Unit Movement Increase

[TriMiro]

I do not agree with the low moving points of the units in Civ3. I think that it is going to take more than 50 years fot my Warrior to get from one of my cities to another even without roads. Ancient Empires were quite large as teritory, yet they could move units much faster than one tile per 50 years.

Take Alexander the Great for instance he managed to conquer most of the ancient world for what 20 - 30 years. In Civ3 I will need that much just to take my troops out of the borders of my empire.

Consider the more modern age. a carier could travel from USA to Iraq for a month or so, and in Civ3 it will take 5 - 7 years even with Magelan's Expedition. This is just not realistic.

I believe that movement of all units has to be changed. It may destroy the balance as it is right now, I agree, but larger movement would make the game little bit more Militaristic. Wars would also be fought much faster and the outcome would be much faster. As it is right now every war in Civ3 is more or less a 100 years war.

What do you think people

[Spec]

Only boats should have a movement increase, I dont beleive that it takes 20 years for a galley to cross a lake.


Spec.

[Willem]

It's not a simulation, it's a game. If you have more movement with units, you lose something in the gameplay. For one thing, no unit will ever be able to retreat.

[Jaybe]

TriMiro, the objective should be to make the game LESS militaristic!!

While I may be leaning more and more towards the dark side, and an offensive war is enjoyable, I do not like it overall.

[wilbill]

Want realism? What's a good estimate of the distance an ancient iron/bronze age warrior could walk in 50 years? From Spain to Siberia? And back again? Several times? How about a horseman? Realism would be to just build railroads on every square of the map when it's generated. Of course then, as the time per turn compresses, we'd have to start cutting back. so that by the industrial age, the standard movement rates would be just about right.

[Jaybe]

Bleep (that is, "expletive deleted")! I did not intend to get into a "basics of strategy game design" here.

How far the individuals in a unit could move in a segment of time (with their particular transportation mode), is NOT how to determine the speed of a unit in a strategy game. It scarcely works even in a tactical game.

They did not have radio then, so communications took time. The decisions had to be made, intelligence gathered, supplies and equipment marshalled. Beauracracies were usually not as efficient then either, so more time is lost. Then the bleepin' decisions had to be made all over again as situations changed. Society has a lot more things to do than just go out conquering others.

You can say that a whole multi-turn war historically would have occured in less than one turn and you would be correct, but it comes out in the wash. It also allows other civs time to react, or YOU time to react to other civs' moves. As it is, Civ is a 540-turn game. Would you like to add a few hundred turns to that?

[ormuzd]

Yes, but how much is the teritory compared to the real world? And, yes, it's a game
and is good enough IMO

[Arrian]

I think minor adjustments to ship movement and aircraft range could be made - and made dependent on map size. Leave the land units alone, though.

-Arrian

[TriMiro]

I never ment the increase to be of magnitude of 100 or more tiles. I would accept 2 - 3 per Warior, and 4 - 5 per Horsemen and so on.

As for the time to react, 2 - 3 movement tiles would not matter that much.

There can also be a feature that the further away your units are from your teritory the slower they become. That will reflect the time for gathering intelligance and so on.

[TheArsenal]

I don't demand that level of realism, and never think of game play in terms of years, but turns. This way, the number of years it takes to move a unit from one place to the next, or the way advances in the tech tree never line up properly with the year I am in, don't bother me.

[wilbill]

Originally posted by TheArsenal
I don't demand that level of realism, and never think of game play in terms of years, but turns.

I think you have to approach it that way. I don't like some of the rather large differences between ground, air, and sea units' movement rates, but to just make a blanket addition of movement points to every unit in the game would really have some incredibly negative effects.
TriMiro, have you considered what would happen in a game with raging barbarians on a tiny or small map? You'd be lucky to get a second city built by the end of the Ancient Era. You'd have "barbarians at the gates" every turn.
Looking at it in terms of game balance, the movement rates may require a small tweak here and there, but an overall increase would create enormous problems.

[wilbill]

double post, sorry

But, TriMiro, there's nothing to stop you from giving your idea a try. It may turn out to be just what you want from the game. That's what mods are for.

[Mad Bomber]

I have had this argument before and I will only say this the movement for all but modern units are fine as long as you keep in mind that they are designed for standard map play. Playing on a large or huge map and the modern unit movements do need to be modded by adding "all terrain as roads flag" to all modern ships as well as to armor and mech units. In addition the carrier and nuc sub need their base movement increased as well.

The main problem is that the time scale used in Civ 3 is wacked. I would love to see a longer game with many units being built and Wonders truly taking many turns to build. I would love to see a game taking at least 2x's the number of turns to complete with the scale drastically curtailed in the ancient age.

[TriMiro]

Playing on a large or huge map and the modern unit movements do need to be modded by adding "all terrain as roads flag" to all modern ships as well as to armor and mech units

That is one of the things that I dislike most. When I have RailRoad I can move my entire army from one end of my empire to the other in 1 turn, however, if I want my attak vs. the enemy to be backed up by sea power I have to wait 3 - 5 turns for my ships to move. This makes ships almost useless in offence.

I see that the voting is against general change. I wish I could add a third option: Change sea movement only, to see what you will say about this.

