6K Man
Bureaucrat
It seems to me that a lot of this is opinion. Definitely SOMETHING is missing between Frigate and Destroyer. Whether it's 5 units, 2 units, or one unit, is a matter of personal preference.
Between Frigate and Destroyer
- Thread starter Colossian
- Start date
Wolfshanze, don't take it personally if a person doesn't appreciate your mod. I personally agree with Woody.
I think your mod has too much.
I personally think we need just the two I said earlier (oceangoing ironclad, and one step in between, to represent the latter part of the 19th C) and possibly a transport, but although there is a huge jump in the graphics I don't see a very good, and useful, intermediate step (I also really dislike the landing craft image for the modern transports, how about a transport vessel?).
Now a person who focus much more on the naval aspect of the game would likely love this mod, but it ain't for me.
I think your mod has too much.
I personally think we need just the two I said earlier (oceangoing ironclad, and one step in between, to represent the latter part of the 19th C) and possibly a transport, but although there is a huge jump in the graphics I don't see a very good, and useful, intermediate step (I also really dislike the landing craft image for the modern transports, how about a transport vessel?).
Now a person who focus much more on the naval aspect of the game would likely love this mod, but it ain't for me.
6K Man
Bureaucrat
I agree. Modders are providing a great service to other Civ4 players. I admire and appreciate the effort they put into modding... but at the same time, there are very few mods that I actually have or would install. That's just my preference.
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
A lot is a matter of opinion... but while I understand somebody seeks "one intermediate" unit, those that say I added too much don't even understand what I did... especially when they say I'm forcing six upgrades on somebody, which I'm clearly not.
I keep getting this...
But neither of you will explain exactly why what I've done is too much, and I think the reason why is because you don't understand exactly what I did do.
Okay... my mod addresses every single issue you point out here... the ONLY differance between my mod and what you stated is that I introduced TWO intermediate steps between a 12-point ironclad and a 30-point destroyer... two steps between 12 and 30 and you call me excessive?
Oceangoing ironclad? Covered in Wolfshanze Mod, same way default Civ4 handles almost every other naval era.
One step in between, to represent the latter part of the 19th Century?
Covered in Wolfshanze Mod... actually exactly as you describe... because there's Ironclads and Pre-Dreadnoughts... both 19th century eras of naval warfare... my 2nd add is actually an early 20th century step... Dreadnoughts... that's too excessive?
Possibly a transport? Covered in Wolfshanze Mod (Paddle Steamer).
I also really dislike the landing craft image for the modern transports, how about a transport vessel? Covered in Wolfshanze Mod... Landing Craft replaced by Liberty Ship transport.
but although there is a huge jump in the graphics I don't see a very good, and useful, intermediate step
So exactly what is wrong with my "Pre-Dreadnought" era... its units are intermediate, useful and representative of the post-Ironclad era... please explain how I didn't cover this.
Okay... I'm not trying to argue a differance of opinion... what I'm debating is the fact that I don't think you or Woody even understand what I did... you put out a laundry list of things you think should be fixed, and almost exactly to the letter I did exactly what you state... then you say I did too much? That's not a differance of opinion, I think you really don't understand exactly what I did, and I'll bet you a big wad of cash you haven't tried playing the mod to see how smoothly it plays-out. I made the mod to blend into Civ4, not scream "hey look at me, here's a dozen new units that are overkill".
Point by point, I addressed everything Woody and you said and explained how I covered each issue... the best counter I get out of you guys is "too many units or differance of opinion"... I'm fine with differance of opinion, but when you put out a grievance list and I cover each and every one of them, I'm baffled why you think the mod doesn't do what you want.
I honestly don't think you understand how I worked things into the game, because you complained about default Civ4's problems and my mod solves all of them.
We both did. And I will got into more detail later in this post.
I don't see the need for it. Sure land units are much closer together, but in most games I play they are far more important.
I did not notice that. Though one graphic is something I can easily deal with (I suffered through the paratroopers and marines, to name a couple, in civ 2 for years and years until I started modding the game, unfortunately civ IV is beyond my ability, civ II was the max).
That comment referred specifically to the transport line. Unless you buff the Transport, I don't really want/need another unit in that line, and I don't want the Transport buffed.
OK, what does your mod have that I don't want, from a quick glance.
1. And unnecessary step in the naval tech tree.
2. German flag changed to the swastika, the cross is a much better German symbol throughout history.
3. Longboat, Galleass, Early Tank, Heavy Tank, Early Bomber, Early Fighter.
4. Hirohito as a leader (Hitler I wouldn't mind, but still unnecessary)
5. More flavour units (I don't want them at all, actually)
In your mod's page one phrase completely turns me away from it, before I look at the details, which supports my initioal opinion:
"Many new units have been added, most of which are nation-specific"
You tout your mod and say it is exactly what we are asking for, but you are ignoring everything about your mod other than the naval units.
I agree with you about mods needing to be minimal (though the exact opposite is also true, i.e. RFC, but I hate the intermediary). I feel that only what is needed should be added (there are things in BTS I disagree with, i.e. Cuirassier, but there is enough stuff I want to compensate), and I feel a lot of you mod us unnecessary.
