Cavalry Moves Faster Than Tanks?

Raleigh · December 4, 2001, 10:16

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?

LaRusso · December 4, 2001, 10:19

yeah, i cannot believe that cavalry does not automatically pillage grasslands into plains - after all, those horses graze on something, right?

Raleigh · December 4, 2001, 10:26

That's pretty funny.

Hywel Dda · December 4, 2001, 10:27

Yes, but they provide fertilizer in exchange!

LaRusso · December 4, 2001, 10:29

oh, and their piss provides a 1-turn irrigation effect

Venger · December 4, 2001, 10:42

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

UncleBeef · December 4, 2001, 11:01

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..

LaRusso · December 4, 2001, 11:15

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.

DarkMatter · December 4, 2001, 11:17

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.

Dev · December 4, 2001, 11:28

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

LaRusso · December 4, 2001, 11:35

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

Be Quicker · December 4, 2001, 11:45

Does this mean that when a cavalry attacks a tank, the cavalry can retreat?

Dev · December 4, 2001, 11:52

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

LaRusso · December 4, 2001, 12:00

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.

xane · December 4, 2001, 12:02

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

Wrong_shui · December 4, 2001, 12:03

Leave LaRusso alone, if I was stupid enough to buy the LE id piss and moan alot too.

LaRusso · December 4, 2001, 12:08

hahaha. well that tin is good to store the magnificent 'making of' video.

rjpageuk · December 4, 2001, 12:11

Maybe someone should mention that cruise missiles only have 1 movement point per turn.

What is going on there?

LaRusso · December 4, 2001, 12:15

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

Dev · December 4, 2001, 12:22

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

Hurry · December 4, 2001, 16:25

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).

UncleBeef · December 4, 2001, 21:12

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.

Venger · December 4, 2001, 21:13

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

simwiz2 · December 4, 2001, 23:25

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.

player1 · December 5, 2001, 04:42

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.

Dev · December 5, 2001, 05:10

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

LaRusso · December 5, 2001, 06:09

still if they wanted to make combat as appealing in any age they did it, at least in terms of movability of your forces

sophist · December 5, 2001, 06:29

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

morb · December 5, 2001, 06:46

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....

Akka · December 5, 2001, 07:53

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...).