Allow ship hopping?

[Matrix]

Ship hopping is when you load units in a ship (in a city), that ship moves into the ocean and unloads it into another ship. That ship moves again, etc. Thus you can move you units infinitely far away, as long you have enough ships.

My vote: allow. For each number of squares to move extra, an extra ship is nescessary. Allowing this means your units will be delivered more spreaded along the time, and only if the transport ships are on the right place. If you disallow this, all units will be delivered on the same time: the time at which the last units would be delivered with ship hopping.

When building transport ships, you pay for averagely more units per turn delivered. With ship hopping it only means more spread over the time.

Yet I have doubt, hence this poll...

 

[LaRo]

The sea unit deplacement is ridiculous as air units.

Waiting for a range extension, it's a kind of remedy so it should be allowed.

 

[Aeson]

I've never played a Civ 3 game and found setting up a ship chain to be worthwhile.

It's almost always better to land with your whole force at once, rather than one transport at a time.

 

[Chieftess]

I thought about it a bit, and I think with modern units, it's more realistic (planes can move anywhere now - rebase). So, hoping from ship to ship (and it's still somewhat limited), is a bit more realistic (it doesn't take a "year" to move halfway around the world.

 

[BillChin]

I vote for allowing one hop. Endless hopping is a bit silly, but one seems reasonable and within the spirit of the game. Hopping is primary for peace time transport, not for massive invasions.

 

[MuddyOne]

With railroads moving units instantaniously on a continent, and planes being stationable anywhere within one turn, I don't have a problem with ship hopping. (Though I never thought about doing it )

 

[skaternate]

I don't see why not. It is a bit of a silly thing to do for a main invasion force, but I might find it usefull for moving reinforcements from one continent to the other. I don't think their is any real way to be able to tell wether someone is doing this or not anyway, its just on the honor system. If it where possible I would say allow it the industrial age and forward, and dissallow it for the past time periods, face it a galleon couldn't make it around the world very fast, but a transport can.

 

[Gargouille]

I remembered doing it in Civ II..., since I have forgotten!

I will never use that brilliant tactic myself, but it should be allowed.

 

[Matrix]

I think the outcome of the poll and the arguments used here are quite convincing.

Hop whatever you like!

 

[cracker]

I personally use "ship hopping" all the time to ferry workers, settlers, and explorers across the oceans. Either back from the front or forward to settle the captured territory

My standard approach is the wave of 5 or 6 transports full of assault troops and either capture or build a beachhead city and then rush a temple and an airport. As soon as the Airport is on-line all the transports are worthless except for ferrying the workers and settlers that have been deliberately sentenced to riding in steerage throughout the ages instead of being able to ride in airplanes.

I even use the airports to speed the transfer of conversion units (longbowmen, swordsmen, cavalry, etc) that are only built with the intent of disbanding them in the captured frontier cities to feed the forced build of improvements when curruption has the frontier at a standstill.

Ship hopping just speeds up some of the more mundane unit movements that should have been possible by air - BUT ARE NOT DANGIT!

 

[civ_steve]

A couple of GOTMs ago (the Americans), I would build a new Tank, railroad it over to a port, transport it to the adjacent continent, railroad it to the other side, transport it to an adjacent island, railroad it to the other side, transport it across to the next island, railroad it to the Front Lines, and engage in combat, all in one turn. 3 Transports, properly placed, along with a developed railroad system, allowed up to 8 units to be so moved. All the loading and unloading makes this seem a little excessive, but the same could be accomplished by an Airport. The effect on the game was negligible; I was so far ahead, and final victory was just a matter of time. I vote to allow, and it looks like that is the ruling by Matrix.

 

[Gregski]

I think that either the ships should be given greatly increased movement especially galleon onward, or a built-in ship-hopping system to make this more automated. In other words if you have a large navy of transports, it should be beneficial. Personally I hardly ever used ship-hopping except protecting precious settlers from the sea/ocean in galleys. I just load up 6-10 transports to the brim with raw firepower so that all my transports arrive at the destination at the same time.

 

[JohnnyReb]

Ugh! I voted no. This smacks me as a horrible cheat (I didn't even know you could do this...never really considered the possibility).

How difficult do you think it would be to transfer a division of troops (not to mention an ARMOURED division) from one ship to another in the high seas? Sorry, I just can't see them 'hoisting' an M1 Abrams battle tank from one transport to another in the ocean.

 

[jimtess]

How do you do infinite ship hopping? I lose a movement point everytime I transfer from one ship to another.

Thanks,
Jim

 

[Matrix]

The ships have to be on the same square. Then you activate the units and press "l" and load all the units into the empty transport ship. So just don't move them in; just unload and reload.

 

[Merle Corey]

Smacks of an exploit to me. The computer opponent doesn't do it, right? It's easy enough to beat up the ai - being the ******** step-child that it is, without taking advantage of built in 'blind spots'.

Otoh, if you get to the point in the game where ship chaining is possible for you to do, then you've probably already beaten the ******** step-child & it's just a matter of finishing them off.

Not something that I would do when playing the step-child at any rate.

Cheers,

 

[Night Raider]

How difficult do you think it would be to transfer a division of troops (not to mention an ARMOURED division) from one ship to another in the high seas? Sorry, I just can't see them 'hoisting' an M1 Abrams battle tank from one transport to another in the ocean.

I agree with the point in principal, however, how long does it truly take to transport an ARMOURED division around the world? With Air Power it takes days to a few weeks for one division, with Ship power two to three months for more. Remember Iraq invaded in August, we had an airborne division in Saudi within days, Armored was completely there in a few months, ground war started in January if I recall.

I think in spirit, the transfer is OK since it is more in reality of the speed of the game. I would be for disallowing it, if they would speed up the movement rate of the ships, at least in the modern age. With the introduction of nuclear power, ships should be able to cruise an additional two to four spaces.

 

[Exsanguination]

Originally posted by Merle Corey
Smacks of an exploit to me. The computer opponent doesn't do it, right? It's easy enough to beat up the ai - being the ******** step-child that it is, without taking advantage of built in 'blind spots'.

I know in civ2 the AI used this endlessly, thats how I learned about it. But I don't know whether the civ3 AI does it.

 

[Merle Corey]

Originally posted by Exsanguination


I know in civ2 the AI used this endlessly, thats how I learned about it. But I don't know whether the civ3 AI does it.

Humm. If I ever knew that, I forgot about it... I haven't seen the civIII pc players doing it. Thanks, I learned (re-learned??) something!

Cheers,