Well, yes, I do think it was unnecessary for BTS to introduce the Cuirassier unit. Generally, I think it's sufficient for each upgrade to be about 50% stronger than the prior unit. So, Knight (10) to Cavalry (15) was sufficient. It's a big enough leap to make you go, "wow... I have to get that tech and build those units", but not so much that you're overwhelmed if the enemy gets it first.
I suppose the Cuirassier allows one to skip the tech for Cavalry for awhile. So, perhaps it's not as bad as I make it sound above.
The problem with your mod is that the increases in strength are not enough to make the unit interesting enough to upgrade to. It just adds micro-management to keep up with the marginal increases to compete with the AI. The AI doesn't have to care about micro-managing.
I do think there is one unit needed to bridge the gap between ironclad (12) and destroyer (30). A unit of strength around 18 would allow that 50% increase in strength that is missing.
And, as another poster mentioned, your mod introduces a whole lot of other stuff (that I don't want or need) other than the naval ships you made.
As a general rule, I think mods should keep it as simple as possible. Increase the fun factor, without increasing micro-management or changing gameplay too much.
jeffreyac
Mostly Harmless
Wolf, for what it's worth, I like your mod very much, both for the additional navies and for the graphics upgrades... (especially for the graphics, as a matter of fact)
However, remember what the wise men say - ya can't please everybody all the time...
Oh, and here's a question for the masses - am I the only one that gets annoyed because privateers become obsolete? I have out-teched the AI to the point where privateers would still be effective (i.e. they're not building frigates yet) but I've accidentally obsoleted privateers, so I can't build any more... I love privateers, so this bugs me!
Granted, this only happens when you're WAY out in front of the AI anyway, but still...
However, remember what the wise men say - ya can't please everybody all the time...
Oh, and here's a question for the masses - am I the only one that gets annoyed because privateers become obsolete? I have out-teched the AI to the point where privateers would still be effective (i.e. they're not building frigates yet) but I've accidentally obsoleted privateers, so I can't build any more... I love privateers, so this bugs me!
Granted, this only happens when you're WAY out in front of the AI anyway, but still...
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
Hmmm... that should probably read "Many new graphic models have been added".
New units (not previously in game) mostly include the aforementioned naval units and the WWI units (Early Tank, Bomber & Fighter). I don't think there's really much else added to the game new-unit wise, though there are a TON of new graphic models.
Because my mod DOES focus on 1850 to 1920 ships and WWI units, that's why I put "1850-1920" in the tag line. A very underwritten time-frame in the history books, and Firaxis was prompt in continuing American tradition forgetting anything after the Civil War and before WWII.
There's a couple of naval units outside that time frame (Galleass and Boomer Sub)... and I tossed-in a heavy (WWII) tank... but I think that's about it for "new" units.
Absolutely right... but the funny thing is, I made my mod because I thought most of the mods out there introduced too much new stuff... I think out of the more downloaded mods, mine actually doesn't add a whole lot of new stuff in comparison to the kitchen sink approach a lot of guys do.Wolf, for what it's worth, I like your mod very much, both for the additional navies and for the graphics upgrades... (especially for the graphics, as a matter of fact)
However, remember what the wise men say - ya can't please everybody all the time...
Oh well... I made the mod to make C'est Moi happy. I just share it here if anyone else wants it... I do want what it does to be understood though... default Civ4 has light/fast, heavy/slow naval units for most periods it covers in the game, and I rarely build all of them... when folks say I'm "forcing" people to build every ship I've added to the game in, I roll my eyes and point at Firaxis... I just mirrored what they did and added two new naval tech periods. If they understand what I did and don't like it... that's fine with me. I know not everyone will want it.
Woody/say1988... I just wanted to be clear on what I did... I assure you there's plenty of more popular mods that added a LOT more then my own humble mod did to the game, so I do understand that "too much" can mess up a game, which is why I didn't try and add everything I could think of to the game. I did hold back from going add-crazy.
Oh well... can't please everyone. Move along!
Oh, and here's a question for the masses - am I the only one that gets annoyed because privateers become obsolete? I have out-teched the AI to the point where privateers would still be effective (i.e. they're not building frigates yet) but I've accidentally obsoleted privateers, so I can't build any more... I love privateers, so this bugs me!
Granted, this only happens when you're WAY out in front of the AI anyway, but still...
That doesn't bother me much. I think privateers were added to the game to give you a relatively brief period to stir up trouble. The period between frigates and destroyers is a long time. By the time I can no longer build any more privateers, I'm usually tired of playing terrorist.
Powerslave
Prince
Wolfshanze, what is your major malfunction? If someone doesn't like your mod, don't have a meltdown and start screaming at people in all caps. Just say, "Thank you for the feedback, and I hope you'll like future versions better."
You've managed to alienate me to the point that I'm putting you on my ignore list, and I'm probably more likely to recreate the aspects of your mod by hand, rather than use your mod and be constantly reminded of Aspie Meltdowns in forums.
