself and I think all the modern units got to few movement points, doubling the movement points for all units starting with infantry would make sense.
Mech inf need another boost to be brought at par with modern armor though.

/dev
as pretty much everything that you 'think' or 'wonder' about, this is yet another bad idea. giving more MPs to units would tilt it to blitzkrieg again
__________________
joseph 1944: LaRusso if you can remember past yesterday I never post a responce to one of your statement. I read most of your post with amusement however.
You are so anti-america that having a conversation with you would be poinless. You may or maynot feel you are an enemy of the United States, I don't care either way. However if I still worked for the Goverment I would turn over your e-mail address to my bosses and what ever happen, happens.
LaRusso is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 11:45   #12
Be Quicker
Warlord
 
Be Quicker's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Zeeheldenkwartier
Posts: 104
Does this mean that when a cavalry attacks a tank, the cavalry can retreat?
Be Quicker is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 11:52   #13
Dev
Warlord
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 130
At least I think, which is more than can be said about you.....

Please explain to me how modern warfare with tanks and mech inf. isn't blitzkrieg?

...

/dev
Dev is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 12:00   #14
LaRusso
King
 
LaRusso's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: appendix of Europe
Posts: 1,634
Quote:
Originally posted by Dev
At least I think, which is more than can be said about you.....

Please explain to me how modern warfare with tanks and mech inf. isn't blitzkrieg?

...

/dev
well if you have 5 movement points for a tank, you can easily bypass his first and attack a second city. the whole tactics changes and the penetration of armor is much deeper. with 2 or 3 movement points it still means attacking the closest city first, with 5 or 6 you have a strategic choice that is really very deep. it can confuse AI (it is just a piece of code) and make capitals and valuable cities much more vulnerable to your sneak attacks. given the city placement and empire size in a usual game, this provides for indecisive, non-wipeout wars in many cases, and that is good. wiping civs out really sucks.
__________________
joseph 1944: LaRusso if you can remember past yesterday I never post a responce to one of your statement. I read most of your post with amusement however.
You are so anti-america that having a conversation with you would be poinless. You may or maynot feel you are an enemy of the United States, I don't care either way. However if I still worked for the Goverment I would turn over your e-mail address to my bosses and what ever happen, happens.
LaRusso is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 12:02   #15
xane
Chieftain
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 97
Quote:
I really don't see how a horse can go faster than a modern mechanized infantry unit.
Bradley M2/M3 Infantry Fighting Vehicle - 66 km/h source
Horse - 70 km/h source

There ya go
__________________
xane
xane is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 12:03   #16
Wrong_shui
Warlord
 
Wrong_shui's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: a field
Posts: 183
Leave LaRusso alone, if I was stupid enough to buy the LE id piss and moan alot too.
__________________
Im sorry Mr Civ Franchise, Civ3 was DOA
Wrong_shui is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 12:08   #17
LaRusso
King
 
LaRusso's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: appendix of Europe
Posts: 1,634
hahaha. well that tin is good to store the magnificent 'making of' video.
__________________
joseph 1944: LaRusso if you can remember past yesterday I never post a responce to one of your statement. I read most of your post with amusement however.
You are so anti-america that having a conversation with you would be poinless. You may or maynot feel you are an enemy of the United States, I don't care either way. However if I still worked for the Goverment I would turn over your e-mail address to my bosses and what ever happen, happens.
LaRusso is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 12:11   #18
rjpageuk
Settler
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 7
Maybe someone should mention that cruise missiles only have 1 movement point per turn.

