Air Units: IF only we could make them realistic

[Grrr]

Originally posted by Willem
Then why don't you just go into the Editor and fix the problems you've mentioned yourself?

Why do so many people in this forum have the attitude that Firaxis has to do everything for them. The game comes with an Editor, it was designed so that anyone who didn't like the way things were playing could customize it, within certain limits, if they so wished. Granted it's not a perfect Editor, but there are other programs here that do have some capability to make some real additions.

Yes it requires time and a great deal of patience, and there are certain things you just can't change. But it seems to me that most of the complaints I've been hearing by members of this forum could be solved by spending some time with the Editor and the Civ3CopyTool. To much corruption? Adjust the settings so that it's not as severe, or create/manipulate improvements to help you reduce it. A problem with troop movement? Create a personnel carrier, or alter the settings of an existing unit, load it up and send it off with 8,10,100 units inside. And this whole issue of obsolete units is so ridiculously easy to solve, I really don't see why so much energy is being wasted in *****ing about it.

It is true that many things can be done on a DIY basis, however, once, if, a multiplayer add-on comes out, it is not good for each and every player to have a custom version of Civ3. If Firaxis fixes such things, most of us will retain a standard copy.

Also, with 3rd party add-ons and stuff are used, firaxis is often unable to give proper tech support, and help. To put it simply, if Firaxis does it, it prevents a mess for the firaxien technicians at a latter date.

[korn469]

Willem

Then why don't you just go into the Editor and fix the problems you've mentioned yourself?

i have (or at least i'm working on it)
but if you have your sigs turned off you may have not noticed
it's called the blitz mod check it out over in the files section, i have been working on it off and on for a while now, and i feel that it is fairly good and getting better all the time (i make a bad posterboy for somebody who doesn't use the editor)

Why do so many people in this forum have the attitude that Firaxis has to do everything for them. The game comes with an Editor, it was designed so that anyone who didn't like the way things were playing could customize it, within certain limits, if they so wished. Granted it's not a perfect Editor, but there are other programs here that do have some capability to make some real additions.

agreed

Yes it requires time and a great deal of patience, and there are certain things you just can't change. But it seems to me that most of the complaints I've been hearing by members of this forum could be solved by spending some time with the Editor and the Civ3CopyTool. To much corruption? Adjust the settings so that it's not as severe, or create/manipulate improvements to help you reduce it. A problem with troop movement? Create a personnel carrier, or alter the settings of an existing unit, load it up and send it off with 8,10,100 units inside. And this whole issue of obsolete units is so ridiculously easy to solve, I really don't see why so much energy is being wasted in *****ing about it

i guess my biggest amazement is this
it would take about five minutes for firaxis to fix this for ALL civ3 fans if they release another patch, so i'm left amazed and intrigued about why they wouldn't make such a small change and want to discuss it, especially when people say things that i think miss the point such as air units are unbalanced because they can't sink ships
while i agree that air units are unbalanced in civ3 it isn't because they can't sink ship, and i'm a sucker for balance arguments, i can't really resist throwing my opinion into the fray

[Grrr]

Originally posted by korn469
it would take about five minutes for firaxis to fix this for ALL civ3 fans if they release another patch, so i'm left amazed and intrigued about why they wouldn't make such a small change and want to discuss it, especially when people say things that i think miss the point such as air units are unbalanced because they can't sink ships while i agree that air units are unbalanced in civ3 it isn't because they can't sink ship, and i'm a sucker for balance arguments, i can't really resist throwing my opinion into the fray

Agreed, and I have stopped argueing on that thread, however as you say, why is FIRAXIS so stubborn in for a day's effort to do thousands of people a favour, for honestly, if they'd fix about 5 major things, add MP and a few features to the editor, then they would have thousands of fans, and as far as I know, these threads will be tied down with customization and multiplayer messages rather than complaints, other than of course those few hardcore whiners who don't know when to stop, and get ignored by everyone, including me.

