Why guerrila?

[Zurai]

Originally posted by planetfall
One game I made both subs hidden nationality. Wow, instead of battleships I had 40-50 AI subs attacking everything that floated. Would be interesting to see what mischief the AI could make with hidden nationlity for land units.

== PF

I have 2 hidden nationality units in my mod. The AI really, REALLY likes them, even though they're twice as expensive as their equivalent non-HN unit. For the record, a 3.2.1 Mercenary at Ironworking for 60 shields, and a 3.2.2 Mounted Mercenary at Monarchy for 100 shields. The AI is very aggressive with them.

[aahz_capone]

all tiles as road and one movement would actualyy make more sence then 2 move, yeah... hmmm...

[Jaybe]

2 movement points, all terrian as grassland would give guerillas retreat capability and the desired mobility.

If I ever get a game to go that far (SP) without crashing ....

[Zero]

Originally posted by player1
Just one thing to say:

If you are planning to give them treat all tiles as roads ability DO NOT, and I repeat DO NOT give them 2 movement point.

Otherwise you'll get a very powerfull Cavalry unit (6 tile movements in enemy territory)

Treat all tiles as roads ability with movement of 1 is on the other hand OK.

I made my custom civ have civ specific paratroopers (same sprite). They had two move AND terrain as road. They were overwhelmingly dominant in the game so I gave them a civ specific warrior with 2 move and terrain as road (used jaguar sprite). They were still dominant.

Allow guerrilas move 2 all as roads. This gives them at least some reason for someone to actually build them (i.e. a unit which can pillage and run.)

Exactly. If they can do that, it's too powerful. 2 mov and road ads up to movement ability of radius of 6 despite terrain. Thats 12X12 squares of terrain for you to choose from if your in the middle of enemy empire!

I think they should be able to sit in "ambush", then if something accidentally comes next to them, they can attack and disengage. They trade punches with the enemy for a percentage of their status (say 2 for normal, 3 for veteran, and 4 for elite) and then disengage regardless of whether they are winning or losing. Guerilla warfare is not necessarily about killing an enemy.

You indirectly have an ambush feature already. Most people longed for ambush option that would allow unit to be on fortify like mode that allows you to attack a unit incoming into that square (so the attack defense role is reversed) in another thread i posted. But really, if you trap a unit to end its turn right next to you and you attack and withdraw thats ambush/guerilla as you are describing. In addition to you saying guerilla is not necessarily about killing an enemy. Yes you're right, but in real life armies dont lose block of health either. Killing only one unit in that square w/ 10 other units sounds like a good enough guerilla action for me.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Chuckles
I think the only point to gorillas is if you don't have rubber. The game is over if you're ever without a rubber. At least with gorillas you have a chance to get some rubbers and maybe survive.

not true guerilla def of 6 is same as riflemen's defense of 6 and riflemen is alot cheaper.

EDIT: sorry, you meant chance of attacking... misread it. anyway attack of 6 won't do you much anyway when the age of normal defense is in their two digits. Yeah I understand that it is still better than beign stuck at four, but it doesn't make a drastic improvement in unbalance of rubber owner VS non rubber owners.

[player1]

Originally posted by Calc II


not true guerilla def of 6 is same as riflemen's defense of 6 and riflemen is alot cheaper.

EDIT: sorry, you meant chance of attacking... misread it. anyway attack of 6 won't do you much anyway when the age of normal defense is in their two digits. Yeah I understand that it is still better than beign stuck at four, but it doesn't make a drastic improvement in unbalance of rubber owner VS non rubber owners.

4 vs 6 makes a lot of difference if you used Arty to soften up defenses.

P.S.
Alot cheaper?
80 vs 90 shields.

[Zero]

Originally posted by player1


4 vs 6 makes a lot of difference if you used Arty to soften up defenses.

P.S.
Alot cheaper?
80 vs 90 shields.

thought it was 70... well I guess for 10 extra shield +2 attack is pretty good since it seems that good rule is to determine unit value is +1 stat per +10 shield.

anyway, yes it makes a difference. But assuming you are on same level w/ rival, the best defense is 10 and best offense is at 6, this is the era where mostly defense seem to play into role. by making that worse if you dont have rubber your defense falls to 6 (w/ or w/o guerilla) anyway.