What is going on there?
rjpageuk is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 12:15   #19
LaRusso
King
 
LaRusso's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: appendix of Europe
Posts: 1,634
um, well, that is if you transport them. you actually should use them as dispensable bombers with a pretty good punch and only 3 squares range. so they are to be transported carefully
__________________
joseph 1944: LaRusso if you can remember past yesterday I never post a responce to one of your statement. I read most of your post with amusement however.
You are so anti-america that having a conversation with you would be poinless. You may or maynot feel you are an enemy of the United States, I don't care either way. However if I still worked for the Goverment I would turn over your e-mail address to my bosses and what ever happen, happens.
LaRusso is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 12:22   #20
Dev
Warlord
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 130
Quote:
Originally posted by LaRusso


well if you have 5 movement points for a tank, you can easily bypass his first and attack a second city.
yea that's what tanks do duh!, how do you think the germans conquered france ? I'll hint you that they didn't drive all their tanks up to the maginot line and started exchanging shots.

Quote:
the whole tactics changes and the penetration of armor is much deeper. with 2 or 3 movement points it still means attacking the closest city first, with 5 or 6 you have a strategic choice that is really very deep.
Yea and that's why any decent player/AI would fortify strong points to make it not happen, if you don't then you ask for it.

Quote:
it can confuse AI (it is just a piece of code) and make capitals and valuable cities much more vulnerable to your sneak attacks.
So you program the AI to deal with this instead of cheaping it out with low movement rates.

Quote:
given the city placement and empire size in a usual game, this provides for indecisive, non-wipeout wars in many cases, and that is good. wiping civs out really sucks.
Wiping out civs really sucks ?
That certainly explains a lot but it doesn't explain why you're wasting time on Civ when Barbie hairdresser is more your cup of tea.....

/dev
Dev is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 16:25   #21
Hurry
Chieftain
 
Local Time: 19:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 57
In good weather, and especially if good roads are present, Tanks (WW2 and later) have been constantly faster than Cavalry.

However, and this is the problem in Civ3; Cavalry is faster in terrain without roads. Since old and new units are mixed in Civ3 much more than anytime in real history, Tanks should be faster in Urban environments, and Cavalry faster in uninhabited territory.

In other words, different kinds of units should pay a different movement cost for different types of terrain. A simple example would be to keep Horses movement allowance at 3, and pay terrain costs as normal, but to increase the Tank´s movement to 4, but it would instead pay double for all terrain except clear and roads.

It seems obvious they didn´t do this since it would make the game more complex and hard to learn, not because it would be difficult to do (they already have prohibited terrain for some units).
Hurry is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 21:12   #22
UncleBeef
Settler
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally posted by Dev


yea that's what tanks do duh!, how do you think the germans conquered france ? I'll hint you that they didn't drive all their tanks up to the maginot line and started exchanging shots.

/dev
Don't forget there's no ZOC anymore- the equivelant is like the Germans driving their tanks THROUGH the line, but not quite running over any Frenchmen so they didn't get to fire back and bang they've got Paris. If you double the speed of modern armor to 6, you're asking for a lot of one-turn empire wipeouts in the modern era on standard size maps- not my idea of fun.
UncleBeef is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 21:13   #23
Venger
King
 
Venger's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Keeper of the Can-O'Whoopass
Posts: 1,104
Quote:
Originally posted by Hurry
In good weather, and especially if good roads are present, Tanks (WW2 and later) have been constantly faster than Cavalry.

However, and this is the problem in Civ3; Cavalry is faster in terrain without roads. Since old and new units are mixed in Civ3 much more than anytime in real history, Tanks should be faster in Urban environments, and Cavalry faster in uninhabited territory.

In other words, different kinds of units should pay a different movement cost for different types of terrain. A simple example would be to keep Horses movement allowance at 3, and pay terrain costs as normal, but to increase the Tank´s movement to 4, but it would instead pay double for all terrain except clear and roads.
I'd like the idea of reducing cavalry to two, but have them treat all terrain as roads - this allows tanks to move faster on roads but slower in uneven ground. Problem is there that as the rules are that'd let the cavalry move 6 hexes, possibly a little too much. I dunno though, the thought has some merit...

