The last twenty or so posts on the "new art" thread have been involved with what actual post-apocalpytic tech development would actually be. Let us move that thread here.

You haven't still commented on my tech tree idea, what's ok and what's wrong there by your opinion.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=282313&page=2

Now to attempt to steer this back on topic: What about Dragoons/mounted infantry? I recall Germany at some point doing something similar with donkeys to increase the mobility of their infantry. Then again, I don't see a real niche for them, except maybe as a cheaper but weaker alternative to Utes. Also can't think of any easy or practical way to show them in-game other than just '2 guys and a horse' or something similar. Maybe it's possible to make a human dismount a horse for combat, but it sounds very time-consuming and not worth the effort.

Well Cavalry during the American Civil War (ACW) when they acted as infantry would have a ratio of 3 fighting and 1 to hold the horses.

Depending on the terrain, Cavalry has an advantage over Ute's because they can go where vehicles can't. Plus, game mechanics assume you can always find enough fodder for your cavalry, which isn't exactly accurate, but perfectly okay for the nature of the game. Plus, dragoons have the advantage of they have what ever weapon available for the rider as opposed to UTE's which generally are going to require larger weapons be fabricated. On the down side, while it takes some work to create them, UTE's are 'cheap' in the fact that vehicles are all over the place and just need to be dragged into a place where they can be made as opposed to horses that still have to be 'made' the old fashion way. Plus, I'm not sure of the game mechanics of maintenance for units, but Cavalry would also be expensive in the sense of just keeping them around doing 'nothing' - A UTE's with a full tank of gas will still have a full tank of gas in a week if not used; horses eat every day.

davidlallen has proposed a mechanic unit that I heartily endorse. Since the scale of Fury Road is of very small units, it is much more critical to the strength of a unit when it loses a vehicle or two compared to brigade or divisional-sized units of modern armies.

I'm not sure if this could be done, but the best way would be that going off road would result either in a small bit of damage that could be repaired in a city or by a mechanic (similar to who the dwarves repair their golems in FfH) or use the old algorithm from Civ II (pretty sure it was Civ II) where certain ships out in the ocean had a chance to sink; in this case vehicles have a chance to get 'injured'. This game mechanic might be used as a trade off on maintenance of units. As mentioned above, a group of UTE's (not sure how many a unit would have, 2-3 - 10-20?) Isn't a lot of men to feed as opposed to a group of dragoons or a infantry unit. So when they are not in use, they are much cheaper to maintain; but when they're put into combat, they should be very expensive due to wear & tear as well as combat damage.

As I've said before, driving without roads and the like really tears up vehicles. Even driving on crappy roads is really rough on vehicles. When I was in Afghanistan, we'd see the toll it took on our military vehicles as well as civilian cars and trucks. Plus, to make a vehicle more armored, like added plates to your SUV, will cause it to be heavy and that breaks axle's and damages tires.

I don't want to sound like I'm nit-picking, but basic Civ doesn't assign any sort of maintenance cost for repairs and the like because of the scale of the game and the fact that your armies have an entire civilization backing them up. There is a lot of what might call 'fat' that allows a civ to go to war for awhile since there is plenty of men, material, and supplies to back them up. In Fury Road, that isn't the case; every military unit is a trade off on something that you might have made for civilian use. To me, that's one of the big decisions of the game: home much safety do I need versus what I need to grow my Civ. This maintenance problem, of having enough parts, gas and the like for your units also explains stuff you see in films like the "Road Warrior" - the Bandit Kings don't feel the need (or have the people) to want to build up the necessary infrastructure to actually support their troops; they'd rather take it.

The game does have Maintenace cost for units. It does not give a detailed report what the maintenance is used for - but the repair/resupply/provisions cost are accounted via maintenance.

Giving some units higher maintenace cost might be a good idea, but i dont think it is possible without SDK work, which for onw is off limits.

Overall, i do not see that Cavalry fits the setting too well - food is scarse in postapocalyptic desert, and Horses are quite sensitive to bad food on top of it, getting sick/dying if not fed properly.

Right now Cavalry is kind of a gap-filler - allowing to mount up some offensive power without having access to vehilces (be it due to lack of oil or the pecularities of the tech path). I think it should stay this way.

At the point in the game where UTE's with Heavy Mount promotion become available, there are firearms already

See that's where that's the part of the mod I most disagree with (which of course doesn't have to mean anything) is that it is too easy to find military grade weaponry. Even if you do break into a National Guard armory, you're not going to find many heavy weapons (they just don't keep them at the armories) and even if you have access to a large military installation (which in the grand scheme of things there aren't that many) you'd find either so much stuff as to unbalanced the game and/or you find lots of stuff but not enough ammo to last you very long.

So to me I think there is where the player comes in; which tech line are they going to take? Go for low tech weapons that are easy to make (good if you have cities with lots of food potential), try to go for more of a gunpowder model, or go like hell in trying to make your own copies of stuff for more modern weapons. I mean if you can recreate a way to mass produce stuff like 5.56mm ball ammo and .50cal ammo (and the belts, don't forget those) then you are really ahead of the game...assuming while you were pursuing that tech some other Civ rolls over you with guys with crossbows riding in steam powered cars.

In a way, it's too bad you couldn't make it, in the early game where units would be built and would have a promotion "Pre-Apocalypse" weapons to show they people have limited ammo for weapons. If they so choose, they can use the promotion (similar to FfH spells) for a big combat increase and couldn't get it back until they are resupplied or go back to a city. Then you'd just have to figure out a way to simulate a way to have count how many times you can use this promotion before that Civ runs out of their stock of old ammo. Depending on your Civilization would have a bearing on how many of these 'ammo' promotions you'd have. Obviously finding goody huts and the like might restock your Civ's supply.

Limited Ammo supply does sound interesting, but it is a huge undertaking to make this feature balanced, not too tedious in MM and understood by the AI, since a concept like this does not exist in the game, it would have to be coded from scratch.

While it might be cool to see it done at some point, right now i prefer seeing features that are easier and safer to implement and add a lot more to the gameplay done.

Limited Ammo supply does sound interesting, but it is a huge undertaking to make this feature balanced, not too tedious in MM and understood by the AI, since a concept like this does not exist in the game, it would have to be coded from scratch.

See that's the problem, a lot of these problems probably aren't that hard...if you know how to code, very good with mathematical models and the like. I mean that was the hardest thing about a lot of analytical models; you know what you'd like to do, but actually getting it to work and be accurate if it's even possible is another. =[ I need to win a big lottery so I can pay people to do this type of research! :crazyeye:

One thing that I was thinking about this mod was that if the game starts 20 years after the Apocalypse and we don't know how long things were going down hill prior to that, then roads shouldn't be so easily built as they are in the game.

First off, in basic Civ IV, the roads early workers are building are more of paths cut through the underbrush/woods. I mean there is a big time gap between 4000 BC and the first Roman roads.

Now, in the modern world, there are roads everywhere. However, after 20 years of weather and no maintenance, these roads will disintegrate. In the popular series, "Earth Without Humans" they show how most 'standard' roads are gone in 20 years and main roads are in rotten shape. So what you'd be left with are the main highways and they would be in serious decay by turn 120. (50 years of no maintenance)

So I'm thinking that at first, workers shouldn't be able to build roads because to make the 'classic 4000 BC' is already done for you. While the asphalt roads aren't a road as we'd think of it, it's still a cleared path. I doubt they'd have the asphalt or the machines (or the inclination) do do much more.

I think this would slow movement down, which is how it should be. This allows for more time for animals or bandits to attack you as well as slows up the aggressive Civs from just pumping out combat units and blithely going through a hostile world to attack you.

So roads as we know them would be thrashed by the beginning of the game and even the highways would start to fade by turn 120. (Perhaps there could be a game mechanic similar to the FfH mod where the world can change from a cold clime to a warmer one. So instead of tundra changing to plains, you'd have roads randomly disappearing with most of them gone by turn 150 or so).

So how is a young Civ going to move around? The answer is an easy one, both historically & technologically: Railroads.

Railroad technology is very easy. First off, there are tracks in existence all over the world currently being used and unlike roads, they last a lot longer without maintenance. Unlike roads, even if they are unusable, the tracks can be taken out, melted down and recast. Since the ground has already been leveled, there isn't a lot of in the need of blasting or earth-moving to done.

Rail cars and engines can be fabricated easily, either from existing ones or just fabricating rail wheels for the thousands of cars laying around.

So a typical game starts out with few road options. You'd have highways (few and far between) as well as some existing rail lines (that if the map maker was working right, would probably not be as useful since they generally connect two radioactive ruins sites). Somewhat early in the tech tree you'd either have a Railroad tech or have smelting or something that would allow railroads to be build by workers. I would make creating a rail tile to be expensive and take some time so the board isn't covered with rail tiles. Thus you'd probably end up with the historically accurate city that is a rail hub and thus militarily important. Warlike civs that neglect this tech would be at at disadvantage since the defender could bring in supplies quicker than the attacker can move up units overland. Plus, if there are few/no roads, linking land-locked cities with rail lines should add a bigger than normal 'connected to capital' bonus.

Again, this is sort of a big change of ideas from the normal Civ, but it also I think is needed because we forget how quickly a lot of man-made things fall apart with time and no maintenance and we just can't realistically expect asphalt roads to stay in perfect condition for the 100 year span of time of the mod. Railroads, on the other hand, are a proven technology and one well within the reach of a post-Apocalyptic society.

One thing that I was thinking about this mod was that if the game starts 20 years after the Apocalypse and we don't know how long things were going down hill prior to that, then roads shouldn't be so easily built as they are in the game.

First off, in basic Civ IV, the roads early workers are building are more of paths cut through the underbrush/woods. I mean there is a big time gap between 4000 BC and the first Roman roads.

Roads in Fury Road actually work exactly this way. If you look carefully at an early game, you can see the graphical difference between the "pre-apocalypse highway" and the roads you build. Roads you build give slightly faster movement for everybody. Highways give very fast movement to vehicles, but you can't build them. If you view the whole map, you will see that a highway rarely goes more than 3-4 plots before there is a gap of one plot in the highway. This represents the decay that you were mentioning. Fast movement breaks when it hits this gap.

In the late game, there is a tech "highways". Once you have this tech, then you can build highways. The way this should be used is to send highway workers to those gaps and fill them in; that represents repairing the decayed part of the highway and restoring them to work for long distance, fast movement.

So how is a young Civ going to move around? The answer is an easy one, both historically & technologically: Railroads.


Good point. In my earliest posts about Fury Road in the dev thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6803377&postcount=12), that is what I wanted to do. But I ran into a snag. Railroads in vanilla allow all units to move along the rail at high speed. This means the locomotives and rail cars are "abstracted"; we assume that there are enough locomotives and rail cars to move any number of units. That doesn't fit with the limited resources theme of Fury Road. So I wanted to make locomotives as specific units, exactly a "land transport".

Sadly, the game AI is known to be unable to use "land transport" effectively. So I gave up on that, and used the railroad mechanic to implement highways instead.

Roads in Fury Road actually work exactly this way. If you look carefully at an early game, you can see the graphical difference between the "pre-apocalypse highway" and the roads you build. Roads you build give slightly faster movement for everybody. Highways give very fast movement to vehicles, but you can't build them. If you view the whole map, you will see that a highway rarely goes more than 3-4 plots before there is a gap of one plot in the highway. This represents the decay that you were mentioning. Fast movement breaks when it hits this gap.

In the late game, there is a tech "highways". Once you have this tech, then you can build highways. The way this should be used is to send highway workers to those gaps and fill them in; that represents repairing the decayed part of the highway and restoring them to work for long distance, fast movement.

Yes, I did notice that. However, the fact remains is that it would take a long time to get the tech to fix or create new roads or even roads equivalent to Roman Roads, whereas you could start cranking out Railroads pretty fast. It's easy tech and with all the roads out there, you'd have lots of pre-made right-of-ways already graded for you to use.

Good point. In my earliest posts about Fury Road in the dev thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6803377&postcount=12), that is what I wanted to do. But I ran into a snag. Railroads in vanilla allow all units to move along the rail at high speed. This means the locomotives and rail cars are "abstracted"; we assume that there are enough locomotives and rail cars to move any number of units. That doesn't fit with the limited resources theme of Fury Road. So I wanted to make locomotives as specific units, exactly a "land transport".

Sadly, the game AI is known to be unable to use "land transport" effectively. So I gave up on that, and used the railroad mechanic to implement highways instead.

