Units

@Mattygerst:

Good idea having Russia's unique building decrease war weariness.

How's your modding going? If you have programming related questions, you can send a PM to RocknRolla. He is just learning civ4 but is an experienced programmer. I told him you may hit him up once and a while for advice as you advance with c++ and python. ;-)
 
agree broadly matty, what did for napolean was winter, most of his men froze and starved.

I would class the average russian soldier as pretty poor. Bad morale, poor training, sub par weapons and protection. Man for man russias conscript based army sucks in training, quality andequipment.
 
Actually thinking about it, Russia has only stopped invasions because of 1) General Winter, and 2) Numbers! The only way Russia was able to stop the Nazi's in WWII was because Stalin just sent waves and waves of men at the Nazi's until they pretty much took out the entire invasion force.
 
I was looking at the unique units/buildings listed on the Spreadsheet posted, and I saw that no Russian unique unit/buildings are listed.

Using history as a guide...I suggest creating a building that decreases war weariness in the city it is built. Something like -75% war :mad:

Unit:
Infantry units should get a 2 city defense bonuses to start, along with +10% strength.

This would represent the fact that Russia has never been successfully taken over - even though they have lost major portions of land/population, the Russian soldiers fight back and continue to fight. They took down Napoleon, and outlasted Hitler's Wehrmact and continued fighting - even when all looked lost. This would represent the city garrison promotions, and the decreased war weariness building.

Possible Russian Infantry Unit graphics: http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=8755

Building: I'm not sure...but why not just use the Kremlin/a variation of the Kremlin as the unique building that can be built in all cities. It is a part of Russian culture, dating all the way back to the Czars/Byzantium empire...so maybe just use the Kremlin and allow it to replace the Jail, and use it as their unique building. The Russian peoples seem to be able to take on a brunt of fighting without getting as discouraged as other militaries such as the USA. The citizens seem to take fighting hand in hand with life, and it has been a major part of Slavic history/culture.

Russia was taken over by the Mongols (Genghis Khan).
 
Russia was not a united country at the time of the Mongol expansion...just Slavic tribes who mostly warred with each other.

Modern Russia has not been taken down & took 2 of the most supreme fighting forces in the world down, also.
 
that was 65 years ago the last time and it was Imperial Russia and the USSR that did that, alots changed since then.

alots changed. th russian armed forces are run down, outdated, abusive, have poor morale and poor training, there weaponry is nearly all at least 25 years out of date and there doctrine is of the sae vintage.

I would rate russias military well below anything in the EU, except in vast quanties of semi obsolesent equipment.
 
Not much was different at the out-set of the German invasion of WWII. Russia had no weapony during that time (airforce was captured/destroyed). They had the more advanced tank - but not to start AND so many were actually caught by the Germans, that it was basically a non-factor. It was the people (granted they lost 10+ MILLION people in WW2 in combat, but - who else would keep fighting like that?) I know the French didn't. The Italians didn't, etc. And I know the Americans would not have as we've seen post-WW2. I am only speaking to their heritage of being able to withstand that hit and keep fighting on as a people.

All I am trying to say...is that, historically speaking - the Slavic peoples are more prone to warring, and also more prone to living WITH war. Being from the USA (and this goes ESPECIALLY for the generations that 'matter' today (ages 18-55), the USA doesn't have the 'stomach' it has been made out to have. We were all happy and uppity about going to war with Iraq/Afghanistan... and once the public found out that war is hard, and long, and people die - the country quickly lost its morale for it (much like Vietnam, etc.).

The only point I was making was that the Slavic peoples - historically - have been more apt to grind it out. Its their nature as people. That is why I suggested a military unit being infantry - the lowest level of military unit - but, just stronger/more defensive - showcasing the "lasting-power" the Slavic people have shown through history.

No way was I comparing their military strength or weapony with the more modern nations.
 
(granted they lost 10+ MILLION people in WW2 in combat, but - who else would keep fighting like that?)

China of course!

And note that, for Russia, WW2 is only 4 years, for China, it is 8 years!
 