[korn469]

Grrr

while i feel that adding mulitplayer is most likely beyond the scope of a patch, they could probably do some fairly significant upgrades in a patch to the editor in a few weeks time, and they could fix 95% of the unit imbalance in civ3 in an afternoon

seriously just increasing hp would end most of the unit imbalance complaints, not all of them (because some imbalance would remain) but that fix alone wouldn't take that long (five minutes in the editor if that, and however long it takes to fix the hp bar trailers in the graphic engine) and it would cure more problems than any other balance fix could

[Doc Paradox]

This thread reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Comic Book Guy is walking down the street reading a comic book and he says, "But Aquaman, you can't marry Wonder Woman. You're from TWO DIFFERENT WORLDS!" And then, when he realizes that Le Bombe Neutron is heading for him, he says, "Oh dear, I've wasted my life."

[Barnacle Bill]

Last night I read an interesting article in "Proceedings" on the future of air defense, which included some interesting past info. For example, in the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Egyptian (Soviet-made) mobile SA-6 launchers deployed with their ground forces scored 50-something kills on Isreali jets in only 95 launches. The Isrealis in fact lost a rather large number of aircraft in that war overall to SAM's and flak of various sorts, mostly while the aircraft were engaged in attacks on ground forces. So, IMO, the way to fix things in Civ is that any "modern" ground or sea unit should have an air defense capability. By modern, I mean since machineguns are invented - Infantry or later on the ground, Destroyer or later at sea. This would be a seperate factor like bombardment, which would be used to "bombard" air units which are bombarding the unit in question. Air units could be killed by this, but would break off if reduced to 1 hit point even if they had not used all their attacks for the mission yet. Of course, later units would get better air defense factors reflecting the progression flak->flak with proximity fuse shells-> radar guided flak->SAM's->better radar guided flak & SAM's, etc...

While we are at it, air units should be able to choose their own target out of a stack, but certain ground/sea units would have a special capability of "area air defense" that would let them do the shooting back even if they are not the target. This, for example, would allow correct modelling of what Aegis is all about.

I like the idea of auto-upgrade. I also think the need for it could be minimized if the AI was programmed to put upgrading at a higher priority than building new units - and also an option to use city production to upgrade units in a city rather than gold (as the AI seems to frequently be cash-strapped).

I don't like the idea of automatically giving civs that are behind a big leap in tech (whole eras). Rather, I think that civs which are behind should get a tech bonus of some sort (lower tech costs or their lightbulb production multiplied by some factor). The bonus should be proportional to how far they are behind the leading civ with which they are in contact. It should also be possible to give/receive units - a received unit would disappear from where it was under the original owner and appear at the capital of the new owner, and should start at Conscript level under the new owner if the new owner lacks the tech to build it. I might also be OK with letting a backwards nation build concript footsoldier-type units (and maybe horse cavalry type units) of the most basic sort from eras it has not reached, at greatly increased cost, if they are in contact with a civ that can build that unit. This would model the primatives getting muskets/ak-47's/whatever from gun runners.

On the scale of Civ3 (and in Civ3 terms), I would decribe the entire Zulu war as an attack by a single English Rifleman unit on a barbarian (Zulu) encampment - the Rifleman unit moved adjacent to the Encampment, was attacked by several Impis and lost a hit point (Isandwalla), then on the next English turn the Rifleman attacked & captured the encampment.

[Deathwalker]

I think that some units should have the ability to defend against air attacks and in some cases destroy the attacking plane. Look at the gulf war and Veitnam numeriouse planes were lost to ground fire. This should be in the game. The VC used units that sole perpose was to shots at planes and in many cases they succeeded. This has not be reflected in the game. And not the mention the fact that you can't sink ships, any one hear of WW2. Planes need to be tinkered with, it's a fact, but the editor does not allow use to do that properley. I liked the option have units double defend against air attacks in Civ 2, that is a good start but we need more

[Willem]

Originally posted by Grrr


It is true that many things can be done on a DIY basis, however, once, if, a multiplayer add-on comes out, it is not good for each and every player to have a custom version of Civ3. If Firaxis fixes such things, most of us will retain a standard copy.

