Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by 2K Greg, Jun 17, 2011.
I think it's a chain.
I believe "non-occupied" would be a settled city or a captured city *with* a courthouse. So, if you have meritocracy, 20 pop in a captured/courthouse'd or settled city would produce 1 less unhappiness than it would without meritocracy.
How about a sniper promotion that includes a % chance to kill a general when attacking a unit in an adjacent tile? The % chance only occurs when you defeat the unit you're attacking. And, if the sniper-promoted unit was upgraded through the archer path and has accuracy, the % chance is higher.
I'd actually say "when attacking an enemy unit in the same hex as an enemy GG, said GG is automatically killed". And make it a rank 4 promotion.
Oooor... the other I've already proposed.
But anyway, I don't think it adds much to the game. A "mortar" (or whatever) unit that lead from crossbowmen to RA would.
I like the mortar idea a lot more, for sure.
BTW, an OCCUPIED city is an annexed city that does NOT have a courthouse (it has the bloody chain below the banner). So NON-occupied would include puppeted cities.
I agree that a bleepin' sniper unit would be totally inappropriate for civ
IF the AI could handle being able to do BOTH ranged and melee attacks, I wouldn't mind heavy weapons (mortars, lite arty, heavy machine guns) being attached to melee units and each form of attack taking 1 movement.
In many wars, there were soldiers who specialized in ambushes, sharpshooting, and skirmishers. They would be relatively few in number, but they could inflict significant damage over to a group of units in both losses and morale. Age of empires actually had skirmishers.
If civilization was a pure war game, then obviously a unit representing snipers/saboteurs/guerrilleros would be needed. But we would also need then supply lines, morale, officials, formations, and some kind of correlation between civilians and military units, since a total war in civilization doesn't mean you loose 3/4 of your total workforce, etc.
It would indeed be REALLY cool to have all these in a scenario, and an AI at least half competent at manipulating the notions behind them. But I don't think the core game needs it. There are already enough mechanics graviting around war, IMVHO.
I'm with you on the Brandenburg gate, I don't understand the value of it, the great generals suck compared to Civ IV because they can't be added to the city as great people to train a better military. I usually just use them to start golden ages.
Actually, with the "-50% GG generation", Brandeburg Gate may actually become a "reasonable" wonder, if you havent' warred in the first eras and don't want to open Honor. Who knows.
But eventually, an "officer specialist" (just like a scientist specialist) might be a good new implementation, since GGs are the only GP that can't be popped, and they are becoming increasingly difficult to get... It could be like a regular specialist (extra gold, extra hammers, whatever, no need for fancy stuff like extra xp for the city units) for barracks and the like, that gave GG points.
Part 3 is now up. (Rome, America, Mongolia, Inca, Spain, Germany)
I'm uploading screenshots of what I think the new tech tree is going to look like.
Let me know if I made a mistake. I don't think so, however...
Civil Service will no longer take 110 turns versus the 69 turns compared to the other techs at the same level. But structurally, it looks correct.
I didn't modify tech costs, just tech links and placements. For visual reference, not for turn study. (I don't know the new tech costs )
Part 4 is now up.
(Iroquois, Greece, Ottomans, Polynesia, Egypt, England)
It even comes with new rankings.
yeah like in Axis & Allies (Atari 2004), I loved those guys. I call them light artillery. There needs to be something between crossbow and light artillery (mortar team) though. Or maybe there doesn't?
Heavy artillery would be what we have now.
Skirmishers were an organized military unit used from earliest ancient warfare, to classical, to medieval to the Napoleonic wars and beyond. They were essentially filled the "cheaper", slower calvary role. They were light infantry who would quickly run in (or flank, etc) and quickly engage (usually with ranged weapons, but not always) and retreating. They were said to be effective against heavier ground infantry who couldn't pursue them after their initial volley/attack.
They were not necessary and in fact, only rarely, "guerilla infantry".
Really like the addition of replay. Gives me something to look forward to during the later game. The old popup screen was not enough of a reward for hours of playing. This alone makes the patch great to me. Im not really into all the tweaks. Seems like a waste of time to me. Much rather them keep working on diplomacy, AI, multiplayer, and performance. Im a casual player and could care less if stonehenge produces 6 culture instead of 8. Seems like they do many of these simple tweeks just to show a long patch list.
Separate names with a comma.