Modern Warfare

[Sarevok]

I dont really have problems in modern warfare since i kill off my opponents very quickly and by the modern era my production levels are so high that its never a problem. Its still a pretty good guide.

 

[gen.dragolen]

Lynx,

How far did you get playing BG?

I've just reloaded it and am having fun remembering where all the bad guys are, and them wiping them out with massed missle weapons. Maked for a nice break from the frustration of trying to take over the world each night...

D.

 

[Laser guided]

You gotta make it that far first.

 

[Sarevok]

Lynx has been on vacation for 2 days. Im not usre what your talking about, but if its Baldur's Gate.... Then thats really cool and Interesting. If its not, what are you talking about, i might be able to answer it, but Im going on my vacation tommorow.

 

[Laser guided]

The biggest frustration is the lack of true differences among the units. Basically what it boils down to is making the best unit, because there is no reward or punishment for using a mix of units. There needs to be a greater range of abilities that units can possess. A/D/M is not enough to approach a good combat system.

Why build Aegis if no one is going to build those invisible submarines?

Nuke subs stink in Civ unless you're going to use them to launch nukes.

Where is the air to air advantage that Aegis is supposed to have otherwise why call it an Aegis?

All modern war ships travel at 30+ knots, including battleships and carriers. The sailing ships traveled at half that how come battleships and carriers only move one movement point faster than that? The fix is charge the big ships an extra point of movement for changing directions.

Give submarines a shoot and retreat function. Something like sub artillery where they can hit you but not sink you unless they engage you in regular combat.

 

[gen.dragolen]

Laser,

This is what modding is all about. Pick one of the mods out there and give it a try. Scipio's Realism Mod is a good start, or Player1's.

I too have been tinkering and yes, there is no differentiation between modern units, so I have been busily adding all the created units I can find in the Unit Library. It's a lot of work if you go to do it up right, with sounds and all, but it's worth it to see actual German Pnz IV's locking horns with Russian T-34's.

If you like naval units best, do some research and checkout the units that have been created so far and see if you can make a better balance between movenent, firepower and abilities.

After all, it was the difference in designs that allowed the Bismark to sink the Hood in WWII: the Hood was a WWI design, when the naval guns were all low trajectory, and you didn't need thick deck plating just really thick side armour, where as the Bismark's guns were high trajectory and it's rounds came down ontop of the deck instead of hitting the side of the Hood where it was designed to take the hits.

The only problem we face is that the combat system in the game doesn't make much of an allowance for the effect of improved technology in modern warfare...


D.

 

[Laser guided]

gen dragolen

There is one major problem with modding though, there is no set standard . I want to play the exact game that everyone else is playing. That is one reason I rant and rave and *itch and moan about what Civ needs to do to improve itself.

(I'm assuming that is one reason GOTM was started to test everyone's Civ skill against each other.)

It is a pain in my left *ss cheek when whomever makes the decisions about Civ makes sh**ty *ss decisions and truly screw up what we do for hours on end. I could be doing something else with my time but instead I'd like to play a nice game of Civ one day and not think how much better the game can be because Civ2 does this better or SMAC did this better.

Civ is not a pure strategy. Civ is not a pure simulation (it is a cool hybrid of the two) and I wouldn't want it to be a sim, but if you make a game with history as the theme please break as few eggs as possible ! It would price a lot of people out of the market to buy Civ, but I would easily pay $100 to $150 for Civ if it was everything WE wanted.

I've definitely already many times over gotten my money's worth out of the Civ series and Civ3. To whomever owns Civ don't make promises you can't keep, it is bad for business .

So, is there a standard Mod that everyone is playing that I'm not aware of??? I don't want to play Civ/PTW unless it is GOTM only. Otherwise it will just be a disappointment waiting to happen .

 

[Sarevok]

I agree that civ 3 seems to cut down the power of modern aged units as far as movement in concerned. When did cavalry be able to outrun armored attack veicles. sure, it may have great speed and manuverability, but thats an animal, not a machine. the battleships are the same situation.

 

[cromagnon]

I voted bombing runs. Bombers simply are not powerful enough compared to artillery, and as a result are good for little more than taking out strategic resources.

