Vokarya's Workshop: Units

OK,then let's reduce the base strength of amphibious units,especially the AH64 because it becomes overpowered against wheeled and tracked units.
 
OK,then let's reduce the base strength of amphibious units,especially the AH64 because it becomes overpowered against wheeled and tracked units.

The point of helicopters in this game is to be tank killers, imho.

Much as it pains me, yes, Amphibious should probably lose the +10% strenght bonus.
 
I will have to take a look. There is the Iron Frigate which is available with Steel tech, but based on how I've reshuffled the techs, that might have pushed Steel into the mid-Industrial Era. The rule I have with new units is that a replacement unit should not show up in the same third of an era.

I do think there is some work that can be done in the Industrial Era navy, as I'd like to rename the Pre-Dreadnought to something less anachronistic, and the Battlecruiser seems too good for when it appears. There might be room for some other ships if we can find an appropriate role for them to play.

The Iron Frigate looks late 19th century to me. Early 20th century (WWI) saw Dreadnought and Battle Cruiser as steam turbine vessels, which were both still in service in WWII, though outdated (witness Hood vs Bismarck). Mind you, battleships generally were arguably outdated by WWII due to air power (witness Prince of Wales and Renown).

Iron Frigate adds screw propellor + steel; the next advance was triple expansion + armour + turrets, then steam turbine + larger and better guns (in time for WWI), then rf rangefinding + diesel (during WWII for the UK).

I'd like to see the possibility of WWI style naval combat as well as WWII style. Maybe it's just that the Battleship appears rather late and with too advanced technology?
 
Something I am looking for is one word to describe all of the non-combatant units that can be carried by a Caravel. These are defined as having the XML category of SPECIALUNIT_PEOPLE. The game text for this group is Scouts, Explorers, Missionaries, Spies, Great People. This is okay but not perfect, and I'd like something more concise as well as more inclusive -- for example, Executives, Inquisitors, Adventurers, and Trade Units are all defined as SPECIALUNIT_PEOPLE. I am thinking of calling this group Noncombatants.

So for example, a Caravel might say Cargo Space: 1 (Carries Noncombatants). What do you think? Is there a better word that might work?
 
Something I am looking for is one word to describe all of the non-combatant units that can be carried by a Caravel. These are defined as having the XML category of SPECIALUNIT_PEOPLE. The game text for this group is Scouts, Explorers, Missionaries, Spies, Great People. This is okay but not perfect, and I'd like something more concise as well as more inclusive -- for example, Executives, Inquisitors, Adventurers, and Trade Units are all defined as SPECIALUNIT_PEOPLE. I am thinking of calling this group Noncombatants.

So for example, a Caravel might say Cargo Space: 1 (Carries Noncombatants). What do you think? Is there a better word that might work?

Civilians maybe? If not, then NonCombatants works :)
 
I've been thinking a little bit about the Mountaineer promotion. I don't think I have ever seen it used, because the requirements are so steep in the early game (Combat III or Led by Warlord) and then it goes obsolete at Mountaineering tech, when all units can pass Peaks. Also looking through the requirements for promotions, Mountain Leader is also available with Led by Warlord and that unit can not only pass peaks but also lead other units onto Peaks, meaning it doesn't make much sense to give a Led by Warlord unit Mountaineer.

I'd like to replace the Led by Warlord prerequisite on the Mountaineer promotion with Guerrilla II. I think that would make the promotion actually see some use. At the very least, we might see some Explorers with Mountaineer, since they start with Guerrilla I and you would need 5 XP (4 with the Charismatic trait) to get them to Guerrilla II and then Mountaineer. What do you think?
 
I'm also doing new Civilopedia strategy text for all of the techs in the game, and I've noticed some shuffling that I want to do with the tech prerequisites for Modern Era units.

Here's what I would like to do:

SAM Infantry
Move from Guided Weapons to Advanced Rocketry. I mentioned this during the Tech Tree revision but forgot to follow up. Right now, SAM Infantry comes after the Mobile SAM that it is supposed to be replaced by, so you would probably never see the SAM. This will put it in the right place.

