Thread Tools
Old October 24, 2001, 15:48   #1
Akaoz
Prince
 
Akaoz's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 457
Movement in Civ
This has little to do with Civ3 in particular but...

How would increasing the movement rates of all units in the game by a factor of something like 10 affect the game?

-Alech
__________________
"Build Ports when possible. A port gives you extra resources, as well as an extra tile for a unit to stand on." - Infogrames
Akaoz is offline  
Old October 24, 2001, 15:49   #2
Stuie
King
 
Stuie's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Philly
Posts: 2,961
Everything would move ten times faster.
__________________
"Stuie has the right idea" - Japher
"I trust Stuie and all involved." - SlowwHand
"Stuie is right...." - Guynemer
Stuie is offline  
Old October 24, 2001, 15:59   #3
drake
King
 
drake's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Maine, US
Posts: 2,372
It would be incredibly boring?

I dont even like the 2x movement rate in civ2
__________________
I see the world through bloodshot eyes
Streets filled with blood from distant lies.
drake is offline  
Old October 24, 2001, 16:00   #4
Sabre2th
King
 
Sabre2th's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,691
It would make wars and combat suck.
Sabre2th is offline  
Old October 24, 2001, 16:08   #5
Akaoz
Prince
 
Akaoz's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 457
Very informative...

But what effect will it have on gameplay. Why will it be borig?

-Alech
__________________
"Build Ports when possible. A port gives you extra resources, as well as an extra tile for a unit to stand on." - Infogrames
Akaoz is offline  
Old October 24, 2001, 16:16   #6
drake
King
 
drake's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Maine, US
Posts: 2,372
It would be boring because, units would become too powerful. It would throw the balance of the game way off. Exploration of an entire planet would occur in a matter of turns and conquest of a "far away" civ could occur almost instantly.

1 well equipped unit could wipe out 5 or 6 under equipped units in ancient times.

I'm going home now, so I dont have time to explain really.....but I know it would be incredibly dull.
__________________
I see the world through bloodshot eyes
Streets filled with blood from distant lies.
drake is offline  
Old October 24, 2001, 17:34   #7
The Rook
Warlord
 
The Rook's Avatar
 
Local Time: 10:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 184
Movment rates in the early game are fine, but IMHO the later rates should be higher. If a warrior moves at 1, a tank should move at 10, but the way combat is related to movement, this is off balancing. If only combat and movement were separate.
The Rook is offline  
Old October 24, 2001, 18:19   #8
Cyclotron
Never Ending StoriesThe Courts of Candle'Bre
King
 
Cyclotron's Avatar
 
Local Time: 10:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cyclo-who?
Posts: 2,995
It is a bad idea to increase movement by factors, because:

1) Number of attacks depends on movement, so a very powerful unit could attack multiple times and devastate an almost unlimited number of weaker units.
2) Transports would have no chance of being intercepted, because they would move so quickly.
3) Movement-inhibiting terrain would not be as powerful an obstacle as it is supposed to be.
4) The first side declaring war would get so many attacks in just one turn that he could completely overwhelm an opponent in just one turn.
5) Exploration and colonization would be way too fast, and the game would not last for long.
__________________
Lime roots and treachery!
"Eventually you're left with a bunch of unmemorable posters like Cyclotron, pretending that they actually know anything about who they're debating pointless crap with." - Drake Tungsten
Cyclotron is offline  
Old October 24, 2001, 18:23   #9
Akaoz
Prince
 
Akaoz's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 457
How about limiting attacks to one per turn, and not increase the movement of ships so drastically.

-Alech
__________________
"Build Ports when possible. A port gives you extra resources, as well as an extra tile for a unit to stand on." - Infogrames
Akaoz is offline  
Old October 24, 2001, 19:59   #10
HalfLotus
Never Ending Stories
King
 
HalfLotus's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,238
HalfLotus is offline  
Old October 24, 2001, 20:06   #11
The Rook
Warlord
 
The Rook's Avatar
 
Local Time: 10:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 184
Attacks should not be tied to movement, or make it so that 1 attack for every 3 movement points after the first. That's the whole point about the blitzkreig, but it shouldn't happen until after mobilzation becomes in affect.

Terrain should be made tougher.