Venger
Venger is offline  
Old December 4, 2001, 23:25   #24
simwiz2
Warlord
 
simwiz2's Avatar
 
Local Time: 12:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 116
i think 1 movement for cav, and then treat all squares as roads would be good. then it gets 3 move everywhere, tanks get better movement on roads, and 1 move thru bad terrain.

also i think the mech inf is slower than the cav because firaxis wanted the attack units to be able to retreat to "show off" one of their few new features that works . so they made the cav and momdern armor 1 move faster than it.
__________________
The Civ3 world is one where stealth bombers are unable to sink galleons, Man-O-Wars are a powerful counter to battleships, and knights always come equipped with the AT-S2 Anti-Tank Sword.

The Simwiz2 Combat Mod Version 2.0 is available for download! See the changes here. You can download it from the CivFanatics Thread or the Apolyton Thread.
simwiz2 is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 04:42   #25
player1
Emperor
 
player1's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Posts: 3,218
3 vs 1 movment = retreat
2 vs 1 movment = retreat
2 vs 2 movment = NO RETREAT
3 vs 3 movment = NO RETREAT
3 vs 2 movment = NO RETREAT

So Cavalry won't retreat if losing from Tank.
player1 is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 05:10   #26
Dev
Warlord
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 130
Quote:
Originally posted by UncleBeef


Don't forget there's no ZOC anymore- the equivelant is like the Germans driving their tanks THROUGH the line, but not quite running over any Frenchmen so they didn't get to fire back and bang they've got Paris. If you double the speed of modern armor to 6, you're asking for a lot of one-turn empire wipeouts in the modern era on standard size maps- not my idea of fun.
No, Firaxis actually dealt with this by disallowing use of enemy roads.
Surely if the empire isn't any deeper than 5(?) tiles then it deserves to be wiped in one turn.

Anyway maybe 6 moves is too much, my grieve is that the movement ratio for old/modern units is completely hosed.
Tanks aside then I'd believe that infantry would have trucks but yet they only move the same as a 5000 years old warrior.

That's just ****ed up :\

/dev
Dev is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 06:09   #27
LaRusso
King
 
LaRusso's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: appendix of Europe
Posts: 1,634
still if they wanted to make combat as appealing in any age they did it, at least in terms of movability of your forces
__________________
joseph 1944: LaRusso if you can remember past yesterday I never post a responce to one of your statement. I read most of your post with amusement however.
You are so anti-america that having a conversation with you would be poinless. You may or maynot feel you are an enemy of the United States, I don't care either way. However if I still worked for the Goverment I would turn over your e-mail address to my bosses and what ever happen, happens.
LaRusso is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 06:29   #28
sophist
Prince
 
sophist's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 532
But a horse cannot sustain that pace for hours. That's pretty tiring.

Regardless of reality, it's a gameplay balance issue.

Quote:
Originally posted by xane


Bradley M2/M3 Infantry Fighting Vehicle - 66 km/h source
Horse - 70 km/h source

There ya go
sophist is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 06:46   #29
morb
Chieftain
 
morb's Avatar
 
Local Time: 09:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally posted by xane


Bradley M2/M3 Infantry Fighting Vehicle - 66 km/h source
Horse - 70 km/h source

There ya go
you show me a horse that can run at 70km/h for 12 hours straight without collapsing....
__________________
I hate Civ3!
morb is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 07:53   #30
Akka
Prince
 
Akka's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In front of my computer.
Posts: 512
Quote:
Originally posted by Dev


No, Firaxis actually dealt with this by disallowing use of enemy roads.
Surely if the empire isn't any deeper than 5(?) tiles then it deserves to be wiped in one turn.
Well, the problem is that the empire has not to be 5 tiles deep. You just have to prepare a BUNCH of tanks, and then take on city after another and then use the new-conquered terrain to bring new tanks (using the railroad that was in the city area and that are now usuable).
If you have enough tanks, you can wipe out a whole continent in one or two turns.
A tank should be faster than cavalry, but have accidented terrain costing more to get through (3 or 4 mov point for forest, impossibility to go to mountain without roads if it's not the case, etc...).
__________________
Science without conscience is the doom of the soul.
Akka is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 13:58.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team