Well from a lot of the reading I've done, making locomotives is not that hard. It is a piston-lever action that is old, old tech. Steam locomotives are 'easy' to make and like I said, you can make trains out of cars, so I don't think the availability of the trains is the issue. To me, what would slow you down is actually building the track. Making railroad ties is easy for a forge, but you have to make a lot of them and then you have to have your worker gang out there doing the laying of the line and that takes time, increasing the danger for the workers. However the payoff is you have a reliable transport that can run off coal, wood or gas and your units wouldn't get banged up in traveling.

Plus, I hate to say it, but by not having boats, you are penalizing coastal cities by not being able to move units up and down the coast quickly. I mean while deep ocean transport is out, just going up and down the coast isn't that hard. As previously mentioned, it's too bad the AI doesn't do land transport well so some way of having "Paddleboats" (which is just a river locomotive) so you could move troops up and down rivers fast.

Yes, I did notice that. However, the fact remains is that it would take a long time to get the tech to fix or create new roads or even roads equivalent to Roman Roads, whereas you could start cranking out Railroads pretty fast. It's easy tech and with all the roads out there, you'd have lots of pre-made right-of-ways already graded for you to use.

Are you saying that it would be harder to build plain roads without pavement than railroads? Think about it again. If you're making a railroad you must prepare the soil much more than when making a normal road. Even that is a huge undertaking compared to building a road without a pavement. Not to mention the amount of steel and concrete you need. I've watched railroad constructing few times and they put 20 meters long poles to the ground every 0.5 meters. And if you compare that to making roads for cars etc it's totally different business.

Are you saying that it would be harder to build plain roads without pavement than railroads? Think about it again. If you're making a railroad you must prepare the soil much more than when making a normal road. Even that is a huge undertaking compared to building a road without a pavement. Not to mention the amount of steel and concrete you need. I've watched railroad constructing few times and they put 20 meters long poles to the ground every 0.5 meters. And if you compare that to making roads for cars etc it's totally different business.

First off, I'm not talking about modern railroads. Those have to withstand tremendous weights that early railroads didn't have to take. Secondly, if you are using small steam engines or multiple cars as engines, you're not going to be hauling a lot of stuff, which is fine for the average size of a Fury Road unit.

The big problem with rails is getting a level ground. While the asphalt has disintegrated, the basic leveling for a modern road still exists so primarily you are just laying down the rail lines and not having to move a lot of earth down. Certainly you'll want some sort of steamroller to make sure things are packed down, but that's not that hard of a machine to build.

And who said steel would be hard to get? The amount of steel from the Two Towers after 9-11 was equivalent to 2 years of the entire steel output of the entire world. There is plenty of it around in ruins, in buildings, not to mention all the trashed vehicles. Plus, while the roads are thrashed, it is estimated that it would take 150-200 years before concrete bridges would begin to fail so you'd be able to use existing structures for the 100 span of the game without much problem.

Another thing to remember is that while this mod is nominally based in Australia so I can't be 100% but here in the US there are miles and miles of unused tracks. You go up into mining country and you can find mines that have rails going up to them and if you break past the boarded entrance, you'll find old carts and the like that where to expensive at the time to cart away. All these could be reused.

I mean in a choice of having to not only having to make/use macadam cement, you'd also need to create the asphalt from oil by-products. Then you need to heat it, spread it and the like. So much simpler to just tear up existing rails or lay down track of your own making. Plus, in WW I, they had a 'tactical' track that was designed to be put down quickly so you could quickly get supplies to the front lines. These tracks could be laid down and extended very quickly. Sure you couldn't put a lot of weight on it, but then again, in the scale of Fury Road, the heaviest thing initially you'd be hauling would vehicles on flat beds, which in railroad terms not that heavy.

Plus, from a historical perspective, after a year in Afghanistan I can tell you from direct experience that a road that hasn't been fixed in 20 years is not a road in the sense of the modern term: it is merely less onerous terrain to drive over. The develop massive sink-holes and the like and often times it doesn't seem like there is much difference between the road and the off-road, and we where in military vehicles with advanced suspension and we'd still get banged up and break axles and the like. If the US had it's way, we'd be building more rail lines in Afghanistan but unfortunately rail lines are to easy for insurgents to blow up.

In Fury Road today, the unit you build to go attack cities is a catapult. This is a vanilla unit which has a wood/stone look, so it is not very post-apocalyptic.

If you had to attack a city with walls, and you want to make openings in the walls so your foot troops and trucks can get in, how would you do it? I bet the first answer will be something steam powered :-)

If we can get a good concept, I am sure one of the unit artists (:rockon: refar) can design it.

If you had to attack a city with walls, and you want to make openings in the walls so your foot troops and trucks can get in, how would you do it? I bet the first answer will be something steam powered :-)

The bigger question is not how to get past the walls, but what are the walls made of? Chances are, most cities walls are going to be a big abatis of all sorts of crap laid in a ring around the city. Much of it could be rubble from destroyed buildings and much of it would probably be bits of destroyed heavy things like rail cars, CONEX'es and other big pieces of metal. I'm sure these crude structures would also have some sort of trench as well as wire obstacles. With all the destroyed buildings around, steel girders could be used to make dragon's teeth of the sort you see at the beginning of the movie "Saving Private Ryan".

So, instead of blocks of stone that have been set in over time, refined and had engineers plan it out, you are instead going to have pretty much just a intense debris field build up to a certain height. Now as someone who got to learn a lot about IED's, I can tell you that often times the blast affect of a weapon isn't the killer, but that it creates secondary shrapnel affects.

Crude walls of this type would be very good at keeping ground troops, as was seen in "The Road Warrior" but they would be vulnerable to explosives. So, as I've said before, you take a junker vehicle, load it with lots of gunpowder or what ever explosive you have. Clear a lane for the vehicle and drive it into the wall. The detonation will not only weaken and/or destroy the wall, but the blast will create shrapnel from the wall it kill a lot of people.

The steam engine that might be used would be in conjunction with the bomb car. You'd take a big vehicle like a dump truck or some form of Dozer and "hillbilly armor" it up and then use it to ram the point where the bomb car detonated. Actually, this is where having access to old military tanks would come in handy since they don't need a gun to help push through the wreckage if they have the proper attachment. An old M-60 tank or better yet a M88 tank recovery vehicle would be the best. However, there are plenty of big construction vehicles that would work here. Actually, on YouTube there is a 'tank' that was made from a small steam locomotive where the wheels where replaced with tracks. If you don't have railroads, using locomotives like this would be a good idea.

So the big thing would be clear the lane of wire, obstacles and bridge any trench or moat. Then drive in the bomb car to be detonated remotely or by suicide bomber. After that weakens or mostly destroys that section, send in the dozer-mobile to clear the breach of debris so the ground troops could get in.

Obviously bomb cars would be great, but would be like cruise missiles in that you only get one shot out of them So perhaps after explosives become available you could build bomb cars to go with the "Steam ram" which is basically all the Dozer Truck would be.

I would think that after a while, when a Civ could afford the effort, real walls could be make, but in my opinion, it is not worth the labor in a post-apocalyptic world compared to the amount of safety you'd get in return. Walls just are not effective against explosive shells which is not that hard to make, being a late 17th century invention. If you have the technology to quarry and move stone enough to build a classic castle, you probably have enough of a base to build explosive shells which render those walls mostly useless.

You'd be better off building mines which are easy to make, easy to use, easy to replace and can be made to be command detonated. Not sure how you could simulate them unless there was a way to have all units attack a certain square take a certain amount of damage on their way in or make the 'mines' a unit like a plane that automatically attacks units attacking. Once the mine unit dies, that part of the minefield is cleared. Multiple mines could show a deeper field though I'd think you'd need to make a cap on how many a city could have.

The steam engine that might be used would be in conjunction with the bomb car. You'd take a big vehicle like a dump truck or some form of Dozer and "hillbilly armor" it up and then use it to ram the point where the bomb car detonated.

Just wanted to point out that while a Mega-Dozer would probably work against the sort of barricade I describe, the problem is that like anything with heavy equipment, you'd probably need multiple passes. I mean if you had access to those claws on boom machines that destroy buildings, that would work as well but it wouldn't work quickly. So while a barricade isn't as strong as castle walls, they delay the attacker and gives the defender that much more time to attack the siege vehicle. I mean I don't want to be in the cab of such vehicle if the defenders are hitting me with flame throwers like they did in "The Road Warrior."

That's why the bomb car is the important first point of attack. Not only does the bomb attack the wall, but fragments from the wall and probably from the vehicle itself (added to make it more dangerous) would help clear the area around the breach of defenders to that not only would it give the Mega-Dozer time to make a few attacks against the wall, it would give the attackers ground troops enough time to get in close for cover. I mean look what happened at the Battle of Helms Deep in The Two Towers?

So the idea is a car bomb, basically. I would like to find a name which doesn't get anti-terrorism people mad at me. It would be a one time unit, requiring machinery and combustion, which does significant damage to walls.

For graphics, it could be a variant ute with a truck bed full of explosives. Hopefully, it could look different enough from the current ute that people wouldn't get them confused. In version 9, the variant utes all serve basically the same role. If somebody mistakes a starting ute for one with antitank, it doesn't make that much difference. But if somebody overlooks some car bombs in a stack with other attackers, that is more of a problem.

I have thought about minefields before, but I have to investigate how to make objects selectively visible: if I have the technology to make minefields, I can see my own minefields but not somebody else's. Minefields and car bombs go together somehow.

So the idea is a car bomb, basically. I would like to find a name which doesn't get anti-terrorism people mad at me. It would be a one time unit, requiring machinery and combustion, which does significant damage to walls.

Well Bomb Car seems to work or maybe Land Spar-Torpedo which is a apt description but a stupid name. :crazyeye: That being said, in some ways that is exactly what you'd want: the explosives to in front of the vehicles so as it comes in contact with the wall, the vehicle itself acts to channel the blast into the wall, similar to how you put sandbags over dynamite when making road craters. (you spend 4 years in Engineer units and you learn these sorts things! :) )

For graphics, it could be a variant ute with a truck bed full of explosives.

Actually you'd want a van if you can get it because one of the whole point of a VBIED (Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Device) is to haul lots of explosives as well as have more of the vehicle become part of the secondary shrapnel effect. In a Van, you could load lots of ball bearing type pieces of metal on top of the explosives to increase the shrapnel effect. Of course you'd want to back the vehicle into the wall so that the engine and cab aren't in the way otherwise you'd channel the explosion up and backward which isn't what you want. Plus it would make it easier for the driver to get out...if that is possible.

Hopefully, it could look different enough from the current ute that people wouldn't get them confused. In version 9, the variant utes all serve basically the same role. If somebody mistakes a starting ute for one with antitank, it doesn't make that much difference. But if somebody overlooks some car bombs in a stack with other attackers, that is more of a problem.

Of course the whole point of a bomb car would be to be sort of nondescript so it wouldn't be easily seen till the last minute. The Mega-Dozer, on the other hand, would be really hard to miss!

I have thought about minefields before, but I have to investigate how to make objects selectively visible: if I have the technology to make minefields, I can see my own minefields but not somebody else's. Minefields and car bombs go together somehow.

Well the thing about minefields is that while you might have some command detonated mines, the problems is that the vast majority are going to be simple pressure plate mines. So while attacks are rare, people have to go on with live every day so you'd have to CLEARLY mark your minefields so you own people wouldn't go there. Remember, in the case of defense, the fact that your enemy knows you have mines works as a deterrent in that the enemy may decide your too hard of a target to crack. Even if the know where your mines are, you either force them to clear them and you ALWAYS cover your mines with direct and indirect fire, or you channel them to the areas where people travel on a day to day basis between mine fields and again making your enemy have to attack in a column which is the worst way to attack into a defensible works since the defender can concentrate their firepower on a small frontage and the attacker cannot reply in kind.

Plus, while anti-mine technology isn't hard, it takes time, and time tends to work for the Defender and not the attacker...well it use to since disease would screw up the attackers and I don't think there is an easy way to show this.

Realism consideration aside - who would actually use the Car Bomb unit in the game ? Compare base game cruise missile - it can reduce defenses, it can do collateral - it can even kill - it's basicly what you will get with the car bomb.

The cruise missiles are dirt cheap for the era they come into play, they can be built at a 1 per turn in a mediocre city (often with overflow)... So what ? Do they get used a lot ?

Add in fury roads economic (and productivity) constrains, and these suicide units become even less attractive (which put's us back on the realism track btw.)

So the idea is a car bomb, basically. I would like to find a name which doesn't get anti-terrorism people mad at me.

Boom Buggy.

