Please discuss your ideas about ship units.

the ability of privateer should maybe be retohught.

or have a modern equivalent. keeping wooden ships from that age should not be encouraged. for some invasion i use privateers as transport to cross borders that i have no open borders with. This encourages me to build many privaeteers so i keep them in the later eras.

Since a modern age unit with this ability would not be very practical.
(sneaking tanks across water and doing so without provooking war isnt realistic i think) however something should be done so that i dont build privateers to stockpile them throught out the game.

comments on a possible new ability for privateer or ability to a modern equivalent?...

Ironclads should be given the abilty to cross oceans. The earlier ironclads were not able to however in France they made the first sea worthy ironclad in 1859.

In 1859, France launched La Gloire, the first ocean-going ironclad warship in history. Designed by the famous naval architect Dupuy de Lôme, she was wooden hulled and covered with iron plates. The French would have gone for an iron hull but their industry was not at the time able to manage it. In the following year and nine months later than planned, the British Royal Navy launched the iron-hulled and armored HMS Warrior, and the Black Prince in 1861. Although La Gloire was developed as a ship of the line, in effect a battleship cut to one deck due to weight considerations, the larger Warrior was classified as an armored frigate." - wikiepdia.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironclads

basically you get gold when you capture ship. Or this could only apply to galleons.

Anyway in my idea, frigates and ship of the lines should be allowed to carry one military unit, or just units that have amphibous promotion. The units who have amphibous promotion should be allowed to "board" an enemy ship. If they defeat the unit that is on the othr ship, one of two things could happen. The enemy ship could either be destroyed or captured(if captured the ship should be damaged) If they capture the ship they should receive gold. For ships like galleons also were used to carry gold, silver, and other goods. I dont think there should be a completely new unit however. i dont htink that is needed as long as you have amphibous promotion.

i guess should maybe think about something similar to this?, maybe....:mischief:

Ironclads should be given the abilty to cross oceans. The earlier ironclads were not able to however in France they made the first sea worthy ironclad in 1859.

In 1859, France launched La Gloire, the first ocean-going ironclad warship in history. Designed by the famous naval architect Dupuy de Lôme, she was wooden hulled and covered with iron plates. The French would have gone for an iron hull but their industry was not at the time able to manage it. In the following year and nine months later than planned, the British Royal Navy launched the iron-hulled and armored HMS Warrior, and the Black Prince in 1861. Although La Gloire was developed as a ship of the line, in effect a battleship cut to one deck due to weight considerations, the larger Warrior was classified as an armored frigate." - wikiepdia.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironclads

Right. Frenchmen were very proud at that time to build such a ship before the English ;) .
If i well remember, there was also a massive use of Ironclad during the American Civil War. Some of them went to deep sea to hunt wooden trade ships. Only their lack of stability make them more usefull on coasts and great rivers.

The Frog.

Right. Frenchmen were very proud at that time to build such a ship before the English ;) .
If i well remember, there was also a massive use of Ironclad during the American Civil War. Some of them went to deep sea to hunt wooden trade ships. Only their lack of stability make them more usefull on coasts and great rivers.

The Frog.
Yes the famous U.S.S. Monitor sank just off of the coast due to its shallow draft and overall inability to ride out heavy seas.

what about adding the lopez's pirate mod

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=173859

the pirate in civ 3 were cool cause you can attack and ppl dont know its you! this is missing in civ 4

the pirate in civ 3 were cool cause you can attack and ppl dont know its you! this is missing in civ 4
I agree bring back the privateers!

1st post on ship:

1) well we discused it a bit earlier about commandiering/capturing/boarding emeny ships. I belive it was in "main" TR forum threat. I cant recall how did it end.

2) Can we have small ship that can sail rivers ? (we have virtually trading boats). I mean a kind of foot soldiers only transport (in WW II we have armored cars, so in middle ages ships might be that kind of unit).
Also Vikings was invading Paris from river using their boats. So i find it quite realistic.

Right. Frenchmen were very proud at that time to build such a ship before the English ;) .
If i well remember, there was also a massive use of Ironclad during the American Civil War. Some of them went to deep sea to hunt wooden trade ships. Only their lack of stability make them more usefull on coasts and great rivers.

The Frog.

Did you forget about what message you get after dicovering steamworks ?

What Napolean said ?

To sail against the wind by lightning a bon fire under her deck ? I have no time for such nonsense

not sure of the exact version, as never had it couse of ctd

Those ships metioned here (Gloire, warrior) were actually the first prototypes of a new breed of warships: the dreadnoughts.
granted they still had sails and wooden structure (La Gloire); but that s why they are protoypes.

