DigitalBoy
Emperor
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2006
- Messages
- 1,347
The idea behind exorbitantly high upgrade prices is clear. Being able to upgrade for cheap would be borderline exploitative. I recall disconnecting resources in CivIII just to build obsolete units for less shields, reconnecting the resource, and paying gold to upgrade them was an exploit that had to be amended.
Fair enough, but I still think it's bogus that I have to delete entire armies of units just because I don't have the gold to upgrade them all. Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to be able to spend hammers to upgrade units instead of (or in addition to for all those purists) unreasonably high amounts of gold?
Send an obsolete unit to a city with a barracks (or drydock or airport for naval and air units) and then have a unit action that removes the unit from the game "attached" to the city. Then the city gets a new build option where it upgrades the old unit (with promotions) to a modern unit by spending an amount of hammers equal to the difference.
That way you have a relatively non-exploitable and much more efficient way to upgrade units so that I don't have to delete my 20 archers come Feudalism. >_>
Fair enough, but I still think it's bogus that I have to delete entire armies of units just because I don't have the gold to upgrade them all. Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to be able to spend hammers to upgrade units instead of (or in addition to for all those purists) unreasonably high amounts of gold?
Send an obsolete unit to a city with a barracks (or drydock or airport for naval and air units) and then have a unit action that removes the unit from the game "attached" to the city. Then the city gets a new build option where it upgrades the old unit (with promotions) to a modern unit by spending an amount of hammers equal to the difference.
That way you have a relatively non-exploitable and much more efficient way to upgrade units so that I don't have to delete my 20 archers come Feudalism. >_>