Combat seems Disgustingly Wrong! Help! Petition?

[SiranTheDespot]

As a forewarning, this is my first post and I have not read many of the posts on these forums. I simply feel compelled to ask and describe my view on the combat system of Civ3.

Easy, perfect example: My Tank attacks a Greek Hoplite on CHEIFTAN. My Tank loses hit points and even dies sometimes, and not even rarely! WHAT IS THIS? I remember reading a review (PC Gamer I think...) that described this annoying phenomanon. So what can we do? If I have a Battleship against a Galley, I don't want to lose any Hit Points! Much less three or four! (Which has happened, again on Cheiftan)

So I'd appriciate any input, advice, something... It really takes away from the game and the fun of rolling over a backward Civ. Not to mention it severely stalls one's war effort.

-Siran, the Benevolent Dictator!

 

[Bamspeedy]

Combat is random. Better units have better odds, but are not invincible. If they were invincible, having a tech lead would allow you to steamroll over EVERYONE *tooo* easily. The odds of a weaker unit winning is not determined by difficulty level, except for barbarians. (Barbarians are easier to kill on chieftain). Pay attention to terrain. If the defender is fortified, on a mountain or hill, in a metropolis, or across a river from the attacker, he has an advantage. It does not matter what terrain the attacker is on (unless attacking ACROSS a river).

 

[SiranTheDespot]

I see your point. And I do pay attention to Terrain and the like, but in a situation like a battleship against a galley, the battleship should automatically sink the galley.

I suppose on land units, like a Spearman against a tank, even in that situation there are logical ways it could beat it. You could reason that this backward civ with spearmen have absorbed some of the tech of others like you and might have learned to make or captured a small amount of "Anti-tank" weapons... I suppose...

It is tough to draw the line on this, though. No arguement there. Still, I think it could have been and still can be more realistic.

 

[TheNiceOne]

SiranTheDespot, its a shame you didn't bother to do a search first, as this is one of the most heavily discussed topics.

I'm part of the faction that prefer it the way it is. No, it is not realistic that a galley sink a battleship, but neither is the fact that a galley fights a battleship.

I would actually say that it is more realistic that weak units have a small chance. Going to war with invincible units is hardly very realistic, but if you prefer it, then you may do something about it in the editor.

I prefer the battles to be uncertain - makes it more interesting.


However, if you don't like it, it can be fixed with the editor in one of two ways:

1) Change the number of HP from 2/3/4/5 to 4/6/8/10 or whatever. Now the galley must be even more lucky to win.

2) Give units in later eras bonus HP, so that a regular battleship has 5 or 10 (or whatever) HP while a regular galley still has 3.

 

[robehans]

There is an illogical problem with especially tanks and M. Armors.
They're Panzer is so thick it would block any rifle or machinegun, never the less, a spear or pike.

Ofc, we here in Finland used Molotov coctails in the second world war, ahen we wanted to stop the russian tanks, but a spearman!?!?
How the hell should an ancient age unit know how to use petrolium to light up a tank!?

 

['Copter Pilot]

How the hell should an ancient age unit know how to use petrolium to light up a tank!?

Why the hell should the ancient unit still be alive when you have tanks? Just view them as some primitive, badly equipped unit, not literally as a group of spearmen who speak Latin to each other and don't wash very often. And recall the scene in The Last Crusade where Sean Connery defeats a tank with a fountain pen - "The pen is mightier than the sword".

 

[Mr.Supermonkey]

I would love to get some Civ 3 programmers, epuip them with spears and see if they can do ANYTHING to a tank.

 

[TheNiceOne]

Mr.Supermonkey, there are actually reports from WWII about japanese heroes that immobilized tanks with sticks, and after being immobilized a tank can be swarmed and taken out.

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by robehans

How the hell should an ancient age unit know how to use petrolium to light up a tank!?

Fire.

For instance, build a fire pit.
Or watch the Learning Channel, steal some gasoline, etc.
Or use the beauty trap.
Or get them while they sleep.
Do not expect the spearmen to stand in a fixed-line and wait to be wiped out by your armor units.

It is very rare in war that both sides do not pay a price in blood. However, the tank will usually win.