A typical dreadnoughts combines steampower; armor and exploding shells

so, I think; instead of making ironclads oceangoing, you should consider adding a new type of ship;
I may even say abandon the ironclad; because they were only so few build, all looking different and had no great influence on warfare (maybe only on the krimean wars and that was only in shelling land fortifications as flottable batteries). Dreadnoughts never fought either (cause there were no mayor naval wars in that era); but controlled the seas in the last half of the 19th century up until wwI and were build in far greater numbers, by all industrialised nations.

just my two cents on naval warfare.

greets

How about a hovercraft. Can go on land or water.

Would make a versatile unit methinks

WarKirby

Some problems with that idea: They're really slow, they don't take hits too well, fairly lightly armed, and you have some issues moving over land with em as well. Look at the US Navy's LCAC for example. Don't get me wrong, they have their uses, just not sure how we'd implement them properly.

How bout renaming the standard Privateer to Corsair, and introducing a "new" type Privateer witch would be an upgraded Galeon. The first fleets where made fromc onfiscated private, ships witch were then armed. You would not be able to build those "upgraded galeons". It could have one cargo space, and be a little weeker then the Corsair(give corsair +1 movement/and +10% attack bonus).. BUT you wouldnt need gold/silver/gems to, get it. Also the corsair shoud be able to attack rival fleets without declering war, the "new" Privateer wouldnt.. It would be cool, and it would add to the realism of the mod.. :]

Furthermore, its not realistic that you upgrade frigates and ships of the line to destroyers.There was class of ship "the iron frigates" ? maybe add a iron frigate for and upgrade from frigate, and "dreadnoughts" for ships of the line.. Theres a great gap in beetwen ships of the line/frigates and destroyers(8/10 - 30 strenght), some units need to be put there. Required techs would be steel and steam power (maybe add a tech like: propelar or smth), and ofcourse Coal. Ships of the line could be moved somewhere earlier then chemistry. Dreadnoughts should upgrade to battleships. Iron Frigates shoud be able to upgrade to destroyers and ..

Cruisers, with a descent movement, strong attack and weak defense(+20% attack bonus -penalty vs battleships/submarines?). Prereq techs: combustion and electricty, and Oil :)

what do You think ?

Furthermore, its not realistic that you upgrade frigates and ships of the line to destroyers.There was class of ship "the iron frigates" ? maybe add a iron frigate for and upgrade from frigate, and "dreadnoughts" for ships of the line.. Theres a great gap in beetwen ships of the line/frigates and destroyers(8/10 - 30 strenght), some units need to be put there. Required techs would be steel and steam power (maybe add a tech like: propelar or smth), and ofcourse Coal. Ships of the line could be moved somewhere earlier then chemistry. Dreadnoughts should upgrade to battleships. Iron Frigates shoud be able to upgrade to destroyers and ..


I like that idea.:goodjob:

Some more ship units should be added for the time period in between.

I like that idea.:goodjob:

Some more ship units should be added for the time period in between.
I second that. We need more freebooters!

I second that. We need more freebooters!

I "third" (lol) that ...

I think modern ships should have multiple attacks. If my Battleship encounters a fleet of Galleons and Frigate I should eat then alive very quickly.

cya, Rob

I think modern ships should have multiple attacks. If my Battleship encounters a fleet of Galleons and Frigate I should eat then alive very quickly.

cya, Rob
Yes I definitely agree with that; if it can be coded into the game.

If dales ranged bombardment is implement, modern ships could have one bombardment and one attack each turn (i know its only 2 attacks, but i think this would do)

Hmm a unit to replace the trireme for most civs would be good, I dunno like a "war galley" or something like that; and have the trireme as a UU/flavour unit for the mediteranean civs it was used by ie the greeks, romans, carthaginians, egyptians (some turkish civs might have used them too i dont know) etc

imo in a normal research tree progress; you should first get battleships before destroyers: battleships ruled the seas during the first ww1
destroyers gradualy became more and more important during ww2 because of submarine and aircraft defense. (which also made carriers replace battleships as kings of ocean). to get destroyers; you should first research something like electronics.

so I d say make destroyers still weaker than battleships; but give them good defence against subs and aircraft (and maybe give battleships a weakness against them); so you d need them in a stack to guard your battleships. And later on your carriers.

according to my view of naval warfare; this should be the upgrade path: privateer/corsair to ship of the line to ironclad ( if it should still be in the game) dreadnought to battleship to carrier (and give the aircraft a serious bombard fuction)

war galley to caravel to galleon to frigate s (weaker than ship of the line; but more movement, and also a bit later in normal game progress) to iron frigates to destroyers, ...

also I think; all ships except for ironclads and subs should be able to transport landunits (certainly frigates and ship of the line). This should solve the issue of having to use galleons as transports in the industrial age. (they were smaller than ship of the lines and even frigates; so shouldn't have more cargo capacity).

military transports should just be able to transport more ... and maybe give an amphibious promotion on landing its units.

i must say; im not yet in the later part of the game; so some thoughts may allready be in it... (in that case, sorry if you read al this)

I just love them battleboats ...

greets

Ps: a bombard function for battleships is a no brainer and multiple attacs might be fun, but I think earlier ships (maybe from ship of the line) should be able to destroy city fortifications; but not bombard other units (land or naval).

