I request no future era.

[h4ppy]

Now I know that several peopel have posted their want of a future era and I really request the oppisite. There are many reasons why a future era is not advisable.

Most people would have already won by then.

It goes against the history of the Civ franchise.

It takes alot of time to develope and would take resources away from the completion of other parts of the expansion.

It will delay the completion of fan made mods.

Many people would not want it.

It is unlikely to represent the real future.

It would make things unbalenced in favor of agressive civs.

 

[Civrules]

There are already techs that have not been discovered yet like the cure for cancer. But that is not so far in the "future" is it?

 

[h4ppy]

Originally posted by Civrules
There are already techs that have not been discovered yet like the cure for cancer. But that is not so far in the "future" is it?

Exactly it is reasonable to expect that within a couple of years that many forms of cancer can be eliminated. Several already have treatments and several drugs are in the late testing stages. However not only would a future era go into the future too far and begin to make stuff up but it is also a major change.(unlike CfC)

 

[Xen]

I agree, although near future units, such as the weopons, and troops the US plans to adopt in 2008 should make an appearence in the game, but nothing further then 50 years, if anything at all

 

[Civrules]

Exactly why I like it the way it is.

EDIT: You are right. Virtually, almost everything will be replaced in the U.S. military between 2006 & 2010. I would love all the new equipment to be added but...

 

[Black Waltz]

Well should Civilisation military hardware be based on only one nations military? No. I don't think so.

But I agree. No future age.

 

[Civrules]

Any suggestions then for other world's military weapons?

 

[G-Force Junkie]

Well, I don't know much about foreign militaries, but they could have a foot infantry called a LandWarrior which has a small computer that controls communication between soldiers on the ground and headquarters. The system also has GPS on it and a eyepiece display which can also display what is in the guns sights, so you can see what you are shooting as you stick your rifle around the wall.

 

[jabancho]

How about Foreign Legion? it will interesting to allow CIVS to recruit foreign lgionaries from other civs...

 

[Xen]

Originally posted by CadetEmperor
Well, I don't know much about foreign militaries, but they could have a foot infantry called a LandWarrior which has a small computer that controls communication between soldiers on the ground and headquarters. The system also has GPS on it and a eyepiece display which can also display what is in the guns sights, so you can see what you are shooting as you stick your rifle around the wall.

unfortuntley, that is still the in the US plans for the next generation of soldire in 2008- but that said its time to face reality, that the US military IS the military that all future ones will be based upon, there is no escaping it

 

[TerraHero]

but there are also techs that we DO have, that isn;t in Civ3

think about how US is shooting down missiles, with a lasser ppl

 

[Civrules]

Actually, when I think of it, there are tons of units and techs that were never the U.S.'s. Mainly techs from the ancient to middle ages. After that, most everything leads to U.S. units and techs.

 

[Michael York]

Originally posted by Black Waltz
Well should Civilisation military hardware be based on only one nations military? No. I don't think so.

But I agree. No future age.

Since a couple others said this too, he is my 2pence

The reason is simple. Most Soviet aircraft were developed by the KGB, not MiG, Tu, or Su. The F-22 is distinctly the most powerfull air-superiority fighter in the World. I read on a British Government sight that the only aircraft in the world that was demonstratably superior to the Typhoon is the F-22.

In the next decade, the combined US/UK JSF will be the world's premier fighter-bomber.

Will everyone build F-22's, no. But they will build something similar in an atempt to compete with it.

As far as Tanks, The M1-A1 uses a German gun & British Armor. It is not entirely American.

At sea, you can list every major naval advancement in tactics and technologies (of the last 100yrs) by studying both the RN & USN. Where one makes a mistake, the other gets it right.

We have the most technologically advanced military so ours provides a preview as to what is to come.

 

[khirkhib]

Quite frankly a manned mission even just a probe (let alone settlement) is not in the near future. A cure for cancer is probably longer off than some people think as well.