[Panag]

hi ,

nope

its fine now , the only thing that should be changed is the RR bonus , it should be limited , ....

have a nice day

[Konquest02]

If you play on a tiny map, you will approach a higher degree of realism. This is a strategy game though, not a simulation...
But you can do whatever you want with the editor and then report it back here or in the creation forum and you will have your answer!

--Kon--

[Master Zen]

It would not be so fun it it were 100% realistic. I think as it is movement land movement is fine, perhaps only alterable in a really huge (ie 362x362) map.

Naval movements IMO is too low, as well as aircraft ranges.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Master Zen
It would not be so fun it it were 100% realistic. I think as it is movement land movement is fine, perhaps only alterable in a really huge (ie 362x362) map.

Naval movements IMO is too low, as well as aircraft ranges.

hi ,

well there is always the editor , but we should be able to play a bit more with it , RR bonus or not , limit this , expand that , etc , ....

have a nice day

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by panag


hi ,

well there is always the editor , but we should be able to play a bit more with it , RR bonus or not , limit this , expand that , etc , ....

have a nice day

I agree, there are some details which I think the editor should be able to change. For example, making Forests increase production with RRs, this would make this terrain type actually useful.

[TheArsenal]

its fine now , the only thing that should be changed is the RR bonus , it should be limited , ....

have a nice day

This is the single aspect of movement I would change The RR instant movement capability takes the sometimes hard choices out of how to position your forces out of the game, especially on large/huge maps. If I am moving large armies for an about-to-be-declared-war on a civ on my northern border, for example, I don't have to put as much thought as to my defensive posture on my other borders. If I over-commit to the north, and a civ attacks from the south, so what? - I can fix my mistake in the blink of an eye. And as I am a player who has not by any means conquered the whole globe by Steam Power, I prefer the challenge.

[Panag]

Originally posted by TheArsenal


This is the single aspect of movement I would change The RR instant movement capability takes the sometimes hard choices out of how to position your forces out of the game, especially on large/huge maps. If I am moving large armies for an about-to-be-declared-war on a civ on my northern border, for example, I don't have to put as much thought as to my defensive posture on my other borders. If I over-commit to the north, and a civ attacks from the south, so what? - I can fix my mistake in the blink of an eye. And as I am a player who has not by any means conquered the whole globe by Steam Power, I prefer the challenge.

hi ,

well thats what can happen , .....

however , the real world is the same

and if you have a mobile force , like horse man , knights or cav you should be able to adapt to the situation at ones , ....

ones again we have many views on the RR's , thats why we should be able to change it , one like more shields , one like slower movement , etc , .....

Firaxis

have a nice day

[The Mad Monk]

With the advent of 250x250+ maps, movement should be adjusted to a more 'realistic' level. I have already changed modern ships to have 'all terrain as roads', and am adding points from infantry on up.

[theNiceOne]

Originally posted by panag
hi ,

well thats what can happen , .....

however , the real world is the same

Do you mean to say that in the real world, if a nation is surprise attacked, it will be able to amass its entire military force against the attacker immediately?

AFAIK, when Germany was surprise attacked in Normandy on D-Day, it didn't have the option of using its forces in Russia too beat the invasion force back. Could you enlight me here?

[Willem]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
With the advent of 250x250+ maps, movement should be adjusted to a more 'realistic' level. I have already changed modern ships to have 'all terrain as roads', and am adding points from infantry on up.

If you do that though, you'll no longer have a late game unit that can retreat. All it takes is a move 2 Infantry unit, and that ability is cancelled out.

[Rommel2D]

Do armies with mobility ever retreat?

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Rommel2D
Do armies with mobility ever retreat?

Yep. Countless examples in the medieval age. More recently, I will refer to Villers-Bocage and the battles of Caen during the Normandy Campaign.

[Panag]

Originally posted by theNiceOne

Do you mean to say that in the real world, if a nation is surprise attacked, it will be able to amass its entire military force against the attacker immediately?

AFAIK, when Germany was surprise attacked in Normandy on D-Day, it didn't have the option of using its forces in Russia too beat the invasion force back. Could you enlight me here?

hi ,

you gave the example yourself , ...... thats why RR's should be limited in movement , .......

and it would be of great help in long games against others , ....

have a nice day

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by Willem


If you do that though, you'll no longer have a late game unit that can retreat. All it takes is a move 2 Infantry unit, and that ability is cancelled out.

Hmmm...I hadn't thought about that.

[ALPHA WOLF 64]

2 game design changes would be highly desireable:
1) remove the unlimited movement from RR
2) change the retreating rule so that a faster unit can retreat.

If these changes were made, a few minor changes to land units would be nice. I drastically increased air ranges and modern naval speeds to more in line with RR. I could not increase many land unit movements because I did not want to remove the retreat option. I did increase roads to 1/4 that compensates somewhat for land units and moved RR to Corporation.

[CiverDan]

I agree with removing unlimited RR movement. It removes some strategy associated with locating your forces in the industrial era & modern era. I would also like to see all ground units get 2 movement in modern era. (Pikeman had to walk the entire 500 miles, Marines dont) but without retreat ability.