First "destroyers" were actualy called "counter torpedo boats" and their role was to provide cover for battleships (which were less maneuverable, and slower) from small tape torpedo boats (higly maneuverable, and fast).

You should get Destroyers and Battleships about the same time (same tech ?) First destroyers were built in the 1900s, just like first "real" battleships (no need for electronics). During the WW1 they played more or less the same role as in WW2 (convoying, sub hunting)

As to giving every ship the ability to transport units is too much IMO.. Ships of the line were much bigger then galeons, but their crew consisted of 10 times the number of ppl then the galeons.. (HMS Victory was complimented by 850 ppl) There realy wasnt much room in a war ship, wheter it was a frigate, a brigg, sloop, or ship of the line).. Supplies, guns and crew took up all of the space..

Old decomissioned ships were being striped out of their guns, and were transformed to transports.. Maybe it could be relfected by an option to upgrade(degrade) a frigate/ship of the line to a transport.. The ship would loose 1 movement point, and half the str.. A frigate would be able to carry 3 units, ship of the line 4.. And to relfect that you are actualy taking stuuf from the ship you could get some gold from doing it or some hammers in the city in witch you do the "upgrade" in (however this could be exploited for rushing building in that city).

[QUOTE=noid]First "destroyers" were actualy called "counter torpedo boats" and their role was to provide cover for battleships (which were less maneuverable, and slower) from small tape torpedo boats (higly maneuverable, and fast).


true

You should get Destroyers and Battleships about the same time (same tech ?) First destroyers were built in the 1900s, just like first "real" battleships (no need for electronics). During the WW1 they played more or less the same role as in WW2 (convoying, sub hunting)

true again, but during ww2 there was much more need for destroyers in their own role; being subhunting and AA defense (hence the need for electronics)
in WW1 they were mostly used as cannon fodder; same as the smaller cruisers,to keep the enemy's smaller ships at a distance, so the battlecuisers and battleships could duke it out over longer ranges.

to represent this in game I say; give the destroyers electronics (or something extra to battleships) to represent ww2 era till present day destroyers, 'cause they are still being used today in the same role; as opposed to battleships.

btw does total realisme have the aegis cruiser? or is that sevo ?

greets

As to giving every ship the ability to transport units is too much IMO.. Ships of the line were much bigger then galeons, but their crew consisted of 10 times the number of ppl then the galeons.. (HMS Victory was complimented by 850 ppl) There realy wasnt much room in a war ship, wheter it was a frigate, a brigg, sloop, or ship of the line).. Supplies, guns and crew took up all of the space..


Well they each had a complement of marines on board; so i figured ...
they might indeed be considered part of the crew, and not big enough to be a civ landunit ...


Old decomissioned ships were being striped out of their guns, and were transformed to transports.. Maybe it could be relfected by an option to upgrade(degrade) a frigate/ship of the line to a transport.. The ship would loose 1 movement point, and half the str.. A frigate would be able to carry 3 units, ship of the line 4.. And to relfect that you are actualy taking stuuf from the ship you could get some gold from doing it or some hammers in the city in witch you do the "upgrade" in (however this could be exploited for rushing building in that city).

valid idea;
but maybe it s easier to ad a new shiptype to represent this ?

( hum; is there a maximum number of unit types in civ4? :p )

indeed they had a marines squad on board, but for any greater action to be taken on land, a few ships had to order their marines to form a landing party.. (I would love to see this represented in TR.. :) ) but if a new marine unit was to be introduced it would be hard to represent the fact that there wasnt many of them (making them week would make them useless).

Making a new ship type would do the trick just fine, but its all bout realism in here :]

(i dont suppose that there is a limit to unit capacity for CIV)

wow, a new ship of the line units, created by rabbit white

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=4642703#post4642703

wow, a new ship of the line units, created by rabbit white

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=4642703#post4642703

Yeap, i have yet seen it. Great, no ?

The Frog.

oh yeah

another great addition

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=189461

different types of galleys.

oh yeah

another great addition

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=189461

different types of galleys.


Mmmm, Nice.
Ask Houman to have a look on these galleys and SoL.

