Increase the aircraft range! - Page 2

zulu9812 · August 28, 2002, 14:27

well that's a pretty conclusive poll - a vote overwhelmingly in favour of making the aircraft range un-hard-coded at 8 and moddable by the scenarioo designer. Doubt it'll happen, though.

Martinus Magnificus · August 31, 2002, 10:31

I agree that movement points should go up in accordance with the size of a map, but it should apply to all units, not only air.

However, IMO being able to disable all negotiations between civ A and civ B and disable city razing are far more important for scenario building, so I voted for the second option.

I have little hope we'll have a decent scenario editor that gives us these kinds of options soon...

Panag · August 31, 2002, 14:35

Quote:

Originally posted by zulu9812
well that's a pretty conclusive poll - a vote overwhelmingly in favour of making the aircraft range un-hard-coded at 8 and moddable by the scenarioo designer. Doubt it'll happen, though.

hi ,

in time there shall be more people who vote , ...

and afterall its a very important issue , ...

have a nice day

Zachriel · August 31, 2002, 16:28

Quote:

Originally posted by MarkG

Quote:

the crazy unlimited MP's on RR's

something that was also a part of civ2, which was "much more close to historic reality" as i recall

Is that a simplification to make the pathfinding algorithm practical? The same with air range?

XOR · September 2, 2002, 06:30

Increasing aircraft range with the size of the map is a big mistake as everything (city radius, mobility of ground units, mobility of sea units, etc...) would stay the same or would have to change accordingly with the size of the map.

If you decide to make only airplane range be map-size dependant, airplanes would be overpowered in very large maps and in very small ones they could be crippled to the point where they cannot reach their targets.

On the other hand, if you choose to make all units movement range be map size based it could lead to panzers being able to attack 5 times or move 5 tiles of distance which means they can reach very deep inside your territory in 1 turn.

Making the value alterable/editable= yes.
Making it map size dependant by default= NO WAY.

And, I think there should be more priority on giving us a cruise missile that is more like a cruise missile and can be fired from carriers, as well as fixing submarines and paratroopers and making some other things like better thought radar towers and tone down the internet. Because, I remind you, that PtW, online, will have the default units and values that come from Firaxis and their totally useless paratroopers.

Panag · September 5, 2002, 12:58

Quote:

Originally posted by XOR
Increasing aircraft range with the size of the map is a big mistake as everything (city radius, mobility of ground units, mobility of sea units, etc...) would stay the same or would have to change accordingly with the size of the map.

If you decide to make only airplane range be map-size dependant, airplanes would be overpowered in very large maps and in very small ones they could be crippled to the point where they cannot reach their targets.

On the other hand, if you choose to make all units movement range be map size based it could lead to panzers being able to attack 5 times or move 5 tiles of distance which means they can reach very deep inside your territory in 1 turn.

Making the value alterable/editable= yes.
Making it map size dependant by default= NO WAY.

And, I think there should be more priority on giving us a cruise missile that is more like a cruise missile and can be fired from carriers, as well as fixing submarines and paratroopers and making some other things like better thought radar towers and tone down the internet. Because, I remind you, that PtW, online, will have the default units and values that come from Firaxis and their totally useless paratroopers.

hi ,

we should be able to set the range , and it should not dependant on mapsize !!

as for PTW , we shall be able to play with mods , ... so no problem

have a nice day

Blue Moose · September 5, 2002, 15:46

Quote:

Originally posted by XOR
Increasing aircraft range with the size of the map is a big mistake as everything (city radius, mobility of ground units, mobility of sea units, etc...) would stay the same or would have to change accordingly with the size of the map.

If you decide to make only airplane range be map-size dependant, airplanes would be overpowered in very large maps and in very small ones they could be crippled to the point where they cannot reach their targets.

On the other hand, if you choose to make all units movement range be map size based it could lead to panzers being able to attack 5 times or move 5 tiles of distance which means they can reach very deep inside your territory in 1 turn.

Making the value alterable/editable= yes.
Making it map size dependant by default= NO WAY.

And, I think there should be more priority on giving us a cruise missile that is more like a cruise missile and can be fired from carriers, as well as fixing submarines and paratroopers and making some other things like better thought radar towers and tone down the internet. Because, I remind you, that PtW, online, will have the default units and values that come from Firaxis and their totally useless paratroopers.

I agree with the cruise missle statement, they should have at least as long a range as bombers. Speaking of which though, Bombers and the like should be able to kill off tanks and other mechanized units, but not infantry (same with artillery)...that would be much more historically accurate. At least they should be able to take out ships. Aircraft need a longer range for defensive missions against though bombers though...air power is very, very important in real life, and this needs to be reflected more.

Range changes for map sizes is fine...if on a huge map you are talking about a move 4 or 5 tank or cavalry...well, that's not that bad or unreasonable, considering how many cities you are likely to have at that point. You need ZOC like there was in Civ2 though, at least for forts and cities with ZOC units. That was you can block of your borders so a rush can't get through as effectively. Ideally RR MPs would be lessened to...to something like 1/10 or the like...maybe 1/5. It makes a lot of sense to me, at least.

-Moose

realpolitic · September 7, 2002, 15:52

Air power and Marines need to come considerably before Tanks to be worthwhile. Zeplins are also a good unit.

Panag · September 8, 2002, 07:47

Quote:

Originally posted by realpolitic
Air power and Marines need to come considerably before Tanks to be worthwhile. Zeplins are also a good unit.

hi ,

marines are around in most nation for more then 200 years , so okay , maybe they need an upgrade as time passes , ...

tanks , the start of the 1900s , the first real thing around 1916 , .....

then an evolution around 1935 , ....

zeplins , they where short lived , ......so should we put them in , or use them only in a WWI scenario , ......

have a nice day

XOR · September 8, 2002, 12:54

Scrap the prototypes and start it with WW1 tanks, then a few different tanks for WW2, then a cold war and post cold war array of tanks.

What's the limit of units the game can have?

Donal Graeme · September 13, 2002, 17:43

I have always felt the ability to easily MOD a game was one of the characteristics that made it a good game. I see no logical reason why they (they being Firaxis) hard-coded the range of airplanes and bombardment from units. It just seem stupid to me. WHY?!

Why go to the trouble to make it so that something can't be altered? One of the big advantages of Bombers over artillery is their range, and was one of the reasons the Israeli Army was so dependent on air-power for a long time. (the reason is simple: the same plane that can shoot down Egyptian MiGs one day can bomb the Golan Heights the next, while artillery has to be towed, which takes time, something the IDF didn't have.) Of course, that brings up another element: Unit cost. Units should have a variable upkeep cost. While a tank unit costs 2 gpt, a infantry should cost 1gpt, and maybe a fighter wing 3gpt, and so on. That way more expensive units are not just expensive in their contstruction, but in their maintenance as well. If Firaxis wants their game to last for as along as Civ 2 did, then they have to stop making these stupid decisions, and give more power to the MODers.

Thrawn05 · September 14, 2002, 20:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Martinus Magnificus
I agree that movement points should go up in accordance with the size of a map, but it should apply to all units, not only air.

I got the sense Firaxis is going to only allow this in MP... and not for SP and for SP mods.

Their silence in this thread is saying a lot to me.