As for offense, calvary is the same stat as guery's offense, so only difference guery makes is that the same startegy can be applied even w/o horse and gunpowder.

EDIT: okay ack, to make things short, There is great unbalance in rubber owner VS have nots. Even assuming you have calvary. But now for people who dont have rubber AND saltpeter, they will be in same equal disadvantageous height as non rubber owning saltpeter owners. Thats what I meant.

[Switch]

I think that the Guerrila should just be standard AD, but 2 M and all terrain as grassland. Otherwise I think it would just be overpowered.

[SpencerH]

Movement of 2 so they could disengage would be better than 'all terrain as roads' except that they would then be able to move 6 along roads.

[sabrewolf]

i think 6,6,2, all terrain as road is waaay too powerful.

after all, 6 is still the best offense (except UUs). and with 6 tiles-moves you can come from the mountains (1. move), attack (2-4. move), go back in the mountains (5. move) and still fortify.

if you want 2 movements and all as road, i'd suggest having just 5 offense.

otherwise just leave it the same IMHO

[planetfall]

Ok, my thoughts so far:

1. 2 movments on roads is too much
2. don't know how to edit 2 movement, all terrain as grass
3. standard guerrila still not useful.

Current thinking:
1. add INVISIBLE to guerrila
2. keep movement at 1
3. make inf/mech/guerrila SEE INVISIBLE but not any armor. Picture a land based sub unit. Need DS or AEGIS or sub to see subs since BS and carriers can't.
4. for first play with edits change guerrila to 5.6.1. {Yeah I know, weaker. Doesn't sound like me, se la vive.}

What the !I#@ does "Stealth" do to land or sea units? With air it effects chances of interception, but guess is nothing in land or sea. If could add stealth to sea, might be interesting to see what a mod of a Stealth SSN would be like.

Any more feedback? Will be next week before start next PTW game with edited guerrilas.

== PF

[problem_child]

I haven't played PTW yet, (can't wait tho) but I think the Guerilla unit would be best as exactly half as powerful as infantry, and always start as conscript, and invisible.

Perhaps they should only be allowed through drafting? nah... maybe not.

Question about invisability tho, would this mean your Guerillas can pop across the border and tear up roads or mines, without that nation then declaring war? Afterall if Civ3 had undersea assets like mines, and a sub were to pillage them, the AI would not then respond would it? So with the guarillas, they'd only be discovered/engaged/war-declared if they ran directly into a military unit of that nation.

[SpencerH]

We tried invisible land units in mods quite a while back. The problem was that they dont tend to be invisible to the AI. We suspected that the since the AI continously moves its units around it kept bumping into our invisible units (and then immediately attacked them). There was a rumour that Firaxis was trying to make the guerrillas invisible, but maybe they couldnt work out the problems either.

[planetfall]

Originally posted by SpencerH
We tried invisible land units in mods quite a while back. The problem was that they dont tend to be invisible to the AI. We suspected that the since the AI continously moves its units around it kept bumping into our invisible units (and then immediately attacked them). There was a rumour that Firaxis was trying to make the guerrillas invisible, but maybe they couldnt work out the problems either.

Sounds like for land units, INVISIBLE and HIDDENNATIONALITY are linked. So, until we have a working option, the choice is either invisible and hidden or no preference change.

I will start a test game later to see what the actual current play characterisitics are.

-- PF

[Zurai]

Originally posted by planetfall


Sounds like for land units, INVISIBLE and HIDDENNATIONALITY are linked. So, until we have a working option, the choice is either invisible and hidden or no preference change.

I will start a test game later to see what the actual current play characterisitics are.

-- PF

No they aren't. "Invisible" is different from "Stealth" in the unit flags in the editor. Invisible is what the submarines have; Stealth is what the Stealth planes have. "Hidden Nationality" is something else completely.

Oh, and to change their movement to all terrain to grasslands, look up the Keshik - it has mountains treated as grasslands. Try to figure out where they made that change and you should be able to change all the other terrain types to 1 movement for Guerrilas. I'd be more specific but, as I mentioned earlier, I still don't have PTW.