Realism consideration aside - who would actually use the Car Bomb unit in the game ? Compare base game cruise missile - it can reduce defenses, it can do collateral - it can even kill - it's basicly what you will get with the car bomb.

The cruise missiles are dirt cheap for the era they come into play, they can be built at a 1 per turn in a mediocre city (often with overflow)... So what ? Do they get used a lot ?

Add in fury roads economic (and productivity) constrains, and these suicide units become even less attractive (which put's us back on the realism track btw.)

Well I would think they'd wouldn't be cheap, but on the other hand they wouldn't always have to be mobile; you could tow it behind another vehicle and push it into position so they might not be too expensive when you consider they are one shot weapons.

Plus as I said, you drive up, back in, the driver runs out, maybe picked up by a guy on a dirt bike and then they detonate it by remote or maybe there is a small fuse lit before the driver leaves. Doesn't have to be a suicide bomber.

Again - realism discussion aside

Would you actually build and use the unit in the game ?
How many hammers would you be willing to spend on it ?

Again - realism discussion aside

Would you actually build and use the unit in the game ?
How many hammers would you be willing to spend on it ?

Certainly, as both you and I mentioned, they are merely a land version of cruise missiles.

Realism or not, I could see them being used against troops in the field a lot more than catapults. You drive up, abandon the vehicle and the detonate it remotely. Or if there was a way that they could be used remotely, to say if a stack with one of these bomb cars is attacked, you'd get a pop-up asking if you want to use your car defensively. If so, you lose the unit, but you get a BIG defensive hit on the attackers.

Plus, here's a bit of post-apocalyptic realism for you. You and your family are refugees and you finally get to a town. They look you up and say, "Well things are tight and you'll be expected to work. However, it also takes money to get you folks started. Here's the deal, one of you needs to volunteer for a certain duty that's pretty much certain death. It's that or we turn you away." So you'd have a pool of people 'willing' to be a bomber if only to keep their family safe. Al Qaeda and the Taliban do this all the time. They find young adults or teens whose families are in a bad way and say, "You go blow yourself up, not only will you be a martyr, but will take care of your family." And they do, so for many people it's not a bad 'deal'.

Plus, realism aside, catapults were almost never used in direct, land combat. they were siege weapons and navy weapons. Having them used against land units, many on horses or trucks is just down right ludicrous.

Certainly, as both you and I mentioned, they are merely a land version of cruise missiles.Which is concidered largely useless by many people. Of course there are different oppinions, as usual, i built a few myself on occasion, when i really did not know where to put the :hammers:, but i know no one who uses them a lot.Plus, realism aside, catapults were almost never used in direct, land combat. they were siege weapons and navy weapons. Having them used against land units, many on horses or trucks is just down right ludicrous.Here i have to agree. I just don't think single use units can be a solution.

These would tend to be fear weapons more than anything IMO. To use them I would suggest they act in a way that would lower the safety level some. They would be cheep ways of hindering a safety victory. Hit a city with high safety during war and drop it say 1% per car. That way the more safety you have the bigger the hit without ever loosing all safety. And as an additional effect it would/could also force all units to become un trenched loosing some type defense bonuses.

Plus doing it this way adds some strategic elements not currently in the game. Everything doesn't have to be about how much damage it can do...

Hmmm... I don't feel a brocken car pushed by a couple of homeless dudes, because they can't afford a engine, like suggested here, causing fear in me... Not even if it is loaded by explosives...

[Edit]
The suggestion of a unit or mission taking safety from a enemy city sounds interesting tho. Perhaps a spy mission ?
Shouldnt be too cheap however.

On the military side there is already a strategy to fight Safety victory - just burn the city to the ground - you would end up doing that anyway, after you hit it with a few bomb cars...

HAHA funny mental picture there Refar :) . I recon safety would already be compromised in that case... Osama has been doing it wrong the whole time...

Hey, popular topic. I guess some people feel post-apocalyptic catapults are not the right thing for breaching city defenses, some people feel post-apocalyptic car bombs are not the right thing.

How about something like "sappers"? In the middle ages this was a specific technique of tunneling under enemy walls to collapse them. But in modern usage it might apply to anybody trained in explosives.

So, if I can get minefields to work, maybe the sapper is a general demolitions unit, who can lay mines, remove mines, or damage enemy walls. What do you think?

How about something like "sappers"? In the middle ages this was a specific technique of tunneling under enemy walls to collapse them. But in modern usage it might apply to anybody trained in explosives.

So, if I can get minefields to work, maybe the sapper is a general demolitions unit, who can lay mines, remove mines, or damage enemy walls. What do you think?

Speaking for someone who spent quite a long time with Engineer units (I was a "Ironhorse Sapper for 2 years) the whole point of 'sapping' was to get create a breach. In the old days this was done by tunneling under a wall (not something really applicable in Fury Road) or by using different methods to cause a explosion or failure of the wall.

As I've said, the best method is with explosive put in such a way as to channel the explosion in one direction. The best method would be to take a vehicle like a van and have the explosives put in near the back of the door. Then you'd back things like sandbags to shunt that explosion toward the back doors. You could put lots of shards of metal in and on the vehicle to create shrapnel affects due to the explosion. It would be better to drive the vehicle up and position it, but you could just push it if you had to.

Otherwise, all a sapper unit would be is a group of trained engineers who would move explosives up to the barricade in such a way as to do the same effect as above. Yet doing that on foot is slow and allows the defenders plenty of time to A) attack you, B) potentially detonate the explosives before they are set with enough blast to be a danger or C) realize they can't stop the blast so they move their troops back so they can be ready to sally into the breach after the blast.

So again, a VBIED would the most effective way to get the amount of explosive necessary to weaken or destroy a barricade into position in one quick stroke. However, as mentioned, these are one shot weapons designed to weaken walls. If you truly want a unit that would attack walls, you'd want a Big steam Mega-Dozer. The 'problem' with such a unit is that it would only be useful against cities. I'm not sure if there is a way to code for that. I mean besides going through barricades, it's not going to be useful in any sort of combat where people are going to be able to get out of the way of it.

couldnt you just make the mega-dozer an average strength unit with a large bonus against cities

Sappers (special forces units i.g.) sound interesting - if these can be amde work and be indeed "special"

couldnt you just make the mega-dozer an average strength unit with a large bonus against cities

On second thought about a vehicle like this, I'm sure they could be used two ways as infantry support: one just early tanks did, they could clear a path through other infantry. Besides that, I'm sure they could tow a large built up trailer that could be built up like a modern day howdah.

If you remember the movie "Tremors" with Kevin Bacon, you could see this in action as they had a big dozer (which could be further up-armored) pulling along what looked like a reinforced trailer built to carry stuff like gravel or coal. I'm sure you could rig a roof, "battlements" on the side and the like and then you'd have some form of combat power.

So yes, I could see this type of vehicle having a average combat power, but with a small plus versus infantry and a very large plus versus cities along with the ability to 'bombard' the walls.

Actually in a way, this "Mega-Dozer" is like a war elephant which brings to mind a terrible geek pun. In the Lord of the Rings, the mûmakil elephants are referred to by Sam as "Oliphants" so I guess in Fury Road a mega-dozer would be a Oilaphant! Ha Ha! I kill myself! :lol:

Har har, oilaphant. The idea of a mega-dozer is a good one. We can set the combat strength to anything, independently of the city wall damage percentage. Actually we "could" use the current catapult stats, which is strength 8, move 1, -16% damage to walls. But now we have a concept for the unit art.

Alternatively, we could do a "two unit solution". Sappers, available at machinery, which are like infantry but can also bombard for say -8%. This assumes they are carrying explosives but either throw, or find junk on site, to carry the explosives against the wall. Then the dozer would be a gas powered unit with move 2, maybe similar stats. The sapper allows you to do some attack against cities without gas units.

There are a ton of variant grenadier unit arts around, I could probably find one appropriate. Maybe there is a combat engineer unit art for one of the WWII mods. But, I seem to recall the flamethrower unit started out life as a WWII combat engineer, so that isn't it.

The dozer would definitely call for unique art. I can certainly make a dozer button myself.

Alternatively, we could do a "two unit solution". Sappers, available at machinery, which are like infantry but can also bombard for say -8%. This assumes they are carrying explosives but either throw, or find junk on site, to carry the explosives against the wall. Then the dozer would be a gas powered unit with move 2, maybe similar stats. The sapper allows you to do some attack against cities without gas units.

Another idea, if for some reason you didn't want another unit, would be to have a sapper promotion. As one who was in engineer units for 4 years, learning how to place demo isn't all that hard. In fact, the Army has been toying with the idea of getting rid of the 12B MOS and just giving certain 11B infantry guys some extra training so that every platoon would have some guys with 12B training.

I don't know what the status is of what you get in the way of 'stuff' when killing a unit, but killing a sapper unit would yield lots of neat stuff. One thing about sappers, though, is historically they also could build defensive works. Perhaps in ruins or in forests, they could spend a turn and thus create a immobile abatis unit that would give a decent defensive bonus. If possible you could also have them able to create an abatis in the open, but would have to return to a city to before they could do it again to simulate restocking their supplies.

tremors, haha it been too long since ive seen that; but it does give me some ideas
would it be possible to make a dozer unit thats sort of modular (like the ship's crew promotions in FFH, they can be changed while in port), that changes a trailor the dozer is carrying, a transport trailor so it protects the units inside from attacks and from "graboids" (see idea 2), or have an artillary trailor with a bonus against cities, or a flamethrower one that is good against animals and melee, ect...
also i think a tremor unit would be awsome, realy high strength and movement, invisible to ground units, but can only move in desert areas and cant attack heavy units like tanks or dozers.

I was thinking the other day about the concept of the 1-ring, minor city-states and why they might stay that way and it got me thinking about insular communities and why they are like that.

Has there been any discussion on disease in Fury Road? I would think that obviously exploring the world, search for Goody Huts and the like is important, but it should also carry some risks beyond that of getting killed by barbarians or eaten by critters. There are a lot of diseases that we can deal with today but traditionally where big killers back in the day.

From a game point of view, I don't like plagues in the game unless they move from city to city, irregardless of the owning Civ: I mean nothing kills a game more than your cities are hit by a plague and your neighbors don't. Plus, I don't think that you should totally lose your combat units: the people may die but the equipment (so vital and hard to come by in Fury Road) would remain.

I'm thinking the best mechanic would be the "diseased" promotion from FfH in that once infected, a unit will either constantly take a bit of damage each turn or takes a lot longer to heal as per the normal diseased promotion. If possible, I'd think that you'd have a chance to unleash the plague into a city if you enter one. Perhaps that plague would stay local and maybe it might spread.

Units could become diseased due to entering goody huts or through an event. It's too bad there isn't a way to have it where units in foreign territory during war to have a small chance of becoming diseased to show they're living off the land or coming into contact with lots of dead bodies and the like.

This is probably way to much realism for many, but it would have the effect of making it hard for players in building lots of cities, which is sort of against the point of the mod as well as simulating how hard it is to have long campaigns in enemy territory w/o a clear supply line. (Of course if you had the medic unit that many mods have, you could help cure diseased units in the field) Plus, if possible to code, for every turn a city is under attack, they might have a chance on getting the plague due to all the people from the surrounding areas crammed in with all the defending troops; never a good thing, sanitation wise.

I think if on top of the economic pressure, low food map (And the sacary animals), we also put in the disease, further hampering growth, the gameplay will become extremely not fun.

The idea of disease as such is interesting tho.

I think if on top of the economic pressure, low food map (And the sacary animals), we also put in the disease, further hampering growth, the gameplay will become extremely not fun.

Well for those who have read, "Guns, Germs & Steel", disease doesn't really start to be a problem until you start having lots of people. Small populations die out too quickly from nasty diseases before they can spread.

However, regardless of how bad things are, the survivors do still know things like germ theory and the importance of sanitation so I would think having diseases come in and perhaps only take out one population unit and just give the units in the city a 'diseased' promotion would work. That way, it would definitely make it worth your while to build things like clinics or the medic unit to combat this.

Some mods have a civic that deals with health care like Rise of Mankind and FfH. Perhaps that might be an avenue to look into, especially if the "Culture Counter" idea is used since if you have the civic that is sort of "Let them Eat Cake!" that wouldn't bode well for your culture and/or safety.

