Thread Tools
Old February 10, 2001, 12:20   #1
Shadowstrike
Emperor
 
Shadowstrike's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:45
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Glorious Land of Canada
Posts: 3,234
Depleted Uranium
I've been doing a project on DU lately and I could help wondering if Civ3 could implement a somewhat realistic model for it. If we could add one more ability, call it "DU shells" or something similar, and those units that have the ability would be more effective against armored vehicles, and fortified positions. Those units would also have a lower cost, to represent the cost-effectiveness of using DU (since it was a waste product) However, they would cause damage to the enviornment which would be expensive to clean up. Of course since it might be in your opponents territory, you could choose whether or not to care. I think this would add an interesting dilema to the game, and make it more realistic. What does everyone else think?
Shadowstrike is offline  
Old February 10, 2001, 12:29   #2
bagdar
Warlord
 
bagdar's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:45
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Turkey
Posts: 166
weapons with environmental consequences is a good idea, I think. However, it raises us this question: are we going to have a different kind of pollution? Or will the unit leave those skulls on the tile it's firing at? (we have ranged weaponry, do we not?)
bagdar is offline  
Old February 10, 2001, 21:18   #3
Shadowstrike
Emperor
 
Shadowstrike's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:45
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Glorious Land of Canada
Posts: 3,234
Hmm... a single type of generic pollution kinda simplifies it, but having several different types of pollution might be cumbersome and inefficient.
Shadowstrike is offline  
Old February 10, 2001, 22:13   #4
Biddles
Prince
 
Biddles's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:45
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Posts: 404
But isn't that just adding yet another minor quirk to the game that has no "real" effect. Don't get me wrong, the idea is fine, but is it worth the trouble of another unit/unit component that is having little effect on gameplay. Look at the civ/civ2 units. They are different from each other. This would be "tank", then "tank using DU shells". You would then have people calling for "phalanx", "phalanx with bronze shields", "phalanx with iron shields". IMO the units shouldn't be differentiated so much.

However, environmentally damaging units sound like a good idea. There is already the nuke which causes damage, maybe there are other distinct weapons that could be included.
Biddles is offline  
Old February 10, 2001, 23:02   #5
Darkknight
NationStates
Prince
 
Darkknight's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:45
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in between Q, W, A and S
Posts: 689
That would be great, Your phalanxes would be upgraded after you discover iron working or you could have different shield types in the Workshop like SMAC.
cool! I know you didn't want it but great idea.
Darkknight is offline  
Old February 11, 2001, 08:00   #6
Roman
King
 
Roman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:45
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia
Posts: 1,292
Even though I like as much realism as possible, I think this is going a little bit two far. A completely unneccessary addition to the game, I think. Let them concentrate their efforts on something more important instead.
Roman is offline  
Old February 11, 2001, 21:55   #7
Biddles
Prince
 
Biddles's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:45
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Posts: 404
I know it would be great but think about it: Every unit has 3 types of armour, 3 types of weapons....

If you were going to implement this, you would HAVE to implement a unit workshop (something we know isn't in the game) because it would be far to cumbersome.

I think firaxis should stick to phalanx, legion etc.
Biddles is offline  
Old February 12, 2001, 18:28   #8
Chaos Warrior
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I generally agree. There should be considerable effects caused by depleted resources in general, not only Uranium. The details might becom hard for Macro-play-lovers
 
Old February 12, 2001, 19:09   #9
Shadowstrike
Emperor
 
Shadowstrike's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:45
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Glorious Land of Canada
Posts: 3,234
It would be an ability like "x2 vs. air" except it only affects tanks and fortified positions. I don't see how implementing that could be too hard. Fuurthermore, there would be no need for a units workshop, because the unit would come with certain units....
Shadowstrike is offline  
Old February 12, 2001, 20:26   #10
Roman
King
 
Roman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:45
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia
Posts: 1,292
quote:

Originally posted by Chaos Warrior on 02-12-2001 05:28 PM
I generally agree. There should be considerable effects caused by depleted resources in general, not only Uranium. The details might becom hard for Macro-play-lovers