[SpencerH]

Zurai is correct 'Hidden Nationality' and 'Submarine' (invisible except to the appropriate units AND to the AI's movement sub-programs) are the two seperate flags in question. Hidden nationality land units are quite fun land versions of the privateer that you can use to raise some hell with your enemies without starting a war. The drawback is that you can capture cities with them and so they can be a little unbalancing. When I was talking about invisible before I meant submarine .

[planetfall]

Originally posted by Zurai


No they aren't.

??????

"Invisible" is different from "Stealth" in the unit flags in the editor. Invisible is what the submarines have; Stealth is what the Stealth planes have. "Hidden Nationality" is something else completely.

Sounds like you missed some of thread. But what is "stealth". For air units it throws unit into different category of intercept rates. There is no concept of intercept rates for land or sea units. Therefore the question, what does "stealth" do to, say nucl subs? We know they are invisible. We know they can be set to have hidden nationality. If steath is checked, does the interaction of this unit change in game play or not?

The question about both is based on a report that Firaxis had problems getting invisible working with guerrila in PTW so came out without invisible checked as unit attribute. Based on AI action of attacking and seeking out invisible units just as it does for hidden nationality units, the proposition is made that there is some programming level link between both invisible and hidden nationality. Until that hidden link is corrected we can't have invisible active without having the AI treating the land unit as hidden nationality. Our only hope for balancing the AI is to turn on hidden nationality so we get balance.

Oh, and to change their movement to all terrain to grasslands, look up the Keshik - it has mountains treated as grasslands. Try to figure out where they made that change and you should be able to change all the other terrain types to 1 movement for Guerrilas. I'd be more specific but, as I mentioned earlier, I still don't have PTW.

Good obsersevation, think it is in unmodifiable code, but will check preferences.

== PF

BTW-- are others noticing a severe degregation of apolyton forum responsivness? I am noticing greatly increased latency.

[Comrade Tribune]

Guerillas should have 'Pirate' ability. (Able to infiltrate and attack opponents you are not at war with -but not allies, perhaps.)

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by planetfall

Sounds like you missed some of thread. But what is "stealth". For air units it throws unit into different category of intercept rates. There is no concept of intercept rates for land or sea units. Therefore the question, what does "stealth" do to, say nucl subs? We know they are invisible. We know they can be set to have hidden nationality. If steath is checked, does the interaction of this unit change in game play or not?

So far as I know, nothing, but it sounds like you're gonna try to find out for sure

The question about both is based on a report that Firaxis had problems getting invisible working with guerrila in PTW so came out without invisible checked as unit attribute. Based on AI action of attacking and seeking out invisible units just as it does for hidden nationality units, the proposition is made that there is some programming level link between both invisible and hidden nationality. Until that hidden link is corrected we can't have invisible active without having the AI treating the land unit as hidden nationality. Our only hope for balancing the AI is to turn on hidden nationality so we get balance.

The AI certainly did go after my 'assasin' units (submarine) but I think I also activated hidden nationality.

[Comrade Tribune]

Only problem with hidden nationality is it allows you to attack friends, which is not appropriate for Guerillas.

[Zero]

Theres a box with all the terrains. U just have to higlight them to consider those terrain as grassland for that unit. U'll see wat I mean if you get into unit editor.

As for invisible/stealth/hidden, all those feature wouldnt help guerilla IMO.

make them 6/6/2! (with maybe treat all terrain as grassland)

I would increase their stat to 7/7 but that would mean they would be better than infantry in attacking and one short of marine's attack capabilty. BTW in off topic note, who here thinks marines should be 10/6/1 instead? its weak as it is IMO.

[sabrewolf]

i reality, guerillas are very effective offensive units when used as surprise, e.g. attacking places you wouldn't expect.
well protected places and counterattacks however make the use of the guerilla quite useless.

so my conclusion:
- definetly NOT stronger offense than infantry (6 is good)
- worse defense then infantry (6 seems ok)
- because they are mobile foot units, either 1 movement (and all terrain as road) or my prefered version: 2 movement points, but treat all terrain as grassland
- cost must be low, because guerillas are usually just a handful of people. small but very effective.
and maybe with the stealth option

something would be nice, but it's currently not possible, because ZOC has changed in civ3: that the guerilla can't go past enemy units, only retreat backwards.

so if i could vote again, i'd now say: only reduce cost. but i don't know how balanced that would be.

