Thread Tools
Old December 5, 2001, 08:06   #31
David Murray
Prince
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 525
Re: cruise missiles

Why can't cruise missiles and nuclear weapons move over water?

I've noticed that you can move nukes and cruise missiles one square per turn over land for as long as you want. Therefore, why can't you do the same over water?

Furthermore...maybe it's just me not having played enough yet, but...helicopters...seem to be pretty useless at transporting troops, what use are they when they have only a small range from their base of operations? If you want to transport troops into enemy territory far away, you just can't, unless you have a city near the enemy to rebase to.

What I'm saying is, helicopters should have a movement value per turn, instead of having a very limited number of squares that they can move during an air mission.

Or am I just missing something? Your help and comments on these matters will be most appreciated.
David Murray is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 08:10   #32
Dev
Warlord
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 130
Quote:
Originally posted by Akka le Vil


Well, the problem is that the empire has not to be 5 tiles deep. You just have to prepare a BUNCH of tanks, and then take on city after another and then use the new-conquered terrain to bring new tanks (using the railroad that was in the city area and that are now usuable).
If you have enough tanks, you can wipe out a whole continent in one or two turns.
A tank should be faster than cavalry, but have accidented terrain costing more to get through (3 or 4 mov point for forest, impossibility to go to mountain without roads if it's not the case, etc...).
You just have to prepare a bunch of 3 movers and you can basicly do the same thing, prepare 500 workers and you can rail an entire continent from end to end in about one turn. 6 moves will help but compared to 3 it's not that much of a difference.

This problem is really due to the flawed hand to mouth approach Firaxes opted for when they should have made a proper upkeep phase instead, IMHO.

/dev
Dev is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 09:12   #33
Mawrin
Settler
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 6
Considering the turn time is in years the whole question of which moves faster in real life is pretty much irrelevant.

When two units fight in Civ 3 I wouldn't view it as a single pitched battle but rather as the summation of a series of conflicts over that square of territory. Unfortunately I can't think of a reasonable way of explaining why it would take a bunch of tanks (or cavalry or anything else for that matter) years to move along a road between two cities within my own borders...
Mawrin is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 10:17   #34
sophist
Prince
 
sophist's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 532
Quote:
Originally posted by David Murray
Re: cruise missiles

Why can't cruise missiles and nuclear weapons move over water?
I believe you could look at the cruise missile and nuclear weapon units as being like those big trucks the Air Force has to carry them around. So they can move all over land, but their bombardment range is only a few squares (for cruise missiles). Or something like that. Gameplay balancing. Also a way to justify having subs (which the AIs can see from the other side of the world).
sophist is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 10:39   #35
Nemesis of the North
Settler
 
Nemesis of the North's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Norway
Posts: 11
Well, actually, the infantry IS faster than the warrior. Take a small look at the year counter, and it moves quite a bit slower in the ages when you have infantry than when you have warriors.

The question is where all those still-existing warriors get their modern trucks from, though.

Nem
Nemesis of the North is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 10:47   #36
David Murray
Prince
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 525
Quote:
Originally posted by sophist


I believe you could look at the cruise missile and nuclear weapon units as being like those big trucks the Air Force has to carry them around. So they can move all over land, but their bombardment range is only a few squares (for cruise missiles). Or something like that. Gameplay balancing. Also a way to justify having subs (which the AIs can see from the other side of the world).
That's a good point.

What about the issue of helicopters though. You could argue that they require regular fuelling, thus they cannot travel great distances at once. But then again, I could rebase my helicopter from a city on one end of my empire to one of my output cities on the other end of the earth in one turn. Surely it would have just been better to have given helicopters a per-turn movement and combat value instead of having to give them silly "missions".

Or...am I missing something.
David Murray is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 11:03   #37
Herder
Chieftain
 
Local Time: 11:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 44
The whole *point* of helicopters is being able to operate outside of normal airbases.

Forcing them to operate from cities and hamstringing them to a short range is ridiculous. Sorry, its true. Whats the frigging point.
Herder is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 11:04   #38
JayKay
Warlord
 
JayKay's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 122
Quote:
Originally posted by sophist


Also a way to justify having subs (which the AIs can see from the other side of the world).
I must disagree with you since in a game of mine where i was the Persians, i had a Submarine stopped in open ocean and when i declared war to the Aztechs they moved a lot of Destroyers nearby, passing exactly side by side with the sub and they didn't attack it! As a matter of fact they only attacked it when i, in the next couple of turns, attacked one of their Destroyers making them aware of the sub! It was quite cool to watch about 5 Destroyers pass by the sub without notice it! This was in Regent difficulty level!
_________________________________________________



Portugal
Nation of: Magellan's (from Magellan's Expedition);
Vasco da Gama (Discoverer of the Maritime path to India);
and Pedro Álvares Cabral (Discoverer of Brazil in 1500)
__________________
"Every day Mankind fights a battle against Nature, forgetting if winning, Mankind will be among the defeated!"
JayKay is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 11:06   #39
David Murray
Prince
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 525
Quote:
Originally posted by Herder
The whole *point* of helicopters is being able to operate outside of normal airbases.

Forcing them to operate from cities and hamstringing them to a short range is ridiculous. Sorry, its true. Whats the frigging point.
Herder--

That's what I'm trying to get at.

Or were you just putting the point more succinctly for me?
David Murray is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 11:09   #40
Dev
Warlord
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 130
Apart from being offensively madly overpowered chopers worked great in SMAC.

They didn't have to return to their base but if they didn't they'd take a bit of damage each turn.