 

[Vietcong]

Originally posted by Civrules
Any suggestions then for other world's military weapons?

i think units shold be bassed off of soviet wepons..

ther more aroudn the world, more widley used and more know.. u see more nations with soviet wepoins like t 72s and mig 29s then with m1a2s and f 15s ect..

 

[Xen]

but soviet wepons are INFERIOR, civ3 needs to take its que from what the best militaries have to offer- and that means the US primarilly, followed by Britain, then Russia (modern, not old soviet),Italy,and France, but in the end its still the US for major hard ware, and troop armour (this said the Russians have a wonderful weapon planned for real production soon- buts it very expensive, and dosent have any of the tech quirks that the next generation US guns will have)

 

[trumpeteer]

There seems to be a lot of talk of US military dominance in the future. That remains to be seen. The US only took the lead in military tech because we have a couple more trillion dollars. I say no Future Era. I mean, the leaders are already 6,050 years old, and they've seen everything from the Wheel to a cure for Cancer. are we gonna make 'em work an extra 300 years or so? Give the leaders a break!

 

[Xen]

It would only be near-future stuff, like all the US stuff coming out in 2008- which no other country can match technologically, which just shows how far a "couple more trillion dollars" can go...

 

[Hellfire]

Originally posted by Xen
but soviet wepons are INFERIOR, civ3 needs to take its que from what the best militaries have to offer- and that means the US primarilly, followed by Britain, then Russia (modern, not old soviet),Italy,and France, but in the end its still the US for major hard ware, and troop armour (this said the Russians have a wonderful weapon planned for real production soon- buts it very expensive, and dosent have any of the tech quirks that the next generation US guns will have)

I would challenge that statement that Soviet weapons are inferior.

Soviet MiGs for a long time were highly advanced fighters, rivaling their western counterparts, simply because MiG test pilots were pushed to do more dangerous testing which created different results. In most of the west, you didn't want to kill your pilots because you needed those pilots and if you didn't care for their health they'd stop working for you. However, if you want to find out as quick as you can how to prevent a pilot from dying, put a bunch of pilots into airplanes and put them into dangerous situations and see if they die or not. That's how soviet tests often worked out.

The T-74 medium tank was considered the best tank of WW2, even better than German Panzers. Panzers aren't considered particularly faster than other tanks, they were simply stronger with better armor and weapons. However the Panzer unit in the game reflects the military philosophy of the Germans at that time which ends up giving you the player a speed bonus instead of attack and defense bonuses.

The AK-47 is not just a populur weapon because the soviets sold millions of them to 3rd world countries. Its a great technical marvel. The M-16 requires constant maintenance, and it does so for a reason. A captured M-16 won't work very well after a while. However, the quote I once heard was "you can throw an AK-47 behind a bush in a rice patty and leave it there for two years in the rain and then when you are attacked you can pull it out and you'll be guarenteed that it will still fire." Kalashnikov, the designer, made the parts on the gun so that it could take a lot of extreme wear and tear. The parts are suspended with a lot of play between them so that a grain of sand doesn't actually get in between them and cause weapon jams.

Don't discount soviet technology so quickly

 

[Hellfire]

Well first off, a future era isn't as playable any more. Back in 1990, stealth was one of those things we considered just outside what we knew, and now its here. Plus now we have the internet. Much of what we thought of as the future era 13 years ago is now already here and some of it is covered in the modern era. Without getting to sci-fi, which I believe defeats the point of the game, I don't think a future era is possible.

However, Doesn't anyone think that the spaceship program is a little wacky? Things happen too fast. Also, we are missing techs from Civ2 that I'd like to see, specifically Fusion power. We don't have semi-conductors in real life, nor integrated SDI defenses, so maybe a few "looking forward" techs might make the game more attractive. Just add them to the current tech tree.

EDIT: Oops! I said semi-conductor when I meant SUPER conductor... duh