Plus, since there is a code for unhappiness due to wanting certain civics (we want Republic!) it would make sense that if your Civ is doing better, the masses might get a bit volatile if you as the leader seem more interested in cranking out military units instead of building them hospitals. I can tell you from first hand experience in Afghanistan that building clinics and providing good health care is probably one of the best ways to spread culture and safety. We would do humanitarian missions to provide dental, medical and OB/GYN care for expectant women and it would cause almost a 180 degree shift in attitudes toward us. I remember the Governor of Paktya province (before he was blown up by a suicide bomber) responded to our pushing to have the Afghan National Army (ANA) take over more of these missions to show the people that their government can help them by saying, "Yes, that is good, but you really don't want to lose all the tremendous good will you garner by doing these missions yourself."

Disease also stems from living in close proximity with animals and your own filth (it also leads to the discovery of watermelons). I did read Guns Germs and Steel. Presumably, the health of the city reflects these concepts already...

As to the car bombs, I could give or take them. But I would like to se new art for the catapult. Perhaps the catapult could be of metal on the frame of a car or truck?

I would also like to see a catapult or trebuchet on a working flatbed truck.

I know artillery is there in the later game, but that should be either recovered pre-apocalypse materiel or rough new versions. It should be difficult to make artillery shells. So I figure people would make catapults out of existing scrap...

I also mentioned before about fire bombs and gas bombs as promotions for catapults.

Also, maybe a flamethrower promotion and graphics for the Ute (if there isn't one already).

As to the car bombs, I could give or take them. But I would like to se new art for the catapult. Perhaps the catapult could be of metal on the frame of a car or truck?

I would also like to see a catapult or trebuchet on a working flatbed truck.

Well the problem I see with catapult and/or trebuchets is what I've said before, other than siege engines, they are pretty much useless. The unit density is such that you don't have masses of tightly packed infantry that could potentially be threatened by such weapons. With low density populations, you'd want to maximize your combat power by using Cavalry (early mobile infantry) and vehicles since it is very difficult for armies without them to affect those with them.

So then you get back into attacking cities. As I've pointed out, the barricades of Fury Road are nowhere near the elegance or science of some Vauben fortress, but would be mostly stacked up rubble pushed there to clear the area. Attacking such with catapults isn't going to do a lot. Chucking rocks into the city itself will probably destroy the very stuff you're wanting to take.

So from a cost to effectiveness ratio, catapults and trebuchets are pretty much useless. Now big dart throwers like ballista would be more useful since they are more of a direct fire weapon that could be used to attack hard-points along the 'walls' but even then, it's only a siege weapon; you're just not going to be able to kill that many troops on the ground with it.

So, instead of wasting time, resources, and effort on a weapon that is practically useless, better to go about up-armoring things like tractors, dozers and other large vehicles. I mean Caterpillar built the first tanks for the US Army. As mentioned earlier, these tank-dozers would be better at attacking walls and could also haul "battle-trailers" like modern day elephant howdahs, sort of like how they up-armored the oil trailer in "The Road Warrior" On a stable platform like that, you could easily mount an air compressor to run those dart guns you see in that movie, which in my opinion is probably one of the best, low tech weapon you could build prior to large scale manufacturing of early model machine guns like the Maxim gun or the Vickers water-cooled gun.

Plus, even with the fall of technology, making canons isn't that hard in the sense that the technology isn't that hard. Hell, outside Vancouver barracks there are two canons made by the Fort Vancouver High School metal shop. I mean technology is hard to eradicate. All it takes is a few books kept by one survivalist, and you're going to have the know-how to build things like canons. The problem is getting the tools to make the tools to make the item in question. So early canons wouldn't be that hard to make as long as you have access to a foundry capable of making bells and that sort of technology has been around for hundreds of years. I would say that by the time any Civ is up to building enough gunpowder to field old-style canons, they would have plenty of people who knew the basics of how to make them since so many people would have had all the metallurgic experience due to all the scavaging and reworking of things.

The health of the city reflects these concepts already... This is a very good point actually, because that's exavtlu what :yuck: does...

However disease is still a inresting concept... Perhaps it is time to think about resurfacing the BTS random events system. I think it would fit well with the mod - There are lost of somewhat random elements in the mod, and this is fun. Adding more would add to the unique character of the mod.

But I would like to se new art for the catapult. Perhaps the catapult could be of metal on the frame of a car or truck?A better Catapult is on Davids art wishlist since the very beginning - the trouble is, i have not the slightest idea on how it would look like. (And asking myself "How would i build and use a catapult if wake up tomorrow in theis scenatio ?" made me seriously doubt if i would do it at all...)

Right now the "Assault Dozer" concept seems to be the best themed siege unit idea...

So how is a young Civ going to move around? The answer is an easy one, both historically & technologically: Railroads.

Rail requires a certain level of social order, though. It is very easy to stop/derail trains or tear up the tracks in order to rob them (or perhaps, collect tolls by force in return for safe passage). So I'd have to say they aren't really viable in a post-apocalyptic world. Yes, you could armour one and load it up with big guns and everything but it won't help much when you turn the corner and they've torn the tracks up. A certain level of security and order is required for trains to be useful for long-distance travel or movement of goods.

The bigger question is not how to get past the walls, but what are the walls made of? Chances are, most cities walls are going to be a big abatis of all sorts of crap laid in a ring around the city. Much of it could be rubble from destroyed buildings and much of it would probably be bits of destroyed heavy things like rail cars, CONEX'es and other big pieces of metal. I'm sure these crude structures would also have some sort of trench as well as wire obstacles. With all the destroyed buildings around, steel girders could be used to make dragon's teeth of the sort you see at the beginning of the movie "Saving Private Ryan".

So, instead of blocks of stone that have been set in over time, refined and had engineers plan it out, you are instead going to have pretty much just a intense debris field build up to a certain height. Now as someone who got to learn a lot about IED's, I can tell you that often times the blast affect of a weapon isn't the killer, but that it creates secondary shrapnel affects.

Crude walls of this type would be very good at keeping ground troops, as was seen in "The Road Warrior" but they would be vulnerable to explosives. So, as I've said before, you take a junker vehicle, load it with lots of gunpowder or what ever explosive you have. Clear a lane for the vehicle and drive it into the wall. The detonation will not only weaken and/or destroy the wall, but the blast will create shrapnel from the wall it kill a lot of people.

I don't really see them using defences quite like that. It would be closer to a Stalingrad sort of situation - miles of bombed out city ruins in which to conduct urban guerrilla warfare. Vehicles of any sort (even car bombs) would be maladapted, as the terrain would be extremely difficult and hazardous, they would be vulnerable to IEDs, have difficulty locating targets, and relentlessly ambushed.

A better Catapult is on Davids art wishlist since the very beginning - the trouble is, i have not the slightest idea on how it would look like. [...] Right now the "Assault Dozer" concept seems to be the best themed siege unit idea...

I think the sapper and bulldozer combination sounds promising. Want to put a big plow on the truck part of the tanker unit?

Rail requires a certain level of social order, though. It is very easy to stop/derail trains or tear up the tracks in order to rob them (or perhaps, collect tolls by force in return for safe passage). So I'd have to say they aren't really viable in a post-apocalyptic world. Yes, you could armour one and load it up with big guns and everything but it won't help much when you turn the corner and they've torn the tracks up. A certain level of security and order is required for trains to be useful for long-distance travel or movement of goods.

For the most part, rail links would be used internally where you could protect them. The utility of railroads is directly in proportion of protecting them, which is why in Afghanistan we wish we could build them, but can't protect them.

However, if you are unable to defend rail lines linking your main cities, you have other problems. Besides, another issue is that without gas, a lot of bulk commodities cannot be moved around inside your borders. If you have a Garage built in one city, how do you move all those vehicles that have been marked for use after being reworked? Pretty simple if it just means throwing them on a flatbed trailer and sending them on their way.

Certainly railroads are vulnerable to raiders, but then everything in Civ is vulnerable to raiders. However, unlike cottages or farms, when you destroy a piece of track, the entire rail network isn't invalidated. You can still move troops right up to the break. Once a farm is destroyed, it's gone till rebuilt.

Personally, I believe that many of the units in Fury Road shouldn't be able to travel unless there is a least the type of road that workers can build. Most of these roads would probably be going along old roads and clearing them of the trees and debris that have accumulated over time. As mentioned previously, scientist point out that it only takes 20 years for your typical road to fail and 40 years to be just a flat right-of way. Without such clearing, you'd be trying to move through either dense underbrush or heavy forest, both of which I've had to try to travel through in my Army time and it is not easy, even with modern tracked vehicles.

Want to put a big plow on the truck part of the tanker unit?Plow ? Like in "agricultural tool" ? I guess i am missing another meaning of the word...

Plow ? Like in "agricultural tool" ? I guess i am missing another meaning of the word...

Something like this: http://www.etanks.ws/images/DSC_8860.jpg

Yeah, like that. If you google "bulldozer" you'll see a bunch of examples. I think the best word for the big thing on the front is "plow", but wikipedia suggests "blade" is the more appropriate word.

I think i would rather like a new unit than redone truck - i had the idea of a war-traktor for a while now, but did not come to do it yet (Partly because of lackof good reference...)

Now when you show it to me, i think i even heard people calling it plow before...
But on your post i somehow imagined the Truck pulling a plow instead of the Tanker trailer... So i was a bit irritated. :confused:

That is why they say a picture is worth a thousand words, I guess.

I will upload the caravans in a few minutes... Then i am going to look if i find some good "Improvized Armored Bulldozer" reference...

Would armour really be around? Who is going to have the gas to run those machines?

Sure, you could have some sort of steam-powered something or other, but a steam engine isn't going to be able to move anything with armour plating thick enough to resist RPGs and IEDs.

I think i would rather like a new unit than redone truck - i had the idea of a war-traktor for a while now, but did not come to do it yet (Partly because of lackof good reference...)

Now when you show it to me, i think i even heard people calling it plow before...
But on your post i somehow imagined the Truck pulling a plow instead of the Tanker trailer... So i was a bit irritated. :confused:

I take it that English is not your first language? If not, then I can really see your problem. Tractor can mean the sort of vehicle that is used to pull farming plows. Tractor can also mean any sort of heavy duty truck that pulls a trailer as in the 18 Wheeler type. In this case the 'tractor' is the truck.

As for plows, that is often used for what a the bulldozer has to push earth. It is often called a "Bulldozer blade". In the picture I posted above, what you're seeing is called a "Mine Plow" and is used to detonate mines in front of the vehicle and is also used to clear wire obstacles and the like.

Here are some good things to look at:
The "Killdozer" where a guy up-armored a heavy bulldozer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na1_welzfxo

If you want to see a good example of what you can do with an old tank, try this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M728_Combat_Engineer_Vehicle - Here you can see the dozer blade that most people think of when they are saying a "plow"

Another picture of sort of the opposite of a plow, but useful tool would be this scoop: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wheel-loader02.jpg

And last, but not least, this is a heavy dozer that has been up-armored. This is a production version the military uses that would pretty much be what people would be trying to make when creating a "Mega-Dozer"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:IDF-D9L003.jpg - The attachment on the back is for making trenches. It doesn't dig the trench by itself, but it breaks up the hard ground so other vehicles that have scoops can have an easier time to dig up the dirt. A vehicle like this might not be fast, but it can also haul a lot of weight. Imagine a vehicle like this pulling the trailer in this picture: http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/len_rogers/2005/oct07/man-bulk.jpg - You could easily see cutting holes in the sides and making a movable fort out of it.

Would armour really be around? Who is going to have the gas to run those machines?

Sure, you could have some sort of steam-powered something or other, but a steam engine isn't going to be able to move anything with armour plating thick enough to resist RPGs and IEDs.

Well as I've mentioned in previous posts, RPG's are a bit thin on the ground, although it might be possible to create a low-tech bazooka with an alcohol-fueled rocket, but they probably wouldn't be safe enough to use.

As for IED threat, from a game perspectives, they'd fall under bombcars in that they'd have to be like Cruise Missiles: one shot weapons.

Plus the troops in Iraq showed that armor is as simple as welding plates onto your vehicle. It's not the best, but versus small arms, it does the job.

As for steam engines, remember, steam has been used to push, pull, drive many a very large machine. remember that locomotives were steam driven and that while a big vehicle is heavy, it also allows for a larger steam engine. I've seen YouTube videos where someone took a small steam locomotive and swapped the rail wheels for drive train wheels and made up tank treads and that steam tank could move pretty fast.

Would armour really be around? Who is going to have the gas to run those machines?

Welcome to the sub-forum. Have you played through the mod yet? There is a "fuel tanker" unit which carries gas. If we wind up with a superheavy unit, then it will be gas-powered just like the jeep and humvee units in the game already. That would be more of a mid game unit to bulldoze debris out of the way of a city assault. The (earlier) game unit to assault cities would be a sapper, built on the grenadier model. It is a guy who either throws explosives at the wall, or sneaks up and sticks them onto the wall.