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by SiranTheDespot
I see your point. And I do pay attention to Terrain and the like, but in a situation like a battleship against a galley, the battleship should automatically sink the galley.

That sort of thinking allowed a small boat to nearly sink the U.S.S. Cole. There is risk in war, and even primitive warriors can be committed, imaginative and dangerous.

 

[sabo]

Originally posted by SiranTheDespot
As a forewarning, this is my first post and I have not read many of the posts on these forums. I simply feel compelled to ask and describe my view on the combat system of Civ3.

Easy, perfect example: My Tank attacks a Greek Hoplite on CHEIFTAN. My Tank loses hit points and even dies sometimes, and not even rarely! WHAT IS THIS? I remember reading a review (PC Gamer I think...) that described this annoying phenomanon. So what can we do? If I have a Battleship against a Galley, I don't want to lose any Hit Points! Much less three or four! (Which has happened, again on Cheiftan)

So I'd appriciate any input, advice, something... It really takes away from the game and the fun of rolling over a backward Civ. Not to mention it severely stalls one's war effort.

-Siran, the Benevolent Dictator!

You know I"ve read alot of threads comlaining about this, I think the biggest complaint is "SPEARMAN KILLS TANK" does anyone remember WWII when a man with a bottle full of gas and a rag for a fuse could stop a tank? The old Molitov cocktail...

 

[SirJethro]

Originally posted by sabo10


You know I"ve read alot of threads comlaining about this, I think the biggest complaint is "SPEARMAN KILLS TANK" does anyone remember WWII when a man with a bottle full of gas and a rag for a fuse could stop a tank? The old Molitov cocktail...

Of course, you forget that this spearman is thousands of years old. Probably not much arm strength left. Would probably kill himself in the process.

 

[Jon Shafer]

Guys, it's not a realism issue, it's a gameplay issue. Looking at things realistically, if someone got a new tech (say, motorized transport), then suddenly they have tanks, which are 5 times as powerful as anything else, then they can immediately go to war and everyone else will lose, because Tanks are so much better than Riflemen... see where the problem is? The AI isn't so great at upgrading (needless to say), and by making more modern units more powerful, all you'll be doing is making the AI at an even greater disadvantage in order to gain more realism.

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

Yeah it's annoying that sometimes a spearman defeats a tank but when it's your spearman vs. the AI's tank do you complain?

Besides, it is important to attack in numbers to diminish the power of the occasional setbacks you might encounter.

 

[sabo]

you are right Moff, who has ever attacked with just one tank, unless of course it was a hurt infantry somewhere away from a city all by himself, heck, I'd even attack him with MI

 

[Chinese American]

Did you take into account familiar terrain, high ground, magical spells, summoned demons, divine intervention, voodoo dolls, guerrilla warfare, traps, special weapons and tactics, bribery, committed resolve, or maybe even luck, chance and randomness? I know Civ games tend to have a special feature called a random number generator that determines battle outcomes and other events.

After all, the spearman did have thousands of years to improve and to perfect his profession. Just because he can't drive a tank doesn't mean he can't take one out.

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Chinese American
Did you take into account familiar terrain, high ground, magical spells, summoned demons, divine intervention, voodoo dolls, guerrilla warfare, traps, special weapons and tactics, bribery, committed resolve, or maybe even luck, chance and randomness?

Might I add bribery, subterfuge, betrayal and fear of native wardrums. Oh, and stupidity and incompetence.

 

[sabo]

Originally posted by Chinese American
Did you take into account familiar terrain, high ground, magical spells, summoned demons, divine intervention, voodoo dolls, guerrilla warfare, traps, special weapons and tactics, bribery, committed resolve, or maybe even luck, chance and randomness? I know Civ games tend to have a special feature called a random number generator that determines battle outcomes and other events.

After all, the spearman did have thousands of years to improve and to perfect his profession. Just because he can't drive a tank doesn't mean he can't take one out.

Yeah but that's only on the second Tuesday of the month when the wind is blowing from the Southeast during a full moon

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by sabo10


Yeah but that's only on the second Tuesday of the month when the wind is blowing from the Southeast during a full moon

Oh yeah, good point . . . and the weather.