It must be the solidarity of those cultures. China and Russia are two of the more prominent nations that are fairly big on maintaining their own, distinct cultural identity. It must be that strong feeling of Nationalism that keeps those peoples going in the face of grave despair.
 
the comparisons you make with France and Italy are disparaging, whereas the USSR and Imperial Russia could retreat thousands of miles into the russian steppe and call on vast reserves of manpower, Italy nor France had this option, Neither did they have bitter arctic winters to help them on the defensive

Russia is a different place today, people are emigrating in droves, an ageing population. massive social problems and declining population numbers, Russia's population isnt even that large when compared to the USA\China\India. What keeps the disparate peoples of the Russian Federation os a fervent nationalism and hollow national pride whilst constantly looking for enemies that dont exist (E.U\NATO & USA).

Russia is a fragile, backward and weakened state, dependent on the price of Natural Gas and Oil for her newfound wealth (also, she spends less on defence than the UK whilst having a military nearly 10 times the size). Says it all really.

Also, nothing special about the Slavs, every country in Europe has been at war with its neigbours at some point in the last 1000 years, sometimes multiple times, look at the military histories of France, Britain, Spain and the Dutch to name four, all countires that have long histories of brutal warfare across the four corners of the globe.
 
Russia was taken over by the Mongols (Genghis Khan).

No, actually that was Ögedei Khan (Genghis' son) who conquered Russia, Genghis was dead by then, sadly :)
 
No, actually that was Ögedei Khan (Genghis' son) who conquered Russia, Genghis was dead by then, sadly :)

To be more accurate, Ogedei was conquering Russia and retreated when he heard the news Genghis was dead. So technically, Genghis was still alive when his son was conquering Russia, at least the beginning. ;)
 
Actually thinking about it, Russia has only stopped invasions because of 1) General Winter, and 2) Numbers! The only way Russia was able to stop the Nazi's in WWII was because Stalin just sent waves and waves of men at the Nazi's until they pretty much took out the entire invasion force.

..and the arrogance of Operation Barbarossa and the inability of the Blitzkrieg tactic over long distances. Plus a general disregard for the Slavic population and that of Ukraine. Also splitting the German Army into two. The Soviet Union could well have been taken over if it hadn't been for some key mistakes and forthcomings.
 
The point I was making is that the army continued to fight...even after losing over 10 MILLION soldiers.

The same can not be said for most westernized nations. The USA would not have the will...nor would the UK...nor would other European countries. That is my opinion, solely.

The fact that the people continued to fight and didn't abandon the army en masse is fairly surprising, and a testament to the will of the people to continue fighting.
 
.

The fact that the people continued to fight and didn't abandon the army en masse is fairly surprising, and a testament to the will of the people to continue fighting.
Not especially suprising when you consider the terrible fear tactics Stalin imposed on all generals and soldiers. This includes of course the, no retreat policy where anyone falling behind the line would be shot.
I'm not saying the Russians weren't brave and honourable, but I think under the same conditions both the U.S. and UK would do the same.
 
Okay, now I'm on to the Units to be made and put into the mod.

I have but 2 questions that I'd like answered, first before I start actually implementing these into the mod.

#1 - Does anyone know (and please no speculation) for sure if the Civ engine uses new units correctly? As in...we make new "modern armor" units. But the USA (just as an example) has a 40 strength unit, and we decide that the current Chinese version is a 36 strength unit. Does the AI realize and understand that the units have been altered and modified with different power rankings? Or...will it simply use the code for a "modern armor" and use the same as if it was two 40 strength units squaring off? Another example: We build a new Jet Fighter unit for the USA tht has 75% chance of evasion. Will the AI use this jet "more often" to do bombing/attack missions with the increased evasion chance? Or is this too far outside the line of thinking for the AI?

#2 - Sheep, where did you get all that good information from? I'd just like to know so I can read up on it in my own spare time for curiousity's sake.
 
We don't have UUs for the main weapons manufacturer states. *sigh*
 
Top Bottom