Units should be able to be set to "patrol" an area. That would solve the transport issue.
The Rook is offline  
Old October 24, 2001, 20:13   #12
Lawrence of Arabia
PtWDG Gathering StormMac
King
 
Lawrence of Arabia's Avatar
 
Local Time: 07:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: California Republic
Posts: 1,240


What if, what if...
__________________
"Everything for the State, nothing against the State, nothing outside the State" - Benito Mussolini
Lawrence of Arabia is offline  
Old October 24, 2001, 22:55   #13
Inverse Icarus
Emperor
 
Inverse Icarus's Avatar
 
Local Time: 10:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: flying too low to the ground
Posts: 4,625
how about you leave it alone and trust firaxis


i said trust and firaxis in the same setence!

multiplayer.
__________________
"I've lived too long with pain. I won't know who I am without it. We have to leave this place, I am almost happy here."
- Ender, from Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card
Inverse Icarus is offline  
Old October 25, 2001, 01:09   #14
Cyclotron
Never Ending StoriesThe Courts of Candle'Bre
King
 
Cyclotron's Avatar
 
Local Time: 10:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cyclo-who?
Posts: 2,995
Why add confusion? There is really no need. Moves = attacks, and with that in mind too many moves is extremely unbalancing.
__________________
Lime roots and treachery!
"Eventually you're left with a bunch of unmemorable posters like Cyclotron, pretending that they actually know anything about who they're debating pointless crap with." - Drake Tungsten
Cyclotron is offline  
Old October 25, 2001, 02:05   #15
Earthling7
Mac
Prince
 
Earthling7's Avatar
 
Local Time: 16:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: of pop
Posts: 735
CONFUSION
__________________
To be one with the Universe is to be very lonely - John Doe - Datalinks
Earthling7 is offline  
Old October 25, 2001, 02:36   #16
Nadexander
Warlord
 
Nadexander's Avatar
 
Local Time: 07:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Saratoga, California
Posts: 122
Quote:
Originally posted by The Rook
Movment rates in the early game are fine, but IMHO the later rates should be higher. If a warrior moves at 1, a tank should move at 10, but the way combat is related to movement, this is off balancing. If only combat and movement were separate.
No. Very Untrue.
A modern ground army (tanks, mechinized infantry) dont move any faster in a battle situation than an ancient army of mongolian horseman. In a non battle situation, railroads and airlifts cover modern transportation teqniques in civ just fine.
Nadexander is offline  
Old October 25, 2001, 02:45   #17
Sarxis
Rise of Nations MultiplayerAlpha Centauri PBEMCivilization III MultiplayerCivilization III PBEMCTP2 Source Code ProjectCall to Power II MultiplayerCall to Power MultiplayerCivilization IV: MultiplayerCivilization IV CreatorsGalCiv Apolyton Empire
Emperor
 
Sarxis's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 3,361
Quote:
Originally posted by Nadexander


No. Very Untrue.
A modern ground army (tanks, mechinized infantry) dont move any faster in a battle situation than an ancient army of mongolian horseman. In a non battle situation, railroads and airlifts cover modern transportation teqniques in civ just fine.
Agreed. Plus, in terms of the game, increased movement wouldn't be very tactical or fun.
Sarxis is offline  
Old October 25, 2001, 02:50   #18
yin26
inmate
Apolytoners Hall of Fame
Born Again Optimist
 
yin26's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: This space reserved for Darkstar.
Posts: 5,667
Quote:
If only combat and movement were separate.
This is one of the things that makes Heroes of Might and Magic so much fun. Good idea for Civ, too, if you ask me...
__________________
I've been on these boards for a long time and I still don't know what to think when it comes to you -- FrantzX, December 21, 2001

"Yin": Your friendly, neighborhood negative cosmic force.
yin26 is offline  
Old October 25, 2001, 09:58   #19
Akaoz
Prince
 
Akaoz's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 457
Quote:
Originally posted by Anunikoba


Agreed. Plus, in terms of the game, increased movement wouldn't be very tactical or fun.
Silly me. I alway thought there was more tactics involved with a mobile army then with a slow one... Oh well, live and learn.

With more mobility, wouldn't the need for blocking units and control be greater?

I see the movement=attacks argument however.

I find it interesting that you dismiss this so out of hand. Has anyone tried this with the editor? I'm not saying "I don't trust Firaxis." I do. I was just wondering what sort of an impact it would have on the game.

