Poll: Bring back Partisans and Guerilla Warfare?

GoodFella · July 1, 2002, 13:26

I say yes.

zulu9812 · July 1, 2002, 13:31

I never really played CivII - how is it supposed to work?

alva · July 1, 2002, 13:53

when you captured a city, enemy units (partisans) would pop-up around your territory. Effectively making sure there was at least some form of counter-attack. Don't really why they removed this.

well this is al done IIRC

, quite awhile since i played civ2. so please correct me if i'm wrong, witch i could well be

EDITED: incorrect INFO

Inverse Icarus · July 1, 2002, 14:27

guerrila units had a weaker attack/defense than riflemen or whatever, but were all as roads.

they were mainly used for pillaging and or making it harder to advance.

they usually appeared on squarwes with defensive vales (mtns, hills, forests, fortresses whatever).

they were just an annoyance, and i think they should be brought back.

when you capture a large city, 1 or 2 pop points drop off and you get 5 or 6 partians in it's city radius.

alva · July 1, 2002, 16:03

btw: isn't the guerilla making a come-back in PTW?
in some kind of form anyway?
cheap, no resources, low adm values

Panag · July 1, 2002, 16:14

Quote:

Originally posted by UberKruX
guerrila units had a weaker attack/defense than riflemen or whatever, but were all as roads.

they were mainly used for pillaging and or making it harder to advance.

they usually appeared on squarwes with defensive vales (mtns, hills, forests, fortresses whatever).

they were just an annoyance, and i think they should be brought back.

when you capture a large city, 1 or 2 pop points drop off and you get 5 or 6 partians in it's city radius.

hi ,

there should be an option to turn this ON or OFF , ...

have a nice day

alva · July 1, 2002, 17:44

there should be an option to have less options IMHO

Kingof the Apes · July 1, 2002, 17:51

Theyjust appeared after you discovered Geurilla warfare. In a way they are represented by resisting citezens.

However, It would be nice to see them back.

zulu9812 · July 1, 2002, 20:18

Too powerful - 5/6 units? Even rush-building that would take 5/6 turns to builld minimum (that's like 120 years!) but a captured city suddenly generates free units for it's previous owners? No way. Bad, bad idea

The_Aussie_Lurker · July 1, 2002, 21:56

I voted yes, but I would like to add the following Caveats:

1) Partisans spawned by initial city capture should appear in the city radius, but NOT adjacent to the city. This makes them too easy to destroy (as I have often done after taking a city!!!).

2) Partisans and Guerillas should be sperate units, with partisans having high defense, but low attack, all as roads and geurillas having a higher attack, but low defense, all as roads. Both units should be colourless!

3) Though geurillas should be buildable at any time once you have the requisite tech, Partisans should not be!! They should only be available in the following ways: a) A new partisan unit is spawned every X-turns within the captured city's radius, as long as there are resistors in that city and/or b) should only be available in a city build queue after you have lost a city to an enemy!

4) Not so sure about this last one, but I reckon that guerillas and partisans should possess a light bombarding ability (non-lethal), in order to reflect their ability to harass an enemy!

Combined, I think all of these factors would definitely make the partisan worth bringing back!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

HazieDaVampire · July 2, 2002, 12:02

Quote:

Originally posted by alva848
btw: isn't the guerilla making a come-back in PTW?
in some kind of form anyway?
cheap, no resources, low adm values

No, thats just a land unit version of the Privateer! So you can cause havok in peace time and not start a war!

zulu9812 · July 2, 2002, 13:13

again - i think this is a really bad idea. Losing 2 population points in a city you've already lost is no price for getting 6 free units. No no no no. I think city resistance is perfectly adequate.

HazieDaVampire · July 2, 2002, 13:16

i think its to simulate French resistance (I say that both because of WW2, and because france for some reason is the civ i kill first in almost every game!)

HazieDaVampire · July 2, 2002, 13:18

i think its cuz off the culturaly linked starting posistions!

Panag · July 2, 2002, 13:48

Quote:

Originally posted by zulu9812
again - i think this is a really bad idea. Losing 2 population points in a city you've already lost is no price for getting 6 free units. No no no no. I think city resistance is perfectly adequate.

hi ,

what about a mix of the two , ...

have a nice day

Andrew_Jay · July 2, 2002, 21:09

I like the idea, especially with the new concept of nation-less units like the Privateer. You could use them in peace time to fight civil wars in another country, perhaps even creating a new civ by taking cities . . . then again, perhaps a little too far fetched

But yeah, I missed the little guys coming out to retake the city (or at least die trying, very quickly).