You've managed to alienate me to the point that I'm putting you on my ignore list, and I'm probably more likely to recreate the aspects of your mod by hand, rather than use your mod and be constantly reminded of Aspie Meltdowns in forums.
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
I'm not going to lose any sleep over it Powerslave, but thanks for notifying me. For the record, I screamed at nobody and didn't use "all caps" in any of my posts. Name one post where I capitalized the whole post... just one. Thankyou, I thought so. You might want to reconsider what you define as a "meltdown", because your current interpretation of one needs a lot of work.
If you don't download my mod, I don't care. All I did was try and clarify what I considered a misunderstanding... no biggie... I never even wrote any posts to you Powerslave... but you're welcome to hate me just the same... I'm too old to worry about people not liking me.
Bahacles44
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2007
- Messages
- 46
The "not enough time to use and enjoy the units" problem can be solved by playing on marathon. Eeeeeverything lasts longer in Marathon!!!! (especially if you play on Great Plains with raging barbarians!! Though with all those naval units maybe a hemispheres map would be better.)
Wolfshanz, I understand you modded what you wanted, the problem was you just got way to defensive of your mod. I do agree many mods add a lot more, and I agree with you that that is generally a bad thing (now mods that drastically change gameplay can be a different story, but these are very hit and miss).
What you seem to miss is that people don't necessarily share your opinion. Argue your case, and if they disagree, then move on.
What you seem to miss is that people don't necessarily share your opinion. Argue your case, and if they disagree, then move on.
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
I thought that's what I did. I'm not mad at either you or Woody... I wasn't being "defensive" I was explaining... there is a differance. When a comment is made "I don't like your mod because now I have to build all these units"... to me, that's not an attack on my mod that I have to defend, that's an issue of clarifying why you're not forced to do anything, it's simply an option that wasn't there before.
I'm not mad at anybody, and frankly I don't care if nobody downloads the mod... not like I'm going to get rich off my mod... I made it for me... I offered it to others that might enjoy it as well... and if somebody says "I don't like this and this and this in default Civ4... and my mod fixes this and this and this... I'm going to say "hey, check it out, maybe you'll like it".
All I was trying to do was clarify what my mod does and doesn't do. Why Powerslave... who wasn't in any way, shape or form a part of this discussion decided he had to jump in, say (essentially) I'm a big loser and (apparently on some sort of powertrip) claim he's blocking all my posts (wow... I'm shaking in my boots now) is really beyond me... seems if anyone is a trouble-maker in this thread, it would be him.
Wodan
Deity
Yeah, it's called Ironclad.
Any one person may think the ironclad doesn't have gameplay balance, but that's a different question. And, it's subjective.
Wodan
Any one person may think the ironclad doesn't have gameplay balance, but that's a different question. And, it's subjective.
Wodan
But the ironclad is of limited ability (coastal only can really limit it on some maps, which are my favourite ones) and still leaves a large gap (18?). I often play on maps with a number of continents, where they make good defensive units, but are useless offensively, and if your opponent bulds them, your navy is almost toothless until destroyers come on the scene and butcher everything in the water.
Now on maps like pangea or archipelago with enough coast to link you to your enemy they become much more useful.
As for marathon, does that not also increase the time required to build the unit?
I never saw much point in the longer games when, from what I know, the ratios stay the same. Seems like a waste of time. Now if it added more turns, slowed teching, but left production the same, I might see a point to it.
Now on maps like pangea or archipelago with enough coast to link you to your enemy they become much more useful.
As for marathon, does that not also increase the time required to build the unit?
I never saw much point in the longer games when, from what I know, the ratios stay the same. Seems like a waste of time. Now if it added more turns, slowed teching, but left production the same, I might see a point to it.
Marathon does add time to build the units. But, it doesn't change the movement rate of units. So there's no problem with moving your units across the ocean before the enemy gets a tech-lead on you.
I play marathon a fair bit. I like it because it lets units stay useful a lot longer.
I play marathon a fair bit. I like it because it lets units stay useful a lot longer.
jkp1187
Unindicted Co-Conspirator
I agree w/this. Make it build-able with coal. In the interests of keeping the numbers of units down, it would be perfectly acceptable to me to have this replace the Ironclad unit as it exists now. (The same technologies enabling the Ironclad -- steel + coal -- seem to me to be the logical ones to unlock the Armored Cruiser, too.) I think anything other than having this unit as a replacement for ironclads (or, if it can be squeezed in between Ironclads + Destroyers, an addition,) is just adding units for the sake of adding units and will not enhance gameplay at all.
Normal games take long enough that I normally quit before finishing them, but quick doesn't feel right.
Plus I generally play, relatively, peacefully and only fight necessary wars before the modern age (generally when I get infantry and tanks, though I may take out a few weak opponents just before that to set myself up in a better position). And I generally try to win without much more advancement (production and gold, with universal suffrage, are far more important).
Plus I generally play, relatively, peacefully and only fight necessary wars before the modern age (generally when I get infantry and tanks, though I may take out a few weak opponents just before that to set myself up in a better position). And I generally try to win without much more advancement (production and gold, with universal suffrage, are far more important).
Similar threads