I end up pounding cities with bombers, trashing their buildings and people, but leaving the defenders mostly unharmed. Eventually I get them down enough, but it's takes too much. Fighters are very quickly upgraded to jetfighters, but bombers stay their weak little selves until way too late (my wars are over by the time I get to stealth).

I would have preferred a 'Modern Bomber' or some such equivalent, maybe with the advent of the laser, with a 12 bombard.

 

[earendil 1]

I voted other. The worst problem of Modern Warfare is the War Weariness. Other than that its when youre facing german panzers

 

[bru]

I think bombing runs could be improved but overall taking the scope of the game into consideration, it works for me!!

 

[Tarwoch]

The real problem is infantry until you have tanks... they are really frustrating.

 

[gen.dragolen]

Tarwoch,

They are supposed to be. Infantry have machine guns, riflemen don´t.

What drives me nuts are combat results that are so far off the average that when you work them out, you´d think the AI just won the Powerball lottery. And they do it many, many, many times...

Even with tanks, they are under-rated for defensive strength. Especially against units like Cavalry.

Tanks have machineguns, and HE rounds, which make flesh and bone bleed and break. I don´t care how good a unit´s morale is: lances and sabres are useless against 600 rpm out of any decent machine gun protected by armour.

In one of the mods I was working on, tanks and mechanized infantry were about twice as powerful as they are in the vanilla PTW. Add in some more hit points and you see how a technological edge becomes your top priority, so you can blitzkrieg your way through all opposition.

Firaxis has admitted that they didn´t do much play testing past the Middle Ages before releasing the game, and it still shows.

A critical part of modern warfare is counterbattery artillery: all it would take is for an artillery unit flagged as fortified to be given the ability to give counterbattery fire when enemy artillery opens up on it. THe main change would be to make artillery a normal unit with hit points. That way, you could silence the enemy guns by doing a direct attack instead of bombardment. It always seemed kind of silly that you could capture enemy guns...

I´ll have to try that out when I get home from work tonight. If it works and if the AI can manage it, I´ll post the .bix file.

D.

 

[#1 Person]

I voted other, I hate the sea battles. at the bgining of the game i might only build a few trasports. Then the enemy comes in with like 20 ships and they bombard me and all of that

 

[Tarkeel]

Thw 2 thing that really irritates me with modern combat (and combat in general) is:

1) The randomness
The random number generator seems to favour the AIs, and not by a small bit either. I did a test on it some time ago, cavalry vs cavalry in jungle. When my cav was attacking, it was lucky to get 1 damage done, when the AI was attacking it was unlucky to suffer 1 damage.

Also, a spearman shouldn't have any chance at all of stopping a modern armor, not even hurt it, yet this is not uncommon.

2) Movement
Railroad is too powerfull, especially on larger maps. If you can shift your entire force around, effectively flanking an enemy without railroads, then you will always have the upper hand. It also makes ships obsolete except for intra-island transit, or in certain special cases such as premoving to another part, skipping enemy territory etc.

Ship movement, especially the later ships, are simply too slow. A galley should not be able to keep up with a sub.

3) Airpower
Airplanes have too low range, their advantage over artillery has always been striking range at the cost of less efficiency. The ideal would be some sort of attack helicopter, that would have lethal ground capability and ignore most terrain bonus and actually gaining bonus from hill/mountain (due to hiding in the contours).

 

[Iztvan]

I voted "other"... my problem with modern warfare is that I almost never have it. The game usualy is over by the late second age. Not that I win, but I'm pretty sure wether I'll win or loose and quit due to lack of intrest (and sleep...)

But sure, modern warfare (from riflemen to tanks) should be slow! If I could make a wish, I'd weaken Cav or strengthen Riflemen (especially their attack...) or make Cav more expensice & riflemen/Infantry cheaper. Because they did dominate and were very hard to beat.

 

[Sarevok]

If you dont have modern warfare, just pick a fight and start a war. In fact, I ALWAYS in some form am the cause of starting the great wars... and i end them too.

 

[Sarevok]

Personallly i hope they add new units foir conquest that can let the player gain alot of good units and have it neccesary to have combined arms.

 

[Lynx]

so do I, its all about the mass MA's these days...

 

[Sarevok]

yeah, i would want to rid civ3 of that.