DG3 Discussion - Game customization (using editor)

[Feodor Ardent]

Feo, I agree with you partially in theory. However, you can't deny that it is dumb that at least later-era arty units can't kill. I mean, think about it. In Civ3, you can pound a single Warrior with enough carpet bombing to level a city, and he still won't die! Obviously, if you are dropping bombs on an enemy formation, after a while you will drop enough to either kill all its soldiers or destroy its cohesion, eliminating it entirely from the battle (killing a unit in Civ terms.)

While it is quite possible for artillery to kill an INDIVDIDUAL or any number of individuals on a battlefield, the lesson of the last century of warfare is that it is almost impossible for bombardment to kill any land UNIT unless that unit is dumb enough to stand up, stand still and let itself be killed. The still-plowed up terrain of the Western Front from World War I and the current topography of Vietnam are the best evidence. It happens most often when the opposing unit is attacking, and, unfortunately, the game mechanics of Civ made killing an attacking unit with artillery virtually impossible.

Likewise, if you fire heavy guns at an enemy ship (be it the big guns of a battleship or shore-based anti-shipping guns) you will eventually sink that ship when you hit it enough times. Yet in Civ3, you can do no more than damage these units!

I am quite in agreement with you with regards to land and air units. When I first tried Civ III and discovered that you couldn’t destroy ships with aircraft, it was a real jaw-dropper. Makes no sense of any sort. My wife hates military history (plays all her games for cultural and diplomatic victories) and even she noted how stupid that was.

 

[Grandmaster]

OK, though I still feel we should include lethal land bombard on some units, I am glad that we are in agreement regarding giving late industrial/modern arty units (land artillery, warships, and planes) the ability to kill ships.

Oh, and to tell you, I set up a scenario in which I had about 20 carriers loaded with bombers, and 7 battleships in a coastal city guarded by infantry. My bombers has both lethal bombards. It took all the bombers, but I was able to sink all 7 battleships from the air in one turn. So Pearl Harbor or Taranto CAN happen in Civ3 if the proper modifications are made.

 

[Shaitan]

Lethal bombardment is either on or off, no? There's no way to allow bombardment to sink ships but not kill land units.

 

[Gingerbread Man]

You can give a unit leathal sea bomnard, or lethal land bombard, or both. So yes, a unit can sink ships but not kill land armies.

Personally, I think that industrial/modern land artillery, and industrial era fighters & bombers should have lethal sea bombard, and modern era airpower should be able to sink ships AND land armies.

Remember that today's Bombers have made soldiers die or flee their divisions, pretty much destroying the unit (please nobody take offence at this, just an example)

 

[Chieftess]

I wonder what the Civ3 Creation & Customization forum users would think of this thread. Anyway, I think Radar Artillery should have lethal bombard. Just study the 2nd Persian Gulf War.

 

[Bootstoots]

I think that no modifications should be made using the editor. If there was a way to have artillery and air units kill naval but not land units, I would support that change, but I do not support a modification to allow lethal bombardment against all units.

 

[Grandmaster]

Lethal Land Bombard and Lethal Sea Bombard are two different flags. Therefore, we can pick and choose who can kill what.

 

[Noldodan]

We should turn on the Lethal Sea Bombard option.

 

[naervod]

I agree that lethal sea bombard should be used.

 

[disorganizer]

well the dyp mod is huge and complex, but we all would start of with the same knowledge of the rules... you cant work on dyp with the classic strategies... but this is what makes that mod much more interesting than "normal" civ3...

just a note: we should list up all modifications we make in the rule thread, but i suppose that was what was planned anyways ;-)

 

[Shaitan]

We've hardly touched even the most common of normal Civ3 strategies. I see no need to abandon the regular rules for a huge mod. For me that wouldn't even be playing Civ3.

 

[Shaitan]

8 days of silence. Poll Posted