Bring back "firepower"

[rtdoplex]

Originally posted by rcoutme
Consider Afghanistan: The Taliban probably had a tech equivalent to muskets. This did not mean that they could not fight. It meant that most of the weapons were inferior and that their realistic chances of victory were very small. Consider also, the Sioux, Iroquois, Apache, etc. They did not have the technology to produce firearms and yet Custer was literally outgunned at the battle of Little Bighorn.

Well just to be fair I think it's worth pointing out that the Taliban uses automatic rifles such as the AK-47/AK-74 with regularity. It's not like they're attacking coalition tanks with rocks or anything. I mean you can get an automatic rifle black market for probably several hundred dollars US.

And as far as the Indians go, the battle of Little Bighorn was an exception rather than the rule. You have to realize that Custer and his troops were a) trapped in a maze of ravines and b) outnumbered 3 to 1 in that battle. That was pretty much a disaster and a fluke. I think the real test of the technology of the indians is where it got them. They were all wiped out, not just in North America, but Cortez and his men pretty much flushed out central america as well. If the technology of the indians could hold up against modern firearms, then they'd still be around, and I'm sure there would be more than one example of a battle that they won in the 200 year history of the indians in conflict with western europeans.

 

[rcoutme]

Actually, the native Americans did have lots of victories. As for South America, it was the imperialistic ways of the Incas that did them in. All of their so-called allies hated them and the Spanish basically started what amounted to a massive civil war with themselves directing the blows and reaping the benefits.

To answer the question of why both Attack and Firepower, as I stated in an earlier thread, citizens (and now roads, etc.) need to be vulnerable in the AA and survivable in the modern age. This will not work if the attack values alone are increased.

 

[Jawz II]

u can buy an old AK for 50$(not in US),although not new,and maybe not in gret shape,defenitly working,when u buy a large numer of them

the talibans didnt have technology compared to musketsm,afghani blacksmiths are known for they craftsmanship,once i saw a documentary about that,this one guy didnt even have an anvil,much less power tools,he put the rifles on the floor and banged on them,yet still he made beautiful boltactions,god know how he made the barrels

in their early wars with the english they even had better long rifles than the english

they lost the war due to american air supperiority,same thing in iraq

they had no industry

hell i remember 10 years ago or so,before the taliban took power,this afghani guy came to our school,he spoke about the condition of their country after the soviets,he said everything was bombed to dust

they had for example no building for their government,they had to keep meetings in tents!!


we had a theme day where we collected money for rebuilding of afghanistan

ps.another major factor that hurt indians bad was biological warfare

they died in droves from white mans cooties!!

and the whiteman didnt hesitate one second to use this as a weapon

god i hate custer and cortez,although the incas had some very very distasteful rituals...

but all those other indians i liked,too bad they all got murdered

 

[micmc]

boy we're goin' get killed for taking this waaaay off civ-mod topic...but *shrug* they can only kill us once...and most folks need more practice anyway.

Preface: I'm an old liberal...who also knows a little about history and socio's --ologies (all them pudding sciences which fight like girls for funding). With that said let me do some old fashioned conservative ranting...

yeah the white man..bad evil guy....all the ills of the world rest on his head and he brought nuthin' to nobody. well except a society(ies) which lets us have the time to examine history fairly...and learn. The white man is an evil bad guy...oh and one gentle enough to allow children to grow up thinking some religous rituals of another people are icky.

other topic....craftsmanship traditionaly has lain with the hands of the crafter not the tools they employ. meaning if the skill is there they will find a way to make it work. Up til about 150 years ago the tech-differences between people had nothing to do with warfare --as in killing people. It took "a man with a bayonet with some guts behind it" on all sides, where tech made a difference is in logistics; the ability to get your guys into the place where you wanted to grow cotton and some other guys had the bad fortune of raising their kids on the same property.

and the nice thing about the white man, his days are numbered in the states at least, give it a hundred years and everyone will be polyglut brown. not a bad thing, but it did mean the white guys in Little Rock who were fighting for their indingeonous rights, like other native people have done, were right and the civil rights movement was going to destroy their way of life.

Its not cooties put into blankets and given to starving freezing people, but words can kill as quick, and more deeply because when you revise history, you kill the memory of those who lost the fight.

We can not fight for a global ideal of equality, or at least fairness by damning any group

 

[a4phantom]

When tanks lose to spearmen I put it down to friendly fire, the result of carelessness that arises from facing such a weak enemy. It was even wierder in Civ2 when spearmen could shoot down stealth bombers.

rtdoplex: The Taliban even had Stinger missiles. That doesn't mean they could produce an AK-47, or a lightbulb.

 

[mevlin]

I'd say the bottom line is, we're not talking about one tank vs 1 pikeman are we? I thought that one unit in the game is represented lots of tanks/pikemen. I think it's totally unfeasible that a legion of tanks (represented by 1 unit in the game) can be beating by a legion of men with pikes (represented by one unit in the game).

