cavalary movement point

[cort]

did u notice the increased movement points for cavalary?
it is equal to what an armor has.. strange..
i guess they considered the fact that roads cannot be used in enemy territory but again making the movement rate of a cavalry and an armor equal does not make sense.. perhaps the armor should be increased as well but from the screenshots we have seen so far it still has 3..

god bless fraxis.. they seem to have much headache from this poorly balanced unit stuff..

 

[jc011]

well, in real life, cavalry could probably go just as fast as an armor, but for movement of the mech infantry, i think mech infantry should at least have 3 like the armor if not 4, but 4 i think is quite excessive.

 

[Black Fluffy Lion]

6/3/3 is very powerfull, especialy compared to the other units we have seen. I have never used cavalry before but now I definately will.

 

[The Last Conformist]

While nobody 'll doubt that modern tanks are faster than horses on decent roads (at longer distances at least - not all tanks can outdo a racing horse for top speed), the movement characteristic in Civ mainly comes to play when moving in "unroaded" terrain. I doubt that tanks can keep a significantly higher speed cross-country than can trained horsemen.

"Tactical" speed, ie how fast a unit can move in actual combat, is presumeably rather included in the attack characteristic. That'd be why Dragoons have a higher attack rating than Musketeers, despite that the Musketeers normally'd have a higher fire-power in real life.

 

[Graeme the mad]

I think this kind of movement rate is more sensible: Remember in the real world pracically every unit would be able to move at a rate of around 100 per turn considering that a turn is 25 years BC and alexander the great capured a huge land empire in aobut 5 (go on tell me im wrong, because I know I am but too lazy to look up exactly how long it is)

As well as this we need faster units for the huge maps - I am presuming tanks have more movement points as well.

 

[cort]

let me state one thing; napoleon's cavalry in the 19. century was not advancing MUCH faster than ancient chariots.. a horse is an horse after all..

its the mobile warfare that made it possible what germans did in the second world war.. no doubt on that.

moreover, in terms of civ gameplay, movement is not only movement, most of the time it directly effects your assault capacity as well..

so making them equal for cavalary and armor.. dont know.. we'll play and see..

 

[The Last Conformist]

Most German advances during WWII wasn't very fast compared to, say, the Mongol armies back in the 1200s, for the simple reason that the speed wasn't dictated by the top speed of the vehicles (hey, an armoured car could've driven from Berlin to Moscow in a couple of days!) but by the enemy resistance, plus logistics of course.

 

[cort]

Originally posted by The Last Conformist
Most German advances during WWII wasn't very fast compared to, say, the Mongol armies back in the 1200s, for the simple reason that the speed wasn't dictated by the top speed of the vehicles (hey, an armoured car could've driven from Berlin to Moscow in a couple of days!) but by the enemy resistance, plus logistics of course.

well im no german nor have any sympathy in the nazi stuff but you have to admire that invading europe that fast was a considerable thing considering the resistance they have faced from tens of nations..

not much comparable to what mongols crushed in the 1200s i beleive..

 

[redsoxrule85]

dont forget; the polish cavalry were armed with spears basically-their military was outdated about 40 to 50 years!

as quoted by Black Fluffy Lion:

I have never used cavalry before but now I definately will

i almost always use them... i would play on prince or king level(hey im not the best), and after the enemy gets musketeers, tis pretty hard at that time to conquer walled cities. id capture their civ for the most part, then when tactics is discovered, move in the cavalry, which goes pretty unchallenged, even for walled musketeers i HATE cannons and catapults, because they move so slow! i always just kept to dragoons and cavalry, and by then, id have won

 

[Ethics]

Its kind of ironic how chariots have gone from an extremely powerful unit in Civ1 to extremely weak in Civ3(as far as we know).

 

[Graeme the mad]

In civ1the chariot was powerful but I almost never built them in civ2 because I got polytheism before the wheel.
Anyhow the way they are done in civ3 is more accurate - chariots wrn't very effective, cavalry replaced them because of their greater manouverability, speed and cheaper cost

 

[jedi rat]

A question: Where did you see tanks movement 3?

Probably a horse could run almost as fast as a tank (not on a road), but for how long?

I believe that Germans success in first few months of the 2nd war was mainly due to:
Ignorance, naiveness and stupidity of generals and governments of France, England, USA and Poland who trusted in pacts with all mentioned before. Blitzkrieg took Germans over 30 days (to occupy Poland) and that was mainly because Russians attacked Poles from other side. It is true that Poland was at least 50 years behind Germany when it comes to militaristic development, but in 30 days one could walk across Poland. So was speed of those tanks so effective?