Landing operations - realistic or not?

[generalwar]

After 1707... Britain*, not England.

*Britain; Informal for the country 'United Kingdom'. Includes England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Sorrrrry.

OK. Thanks for brief. In Croatia we always say England . I know the difference between Great Britain(island on which are England, Scotland and Wels) and UK is Great Briain + Northern Ireland, am I right(and some small colonies if we want be exact)?
Can someone tell me what is exactly War of 1812. about. I was reading a book about the history of USA that is really full of some crappy laws and, how far I know USA was disagreeing about some american forts in Canada or smth like that. I hate wikipedia, don't trust to it and don't have will to look at it. I knew to fond some stupid things in that so I want to hear you, my American and English (pardon me, British) side.
P.S. Are you, Americans, watching finals between Turkey and USA or do you watch only NBA? I always asked myself that.

 

[imperialman]

OK. Thanks for brief. In Croatia we always say England . I know the difference between Great Britain(island on which are England, Scotland and Wels) and UK is Great Briain + Northern Ireland, am I right(and some small colonies if we want be exact)?
Can someone tell me what is exactly War of 1812. about. I was reading a book about the history of USA that is really full of some crappy laws and, how far I know USA was disagreeing about some american forts in Canada or smth like that. I hate wikipedia, don't trust to it and don't have will to look at it. I knew to fond some stupid things in that so I want to hear you, my American and English (pardon me, British) side.
P.S. Are you, Americans, watching finals between Turkey and USA or do you watch only NBA? I always asked myself that.

Well the colonies are now just places that want to be run by the UK but close enough yeah. The Wiki article on the war of 1812 is pretty accurate, I suggest giving it a read.

 

[Schuesseled]

Wales isn't spelt Wels. Maybe you were thinking of Welsh.

 

[deanej]

At least it wasn't Whales!

 

[generalwar]

Wales isn't spelt Wels. Maybe you were thinking of Welsh.

I'm sorry, forgot that.I can't always write right. You're making mistakes too, aren't you? If you don't write you don't remember always. When you start writing and thinking about what have you written you'll rememer the word. I hate in English that some words can be spelled exactly as they are the same word despite that they look totally different. Be happy that I'm from Croatia, not from Serbia. They write New York Njujork, Wales-Vels. That would be a confusion. We have rule that we write as we read, but that's not true because we still write New York despite that we don't have letters Y and W to write it. Serbs don't boder with that. They literally write as they speak( At least for town names Im sure, because of war with them we, new generations, don't know a lot about them and their culture and that's a pity. ). So don't be mad if I write wrong some places or town names.

 

[generalwar]

At least it wasn't Whales!

I'm not that stupid. Whale is a resource in civ isn't it? How could I forget it and mix it with Wales? I'm wandering could you remember Croatia not as Croatia but as Hrvatska and pronunciate it right. But, it's easier to learn English then Croatian, so I don't know can I compare this. No, this is stupid, I can't compare this. England is the number 1 speaking language in the world and Croatia is a state that occupies 1/9000 piece of land part of Earth. Yea, can't compare it.

 

[deanej]

Believe it or not, some people in my AP Government and Politics class actually did spell it Whales. When the teacher looked at the papers, he then wrote "Wales" and "Whales" on the board and mentioned that such an error wouldn't leave a good impression on the grader of the AP exam.

 

[Gath]

Question:

Do ships cost money to procure? Shouldn't there be some sort of gold charge to load your troops? Seems like that would be a good balancing factor to me.

Also, the Mediterranean was a lousy place to move armies. The romans lost two entire fleets to storms in the First Punic War. I think the Spanish Armada and the Mongols two expeditions to Japan were already mentioned. The sea is a treacherous mistress.

I don't mind the lack of building transports, but I hope they're not free.

 

[Lordus]

Hello,
i was disapointed that transport ships will be erased from civ5, but if it will mean that sea battles will be more entertaining, why not.

I have to add to the previous discussion, that there are 2 different forms of war supply/army/troops transport over the sea.