The Frog.

Yeah they look good and can be implemented. A new UU for Vokings as well I suppose. Are their ships already made? Dragon ships I mean? Because Galley isn;t correct for Vikings as UU right? NOt sure though...

About Ship of Line, we already have a ship of line. As far as I know it is for everyone, so should this ship better replace the old model? I guess so right? Because we did the sam ething with the new zeppelin...

Yeah they look good and can be implemented. A new UU for Vokings as well I suppose. Are their ships already made? Dragon ships I mean? Because Galley isn;t correct for Vikings as UU right? NOt sure though...

About Ship of Line, we already have a ship of line. As far as I know it is for everyone, so should this ship better replace the old model? I guess so right? Because we did the sam ething with the new zeppelin...

Houman,

In fact, Vikings were using two majors kinds of boats: Drakkars ans Snakkars. (French names of these boats). Nevertheless, adding the drakkar would be very realistic. These boats and their crew were so feared by common pop of western countries....

The Frog.

@ Hian the Frog

I heared only of Longboats and Dragonboats/dragonships.

But you might be right (maybe not names :P) as Vikings just loved raping french woman, stealing french wine, burning french houses...In school you might lear more about that. In Poland it was a bit more than just mentioned. We were rewiewing and repeating Polish history 4 times... Ancient age only 2 times, French revolution i had only once (in earlier classes it was just mentioned, but even year of it was not spoken of). Why i wasnt born back than ??? Ow no CivIV was there...
Maybe my lack of knowlage of French history is also reason for my "-4 you are citzen of my most hatred nation" :lol:

Might you ckeck Wikipedia about this ? I already made 10 savegames to help kill diplomacy CTD.

@ Anaztazioch

Vikings were dangerous on ALL known seas and rivers of that time (around 750-1000). Swedish vikings went eastward and conquered (not always with violent but trade) most of todays Russia. The first "Russian" dynasty (the Rurikovitch) came from Rukik, a viking leader.
In western Europe, Danish and Norwegians vikings were deeply violent. They attacked, pillaged, burned, killed,... in all British Isles, France, Germany, low countries and even.... Spain, Portugal and Morocco. They besiedge Paris with around 700 drakkars but never took the inner city (protected by the river Seine and walls). Slowly, they took lands on many coasts of these countries, and built or rebuilt cities. In France for exemple, a treaty with the King in 911, gave them vast territories and the title of Duke of Normandy ( in old French Duke of the North Men). This province still have this name more than 1000 years after their coming. In fact, this King made the real good political choice: giving them lands, titles in exchange of protection against other vikings.... and it worked well !!! There was no more big invasion after 920, only some minor raids.
Today, sometimes some Drakkars are still unearthed by archeologists along the River Seine, as weapons, shields and stuff they had pillaged.

About TR: it would be very logical to add a real specail boat to viking. They were great Mariners. They went to Iceland, Greenland and North America to the west, they travel to constantinople to the south and went on all the major Russian rivers....

The Frog.

New ship to Vikings.

Not only it should be implanted, but it should dubble pillage profit. What you say ? As navy can pillage only fishing boats and whaling boats, giving 200% profit, would be great, but not disballancing. Also make it carry more troops or something (to make Berserkers even stronger, as they are weaker than other knights. Only amphibeus that gives +10% str makes them more ballanced)

hey guys; I agree the vikings should have a uu ship called drakkar (as far as I know this is not only their French name; but also swedish ...). cause they were revolutionairy ships for the age: able to go deep inland on rivers; aswel as cross oceans (to greenland and maybe even canada ...)

but I think the vanilla model of galley s is in fact a viking ship: a gally with hi bow and stern; dragon head (hence the name drakkar, i believe) row of shields and a square sail. So if somebody were to make a new model it should be for a galley; as for the other nations, I don't know what it should look like though; maybe something like a big raft ? or a big canoe?

maybe you can give all units attacking from a drakkar some temporary amphibious bonus (as I think Anaztazioch said ?)

greets

good point mqrt :] drakkar is a polish name as well, the dragon head and row of shields fit in perfectly :)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/68/Vikings02.jpg/180px-Vikings02.jpg

This is a photo of Drakkar. Looks like Civ IV galley for me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longship for intrested.
pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drakkar for noid

Check Types of Ships section.

Did You saw maybe "crew" idea in ships implemented in FfHII ? http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=171398

This is a great idea. To equip ship with a special abbilities which can be changed in cities. There were (names more or less):

• extra board crew: +1 strength, -1 speed
• extra oarsmen: -1 cargo space, +1 speed
• extra cargo: +1 cargo space, -1 speed

This ones can be used for old ships but we can think also about additions for modern ones:

• extra cannons: +40% bombardment, -1 speed
• anti aircraft: 30% chance of intercepting enemy aircraft, -1 cargo space
• landing forces: +1 cargo space, -1 strength

etc.