As for steam engines, remember, steam has been used to push, pull, drive many a very large machine. remember that locomotives were steam driven and that while a big vehicle is heavy, it also allows for a larger steam engine. I've seen YouTube videos where someone took a small steam locomotive and swapped the rail wheels for drive train wheels and made up tank treads and that steam tank could move pretty fast.

Is there any information on how much wood is required to burn to move any significant distance in a day? For jeeps, we have gas tankers; for steam powered units, wouldn't we have to have wood trailers they carry along? Maybe they could "refuel" in forests, but even though it runs on steam it still needs fuel.

Is there any information on how much wood is required to burn to move any significant distance in a day? For jeeps, we have gas tankers; for steam powered units, wouldn't we have to have wood trailers they carry along? Maybe they could "refuel" in forests, but even though it runs on steam it still needs fuel.

Coal is more portable. It would be really difficult to run large steam engines such as locomotives on wood. Coal is light enough that the engine can usually haul a decent supply of it, the bigger problem is water.

Is there any information on how much wood is required to burn to move any significant distance in a day? For jeeps, we have gas tankers; for steam powered units, wouldn't we have to have wood trailers they carry along? Maybe they could "refuel" in forests, but even though it runs on steam it still needs fuel.

Well in my delving into steampunk madness, I found that these days, most steam engines (and there are a lot more than you think) use propane. In fact a lot of vehicles use something called "autogas". However, in a classic steam engine, the propane would heat the water in lieu of wood.

I've tried to do some wiki searches and the like on how hard it is to make propane and all I've come up with is that it is a by-product of refining natural gas and/or petroleum.

Plus, remember that coal is also a good (if heavy in large amounts) fuel for steam engines.

Coal in not easily accessible however - there are only few areas left in the world where you can access coal without heavy machines.
I think Arkhams note on gas powered steam engines, is the most likely variant.

But i still dont like the Steam Engine idea as a whole.

If talking gas powered - some modern MBT and Gunships are powered by gas turbines. And a normal combustion engine can run on gas with minimal adjustments. So what's the point bothering with steam engines - which probably no one knows how to build properly anyway.

I can add coal as a resource, but it's still the same issue: if you have to mine coal and carry it along, plus carry or find water (not so easy in the desert) then steam power may not be such an obvious choice. Wouldn't I have to model coal/water haulers for steam powered units?

But i still dont like the Steam Engine idea as a whole.

If talking gas powered - some modern MBT and Gunships are powered by gas turbines. And a normal combustion engine can run on gas with minimal adjustments. So what's the point bothering with steam engines - which probably no one knows how to build properly anyway.

Gas turbines they may be, but they don't run on natural gas, but on a variant of JP-5, the same sort of fuel used in jets. It's a much more refined, powerful, volatile and expensive form of regular gas. It's also why they have so much heat. They tried to replace the old M88 tank recovery vehicle with one built on the M1 Abrams chassis but they couldn't get it to work because the heat of the engine would end up melting what it was towing. :p

As for knowing how to build, steam engines are still used today in many industries, are easy to build, considering they are a 19th century technology and don't require gas if you don't have it. Sure coal is hard to come by, but wood can be used. Plus, if you have natural gas deposit, but no oil, you can make propane, which as I've said is the main way modern steam engines are powered.

Plus, steam doesn't have to be used in vehicles: steam technology is what drove the Industrial Revolution. Plus, remember that nuclear power is just one big steam plant where the heat from the nuclear decay is used to heat water to push turbines to create electricity. In a world without electricity, unless you have access to streams and rivers with a good current to run water wheels, steam is about your only other option for non human/animal powered machines.

Stationary steam engines are something i can live with, tho i am not sure how much impact they would have on gameplay.

The Steam Turbines used in nuclear power plants are a whole different kind of beast, they need huge pressure (and temerature). I dont think building thse from scrap metal our poor survivors can scavenge is such a good idea.

Stationary steam engines are something i can live with, tho i am not sure how much impact they would have on gameplay.

The Steam Turbines used in nuclear power plants are a whole different kind of beast, they need huge pressure (and temerature). I dont think building thse from scrap metal our poor survivors can scavenge is such a good idea.

In never implied that they would; I'm just saying that steam technology isn't something that suddenly got junked like the 8-Track tape after oil went into general use.

And while it might not have a lot of general use in the terms of units, steam for industry makes it possible for lots of projects that probably couldn't be done. Steam driven locomotives and steam driven riverboats and steamships were the first major improvement over canals to move people and material around. Steam pistons can be used to pound, cut, hammer and do a lot of power intensive works. Many of the tech trees I've see sort of leave out this step in industry.

Again, I'm not advocating going nuts with steam units, I've just advocated that the technology exist today and existed for a long time when steam was it since oil hadn't been "invented" in a modern sense. So just because a Civ doesn't have access to lots of oil, there are other alternatives.

Plus, realism or not, you wouldn't just jump from guys on horses w/crossbows right into vehicles like we have now; there is nothing stopping people from creating intermediary steam vehicles, especially since so many oil vehicles would just be laying around available for conversion.

This is a very good point actually, because that's exavtlu what :yuck: does...

However disease is still a inresting concept... Perhaps it is time to think about resurfacing the BTS random events system. I think it would fit well with the mod - There are lost of somewhat random elements in the mod, and this is fun. Adding more would add to the unique character of the mod.

A better Catapult is on Davids art wishlist since the very beginning - the trouble is, i have not the slightest idea on how it would look like. (And asking myself "How would i build and use a catapult if wake up tomorrow in theis scenatio ?" made me seriously doubt if i would do it at all...)

Right now the "Assault Dozer" concept seems to be the best themed siege unit idea...

I like the assault dozer idea, but see it as a later game concept. Without gasoline or vehicles, how would you destroy city defenses? They don't have to throw rocks, they could throw metal balls or fire or gas.

It just seems logical that catapults would be built to attack heavily defended strongpoints in the absecence of artillery or vehicles.

It just seems logical that catapults would be built to attack heavily defended strongpoints in the absence of artillery or vehicles.

If you go back a bit in this thread, you can see my points in messages 31 and 42 why catapults would not be very effective against the sort of barricades that would be, in essence, just piles of destroyed buildings/vehicles pushed into a defensive ring around the city center. This sort of rubble abatis would not stand up against explosives, but would do pretty well against any non-engine powered ram or explosives.

Plus, as I mentioned not to long ago, another problem is that with catapults, you can't always expect to hit your target; you don't want to overshoot into the city since you might end up destroying some very valuable stuff your trying to steal in the first place.

Plus, since for much of the early game (say the first 20-40 years) you're really not going to have access to many tracked vehicles with the power to plow through such a wall so for the most part, the barricade is probably mostly the crude abatis with a trench/ditch outer ring along with wire obstacles. This is enough to help deter infantry and trucks (concertina wire does wonders on wheeled vehicles as I can attest by personal observation) but in the face of something like a heavy duty Caterpillar dozer, would probably fail pretty quickly.

Hence my whole point of steam engines. They may not be as effective as gas/oil vehicles, but if you make some early-ish in the game, you could use the to great effect when attacking cities.

Perhaps there could be a "National" unit that is built like a FfH hero unit where you get your steam "Killdozer" available somewhat early. It's tough, slow and really only works against cities. Is it worth the time and resources to build it instead of 2-3 buildings or lots of cheaper units? Depending on your Vision and your Civ, it may be if you are a conquering type.

It just seems logical that catapults would be built to attack heavily defended strongpoints in the absecence of artillery or vehicles.I am not sure how logical it actually is.
A catapult is easily outranged by most modern rifles, slow moving (if at all) and slow rate of fire. Deploying, loading and using such a weapon on a hevily defended stronghold, where defenders have access to even some firearms, is more or less suicide - and firearms come up quite quick in the game.
So maybe the answer here is...Without gasoline or vehicles, how would you destroy city defenses?Perhaps you wouldnt.

I can add coal as a resource, but it's still the same issue: if you have to mine coal and carry it along, plus carry or find water (not so easy in the desert) then steam power may not be such an obvious choice. Wouldn't I have to model coal/water haulers for steam powered units?

Well I think coal and sulfur can should be added, especially since sulfur is really important in any large scale gunpowder production without the aid of modern synthetics. Is there a way to make them rare? Also, if you're going to have oil, you need to have a natural gas which is extracted by very similar technology as oil. However, I think I'm wondering about the whole fuel truck thing. I realize it's for ease of game play, but one of the big things about oil and n-gas is that you can pump it out of the ground but it won't do you much good until it's refined.

So to me, the fuel trucks shouldn't appear from the oil wells, but from where you have built an oil or n-gas refinery. For the scale of the game, I'm not sure how many of these you'd need, but I almost see them as being a national wonder (build one big one and protect it at all costs) that can produce a certain amount of fuel trucks dependent on how many oil wells you have available.

I think this would add more realism to the game and show how vulnerable oil & n-gas production can be. I mean oil wells can be destroyed and rebuilt relatively quickly compared to having to rebuild an oil refinery. With all the danger in the Fury Road world, I can't see building refineries out on the oil site where they can't (at least in the game) be protected other than parking units on them.

Coal in not easily accessible however - there are only few areas left in the world where you can access coal without heavy machines.

Yes and no - coal shale is not easy to access, but charcoal (which is almost as good, and certainly much better than wood, for steam engines) can be produced anywhere there are trees with very primitive technology. Coppicing.

Of course, we haven't considered other types of engines. These days they're running busses on vegetable oil, and then there's ethanol and methanol to consider.

Without gasoline or vehicles, how would you destroy city defenses?

Actually, in modern warfare, armoured fighting vehicles are traditionally least effective in urban combat. Not that they aren't used, especially when it's just low-intensity fighting, but when you've got a really bombed out, ruined city the terrain makes the usefulness of fighting vehicles dubious to say the least. Witness Stalingrad - and it's not limited to metropolitan centres either (eg the little-known Battle of Ortona)

@frekk yes charcoal is easily produced where there is an abundance of wood... but when i think post-apocolyptic australia lots of forests doesnt come to mind

So to me, the fuel trucks shouldn't appear from the oil wells, but from where you have built an oil or n-gas refinery. [...] I think this would add more realism to the game and show how vulnerable oil & n-gas production can be. I mean oil wells can be destroyed and rebuilt relatively quickly compared to having to rebuild an oil refinery. With all the danger in the Fury Road world, I can't see building refineries out on the oil site where they can't (at least in the game) be protected other than parking units on them.

Up until version 5, I think, the oil well was an improvement, and there was a refinery (city) building, and the oil trucks spawned on refineries. However, this led to a mostly defensive battle since as long as you had one well, you only had to protect your cities. Putting the spawn point at the improvement makes each well more important.

Besides, not that movies prove anything, but the whole point of the good guy camp in Road Warrior is that they were both pumping and refining at the same point, since they produced gasoline. So my improvements match that setting.

@frekk yes charcoal is easily produced where there is an abundance of wood... but when i think post-apocolyptic australia lots of forests doesnt come to mind

Post-apocalyptic Australia is kind of screwed for energy, period. Not enough arable land to divert to ethanol, not enough natural vegetation to sustain coal or methanol production for long, and the only oil is a few tiny deposits of shale oil, which require a very high level of technology and industrial capacity to extract and process.

More specifically, it is the imaginary Australia of the Road Warrior movies, which at least had some real oil.

Besides, not that movies prove anything, but the whole point of the good guy camp in Road Warrior is that they were both pumping and refining at the same point, since they produced gasoline. So my improvements match that setting.

Well in line with what I said about sappers building abatis', I have no problem with the refinery being by the oil wells (less transport costs) but since there isn't a way to build a Fort in the same square as a resource (which is stupid) I think you should be able to build a "Fort" unit that represents all the barricades and stuff you saw in "The Road Warrior" - It wouldn't move and would give a defensive bonus and maybe a small healing bonus to units in the same hex.

Perhaps this could be made by sappers or use the idea where you need one or two worker unit's to 'sacrifice' themselves to create the Fort so you just can't build them all over. Plus, maybe you could put a cap on them so you don't have players building them all over, but then again, I've never liked that Fort's can't be used on resource squares since that is the very thing you're trying to protect!

More specifically, it is the imaginary Australia of the Road Warrior movies, which at least had some real oil.

Don't feel bad about this Frekk, I've been banging my head against the whole idea of post-apocalyptic Australia since it's probably one of the worst places to be stuck in (resource wise) after the Doom of Man(tm). The land sucks for farming, most of the continent is desert, few natural resources and a low population to begin with so there isn't a lot of stuff to loot.