Seeker · July 3, 2002, 01:25

I remember the Partisan had a wacky 'hard-wired' power...

It got a big bonus versus units with a zero attack rating.

In the original game, this just meant diplomats and spies, but in scenarios people would often make pillbox, castle, or bunker units only to find that the lowly Partisan was taking them out easy.

This was used intentionally in Red Front I believe.

The_Aussie_Lurker · July 9, 2002, 02:14

<>

NeOmega · July 13, 2002, 04:54

and the most fun, they required no support slipped past defenses, and were great for pillaging, cutting roads, and holding mountains.

snuggs · July 13, 2002, 09:41

The worst thing about Partisans from the game balance point of view was their lack of support city. This meant every time you lost a city you took a handful of free-to-maintain units that could hold positions anywhere in the world - all at no shield/unhappiness cost in a Democracy. OK, they weren't brilliant defenders, but veterans entrenched in mountains were capable of withstanding even enemy bomber attacks.

asleepathewheel · July 13, 2002, 15:37

I didn't care for the partisans in civ2 very much.

how I dealt with them:

attack city with howitzer once, move howitzer to adjacent empty square, hit "w" to wait. repeat to next tile.

When all tiles have howitzers that have moved one turn (when squares are all railroaded) I take the city. voila, no partisans, no mess no fuss. rinse, repeat. this allows more attacks by howitzers on real units and cities.

If they could be implemented better ,then I could agree on the unit. I would prefer that they keep them abstracted as they are with the flipping with instead warnings about garrisoning against flipping and riots than adding the civ2 partisans in.

phunny_pharmer · July 19, 2002, 01:06

Asleepathewheel: would get a little harder to do this, without paratroopers. That already makes it necessary to have these guys back- it would up the value of the airborne guys.

These guys must come back! Think of all the paramilitary, extralegal things that you could do in peace and war. Take out a crucial rail link at the wrong time...even capture a city...adding a fifth column should always help!

How about making this guy an infantryman with no support? And a nice new graphic, too!

Btw: GoodFella, your avitar says it all...

Verto · July 19, 2002, 22:16

I really think partisans should be in PtW, but they shouldn't be the same as they were in Civ2. The # of guerillas/partisans should be based on the general happiness of the city and the culture value, and if it is one of your own cities, recently captured, etc.

I really don't like the idea that you can have the guerillas, who want to liberate their city, go off and fight somewhere else and forget about their city.

My solution: Guerillas get a +1 bonus when attempting to "liberate" their homes, or a -1 decrease when you send them off to fight on a different continent.

Andrew_Jay · July 19, 2002, 22:37

Sounds good to me Verto. Perhaps they only work at all decently when inside your own borders, maybe even have stats close to an infantry. Another idea would be to make them weak (like the privateer) but double their defensive bonuses for terrain.

Maybe if a "we love the king day" city gets taken you get partisans, though it's not likely you'll have many, if any of those during a war.

Darkworld Ark · July 20, 2002, 00:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Verto
I really don't like the idea that you can have the guerillas, who want to liberate their city, go off and fight somewhere else and forget about their city.

My solution: Guerillas get a +1 bonus when attempting to "liberate" their homes, or a -1 decrease when you send them off to fight on a different continent.

The problem with that idea is that Civ3 doesn't have "home cities" for units, once they're made, they belong to the empire.

Dom Pedro II · July 20, 2002, 01:16

I mentioned this in the "General" forum in my "whining" post the other day, and I think that partisans would be a great way to silence the critics who still find the game to be too easy.

A combination of Partisans, no-road usage, and resisters in cities would make invasions VERY hard. I remember having to sweep up the partisans in Civ2. In Civ3, I think they could be invasion-halting.

I do think there should be conditions though....

it should be taken from the population, like if you have a size 8 city captured then 3 people become partisans, 1 is lost in the invasion, and 4 are left in the town.

And also, if an invader loses the city they've captured, they shouldn't get partisans... it should only be from their national group.

Partisans should be powerful defensive units, only small annoyances to an advancing army. I think this would be a tremendous advantage for the AI rather than the human player because it's rare in the Modern Age that the human player loses a city, and even if they do, the guerillas aren't going to be the decisive factor for a human player.