What do you think of this?

Any idea how such upgrading would look like ?

I dont think that promotions can forbid others, so this idea is out.

Other is that you could upgrade galley to "extra board crew galley" for 20 gold. "extra board crew galley" would become a new unit with same mesh, same requirement of technology, but cannot be built, only upgraded to.

The problem is, what if the upgraded one would replace regular galley, making it impossible to build any of these two.

Anaztazioch
Actually those ships are not upgrade once for ever.
Every time when ships is in a city, new ability can be chosen.
It is hard to explain this more precisely - just have a look on the mod Fall from Heaven II.

Great idea! ;)

• extra board crew: +1 strength, -1 speed
• extra oarsmen: -1 cargo space, +1 speed
• extra cargo: +1 cargo space, -1 speed


You've got it almost right... it's Buccaneers for +1 :strength:, -1 :move:; Longshoremen for +1 :move:, -1 cargo; and Skeleton Crew for +1 cargo, -1 :strength: (Note: -1 :strength:, not -1 :move:)

It's implemented as part of the FfH spell system, and as such might require a lot of work to add (but could open up some neat options). Gameplay-wise, it works like this; when a ship is in port, it has extra action buttons available, for each different crew type (or 'Crew Normally' to resume normal operations). The ability removes any existing crew promotion, and adds the new promotion.

Do note that these promotions cost no XP to add... they're a free method of customizing your navy.

i fear bugs :/

i fear bugs :/

It works fine in FfH2 (no bugs) so it could be implemented.http://forums.civfanatics.com/images/smilies/civ4/traderoute2.gif

FfH2 uses differant source files. FhF2 game code differs from Total Realism's. This incopatibility might or even should create few bugs.

Anyway i dubt it will be impanted in beta4. But for X-mas is some time. Unless Houman and Mexico will have a hard time at work (or what ever they do) it can be tried.

But other thing is performance. I say that TR team should work on performance not features for now.

Actually it does have bugs in FFh. A rather huge game breaking one for anything other than pangea... The AI has no clue how to use the promotions and ends up only making ships with reduced/no cargo spaces, and as a result you rarely ever see the AI attack from sea.

If you were going to use that promotion system I would take out anything that reduces cargo capacity, or you may be left with a broken seagoing AI.

Actually, the AI only uses Buccaneers (more strength, less speed) in the early sea game. It's not a problem with a cargo-reducing promotion at all... the problem is that in FfH, the basic ships have no cargo capacity. As such, unless cargo is specifically put in, the ship won't have it. However, the AI doesn't know this, and as such doesn't assign a cargo role to a ship with no cargo... and as such, it makes all it's ships warships until the point where it gets the technology to make better ones.

A little graphic suggestion, give seamines 4 units instead of one and make then a lot smaller.

Actually, the AI only uses Buccaneers (more strength, less speed) in the early sea game. It's not a problem with a cargo-reducing promotion at all... the problem is that in FfH, the basic ships have no cargo capacity. As such, unless cargo is specifically put in, the ship won't have it. However, the AI doesn't know this, and as such doesn't assign a cargo role to a ship with no cargo... and as such, it makes all it's ships warships until the point where it gets the technology to make better ones.

Indeed! I've noticed the same thing

Another Idea is to give submarines a 10% defence bonus in ocean squares and a -10 defence bonus in coastal squares. That way, submarines have the higher survivablity in deep water where they can dive deep sneek away, and and couter attack

@Fanatic Demon

Submarines should have bonus against all navy units exept submiarines. They have +100% attack vs Transport, +50% attack vs battleship, +50% attack vs carrier.

They are also invisable to most units, so cannot be attacked by units that dont see it. However submarines can attack it. Also when its deep underwater, it cannot be seen/attacked by units other than submarines, as for such attacks, attacking submarine is better than defanding submarine so +10% defance i vote no.

But on coastal titles in enemy borders submarines should not be inviasable (raders can detect it). Still its hard for battle ship to attack what is underwater.

Not with depth charges it isnt.

And subs typically didnt fare too well against sub hunting destroyers equipped with sonar.

They are also invisable to most units, so cannot be attacked by units that dont see it. However submarines can attack it. Also when its deep underwater, it cannot be seen/attacked by units other than submarines, as for such attacks, attacking submarine is better than defanding submarine so +10% defance i vote no.