However, as has been discussed quite often, this Mod screams for area specific scenarios.

If you go back a bit in this thread, you can see my points in messages 31 and 42 why catapults would not be very effective against the sort of barricades that would be, in essence, just piles of destroyed buildings/vehicles pushed into a defensive ring around the city center. This sort of rubble abatis would not stand up against explosives, but would do pretty well against any non-engine powered ram or explosives.

Plus, as I mentioned not to long ago, another problem is that with catapults, you can't always expect to hit your target; you don't want to overshoot into the city since you might end up destroying some very valuable stuff your trying to steal in the first place.

Plus, since for much of the early game (say the first 20-40 years) you're really not going to have access to many tracked vehicles with the power to plow through such a wall so for the most part, the barricade is probably mostly the crude abatis with a trench/ditch outer ring along with wire obstacles. This is enough to help deter infantry and trucks (concertina wire does wonders on wheeled vehicles as I can attest by personal observation) but in the face of something like a heavy duty Caterpillar dozer, would probably fail pretty quickly.

Hence my whole point of steam engines. They may not be as effective as gas/oil vehicles, but if you make some early-ish in the game, you could use the to great effect when attacking cities.

Perhaps there could be a "National" unit that is built like a FfH hero unit where you get your steam "Killdozer" available somewhat early. It's tough, slow and really only works against cities. Is it worth the time and resources to build it instead of 2-3 buildings or lots of cheaper units? Depending on your Vision and your Civ, it may be if you are a conquering type.

I'm sold...I am coming around to the sappers and/or car bomb idea. Maybe available with a chemistry tech for ANFO bombs (Ammonium Nitrate/Fuel Oil) rather then c-4.

Tangential approach: What about using a civic for Energy?

Choosing the relevant Civic would determine what the primary energy source: Oil, Steam, Gas, Batteries (Solar and Hydro), Bio-fuel, etc. Each would have an effect and produce Fuel Trucks at a different rate as listed in the Civic and could have other effects: Coal = +2 Unhealth, Bio Fuel = -1 Food, etc. Specific buildings and units would only be available with the relevant civic.

Tangential approach: What about using a civic for Energy?

Sounds like something that might work. Plus it allows to change as your technology changes.

Interesting idea. Each one would have a tech requirement, of course. The idea of civics is that there are supposed to be tradeoffs between them, rather than each new technology automatically taking over from the previous. If there are enough different bonus/penalties to them, it might work. We can get Al Gore to suggest the tradeoffs :-)

he idea of civics is that there are supposed to be trade-offs between them, rather than each new technology automatically taking over from the previous. If there are enough different bonus/penalties to them, it might work. We can get Al Gore to suggest the trade-offs :-)

Well after looking up Bio-Diesel, it has the advantage that a lot of the base product used is so called 'waste oil' that is left over from cooking. So after you fry up your Iguana-On-A-Stick, that oil can be made into Bio-Diesel. The question I would ask is that recycling would be a mandated way of life in a Fury Road world, so getting people to recover their cooking oil for bio-diesel production is easy to see, but is it enough to power the vehicles of the civ? Probably not so you'd need to have some sort of negative food effect to represent acreage devoted to veggie farming where the food isn't going to be used. Although I would think that even if the veggies aren't eaten by people, the rind and pulp left over after the pressings could be fed to livestock and thus cutting down on the amount of hay and the like they would need.

Now you know my view on resources that plant based since why can you only have corn in one square and not the one right next to it? It's just stupid. However, if we remained chained to that outmoded Civ tradition (:p) having a corn resource would allow you to produce gasahol.

As much as I like the civic idea, I can't really see enough difference you'd have in power. From what I've read, it would seem likely that the first vehicles would be powered by Gasahol and/or Bio-Diesel since they can be made from products easily grown and a vehicle that is designed to run on Diesel won't 'care' if it's bio or regular diesel.

The only downside to bio-diesel I can find is that by it's nature it attracts water and thus can easily allow water into the engine system which causes problems. Plus, due to it's different chemical make-up, it tends to wear out rubber seals and the like faster than petroleum based oil. So perhaps when a Civ is using bio-fuels, their maintenance cost would be higher for their vehicles.

One thing I did find about working with vegetable oils, is another reason you'd want to go into it right away is that not only can you make fuel, you make a lot of lubricants, soap, paint and wood treating agents.

So it seems to me, that using bio-fuels, you'd be able to get a lot of trucks, tractors and other heavy equipment already set to run on diesel up and running quickly which is good for the game. However, it would seem that the loss of food units would also be a big problem since food is so scarce in this mod. So again you're having a trade off over units and city growth.

So this leads one to ask, is there a way to make an "oil well" that would work on corn or wheat resources? Would there be a way to show that if you build a bio-fuel extraction plant on this resource, that you'd loss the resource for food, but then could gain fuel trucks? Or, since bio-fuel not only comes from farms, but also from oil originally made for cooking that you could build a refinery in the city and this would cause a city-wide drain on food units coming in? Of course then you'd have the fuel trucks appearing in the city which has been said to make the game a bit too defensive.

There have been a few discussions about biofuel in the sub-forum. One idea is to have a "biofuel farm" improvement, which you build instead of a farm. It *decreases* the food output of the plot but generates a fuel truck every so often. This gives you a direct tradeoff between food and fuel. I think we can agree that there is no need to manage two types of fuel trucks, the engine doesn't care if it was biofuel or gasoline.

Some people use the waypoint feature of civ, but not everybody knows about it. When you have a medium to large size empire, you may devote one city to just pumping out the same unit over and over, and directing the unit to move to some city on the front. You can set a waypoint for city production. I have thought that it would be nice to set waypoints for depots and oil wells also. So, if you have a depot and an oil well near each other, you might give both of them the same waypoint -- perhaps the nearest city. That way the fuel trucks and the almost-out-of-gas tanks all meet up automatically.

I haven't tried to do that, but if each biofuel farm also generates trucks, this would be important to avoid micromanagement.

There have been a few discussions about biofuel in the sub-forum. One idea is to have a "biofuel farm" improvement, which you build instead of a farm. It *decreases* the food output of the plot but generates a fuel truck every so often. This gives you a direct tradeoff between food and fuel. I think we can agree that there is no need to manage two types of fuel trucks, the engine doesn't care if it was biofuel or gasoline.

That seems to be the way to go. Plus I like that you can build it instead of a farm, regardless of whether there is a food resource or not. I personally believe that there shouldn't be food resources like wheat or corn, just a resource that shows "good soil" or something that gives the same food bonus since agricultural products aren't like metals or oils that can only be extracted from one plot.

Some people use the waypoint feature of civ, but not everybody knows about it.

Perhaps a tutorial might be posted somewhere for this? I didn't know about it and I've been playing Civ since Civ II.

Another point is if you have promotion jumps like FfH based on tech, you have the oil promotion reduce maintenance costs to the vehicle since the gas has less water and doesn't mess with the seals and gaskets as much.

BTW, we were discussion steam and the need for coal or wood. Obviously bio-disel will fuel all the diesel vehicles, but not the gas powered ones. Another trade off would be to take gas vehicles and use a steam engine to drive them, using the bio-diesel as the heating element, rather than propane.

To me, after all this research, it's looking like you could get vehicles going pretty quickly (not sure about what you'd replace tires with though) just as long as you can get enough people and equipment to do some form of basic machinery (lathes, presses and the like) that can make basic engines, be they steam or what have you. I mean a steam engine isn't rocket science: as long as you can make the engine tight enough to hold pressure, you're good to go.

So the limiting factor is that you can get vehicles up and running quickly with bio-fuels, but at the cost of city growth. Right now, the bottle-neck for me would be gunpowder production. I mean it seems that you can get your diesel truck running pretty quick, but you'll be limited to guys with crossbows for awhile.

To use a waypoint, click on the city bar for your city. Then move the mouse to some other plot which will be the destination, and shift-right-click. (I never remember which click it is, I think that is correct, I do not have my game here.) A yellow circle will appear. Now whenever that city completes a unit, it will automatically start moving towards the selected plot.

I use this to have 5-6 cities all producing stuff and delivering it to one city or other handy spot on the warfront. So I don't have to worry about when each city finishes; I just get a steady stream of units appearing at the handy spot.

If you forget where you have set the waypoint for a city, I don't think there is any way to display it. But you can "clear" the waypoint by setting the city itself as the waypoint.

For early game seige a smoothbore cannon would probably be the easyist thing to make. Gunpowder would be your only issue, but assuming you have that, you could find any strong pipe, with limited machinery you could add a breach, and just use it to chuck rocks. Certainly would be alot easier to make then a steam driven catapult or treb in a post apocolyptic environment.

Car bombs maybe, some people would use them. But here's the thing assuming you get a vehicle able to roll again, I think you'd find much better uses for it (even with no gas and stuck in neutral) then blowing it up. It's possible not though, scaricity might not be an issue in the timeframe of this mod. Post nuclear war 1/4 - 1/2 the world's population are supposed to survive, but there is no infrustructure left. So everyone starves, things go to sh!t in general, civilization is basically destroyed by the starving mobs. I understand this is supposed to be in the timeperiod after everyone who couldn't make it starved to death, and in such an environment alot of things like broken down cars would probably be in abundance. (The main issue would be food and clean water and allocating labor to do stuff like make working weapons and ammo)

Rather than a smoothbore cannon, a mortar would be far simpler I think. In fact, I recall seeing a video somewhere of a homemade black-powder mortar that fired bowling balls. Basically just a large steel tube welded to a baseplate. Granted, if the weld is flawed you have a rather catastrophic failure, but still.

Another alternative is black-powder rockets. Simple in concept, and though they aren't much good for damaging structures, en masse they can be quite devastating to unprotected infantry. Think Katyusha batteries, though Congreve rockets would work as well.

Rather than a smoothbore cannon, a mortar would be far simpler I think. In fact, I recall seeing a video somewhere of a homemade black-powder mortar that fired bowling balls. Basically just a large steel tube welded to a baseplate. Granted, if the weld is flawed you have a rather catastrophic failure, but still.

Well actually you'd probably start with howitzers (which a lot of people forget used to mean a mortar/cannon designed for high arcing fire) since you'd have less of a chance for failure. The only problem with mortars (and rockets) would be getting the fuses right and also there is a lot of training involved which might be tough with resources so tight. Canons, on the other hand, are a bit more "point and shoot" being mostly direct fire weapons prior to the advancement of more modern artillery.

Another alternative is black-powder rockets. Simple in concept, and though they aren't much good for damaging structures, en masse they can be quite devastating to unprotected infantry. Think Katyusha batteries, though Congreve rockets would work as well.

The problem with these is getting them to go anywhere remotely where you target them. The Katyusha's "work" because they are fired into a densely packed urban area where anything they hit is probably worthy of being called a target. Even missiles like the SCUD-D can totally miss it's target if the operators don't correct for a wind as slight as 5mph prompting us intel analyst to say "Accuracy for a SCUD is hitting the city you aimed at!" I was rocketed quite often in Afghanistan with 107mm Chinese rockets and they are basically a propaganda weapon since the odds of them landing on our base and killing anyone was small.

However, if the fuses could be designed, the could make a good anti-personnel weapon in that they are filled with little piece of metal and are primed to detonate above the troops. So these short range, almost medieval rockets would probably be a better bet. However, these rockets (and mortars) should probably get a penalty for attacking vehicles since they move quicker and have less unit density than infantry and thus are much harder to target.

Well actually, you don't need to worry that much about fuses. My friend made a potato cannon that fires on the push of a button with only a pipe what ever he used to propel it and a tazer.

The fuse timer isn't for firing the cannon/mortar, it's for the shell/rocket, so it explodes over your target, not too close, and not too far away.

But like I said, for early, post apocolyptic siege, I think people wouldn't be using things so complex at first. It would be much easier to chuck rocks with a smoothbore cannon you made out of a pipe.

Or balls of iron or steel melted down from scrap

But once you did that, someone would try to go one better and reinvent shells and rockets, etc.

But once you did that, someone would try to go one better and reinvent shells and rockets, etc.

Another reason for rockets is for the fear factor. The whole "Bombs bursting in Air" is never good for morale. That and it allows you to attack troops in 'dead spaces' that give them cover from direct fire.

Plus, remember that by the time this mod gets going, there will be less and less folks who don't remember the modern age. We tend to forget how desensitized we are to certain things. I'm not saying rockets will be seen as 'magic' or anything like that, but while working in Afghanistan, I can say that people that aren't used to a technology will fear it more than they should due to the unknown involved with it. We heard all sorts of things the Bad Guys thought we could do (and I wish I could tell you because they're funny but classified because we still want them to think we can do it) that sound totally crazy to a literate, technical savvy First World person.