Also, with 3rd party add-ons and stuff are used, firaxis is often unable to give proper tech support, and help. To put it simply, if Firaxis does it, it prevents a mess for the firaxien technicians at a latter date.

Well maybe that's why they didn't include multiplayer. They knew that they weren't going to be able to please everyone, so people would start changing things to suit their own tastes, making multiplayer useless.

As for the lack of third party support, and a proper editor, judging from my attempts at customizing my own game, a slight change can have some serious and unexpected repercussions on the game. If I were in their shoes, I'd be reluctant to encourage making any changes in any way, until they knew for sure what works and what crashes the game. It's better for them from a PR standpoint to do nothing right now, rather than have everyone upset because the game keeps crashing after they make a change. I'm sure in time, they'll come up with a better editor and in any event, as I pointed out somewhere else, it's certainly an improvement over the text based ones they used for Civ II and Alpha Centauri.

[Willem]

Originally posted by korn469
i guess my biggest amazement is this
it would take about five minutes for firaxis to fix this for ALL civ3 fans if they release another patch, so i'm left amazed and intrigued about why they wouldn't make such a small change and want to discuss it, especially when people say things that i think miss the point such as air units are unbalanced because they can't sink ships
while i agree that air units are unbalanced in civ3 it isn't because they can't sink ship, and i'm a sucker for balance arguments, i can't really resist throwing my opinion into the fray

Well I don't see the point in releasing a patch just to deal with a minor aspect of the game. We'd be getting patches everyday if they did that. I'd prefer to wait until they've dealt with a number of the issues, which is no doubt what they're doing. And that requires a lot of testing and retesting to make sure the changes don't screw up the program which, if you're playing with the Editor, you'll realize is easy to do. This game has a lot of features that are delicately balanced, and one small change can have some serious effects elsewhere. So it's to no one's benefit to hurriedly release a patch that everyone is going to hate because it screws up their game.

[TinCow]

korn469

I see where you're coming from and I feel I should clarify my position. My statement about spearmen and other such units being untrained conscripts with AK-47s really only applies to AI units that have not been upgraded. If indeed the civ you're fighting against doesn't have gunpowder, then yeah... the spearmen are still spearmen. However, it is MUCH more common that the AI will have the technology and simply doesn't have the money or the facilities to upgrade its old units. In such a case, you can have a modern civilization with destroyers and artillery that also has a few spearmen units. It's crazy to think that a civ with that level of technology would even bother equiping its troops with spears... so what the spearmen really are is the lowest level of military they have... the equivalent of crappy third world militia. They are 'modern' troops that are of a very low quality.

[Barnacle Bill]

Originally posted by TinCow
korn469

It's crazy to think that a civ with that level of technology would even bother equiping its troops with spears... so what the spearmen really are is the lowest level of military they have... the equivalent of crappy third world militia. They are 'modern' troops that are of a very low quality.

If this is what Firaxis intended, then they should have named the unit "Militia" instead of "Spearman" and had its graphics change in every era the way that Workers do. It could easily progress from looking as it does to looking like a period-civilian with a period firearm in the Musketman, Rifleman, Infantry and Mech Infantry eras. They could have done this just as easily as they did it with workers. They did not. Ergo, it is a Spearman which has not been upgraded, which is lame on the part of the AI, and should be militarily useless.

[TinCow]

Originally posted by Barnacle Bill


If this is what Firaxis intended, then they should have named the unit "Militia" instead of "Spearman" and had its graphics change in every era the way that Workers do. It could easily progress from looking as it does to looking like a period-civilian with a period firearm in the Musketman, Rifleman, Infantry and Mech Infantry eras. They could have done this just as easily as they did it with workers. They did not. Ergo, it is a Spearman which has not been upgraded, which is lame on the part of the AI, and should be militarily useless.

I'm not saying Firaxis did it right, I'm just saying there is a way to look at the situation which makes it seem a little less far fetched. It's called using your imagination. Even though it doesn't seem that Firaxis listed that on the 'Requirements' section of the game box doesn't mean you can't improvise to make the game better for yourself.