There are a limited number of units that can actually see a submarine to engage it, true... but there are means of attacking submarines, if you know that they're there (ie: if they're attacking you). Most commonly, Depth Charges. Such things are the main reasons why submarines usually don't attack warships unless they've got a really good reason to do so... typically a damaged foe, superior numbers on your side, or as a last resort when surrounded.

But on coastal titles in enemy borders submarines should not be inviasable (raders can detect it). Still its hard for battle ship to attack what is underwater.

Umm... no, Radar cannot detect Submarines. You're thinking of Sonar, which is typically NOT implemented as a shore defense. The way to stop Submarines is with more Submarines, or with Sonar-equipped Destroyers. Without such defenses, there's not much you can do.

Guys,

In fact most of the Nuclear submarines are used to destroy trade fleet, supply fleet and of course other submarines. Most of the countries owning Nuclear Sub used also used them to protect some CVN Task Forces. (as France, USA and UK in the Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf).
Note that one of the main weakness of Nuclear Submarines are the low depth waters (as the Persian Gulf). Nuclear submarines are (it seems) easier to detect in low waters.

As a developper, my wish is to change something to Nuclear Submarines. Only a very few countries had the money, techs, scientists,...to build such a weapon. So i hope to find a good way to make these submarines more difficult to build (but not necessary more costly).

Hian the Frog.

Hian the Frog

I belive you can set cost to higher and some bonus to hurry production. (so the nuclear sub will be longer to build [more hammers required], but its hurry production will be same [eg. 50% cheaper hurrying]

I think i saw that somewhere in xml

There's a possibility this belongs in the promotions thread instead, but it's relevant to the discussion beforehand about Privateers/Pirates...

1) Would it be possible to deploy the promotion "Hidden Nationality" (FfH2 features this, although I note Anaztazioch said something about the code from FfH2 being thoroughly incompatible) and give that to the Privateer unit? This would allow a truer reflection of the Privateer historically (as they would often revert from 'unofficial' sanctioned action to true piracy during times of peace, thus would be a target for practically anyone).

2) Someone was talking about a modern privateer equivalent unit... Piracy is still a big concern for merchant sailors in modern times, especially in Asia. Add to that that many of the world's smaller countries have Navies which are mainly consisting of Patrol Boats or small but heavily armed gunboats. A Gunboat unit of some sort which you could upgrade the Privateer to could very well represent both roles in the mod. In modern times, perhaps AI spawning barb gunboats around Asia, Africa and the Med/Persian Gulf could represent this modern piracy (according to TheLopez, the current game doesn't spawn seaborne barb units too aggressively anyway, so it shouldn't unbalance anything).

On the other hand, player or AI civs could use the unit in the aforementioned "coast guard" or "patrol boat navy" role.

I'd agree with Anazazioch that it's a better idea to improve performance of the existing mod and fix existing bugs than add new content, but it's just an idea. ;)

IT IS NOT ANAZ !!!

I think that subs in the game are much too homogenized. Early subs only submerged when they had to avoid detection. Before the snorkel was developed late in WW2, they could only run on batteries, which didn't last long. Even early in WW2, torpedoes were so unreliable and difficult to target that most engagements were done while surfaced with the deck gun. More reliable torpedoes allowed them to engage warships. Sub-on-sub engagements weren't realistically feasible until after WW2. The subs just didn't have the equipment to track and target other subs while submerged. Ironically, the US navy lost several subs in WW2 after being hit by there own torpedoes!

Guys,
As a developper, my wish is to change something to Nuclear Submarines. Only a very few countries had the money, techs, scientists,...to build such a weapon. So i hope to find a good way to make these submarines more difficult to build (but not necessary more costly).

Hian the Frog.

Carriers as well.

IT IS NOT ANAZ !!!

Edited.

Apologies dude, but at the same time - it's just a net handle, and I don't see anyone else on this entire site getting worked up if their handle gets shortened during the course of a post. CTFO. :p :)

Edited.

Apologies dude, but at the same time - it's just a net handle, and I don't see anyone else on this entire site getting worked up if their handle gets shortened during the course of a post. CTFO. :p :)

I hear you Brother Anti....regards Ankh. :mischief:

Its so importand to me becouse it is the name i was GIVEN not my nickname i "just" made up.

Its so importand to me becouse it is the name i was GIVEN not my nickname i "just" made up.

Anaztazioch? What kind of name it is?
maybe "Anastazja Ch."? or "Anna Stazioch" ;)

Nope
Anastazja is a birth name, as well as Anna Stazioch.

It was Anetrith from a girlfriend Anet (her real name was Karoline), who was also in brotherhood. Giving a name simmilar to the named of a loved one is some kngiht custom in some of knight parties (witch were simmilar to a guild, but smaller and not as organized as my brotherhood is). We took that custom to our brotherhood and hence my name.