So the sounds of the rockets and the fact that they resemble the "old time" weapons would give them an air of lethality that they wouldn't deserve but soldiers, like athletes can be a superstitious bunch and fear is a powerful weapon if used properly. Look how effective the Stuka's were simply because they added that flap that created their signature 'scream' as they dove.

We tend to forget how desensitized we are to certain things.

We are? I mean, I don't know about you, but most people where I live have never seen a large explosion - let alone a missile impact - in real life. I tend to think that average people in the First World would be far, far more shocked at witnessing such a thing in their own cities and towns than are people in Afghanistan, Israel, Palestine, etc. People around here would freak if just a grenade went off downtown.

I mean, just look at the footage of the faces in the street during the 911/WTC thing - they don't look any more calm than people in African, Middle Eastern, or Balkan conflicts do in footage of artillery shelling or air raids. Less, actually. I'd say we're sheltered, not desensitized. In the wake of whatever caused a global apocalypse, we'd be a lot more accustomed to such things.

We are? I mean, I don't know about you, but most people where I live have never seen a large explosion - let alone a missile impact - in real life. I tend to think that average people in the First World would be far, far more shocked at witnessing such a thing in their own cities and towns than are people in Afghanistan, Israel, Palestine, etc. People around here would freak if just a grenade went off downtown.

You'd be amazed how much a rocket explosion sounds like a back-hoe digging into the ground. Really, I kid you not. Of course the down side to this is that with all the new construction in and around where I live, I am having serious PTSD issues because I keep hearing things that sound like I'm back getting rocketed. :eek:

What I meant about desensitized, was that it's easy for us to see all that . .. .. .. . blow up on TV and maybe think it can't be that bad; but when it happens to you...it's bad.

I remember the awful feeling I had when during a training exercise, we had a jet come in on a bombing run on us. Turned out to be a friendly dropping on targets close to us, but we didn't know that at the time. I remember looking up at that plane thinking, "If this was real, death would be coming down on me; we'd see it and only luck could save me." It was NOT a nice feeling. Getting attack/straffed from the air just sucks.

I think Arkhams point was that the greater the difference in technology the more it seems like magic. Imagine a tribe that has lived in the depths of the Amazon and never had contact with the outside world...a lighter would seem like magic. Things we describe a science fiction are often possible and are often invented. If you told someone in the 1700's that we could have ships that sailed underwater, they would have thought you were crazy. If you told someone in the early 1900s that we would have a box that that cooks food with heat or fire they would have said you were insane. Going to the moon, boxes that allow you to transmit pictures all over the world in an instant, boxes that keep your food cold without ice, boxes with wheels that move on their own without horses, etc.

If you don't have experience with those things they would seem like magic. We also take for granted that cool stuff can be invented and are less impressed or surprised when that stuff is, like the viewscreens from Star Trek or a version of the medical tricorder. Would anyone really be surprised if someone invented or discovered warp travel and teleporters?

Keep in mind that in the mod its a few years or a generation or two past the apocalypse. There would be many who haven't seen the wonders of the Old World and are not very educated.

We also take for granted that cool stuff can be invented and are less impressed or surprised when that stuff is, like the viewscreens from Star Trek or a version of the medical tricorder.

Tricorder, saw it on the History channel, 2 years ago. They had a device that listened for gut sounds, Detected heart pulses of elctro magnetic disturbances, and used CNS static to pinpoint the location of any mammal over 100Kgs within 300 meteres. Sounded like star trek tricorder to me, but I don't think the congress allocated the funds to mass produce the tri-corder product, even thought it was proven to work. It would have no real use in an urban conflict (it would be overwhelmed), and if the US was fighting in a non urban area, it was decided they could mass produce them easily enough, if needed, and they costed alot per unit, like a million bucks a piece.

Most soldiers ain't given pieces of equipment they are personally acountable for, more then Night vision goggles, wich are worth a couple grand a piece.

I think Arkhams point was that the greater the difference in technology the more it seems like magic.

Exactly. Plus, since there would be examples, in books or perhaps the occasional movie/CD/DVD used on special occasions, anything that seemed a bit more like what was before (like rockets) might cause a bit more dread in those who never had any direct experience with it.

If you don't have experience with those things they would seem like magic. We also take for granted that cool stuff can be invented and are less impressed or surprised when that stuff is, like the viewscreens from Star Trek or a version of the medical tricorder. Would anyone really be surprised if someone invented or discovered warp travel and teleporters?

It's funny how quick technology can change. I mean I was 3 when Star Trek first came out and now 30 years from then we went from GINOURMOUS computers to laptops. How many times have you seen a ST: Voyager episode and marveled that they STILL don't seem to have a wi-fi network to send messages around the ship? I mean, "Take this to LT Torres in Engineering!" Pa-Leeze! It reminds me of the Harvey Birdman: Attorney At Law episode when the Jetsons (who are from the 21st Century) come back and try to impress Harvey w/their tech...much of it in that early cartoon has already been superseded!

One of the reasons I've pushed for some of the steampunk stuff or pushing ideas from books like the 1632 series is that by the time of the game, there will be less and less people from the Post-War world and those behind will have become masters of taking what they have and adapting. Many of the things we have now or have had are all predicated on having a nation with an intact infrastructure to support it. In the threads about railroads, people discuss how easy it is to cut them; well think of how hard it would be to establish roads strong enough to deal with trucks capable of hauling the equivalent capacity. Remember, but turn 80, we're about 50 years after the War and without maintenance with equipment and resources that I doubt the survivors will have, the old roads will be gone.

So, I think that the game should (or at least a mod of the mod) should take into account that the survivors won't just instantly go from a period of not being able to do much to suddenly jumping back onto the regular vanilla BTS tech tree. Due to lack of resources, or fear of constant attack, the new Civs might make go down different routes because they have to.

But then again, we're straying down the road of the difference between Fury Road being a Mad Max simulation over a general mod to simulate what happens after the Doom of Man(tm). (Personally from what I have researched, those folks down in Australia are screwed; better to crank out the old Polynesian boats and get out of Perth and head for a better place!)

Most soldiers ain't given pieces of equipment they are personally accountable for, more then Night vision goggles, wich are worth a couple grand a piece.

Actually that has changed. Soldiers now are issued their TA-50 once and it follows them for the rest of their career. So you now your personally accountable for something like $14,000 of equipment, especially if you account for the M-4 w/CCO.

Weird, when I was in you got different TA-50 from each duty assignment. Which kind of made sense, since you need alot more cold weather gear in Korea then you do in NC.

What in the new TA-50 you get issued is worth $10,000? It's mostly just clothes, and backpacks, suspenders, stuff like that... do they include an M4 and night vision goggles in the new TA-50 they hand out? Also if it follows you now for the rest of your army career, do you get it issued in AIT or Basic or something?

What in the new TA-50 you get issued is worth $10,000? It's mostly just clothes, and backpacks, suspenders, stuff like that... do they include an M4 and night vision goggles in the new TA-50 they hand out? Also if it follows you now for the rest of your army career, do you get it issued in AIT or Basic or something?

Well now it's all your body armor (which isn't cheap) your high-speed (and I mean that in a good way) medical kit, and the like. Plus with the newer modular stuff, they give you more and it also costs more. I'm sure the M-4 is included.

Pretty much you are issued your full load at Basic and the rest comes at your first duty station. Each station can add stuff as I'm sure when you're at Fort Drum, they might want to add to your basic TA-50.

It's funny how quick technology can change. I mean I was 3 when Star Trek first came out and now 30 years from then we went from GINOURMOUS computers to laptops. How many times have you seen a ST: Voyager episode and marveled that they STILL don't seem to have a wi-fi network to send messages around the ship? I mean, "Take this to LT Torres in Engineering!" Pa-Leeze!

I always found the technological issue a bit funny with that series. Never mind wi-fi; how come they didn't even have security cameras? Was closed circuit television beyond their capabilities?

That's one of the fun things about looking back at older science fiction. One famous example is the book called "Where's my Jetpack?" Older SF predicted some things correctly, like geosynchronous satellites, but some other things, notably the internet, were never imagined by older SF. They made good use of all the things they did think of, but we shouldn't object that we have invented some other things they didn't predict.

That's one of the fun things about looking back at older science fiction. One famous example is the book called "Where's my Jetpack?" Older SF predicted some things correctly, like geosynchronous satellites, but some other things, notably the internet, were never imagined by older SF. They made good use of all the things they did think of, but we shouldn't object that we have invented some other things they didn't predict.

Yes, sadly while much of the stories H. Beam Piper wrote were good, they tend to have a social feel of the late 1950's and the fact that their computer tech still has massive computers that only work w/machine language does 'age' well, unlike most Heinlein novels that aged quite well.

I guess one of the reasons I am stumping for different tech paths like more steam or zeppelins is due to watching a lot of James Burke's Connections & Day the Universe Changed. These shows showed how often chance, scarcity of a certain resource, war and just luck cause certain things to be invented when they did. It wasn't inevitable. William Gibson's "The Difference Engine" shows that with a analytical engine, we might have had the "Information Age" much earlier.

The show also focuses on how very static cultures (like China) tend to resist change, even if they do invent half the things we take for granted today. It is the cultures that are in a state of flux or conflict that really go for innovation because the rewards are so much greater.

I mean take wind power, for example. With abundant electricity, for years no one bothered to recently because it was cheaper to make electricity with coal or oil burning refineries. In Fury Road, neither of those are cheap or readily available. However, people know you can generate electricity that way. With the scale involved, you wouldn't need those giant, multi-polymer windmills we used today, but you could still build wind farms to generate electricity.

For that matter, lead-acid batteries are not high-tech. Viable electrical cars were created back in the '20's, but where squashed by companies like standard oil.

...and all of this would probably be more useful in the mod of the mod, for a more of a post-apocalypse start of a vanilla BTS and not Fury Road specifically! :crazyeye: I must say, you'd think The Powers That Be would look into this since it obviously has appeal.

They didn't quash the electric cars, they bought the paptent and never built any, genius, lol!

Wind Power is another thing altogether, it can be used to grind grain for example, but generating usable electricity is much harder then people make it sound. It requires a lot of wind and constant to, as well as wind from the proper direction to turn the windmill. Thats why most current windmills are cylindrical. They cost a fortune to make and require extensive knowledge to mount. PLUS, very few areas actually get enough wind for them to be effective. Most of that is off the coast which would be hard to mount in a PA world.

Now giant batteries or tons of car batteries tied together, that I could see.

They didn't quash the electric cars, they bought the paptent and never built any, genius, lol!

Wind Power is another thing altogether, it can be used to grind grain for example, but generating usable electricity is much harder then people make it sound. It requires a lot of wind and constant to, as well as wind from the proper direction to turn the windmill. Thats why most current windmills are cylindrical. They cost a fortune to make and require extensive knowledge to mount.

Wind Farms (and other renewable sources) also face a more subtle form of opposition which would not be a problem in PA world, and one which you have alluded to already in the first paragraph: vested interests.

The Nuclear Power industry is currently very keen on putting out negative PR for any kind of renewable energy. As oil and coal costs rise and Global Warming rises up the political agenda, the Nuclear Power industry is trying to rebrand itself as the green alternative for the future.

Renewable energy is a rival technology which could seriously cut into the profits of the Nuclear Industry. As a result you get any number of scare stories and soft propaganda leaked to lazy/overworked journalists from PR hacks with their own agenda to grind. Over here in the UK, (coincidentally right next door to the Atlantic Ocean), I have heard stories that Wind Farms are inefficient / noisy / a blot on the landscape / eagles will get caught in their turbines / it costs more in energy costs to construct than they will produce in their lifetime, and any other tripe the tabloids see fit to publish.

In a post-apocalypse world, survival becomes a higher priority than profit and a civilization which develops a power-supply will be further up the food chain than one that doesn't, so wind power won't face this resistance.

Running microturbines on the lamp-posts of large cities might be a good place to start. The tall buildings could be used to funnel the wind in a particular direction, the posts are already in place so would not need to be built and there's already a connection to the power grid to feed into or canibalise.

Microturbines might be a bit advanced for a PA world. Not sure how feasible they are now. Some of what you call tripe is true, they are relatively ineffecient, they are a blot on the landscape (if you value your view), I don't care about the eagles but that might be true, and they are noisy. BUT, they can work in the right situation and require a lot of startup capital as well as the right location.