Mobile SAM
Move from Modern Warfare to Guided Weapons. This is to open up a little distance between the SAM Infantry and the Mobile SAM.

Modern Marine
Move from Amphibious Warfare to Modern Warfare. I don't like to see units with prerequisites from two different eras. Modern Marine currently requires Composites (Modern Era) and Amphibious Warfare (Industrial Era). I think moving Modern Marine up to Modern Warfare would be better overall, giving it two different Modern Era prerequisites.

Landing Ship Tank
Move from Manufacturing to Amphibious Warfare. This is historically where the LST appears, and I think this will make Amphibious Warfare more attractive as a tech. Amphibious Warfare would wind up as a one-trick-pony after removing the Modern Marine, so I want to give it one more thing.

A-10 Thunderbolt
Move from Guided Weapons to Modern Warfare. Guided Weapons as a tech has a LOT of units currently attached, and I'd like to spread them out a little more. I think giving one Air unit to Modern Warfare would be a good thing.

Does all of this sound workable?
 
I've been thinking a little bit about the Mountaineer promotion. I don't think I have ever seen it used, because the requirements are so steep in the early game (Combat III or Led by Warlord) and then it goes obsolete at Mountaineering tech, when all units can pass Peaks. Also looking through the requirements for promotions, Mountain Leader is also available with Led by Warlord and that unit can not only pass peaks but also lead other units onto Peaks, meaning it doesn't make much sense to give a Led by Warlord unit Mountaineer.

I'd like to replace the Led by Warlord prerequisite on the Mountaineer promotion with Guerrilla II. I think that would make the promotion actually see some use. At the very least, we might see some Explorers with Mountaineer, since they start with Guerrilla I and you would need 5 XP (4 with the Charismatic trait) to get them to Guerrilla II and then Mountaineer. What do you think?

Looks great to me, I've never seen that promotion too.
 
I've been thinking a little bit about the Mountaineer promotion. I don't think I have ever seen it used, because the requirements are so steep in the early game (Combat III or Led by Warlord) and then it goes obsolete at Mountaineering tech, when all units can pass Peaks. Also looking through the requirements for promotions, Mountain Leader is also available with Led by Warlord and that unit can not only pass peaks but also lead other units onto Peaks, meaning it doesn't make much sense to give a Led by Warlord unit Mountaineer.

I'd like to replace the Led by Warlord prerequisite on the Mountaineer promotion with Guerrilla II. I think that would make the promotion actually see some use. At the very least, we might see some Explorers with Mountaineer, since they start with Guerrilla I and you would need 5 XP (4 with the Charismatic trait) to get them to Guerrilla II and then Mountaineer. What do you think?

What about getting rid of Mountaineer entirely, and adding "can go on Peaks" to Guerrilla 3 ?
 
What about getting rid of Mountaineer entirely, and adding "can go on Peaks" to Guerrilla 3 ?

Could also possibly drop the whole promotion thing entirely and grant all units the ability to natively cross mountains if 'Useable Mountains' is checked? CivilizationIII had useable mountains, which surprised me a ton when I first played, and no techs or anything were needed for that. :)
 
Could also possibly drop the whole promotion thing entirely and grant all units the ability to natively cross mountains if 'Useable Mountains' is checked? CivilizationIII had useable mountains, which surprised me a ton when I first played, and no techs or anything were needed for that. :)

I think this is little too unrealistic. Much of the land is unusable for military purpose (landwar) in real world. For example tanks will never cross himalaja:)

I think maps should have impossible land tiles, whats the point of mountains otherwise?
Maybe there should be a mapscript without mountais? Usable mountain is kind of hill:)

I Never use usable mountains option and I even think that mountaineer promotion should be limited somehow. No tracked or wheeled units on mountains for example..
 