First is that you described before: hiring commercial ships for transport.
Second is that if you want amphibious attack coast where enemy is (Normandy, most of Pacific campaing islands,..), you need special ships to succesfull assault.

So i will miss this possibility (and my favourite marines unit too - i have read a lot about amp. assaults during pacific campaign in WW2 (even before Pacific series )), so i hope there will exist some mod with current possibilities.

 

[Viatrix]

Question:

Do ships cost money to procure? Shouldn't there be some sort of gold charge to load your troops? Seems like that would be a good balancing factor to me.

Also, the Mediterranean was a lousy place to move armies. The romans lost two entire fleets to storms in the First Punic War. I think the Spanish Armada and the Mongols two expeditions to Japan were already mentioned. The sea is a treacherous mistress.

I don't mind the lack of building transports, but I hope they're not free.

They are not entirely free. Your unit needs to have a certain promotion (embarkation) in order to move on water. So you'll have your own land and sea troops!

 

[Niniux]

I don't see how it is as unrealistic as everyone is claiming it will be. I am pretty sure that it will take a turn to embark, which signifies getting the necessary transport ship to the loading area, etc. I hope that the unit is kept on a land tile, vulnerable to attack, while embarking and start out on the water tile next turn. It would make it so there isn't the cheese of just taking off if you're outnumbered without penalty.

 

[gunter]

To summarize, we have to speculate about the " transport " stats, therefore movement, strenght and above all how can they be sunk.

Any guess ?

 

[CyberChrist]

I am pretty sure that it will take a turn to embark, which signifies getting the necessary transport ship to the loading area, etc.

Where do those transport ships supposedly come from?

A nearby friendly harbor? If so then shouldn't it be impossible to embark if there is no safe/revealed route from a friendly harbor to the coastal tile you want the unit to embark in?

And if not from a nearby friendly harbor then why shouldn't the transport ship(s) require to be defended even when they carry no troops?


It seems to me that this new mechanism - despite the popular claim to the contrary - actually reduce the power of your navies, since you can now only work to prevent an overseas invasion (with your navy) when the enemy actually have troops in the water. Where previously you could also work on preventing overseas invasions by hunting/harbor locking empty transport ships as well.

 

[generalwar]

Now you'll have to defend yourself from sea too and enemy will be able to attack scattered in small fleets and few fleets will surely come to your Motherland. In civ 4 it was too random. Now, your sees will be flooded by enemy transports and battleships. How poetic: Your sees will be flooded...

 

[deanej]

They are not entirely free. Your unit needs to have a certain promotion (embarkation) in order to move on water. So you'll have your own land and sea troops!

They require a promo? I was under the impression that it was free. If said promo costs sufficient gold or is far enough down the tree, I guess I can accept this.

 

[gunter]

IMO this way it will be easy during a war to land a unit on enemy lands, killing workers or roaming weaker units , pillaging a lot and then again embarking to escape to come back again......and reapeat the task several times on opposite shores and so on.

The movement of the " transport " it is speculated to be 3, do your math.

 

[deanej]

The movement of the " transport " it is speculated to be 3, do your math.

That's it? In civ4, transports had 7 moves (at least in the industrial/modern era).

 

[gunter]

That's it? In civ4, transports had 7 moves (at least in the industrial/modern era).

If it was 7 for real all Civ V battles will summarize in flashing transports landing units, pillaging , escaping etc . Transports would be too fast to allow land units to play a counterpart.

Assuming you will not start to stop enemy tranports with your transports that into Civ V come for free for each land unit

 

[KrikkitTwo]

That's it? In civ4, transports had 7 moves (at least in the industrial/modern era).

hat's
A) Total speculation
and
B) could easily change... say 3 for ancient/classical, 4 Mideval/Renaissance, 5 Industrial/Modern, 6 Future

or particular techs could change it.

 

[gunter]

Of course it is speculation but in these days before the release we have to fill the time speculating, I like it