I've always though it was funny how it would take about a 100 years (5 turns x 20 years) to move a phalanx from Rome to Paris.

-Alech
__________________
"Build Ports when possible. A port gives you extra resources, as well as an extra tile for a unit to stand on." - Infogrames
Akaoz is offline  
Old October 25, 2001, 10:10   #20
drake
King
 
drake's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Maine, US
Posts: 2,372
As I said, I think even playing 2x movement games thrwos off the balance of the stock civ game.

Adding moves means an almost completely offensive game. What good are defensive units if they arent gievn time to fortufy and prepare for attack?

Quote:
I've always though it was funny how it would take about a 100 years (5 turns x 20 years) to move a phalanx from Rome to Paris.
Its a game
Surely you cant expect it to be realistic.

By the way, we have these things called roads....they effectively triple the amount of moves a unit has....and in modern times, these things called railroads.....they allow UNLIMITED movements.

If youre so intent, just edit the file for movement and give it a test.
__________________
I see the world through bloodshot eyes
Streets filled with blood from distant lies.
drake is offline  
Old October 25, 2001, 10:15   #21
Spatzimaus
Chieftain
 
Local Time: 10:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 91
I wondered the same thing, actually, in regards to the scenarios. If we're zoomed in on some part of the world, why don't the ranges for aircraft, bombardment, etc. scale up? Why is it on a small map a bomber can fly halfway across the world, while on a large scenario map they can't even go halfway across the country?

But, scaling up your map by a factor of X and increasing movement across the board by the same amount has other effects, some of which were mentioned above:

1> Each unit gets more attacks before the other side gets a chance to respond. If you played SMAC, it's like the difference between helicopters and jets; if you only ever used them for one attack they'd be equal, but against "soft" targets the copter was far superior.
This one could be solved by saying that attacks cost X movement points.

2> Zone of Control, spotting range, air intercept range, and bombardment range don't scale up, so it'd be more difficult to establish a defensive perimeter; the other side could always find a place to sneak through.
This one can be partially solved by splitting units into X "subunits"; so, the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment would be split into a few tank batallions, each of which would cover part of your border. It's still not the same, though, especially if you're using Armies (which have to be stacked and so wouldn't benefit). More importantly, an enemy tank that is attempting to defeat a static defensive emplacement could move in, attack, and back out of visual/bombardment range in one turn. Static defense sites (city, fort, colony) would be MUCH more vulnerable; you'd have to defend the borders. This might be a good thing.

3> The area of your city doesn't scale, so you're still limited to whatever resources are within radius. Of course, this would promote colonies, but thanks to the effects mentioned above they'd be harder to defend.

Of course, you could tweak all of this in the editor. If they allow you to define the number of movement points taken by each attack, it might even be workable.
Spatzimaus is offline  
Old October 25, 2001, 11:23   #22
Akaoz
Prince
 
Akaoz's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 457
Quote:
Originally posted by drake
As I said, I think even playing 2x movement games thrwos off the balance of the stock civ game.

Adding moves means an almost completely offensive game. What good are defensive units if they arent gievn time to fortufy and prepare for attack?



Its a game
Surely you cant expect it to be realistic.

By the way, we have these things called roads....they effectively triple the amount of moves a unit has....and in modern times, these things called railroads.....they allow UNLIMITED movements.

If youre so intent, just edit the file for movement and give it a test.
Yes it is a game. So what?

Roads and Rail go a long way to help the situation, but...

The reason why I posted here was to see what you ppl think, before I go waste my time with something that is doomed to fail. From the posts here, it looks like a lot of you think it's a waste of time.

I think one solution could be to make defensive units cheaper than offensive units. Also re-adjusting the Attack vs. Defense values would be prudent.

As for Aircraft, I would expect their operational range to increase as well.

When I said increase movement by a factor of 10 across the board was perhaps a bit hasty. The object of this little exercise is to increase movement rates of most units by a significant factor. I have no idea how far one could take things.

The hope was to add more tactics and strategy to the game.

BTW, to fortify takes one turn right?

-Alech
__________________
"Build Ports when possible. A port gives you extra resources, as well as an extra tile for a unit to stand on." - Infogrames
Akaoz 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 11:06.


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