Anetrith changed into Anaztazioch after the win over Z'ioch's guild (the name of a rival brotherhood, Z'ioch was its founder and master). So my name was Anet-Z'ioch, but Anet was a female name it was changet to Anats(belonger to Anet...)-Z'ioch. But it has "sZ" in the name that was hard to spell right, and often my name was wrongly prenouced, so it was changed again to Anaztazioch.

I would specify its meaning better if not for my lack in English, I wont even know what i will type in ;)

Short story isnt it ;p

Now changing my sig for beta 4

Nope
Anastazja is a birth name, as well as Anna Stazioch.

It was Anetrith from a girlfriend Anet (her real name was Karoline), who was also in brotherhood. Giving a name simmilar to the named of a loved one is some kngiht custom in some of knight parties (witch were simmilar to a guild, but smaller and not as organized as my brotherhood is). We took that custom to our brotherhood and hence my name.

Anetrith changed into Anaztazioch after the win over Z'ioch's guild (the name of a rival brotherhood, Z'ioch was its founder and master). So my name was Anet-Z'ioch, but Anet was a female name it was changet to Anats(belonger to Anet...)-Z'ioch. But it has "sZ" in the name that was hard to spell right, and often my name was wrongly prenouced, so it was changed again to Anaztazioch.

I would specify its meaning better if not for my lack in English, I wont even know what i will type in ;)

Short story isnt it ;p

Now changing my sig for beta 4

Well, like I said mate, no offence meant... You have my apologies. Now that I know it's important to you, I'll be sure to respect that in future ok? :)

After all, if I wanna p1ss ppl off, I won't do it on the 'net... More fun to go down to the local pub and see if I can't get a rise out of someone there... :p

*Looks on general discussion threads for any talk about the Ashes :lol: :goodjob: *

I though you were female, Anastazioch.
And was your fan - because usually there are no girls playing civ.
But... too bad... this is real life :)

@ Vertico

LOL I have a fan :lol:

Ya i spend too much time with girls, so you are not the first one to tell me this heh.
But spending time with them has its good sides ;)

Is it possible to implement types of ships?

I send couple of battleships and aegis cruiser into hordes of frigates and privateers and I lost almost all of them. Scenarios was always the same:
I defend:
1 fight - I won
2 fight - I won
3 fight - I lost - no battleship :(

Woden frigate's cannons are not able to penetrate armour of heavy battleships!
One modern ship should be able to sunk all that stuff, because only modern warfare is able to stop it. The same with nuclear submarines -
I lost finally atacking those frigates. Why? Sabotage? Reactor malfunction?

For ground troops ods are real as you implement some modificators like: "+150% vs. melle untis" etc. Same think should be done with fleets. Can be two types of ships: old and modern or even:
• rowing boats (like galleys, triremes)
• saling ships (galeon, frigaets)
• steel vessels (battleships, destroyers) etc.

I would also like to see a larger difference between the different "classes" of ships, as according to Vertico.

Additionally, some units should not even be able to attack/defend against others, e.g.: a sub attacking a frigate, or a destroyer attacking a galley.

I concur. Moreover, history of naval warfare knows less situations where opposing sides were about equal than land warfare. Usually we have nation(s) that dominate the seas, sometimes due to a slight technological superiority. Really, only fleets of about the same technological level can compete. Take for example Russo-Japanese war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Japanese_war), where Russia completely lost at sea due to her fleet being technologically inferior, though much more numerous - while in Civ ships of Russia and Japan would be the same unit types, and Russia would have won a crushing victory!

Is it possible to implement types of ships?

For ground troops ods are real as you implement some modificators like: "+150% vs. melle untis" etc. Same think should be done with fleets. Can be two types of ships: old and modern or even:
• rowing boats (like galleys, triremes)
• saling ships (galeon, frigaets)
• steel vessels (battleships, destroyers) etc.


I also agree with this idea. :goodjob:

A suggestion: make galleass a new unit class, available with gunpowder, stronger than caravel but not seaworthy. These ships historically could only operate in Mediterranean, Baltic and Black sea and along the cost of Europe, no dreams of crossing Atlantic in one. Also, this yields us one more upgrade in military ship line. It is not that Triremes were used up to the appearance of Frigates... Galleass-type (or similar) ships were also used by at least Spain, France, Russia and Sweden.

It is also a strange choice to replace caravel with carrack for Spain, as Spain is the country that invented caravel design and used it most heavily.