But then I've never seen it in RL so who knows...

 

[T-Money]

I think it's a good idea to bring back firepower, but then it's entirely unfair to civs that get bad starts without resources and behind in techs. If you control 80% of the land and have all the resources and come stomping over to the Zulu with your MAs, I think it's entirely fair that their Impis hav a small chance of taking you out. After all, even though people say this happens all the time, the real chance is probably about a quarter that of getting a MGL. After all, all it takes is the hatch open and a bucket of hot tar poured in and that tank's history.

But staying on the topic of firepower, tanks are not at all suited to fighting foot units, which is why the possibility of a Pike beating a MA is so real. The pikemen have the ability to dodge and run and sneak around and climb up on the tank, while all the tank has is a really big gun that takes a while to reload and maybe a chaingun. Tanks are designed to basically be mobile artillery that can defend themselves, and to be things that can stop other tanks. So I think firepower should be left out and more realism added.

Guerillas, for instance, should have a high probability to take down tanks due to their ability to coordinate and execute silent, accurate attacks. My uncle Jim, who was in Vietnam, told me that he heard a tale from his good friend in his battalion about a guy who's tank crew was murdered by a small group of Viet Cong who popped their hatch and dropped a grenade inside while the crew was sleeping.

 

[Midnight Piper]

[Justification Mode ON]The lesson is the same lesson learned by leader after leader since the advent of mechanized armor - they just don't perform well in urban combat situations! Any yokal with home-made weapons can be dangerous to that expensive tank once it enters a close combat situation and terrain that allows for constant ambush and encirclment opportunity. Best just to leave the tanks out in the open terrain where they can maneuver (eg, move quickly and hit the *non-fortified* spearmen from a position that does not include crosing rivers and attacking up a mountain!).[Justification Mode OFF]

 

[T-Money]

Precisely. Take the disaster in Mogadishu in the late nineties. Anyone who's seen the movie or read the book Black Hawk Down will know that mechanized units have no chance against foot soldiers. The hordes of screaming Somalis with AK-47s butchered the convoy in Mog, and they should be able to do it in Civ.

 

[Hellfury]

I'd say the bottom line is, we're not talking about one tank vs 1 pikeman are we? I thought that one unit in the game is represented lots of tanks/pikemen. I think it's totally unfeasible that a legion of tanks (represented by 1 unit in the game) can be beating by a legion of men with pikes (represented by one unit in the game).

If you think about it one legion of tanks may consist of arround 30 tanks where as one legion of spear men may constist of 30,000 men, mabye the tanks just dont have enough ammo to mow them all down.

 

[a4phantom]

Didn't you guys see Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade?

If your enemy is weak enough to have never upgraded his pikemen or never moved beyond pikes when you're using MA, you can probably spare the one lost to extreme bad luck. You might also consider playing at a harder level where the AI is up to musketmen when you come at them with Abramses. The bottom line is that realism is second to playability, and if there were truly safe wars where you couldn't possibly lose a single unit, it would not be much of a game.

In Civ1 that spearman on the coast could sink a battleship and in Civ2 he could shoot down a stealth bomber. Now that was wierd.

 

[Yuri2356]

I Belive I have explained the whole Spearman/Tank issue:

Better yet, how about a "find out everything you think is real isn't" ending?

Computer: Wake up Ceaser.
Ceaser: Wha?
Computer: The matrix has you Ceaser....
Follow the white spearman.
-blip-
Ceaser:

That would finally explain this:

After all, it's a COMPUTER GAME. Anything could hapen....
You seem to be leading to lives mr Meier. In one, you are Sid Meier, president of Fraxis Games. In the other, you are Julius Ceaser, Emporer of Rome. One of these lives has a future, the other doesn't.
Ceaser: I don't follow.
Just hurry up and bug him.
Ceaser: OW MY ENTRAILS!

 

[Philips beard]

They (Firaxis) should give old units from older ages a new look and appearance when you was entering a new age. Make them look like guerilla fighters or an angry mob, but keep their old lozy combat stats! Perhaps that would satisfy some people on this thread....

 

[Elgalad]

But Yuri.

It's very important that you learn one thing.




There is no spear.

-E

 

[Yuri2356]

But at the same time there is no tank....

Think about it....

What, you mean I can dodge bullets?
When the time comes, You won't have to.



- - - - - - - - *wooshingmatrixdodgeingefect*

 

[a4phantom]

But at the same time there is no tank....

Think about it....

But that's exactly the problem! Two seconds ago there was a tank!

Look, realistically could an Abrams battalion achieve elite status and then produce a great leader by crushing spearmen? "Yeah, General Schwartzenagger not only destroyed the bushpeople uprising, but by running them over instead of shooting them he saved us ammo! I'm not one to toss around the word hero, but he's clearly the Military Great Leader of our Civ." So it all balances out.