/dev
Dev is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 11:43   #41
Auren
Settler
 
Local Time: 19:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 23
Quote:
Originally posted by morb


you show me a horse that can run at 70km/h for 12 hours straight without collapsing....
I show it as soon as you show me modern armor that can go 70 km/h for 12 hours straight without running out of gas.
Auren is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 19:19   #42
black98z
Settler
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally posted by Auren


I show it as soon as you show me modern armor that can go 70 km/h for 12 hours straight without running out of gas.
Yea, what do they get? 3kpg? Anyways, you also got to remember that equipment like that needs alot of maintenance.
black98z is offline  
Old December 5, 2001, 21:51   #43
morb
Chieftain
 
morb's Avatar
 
Local Time: 09:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally posted by black98z
Yea, what do they get? 3kpg? Anyways, you also got to remember that equipment like that needs alot of maintenance.
actually more like 3 gallons per km. but they carry thousands of pounds of fuel. a horse will run out of breath long before a tank will run out of fuel if both run at maximum speed.
__________________
I hate Civ3!
morb is offline  
Old December 6, 2001, 04:06   #44
Raleigh
Warlord
 
Raleigh's Avatar
 
Local Time: 12:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 198
My fellow forum contributors:

Thank you ever so much. Of all the posts I placed here I least expected good replies to this one and thought for sure it would be flamed or ignored. So far we **** in at over 40 replies I think! Thank you all for contributing.

Thanks most especially to Xane for his excellent excellent research!
Raleigh is offline  
Old December 6, 2001, 04:27   #45
Venger
King
 
Venger's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Keeper of the Can-O'Whoopass
Posts: 1,104
Quote:
Originally posted by xane


Bradley M2/M3 Infantry Fighting Vehicle - 66 km/h source
Horse - 70 km/h source

There ya go
I'm pretty sure that speed is governed. And anything that is governed...

Venger
Venger is offline  
Old December 6, 2001, 04:45   #46
Badtz Maru
Prince
 
Badtz Maru's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally posted by Venger


I'm pretty sure that speed is governed. And anything that is governed...

Venger
...is governed for a good reason, i.e. running at higher speeds for sustained periods would cause breakdown. Though I seriously doubt that it is governed, the military trains it's people to govern themselves, to know how fast they can push their vehicle for how long before it breaks down. Why are you 'pretty sure' that the top speed quoted is governed, BTW?

Anyway, that top speed listed for horses is not the speed a horse can maintain for long periods of time, but I still believe that on varied terrain mounted troops could cover more ground than most armor, especially over long periods of time, as vehicles have to maintain a supply train and be maintained on a regular basis.
Badtz Maru is offline  
Old December 6, 2001, 04:54   #47
Ironwood
Prince
 
Local Time: 10:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clovis, CA
Posts: 386
Quote:
Originally posted by Nemesis of the North
Well, actually, the infantry IS faster than the warrior. Take a small look at the year counter, and it moves quite a bit slower in the ages when you have infantry than when you have warriors.

The question is where all those still-existing warriors get their modern trucks from, though.

Nem
Why, they refit old VW's of corse! Or maybe they're on motorcycles. Whatever.

Exelent point, anyway. The point is really moot. By the time you've got tanks, you've got rails. Strategically speaking, they'll move where you want, when you want, regardless of their movement point value. If they're ever operating outside railroaded territory, it's *very* likely they're operating in hostile territory without refeuling stations every few miles. So I don't see a problem.
__________________
To those who understand,
I extend my hand.
To the doubtful I demand,
Take me as I am.
Ironwood is offline  
Old December 6, 2001, 06:05   #48
xane
Chieftain
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 97
The question I answered I took to mean a straight "faster than", i.e. from a standing start, the fact is that Cavalry _can_ charge just as fast as modern armour. The Bradley M2/M3 represents a very advanced form of Mechanised Infantry transport and it has only just got up to horse speed, something that has existed for thousands of years.

Over a year, a horse _will_ travel a greater distance than any military motorized vehicle, a horse needs minimal maintainance and can gather "fuel" from the environment. At the end of the day a mech. vehicle is only as fast as the support units that follow it.
__________________
xane
xane is offline  
Old December 6, 2001, 11:39   #49
Ozymandous
Prince
 
Ozymandous's Avatar
 
Local Time: 12:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 507
Quote:
Originally posted by morb


you show me a horse that can run at 70km/h for 12 hours straight without collapsing....
And you show me a tank that can run for a month by eating grass...
Ozymandous is offline  
Old December 6, 2001, 13:58   #50
Mawrin
Settler
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 6
I wonder if they thought of putting some representation of lines of supply into Civ 3 e.g. tanks would have almost unlimited movement provided they were within (say) 3 squares of a city with access to oil.
Mawrin is offline  
Old December 6, 2001, 14:11   #51
faded glory
Civilization II Multiplayer
King
 
faded glory's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Fascist party of apolyton.
Posts: 1,405
Guys your way out of line.


Tanks have to turn there engines every 12 hours and stop for refueling, exhaust, and tons of other maintence quirks.

This is also not about how fasy they drive...its about how far they go. In a 3 day race through roadless terrain take your average horse and your average Soviet tank. The Horse would win...no doubt about it.
faded glory is offline  
Old December 6, 2001, 14:55   #52
barefootbadass
Prince
 
Local Time: 17:58
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally posted by Mawrin
I wonder if they thought of putting some representation of lines of supply into Civ 3 e.g. tanks would have almost unlimited movement provided they were within (say) 3 squares of a city with access to oil.
Umm, well in your territory on railroads(and since you can start building rr at beginning of industrial this shouldn't be an issue) tanks have unlimited movement. Advancing beyond your supply lines IMO is represented well in this game by getting into enemy territory where the roads and railroads don't help and you don't have access to barracks to quick heal instead of the no healing or slow healing with battlefield medicine.
barefootbadass 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 13:58.


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