You know what should be the easiest to solve this problem?
To change the difference of strengths. It has no influence on anything elso, so why not use:
Battleship with 120:strength:
Destroyer: 70:strength:
Ironclad: 35:strength:
Frigate: 15:strength:
Trireme: 2:strength:

@ Vertico

carrier : 60:strength:
submarine: 70:strength:
nuclear submarine: 80:strength:

Anaztaziochs personal galleon: 576953:strength:

Anaztaziochs personal galleon: 576953:strength:

absolutely :goodjob:

Or do it like this.

Wooden ships

Wooden ships (sail) + 100% vs wooden ships (oars)

Iron ships + 200% vs wooden ships (Both types)

Steel ships +100% vs iron ships and +500% vs wooden ships (Both types)

are any changes to ships going to be implemented?

We got Man 'o' War ;)

Stay patien, we are making PATCH now. It must be savegame compatibile, so we cant change too much, but unit statistecs are no problem.

I wish they did something with the trireme unit for all civilizations, cause I don't recall that the Incans using those units.

I don't recall Incans using any ships. Do you suggest they shouldn't be able to build any? ;)

How about blocking building of naval combat units until the eras which the civs were actually ready to field naval forces? (Let everyone build work boats and galleys)

{My apologies if I slighted anyone through insufficient research}

Ancient - Greece, Rome, Persia, Carthage, Egyptian

Classical - Celtic

Medieval - England, France, Germany, Viking, China, Japan, Korea

Renaissance - America, Spain, Russia, Turks

Industrial - Aztec, Inca, Mali, Zulu, Arabs, India, Mongols (for the civs that never really had much of a navy)

The late comers will find the overlooked techs relatively cheap and allow them to catch-up fairly quickly.

How about blocking building of naval combat units until the eras which the civs were actually ready to field naval forces? (Let everyone build work boats and galleys)

{My apologies if I slighted anyone through insufficient research}

Ancient - Greece, Rome, Persia, Carthage, Egyptian

Classical - Celtic

Medieval - England, France, Germany, Viking, China, Japan, Korea

Renaissance - America, Spain, Russia, Turks

Industrial - Aztec, Inca, Mali, Zulu, Arabs, India, Mongols (for the civs that never really had much of a navy)

The late comers will find the overlooked techs relatively cheap and allow them to catch-up fairly quickly.

Sounds like a bad idea. I wouldn't like to be thrown out of the seas if playing India, for example. Although, an ancient war ship more generic than trireme would be nice, current system is the best we can have now. A major ship overhaul is coming, but it will touch later ships more.

current system is the best we can have now.

No it is not. Destroyer sunk by band of three galeons?! Come on!!

Maybe galleon had A-Bombs in its cannons and Mel Gibson as Captian ;)

I don't see any point in arguing here. We all know that current ship balance is far from ideal, and that something will be done with it in the future. Maybe near future.

No it is not. Destroyer sunk by band of three galeons?! Come on!!

A few years ago (3 or 4 years only, I can not remember exactly.) 2 Somolian basic fishing boats with simple engines, and only about 6 somalie pirates on each boat, tried to attack a Modern ( about 2 years old) American Cruise liner (With about 500 people on board). They used Rocket propelled grenades, machine guns, automatic weapons etc. They almost succeded.

Except this Cruise ship had a Sonic Gun - one of the very few that have. But it only just worked, as the operators of the gun were all injured by gunfire and nearly died.

Unfortunately they, having survived their wounds are now all nearly deaf because of the Sonic Gun.

So 3 Galleons sinking a Destroyer is not that impossible. It is not the age of the ship - it is what else it may be carrying that is important.

They almost succeded.


In Poland they say: "Almost make a big difference" and there were serie of funny commercials about it:
"prawie jak" = "almost like" ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTklwiaFiNc
http://www.zywiec.com.pl/zywiec_root/zywe_obrazy/mpg/prawie2_markowe.mpg
http://www.zywiec.com.pl/zywiec_root/zywe_obrazy/mpg/prawie2_hifi.mpg
http://www.zywiec.com.pl/zywiec_root/zywe_obrazy/mpg/prawie2_didzej.mpg

or parodies, like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0c2_4JWllM

Except this Cruise ship had a Sonic Gun - one of the very few that have. But it only just worked, as the operators of the gun were all injured by gunfire and nearly died.

Unfortunately they, having survived their wounds are now all nearly deaf because of the Sonic Gun.

This sounds crazy, man, like a line from a comedy movie, oh irony ;)
What on earth is a sonic gun? Do military vessels also possess these or they're restricted to cruise liners only? :confused:

This sounds crazy, man, like a line from a comedy movie, oh irony ;)
What on earth is a sonic gun? Do military vessels also possess these or they're restricted to cruise liners only? :confused:

You might want to check for yourself (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_range_acoustic_device). It is interesting to know that the first working prototypes of such things were manufactured in Franco's Spain in the 1970's.