I think this is little too unrealistic. Much of the land is unusable for military purpose (landwar) in real world. For example tanks will never cross himalaja:)

I think maps should have impossible land tiles, whats the point of mountains otherwise?
Maybe there should be a mapscript without mountais? Usable mountain is kind of hill:)

I Never use usable mountains option and I even think that mountaineer promotion should be limited somehow. No tracked or wheeled units on mountains for example..

While a tank can't climb a mountain like a goat, there exist roads and valleys and passes!
People and armies went through mountains since the ancient times (Hannibals and his elephants against Rome comes to mind as a famous example), of course it wasn't easy, that's the point of needing a promotion or a technology. And the insanely increased worker turn-costs for building anything on a mountain.
 
While a tank can't climb a mountain like a goat, there exist roads and valleys and passes!
People and armies went through mountains since the ancient times (Hannibals and his elephants against Rome comes to mind as a famous example), of course it wasn't easy, that's the point of needing a promotion or a technology. And the insanely increased worker turn-costs for building anything on a mountain.

Yes but Hannibal and elephants were living beings:)
No modern motorized army has never crossed mountains in large scale, its just impossible. Actually RL tanks for example are useless if terrain is rocky, too wet, forested etc.. more than 70% of all terrain in my country is like that and I would say 40-50% rest of the world. Thats why we still have infantry in today:lol:

Yes tunnels and passes/bridges are possible but for example tunnel through himalaja would take 100 years to build and amount of zeros in price... Ability to cross every single mountain for all kinds of units just takes important and realistic strategy element out of game. Opinion only ofcource:)
 
What about getting rid of Mountaineer entirely, and adding "can go on Peaks" to Guerrilla 3 ?

This is a win idea right here. I also support removing the 10% strength from amphibious someone mentioned earlier.

Edit: Letting airplanes sink ships will help ensure post-battleship naval combat turns out more correct than it is now.
 
The Iron Frigate looks late 19th century to me. Early 20th century (WWI) saw Dreadnought and Battle Cruiser as steam turbine vessels, which were both still in service in WWII, though outdated (witness Hood vs Bismarck). Mind you, battleships generally were arguably outdated by WWII due to air power (witness Prince of Wales and Renown).

Iron Frigate adds screw propellor + steel; the next advance was triple expansion + armour + turrets, then steam turbine + larger and better guns (in time for WWI), then rf rangefinding + diesel (during WWII for the UK).

I'd like to see the possibility of WWI style naval combat as well as WWII style. Maybe it's just that the Battleship appears rather late and with too advanced technology?

I think the Battleship is in the right place. I use "thirds of an era" as my benchmark for placing when a unit should see a replacement, and just about all the current ships are in the right place. The only exception is Pre-Dreadnought, which is getting replaced by Dreadnought a little too quickly. I'm pretty sure the Dreadnought is supposed to be the WWI battleship.

The only units that I can see adding without overcrowding the Industrial Era too much would be a precursor to either the Battlecruiser or the Pre-Dreadnought. Other than that, the ships are upgrading right on schedule, so I don't want to move anything else around or add too much. I can post the analysis if you want.
 
This is a win idea right here. I also support removing the 10% strength from amphibious someone mentioned earlier.

Okay. I'll do that the next time I upload a revision. Mountaineer will be gone, Can Pass Peaks will be added to Guerrilla III, and Mountain Leader will take the Mountaineer name because I hate to let a name that good and concise go to waste.
 
Okay. I'll do that the next time I upload a revision. Mountaineer will be gone, Can Pass Peaks will be added to Guerrilla III, and Mountain Leader will take the Mountaineer name because I hate to let a name that good and concise go to waste.

:goodjob:
 
Okay. I'll do that the next time I upload a revision. Mountaineer will be gone, Can Pass Peaks will be added to Guerrilla III, and Mountain Leader will take the Mountaineer name because I hate to let a name that good and concise go to waste.

What about worker, stelers, missionaries? Will they be able to to pass peaks?

I like the idea of tanks not being able to pass peaks, marsh, forest and junge.
Maybe some high-tech tanks could, but slowed down. If that is possible.
Maybe the the Hower tank could pass all terain.
 
Top Bottom