My point was that they would be tough to make and manufacture for the level of tech in this mod. And you would have to find a good location for them.

They (wind turbines) also require powerfull construction machines to be available to be built in the first place. You can't exactly put a off-shore foundation for a 50 meters high tower using a inflatable raft and a showel...

They (wind turbines) also require powerfull construction machines to be available to be built in the first place. You can't exactly put a off-shore foundation for a 50 meters high tower using a inflatable raft and a shovel...

You know, the Dutch have been using wooden windmills for years. I would think it would be relatively easy to adapt these to charging banks of lead acid batteries. Thus you have a cheap, low-tech way to provide power for essential systems. I would think that until higher tech stuff was available again, most people would be living in a sort of 19th century lifestyle with oil lamps and the like and only vital machines using the scant electricity available.

Once again we have lots of stuff lying around, but every 4 turns is another year of things wearing out that cannot be replaced. So I would think that only essential systems would be used and everyone else would just have to get used (or be born into) living a less technological life. Not that that would be that bad. I mean you wouldn't say cities like London, New York or Paris were 'uncivilized' prior to 1881 when the first major electrical plants started to come on line. I mean the Romans had flush toilets and moved water over vast distances. Of course in both cases, these are cities/cultures who built things up over hundreds of years, which right now, this mod's time scale doesn't represent.

"Vintage" windmills might be (and probably are) a good idea for powering various mechanical tasks - like milling :mischief: or maybe a water pump (i think these kind of thing is actually used in australia).
But they are uterly useless if you want electricity.
The dutch windmills you are talking about had a - by todays standards - ridiculously low power output - like < 1 KW Mechanical power. Count in them being unsteady (weather dependant) hence the loss of power on batterys (which is high) on top of the "normal" power loss on comversion from Mechanical to Electrical power (Which is high as well) and they are not good at all...

Which is why Windmills for electricty - even todays high tech ones - need to be put in specific areas where the conditions are optimal for that kind of stuff.

@Jabie. I'm a scientist. I have SO much data in direct conflict with what you stated(about nuclear/renewable power).. but that's a topic for a different forum completely so we'll leave that alone for now.


@Devs.
It would be seriously cool if one could find an old nuclear powerplant in one of those ruins. Of course such a plant would be worn from time and conflict, so one would need radiation imune (the medicine tech?) and perhaps some other tech to run it.


------
Don't know if this has been brought up yet or not(since I'm quite new to fury road), but having different locked techpaths available would be awesome.

example paths:
Tech/science-oriented(Think Brotherhood of Steel from Fallout; oil, vehicles, heavy weapons)
Harmony(Old school/present day environmentalism; Let's get our earth back!)
Environmentalism(Preserv the environment you live in; Harness/befriend mutants, ghouls running the local powerplant, mutants fighting for their right in society, and so on.)

Once you start on one path the others become unavailable. Specific civics for each path with different levels of conflict to the civics from the other paths, different units with widely different abilities/specialities/tactics and so on.


Is this plausable? Or even in line with the mods general direction?

//Joel

Don't know if this has been brought up yet or not(since I'm quite new to fury road), but having different locked tech paths available would be awesome.

I've been stumping for this since about Day One. I've been pushing that with resources so scarce that even if you get access to the knowledge of another tech path, you've already invested too much time and material that you can't really switch over.

example paths:
Tech/science-oriented(Think Brotherhood of Steel from Fallout; oil, vehicles, heavy weapons)
Harmony(Old school/present day environmentalism; Let's get our earth back!)
Environmentalism(Preserv the environment you live in; Harness/befriend mutants, ghouls running the local powerplant, mutants fighting for their right in society, and so on.)

While many say they don't want a copy of an older game, it is true that much of the different Vision paths mimic the ideologies of the different Civs in Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri. I also pointed out in regards to scarcity of resources, what you start out with would influence your tech path. As I said in a previous post in a different sub-forum a while ago, I gave some ideas:

* Recovery: "We had high tech and damnit we'll have it again!" Civ's using this would focus on getting old tech working again so they'd have fewer weapons but more powerful ones. They might also have more of a bunker mentality, fewer cities, but bigger ones.
* Downshift: This could be for Civ's without a lot of resources at their disposal except for maybe people so they push to use older techs like gunpowder or steam. This theme is useful if you access to sulfur and coal but maybe no oil.
* Maritime: As mentioned above, Civ's using this would focus on ships, have access to whaling boats and perhaps 'super fisheries' in the sense that the normal work boat gets only a token amount of fish whereas the maritime Civ's work boat creates a fishery that really cranks out the food. Plus they might also have access to the River Port that some mods have. They'd get increased commerce.
* Luddite: Technology brought us ruin. These folks would want to return to a simple life. Sure guys in jeeps with machine guns are bad ass, but up against LOTS of guys with crossbows is a bad thing. Perhaps also allow this theme to have the mobile yurts the one Mongol scenario had to enable them to be semi-nomadic. Either that or they get a lot less penalty for spreading out.
* Mad Scientist: Not sure how high-tech the planet was before, but perhaps they are going to focus on mutations and other bio-secrets that might have been unlocked prior to the war. You could have clones, mutates and 'necrotroops' (basically robocops) plus bio-weapons or just good old fashion chemical weapons.
* Gaian: Theme that is focused on terraforming and using fixing the planet. Similar to the Gaians in Alpha Centauri, perhaps they could use, breed many of the new mutations. Plus, who wouldn't want to have cavalry using giant spiders! =)~ Plus this theme would go for more wind-farms for electricity and bio-diesel.

Of course I wrote that a while a go and we've had a lot of good discussions on various things since then. :p

Once you start on one path the others become unavailable. Specific civics for each path with different levels of conflict to the civics from the other paths, different units with widely different abilities/specialties/tactics and so on. Is this plausible? Or even in line with the mods general direction? //Joel

I don't know the secrets of the Modding Ways, but beyond having semi-locked tech paths (I say this because I would expect some techs would be necessary in almost any tech path) I want to see another thing from Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri and that is the ability to set "Blind Research" so you don't know what tech you'll get next. So even if you don't have a tech path, you're not exactly sure what you'll get next. Of course AC and older versions of Civ had each tech classed generally into 4 categories:
Growth/Ecology
Discovery/Science
Combat
Mercantile
In AC, if you were playing with Blind Research, you could set your research priorities so a more enviro-friendly Civ might go for Growth and Discovery and another might go for just Combat. Plus, you could not have any research priority and get whatever you get. It was a nice way to balance the human versus the AI since knowing how to work the tech tree really does help the human player.

@Daemon, since you're new here, let me point out some things so you don't pull your hair out.

1) As much as people like me tend to forget, Fury Road is a simulator of the Mad Max genre and so is nominally set in Australia and not a mod that is trying to really simulate Civilization coming back after the Doom of Man(tm)...even though it does that alright. However, many of us are pushing that while the base mod may be set in Australia, this mod screams for area specific add-on scenarios. I live in the PNW and we'd have a LOT more resources to play with than those folks Down Under.

2) Time: each turn is 3 months, the game lasts 100 years (400 turns) and there has been 20 years (80 turns equivalent) since the end of the War and the first turn of the game.

3) Due to the scarcity of resources and the time-scale, the mod designer doesn't expect (or want) that during the scale of the game (and I agree) that the tech level will ever get back anywhere past what we have now.

4) Don't bring up zombies! :p He'll just point you to the NecroChristi mod!

But they are utterly useless if you want electricity.

I disagree and agree with this. First off, I know that electrical power generation via wind power is not feasible at low tech. However, it generates more than enough to recharge banks of batteries if a water power is not available. Since Fury Road is mostly in Australia, where water is rare compared to other places on Earth, this becomes rather important.

Plus, it would be easy to have a combination of wind and muscle power. When the wind isn't blowing, you could have a set-up similar to mills that run on literal horse power where a donkey pulls a wheel and that will move the turbine to create current. Depending on your Vision, you might use small children instead.

...although you might want to watch out for the Conan special event! :goodjob:

I agree that the tech tree needs work. I had spent most of August playing FFH, and the tech tree there is pretty good. It forces you to make tradeoffs and research up one "line", such as a recon line, rather than getting everything. On the other hand, in Fury Road, the tech tree is pretty small, and there are a number of single techs which give multiple benefits. When I run games out to 400 turns on autoplay, all of the players finish the entire tech tree and then dump all their research into "Future Tech".

Several playtesters have contributed new tech trees. I appreciate this and I apologize that I have not been able to examine them in enough detail yet. Redoing the tech tree requires rebalancing the entire game, even if the units don't change, to make sure that each branch leads to about the same chance of victory. That is actually more work than the entire current tech tree. I will get there, but I can't give any definite date for it.

Zombies -- see the FAQ (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6980117&postcount=2), which leads to this answer (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=7066773&postcount=144). But, I would like to put in ghouls, from the Fallout series. Search "ghouls" in this sub-forum to see some other posts about that. (29 more days till Fallout 3 is released!)

Nuclear reactor -- it has been suggested before, but not in connection with having rad-immune. I like that! It would be a "natural wonder" which appears in a plot which has fallout.

I agree that the tech tree needs work. I had spent most of August playing FFH, and the tech tree there is pretty good.

We did warn you that that would happen! :crazyeye:

All nyuks aside, that mod just has a lot of things that make it useful in other games. I was just commenting that their 'crazed' promotion can work to show when units have a possibility of desertion. With Civ IV: Colonization out, they need a way to show that during the original Amer-Rev, lots of soldiers (many of them the Hessians) deserted because why be a soldier when you can desert with all the 'free' land around? The Brits found that marching their Hessians through mostly German areas of Pennsylvania was a good way to lose a lot of troops.

I disagree and agree with this. First off, I know that electrical power generation via wind power is not feasible at low tech. However, it generates more than enough to recharge banks of batteries if a water power is not available. Since Fury Road is mostly in Australia, where water is rare compared to other places on Earth, this becomes rather important.

Plus, it would be easy to have a combination of wind and muscle power. When the wind isn't blowing, you could have a set-up similar to mills that run on literal horse power where a donkey pulls a wheel and that will move the turbine to create current. Depending on your Vision, you might use small children instead.

...although you might want to watch out for the Conan special event! :goodjob:

You have to turn the wheel really really fast to generate power, for example you can power a small tv by pedaling a bicycle. But if you slow down the so does the flow of current. A donkey would definitely not work, maybe small children in giant hamster wheels might, but in general this would be worthless.

You can make your own electricity generator using this concept (see the boy scouts Electricity merit badge book) but it is extremely ineffecient and requires alot of physical energy to work. You can build capacitors to store it (or batteries) and an alternator from a car to make it useable for lamps and stuff, but the amount of time and energy to generate enough power would be counterproductive. People would use propane or oil instead.

Now, you could hook up a car/truck and run that to generate electricity (a la Predator, another Schwarzenegger movie). That might be easier.

I think the point about whether solar/wind/nuclear is feasible misses the point. Its what could be built easiest and be most effective for the tech level and resources of the mod. If a generator made from truck parts is easy and works best then thats what they would do.

You have to turn the wheel really really fast to generate power, for example you can power a small tv by pedaling a bicycle. But if you slow down the so does the flow of current. A donkey would definitely not work, maybe small children in giant hamster wheels might, but in general this would be worthless.

You can make your own electricity generator using this concept (see the boy scouts Electricity merit badge book) but it is extremely ineffecient and requires alot of physical energy to work. You can build capacitors to store it (or batteries) and an alternator from a car to make it useable for lamps and stuff, but the amount of time and energy to generate enough power would be counterproductive. People would use propane or oil instead.

Now, you could hook up a car/truck and run that to generate electricity (a la Predator, another Schwarzenegger movie). That might be easier.

I think the point about whether solar/wind/nuclear is feasible misses the point. Its what could be built easiest and be most effective for the tech level and resources of the mod. If a generator made from truck parts is easy and works best then thats what they would do.
True. Human efficiency is about 5% and if one could make a generator with 40% efficiency it would still mean that just 2% of all energy of food is used to generate electricity. On the other hand, small generators used to power off-grid areas don't often have much power, yet they are satisfactory for quite many tasks. Now as the things wear and lose efficiency, replace the 10 kW engine with a 100 kW car engine and you're bound to get enough juice for most of your needs.

When the generators are too old to work anymore, anyone skilled in basic electrics could build a replacement one from a car.


Having fear of the dark?

Need light to shoot the attackers with deadly accuracy even at night?

Wanna power up that radio or radar station of yours?


We have the answer for you!

Electricity generators, compatible with 99% of the most common ute types.

Buy now! Only 500 gallons of fuel each!