[Minmaster]

Originally posted by ruby_maser
yeah, the poll should be revised so they can be made invisible only in the jungle.

When they are in the jungle, the only way you should be able to spot them is by moving right next to them. Instead of giving them 2 movements, I think they should be able to sit in "ambush", then if something accidentally comes next to them, they can attack and disengage. They trade punches with the enemy for a percentage of their status (say 2 for normal, 3 for veteran, and 4 for elite) and then disengage regardless of whether they are winning or losing. Guerilla warfare is not necessarily about killing an enemy. However, I think a large enough force of guerillas stationed in ambush could take out an enemy unit by each making small strikes and then disengaging and getting the choice of still moving after their initial attack so they can disappear back into the jungle.

by the time they're available, i dont think many jungle tiles would remain. they'd all be chopped down and cleared.

[SpencerH]

well if we're going into details I think guerrillas should be dirt cheap with a 4/2/2 ADM and no unit maintenance cost (if thats poss I havent looked at the editor yet). Also upgrade from medieval inf and longbows so I dont have guys with morningstars fighting mech inf.

[sabrewolf]

spencer: 4,2,2? that would make them the same strong as medieval infantry, just a little bit faster. do you REALLY think, that a well trained fanatic group of heavily armed soldiers is the same strong as a bunch of peasant with swords and shields? i don't think so...

[SpencerH]

I could ask the question in the other way. Do you think that a bunch of peasants armed with machetes and a few rifles has the same capacity to attack as professional soldiers. Not a chance. Guerrillas are not heavily armed troops, almost by definition. Show me a single example of guerrillas defeating (real) professionals in a battle (not a war).

[sabrewolf]

they don't stand a chance against professionals. not i clear fight. but they do use terrain, nigthtime, surprises, etc. for their advantage (guerilla warfare) which can make their assaults extremely effective.

with heavily armed i meant machine guns and explosives. sometimes jeeps for speed.

infantry usually have better equipment (but still the same sort: guns and explosives), come in bigger numbers and are better organised, that's why they should have a lot better defense.

i just don't want to make a guerilla have a weaker attack than cavalry (with primitive guns) or berserks. imho, infantry should be stronger (maybe 8/10), not the guerilla weaker.

[sabrewolf]

i can't give you an example, sorry. i don't know when such a group is called rebels, paramilitary, terrorists, guerilla, freedom fighters, revolutionaries, etc.

[SpencerH]

Well one problem is that CIV3 is not a wargame and it's not possible to create good combat models. Its also true that the relative strengths between units are way out of proportion. I think of these guerilla units as say company size (a good size tribe) with a smattering of small arms not something on the scope of the vietcong battalions.

Guerrilla's are definitely going to be weaker than cavalry in a stand up battle. It took the advent of massed machine guns (with plenty of ammunition) to end the calvary charge. It took a ****-load of training and/or guts to stand up the charge of a calvary Regt. It was the calvarys shock value rather than their hand weapons that was the main offensive factor.

[sabrewolf]

you're right about the guts needed to stand up against a cavalry regiment. but you're forgetting the era-factor.

iirc, the cavalry's time time ended in beginning of the twentieth century when armored vehicules started coming up. so the cavalry soldiers represented in civ3 where armed with fairly simple rifles with weak firing power (it could still kill you), bad accuracy (well, sitting on a moving horse makes that difficult anyway) and a danger for the soldier himself (how often did the weapons blow up in their hands?). also reloading the weapon took time... time you don't have in a battle.

the guerilla however is a unit of the 2nd half of the 20th century. weapons will work even if they are wet. bullets come in magazines (is that the english word?) which can be replaced in less than a second.

now if i have the choice of riding on a horse with a primitive rifle and charging or lying in a trench with a neat machine gun and plenty of ammo... i'd choose the guerilla