You missed the point. This thread is not about resources running out, but about 'pollution' caused by DU weapons. I think this pollution is completely unneccessary to model.
Roman is offline  
Old February 12, 2001, 20:51   #11
marc420
Warlord
 
Local Time: 00:45
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oceania
Posts: 123
Another consequence of DU use should be that it should be considered an "atrocity" ala SMAC. Leaving behind a radioactive waste after a battle that's going to cause generations of cancer and leukemias isn't likely to be looked onto very kindly by the other Civs.
marc420 is offline  
Old February 13, 2001, 02:04   #12
Jon Miller
staff
ApolyCon 06 ParticipantsCivilization III MultiplayerCivilization II MultiplayerRise of Nations MultiplayerPtWDG Vox ControliC4DG Vox
OTF Moderator
 
Jon Miller's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:45
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 13,063
DU should not matter because it has no effects on the Civ level. It is not at all atrocity like and may very well have no effect on any level. Now if DU caused a 100 mile area to be so polluted that it was hardly liviable then I would agree with you. But in no stretch of the imagination does DU do that. Compared to the effects of pollution of industry (which is by far the most prevalent pollution in civ) it would be rediculous to make DU pollute at all. I mean compare it to the nuclear weapons. It would be rediculous to have DU do anything on this scale. Now what might be interesting in line with SMACs gas pods (ie weapons that are atrocities) would be tactical nukes and biological and chemical weapons.

Jon Miller
Jon Miller is offline  
Old February 13, 2001, 02:32   #13
Cyclotron
Never Ending StoriesThe Courts of Candle'Bre
King
 
Cyclotron's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:45
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cyclo-who?
Posts: 2,995
Umm, about this whole atrocities thing:

I thought the whole atrocity system was always kind of bogus. Isn't the act of war in itself an atrocity? Bombarding, killing, and sacking? Umm, so why should a nuke be looked at as so much worse than, say, 20 armor units razing an enemy's entire country and leaving a civ in ruins from war?

Most any combat is an "atrocity," especially in modern times.
Cyclotron is offline  
Old February 13, 2001, 02:57   #14
Jon Miller
staff
ApolyCon 06 ParticipantsCivilization III MultiplayerCivilization II MultiplayerRise of Nations MultiplayerPtWDG Vox ControliC4DG Vox
OTF Moderator
 
Jon Miller's Avatar
 
Local Time: 18:45
Local Date: October 30, 2010
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 13,063
quote:

Originally posted by cyclotron7 on 02-13-2001 01:32 AM
Umm, about this whole atrocities thing:

I thought the whole atrocity system was always kind of bogus. Isn't the act of war in itself an atrocity? Bombarding, killing, and sacking? Umm, so why should a nuke be looked at as so much worse than, say, 20 armor units razing an enemy's entire country and leaving a civ in ruins from war?

Most any combat is an "atrocity," especially in modern times.


To a large extant I agree. Most standard war practices like looting, raping, pillaging are looked down upon more in the modern age. Not to say these don't occur but in the modern limited wars countries don't do them because they are 'atrocities'. And for whatever reason (maybe even because the country does not want them used on them) even nations which have a fairly 'screw the international community' attitude (ie Hitler) haven't for the most part used biological and chemical weapons (and nukes). So therefore I do somewhat disagree in that there are diffinitely some forms of weapons that nations do not use as much because they are somejow worse.

Maybe there should be (in more modern times) two forms of war (or maybe even three). One that is full blown srew the other guy, another is limited war (ie vietnam). WW2 was mostly the second type but did have a fair ammount of the first type (especially Germans towards Russians, Jappenese towards everyone, and Hiroshima and Nagasaki). The possible third type would be like the Kosovo action or even Desert Storm (or this might just be the natural result of vietnam) where the people want no losses to there side and don't really want any losses to the people of the other side.

Jon Miller
Jon Miller 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 20:45.


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