Make Naval More Important

[Camikaze]

Why? It happens all the time in real life.

 

[Argetnyx]

With naval units we're talking much bigger, less space and more, and larger support groups. Since space is tight, and confusion would definitely takeplace if that really happened, it shouldn't work.

 

[exhile]

Also, I feel that the elimination of Naval Borders is needed. Instead, have it so two civ's water units can't go on the same tile without a special open borders agreement, so to say that the nation with a larger navy would actually have control of the seas.

Removing the cultural border that overlaps the coast, seas and islands is something I agree with. How can a city on a single square grid have its cultural ocean border 2 squares out when surrounded by water? It's like a ship can't even get out of the Mediterranean with the borders of Spain, France, Rome, Germany, Greece, Egypt and Mali not colliding together.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Removing the cultural border that overlaps the coast, seas and islands is something I agree with. How can a city on a single square grid have its cultural ocean border 2 squares out when surrounded by water? It's like a ship can't even get out of the Mediterranean with the borders of Spain, France, Rome, Germany, Greece, Egypt and Mali not colliding together.

Yes, it is a good argument, but I don't see why naval units should not be able to be in the same square yet... .

 

[Argetnyx]

Borders should not be closed all the time, like in civ4. They should be crosseble, but the rulers of that country would get mad at you and tell you to get out, like Civ3. This way, you don't have to ask for a RoP, and you can threaten the country, if it is smaller, by sending military units in and 'occupying' it.

 

[exhile]

Yes, it is a good argument, but I don't see why naval units should not be able to be in the same square yet... .

It's like playing battleship. No square can be occupied by two vessels. However, it will be interesting if an air unit can occupy the air cube above a naval unit in an ocean cube.

 

[Camikaze]

With naval units we're talking much bigger, less space and more, and larger support groups. Since space is tight, and confusion would definitely takeplace if that really happened, it shouldn't work.

But in comparison to the size of tiles, naval units are puny. If two nations are not at war, then I don't really see how having another ship within 15km would really create that much confusion. Perhaps under specific circumstances there may be a problem, but as a general rule, there would not be.

Borders should not be closed all the time, like in civ4. They should be crosseble, but the rulers of that country would get mad at you and tell you to get out, like Civ3. This way, you don't have to ask for a RoP, and you can threaten the country, if it is smaller, by sending military units in and 'occupying' it.

This is a pretty good idea, IMO, although it could be incorporated into the idea of border wars, slightly more successfully than just having some arbitrary diplomatic penalty.

 

[rysmiel]

Borders should not be closed all the time, like in civ4. They should be crosseble, but the rulers of that country would get mad at you and tell you to get out, like Civ3. This way, you don't have to ask for a RoP, and you can threaten the country, if it is smaller, by sending military units in and 'occupying' it.

There should be varying degrees of "open borders", and it should be possible to arrange for them to not necessarily be equal; if I have just beaten the living daylights out of someone, it should be possible to demand their borders are open to my units without mine being open to theirs.

I also think that default behaviour here should be to have borders open to some classes of unit, like scouts; it would also make things interesting if scouts and settlers were default to hidden-nationality, and some classes of naval units also.

 

[Argetnyx]

In Civ3, being able to cross without a RoP is VERY useful, especially if you are exploring.

 

[Camikaze]

Whilst I like the general idea of differing levels of open borders, I only like it in the regards it pertains to cultural borders. Sure, naval units may generally encroach on your territorial waters, and that probably should be implemented in the game. However, I don't quite understand what you were saying about two civ's naval ships not being able to go on the same tile, in relation to open borders, and encroaching on them. Please explain again?

 

[Argetnyx]

I was just having an idea.... But how you say it, the naval units should not be able to go on the same tile if they do not have open borders. That should be used. How would you like a rival naval force to go right by yours like you're not even there.

 

[Camikaze]

It probably wouldn't be all that nice, but it wouldn't preclude the possibility of it. Also, what if they are your friends? Shouldn't they then be able to enter the same square. I see how this could work to a degree with the ability to break open borders, or in this case, naval open borders, but as a general rule, I don't think it is all that realistic or workable.

 

[Naokaukodem]

It's like playing battleship. No square can be occupied by two vessels. However, it will be interesting if an air unit can occupy the air cube above a naval unit in an ocean cube.

You are not explaining it.

 

[Argetnyx]

It probably wouldn't be all that nice, but it wouldn't preclude the possibility of it. Also, what if they are your friends? Shouldn't they then be able to enter the same square. I see how this could work to a degree with the ability to break open borders, or in this case, naval open borders, but as a general rule, I don't think it is all that realistic or workable.

Politics and the military are many times of a different opinion about a rival civ. I've already said my opinion on 'open borders', so I will not repeat it.

 

[Big Rob]

Don't know if this question has been posted or not, but is it possible to allow Great Leaders to build a fleet ?

 

[Argetnyx]

Not in the current game, but it would be interesting if Civ5 had it. I think instead of a great leader (whatever that is) or an army (like in Civ3), you would designate one of the ships the 'flagship'.

 

[Big Rob]

I've seen in the editor where you can designate a unit as air, land, or sea. Has anyone tried this yet ?

 

[Argetnyx]

I've seen in the editor where you can designate a unit as air, land, or sea. Has anyone tried this yet ?

You mean the Civ3 editor right? (the civ4 one sucks anyway)

If it is what you're talking about:
Yes, you can designate a unit as air, land, or sea, but the three sections under 'AI Strategies' are for each of those: land for land, sea for sea, and air for air. In order for a unit to be used as an army, it has to have the 'Army' strategy checked, and that's only in the land section. Naval 'armies' are not possible because the only things you can check are in the naval section (Naval Power, Naval Transport, Naval Carrier, and Naval Missile Transport).

Trust me, I know my way around the Civ3 editor like you wouldn't believe.

 

[Camikaze]

Question: What's a great leader?

If you're referring to a Great General in Civ4, then yes, you can attach it to a ship, and make that a very powerful ship (although it gets no designation as a 'flagship', or anything. It is merely very powerful).

 

[Big Rob]

Civ3, G.L. can build an army (load units), but only land units.