New Unit Wish Lists ?

[DiamondzAndGunz]

Originally posted by elpadrino87
On a slightly different note, does anyone think that maybe there should be an upkeep (not large, just a small one) for roads or at least rails? Maybe pay for roads or rails that are outside of the radius of cities, guessing 1gpt for 5-10 tiles of road. This would definitely make the players as well as the AI rethink how they are going to place their roads. Only an idea, not entirely a suggestion, just throwing it out there.

I would honestly hate that. It would make sense, yes, since you have to pay for city improvements. But they probably had their reasons for not making you pay for roads. They are, after all, there to help GENERATE income, not eat it away. Yes, seeing everything covered in roads/rails can be wierd, but it's just a game... not real life. I can probably imagine that the roads create enough trade to pay for themselves, so there is no upkeep.

Here's something that I just thought of, that might be a little less harsh than charging for every road, or group of roads. There could, instead, be a charge for roads that are not in a city radius or necessary for a trade route/resource connection. Those are, essentially, excess roads, and you could probably do without 'em. Plant a forest in the square .

 

[elpadrino87]

yeah, that's pretty much all i think there should be. Anyways, I've seen in a lot of threads with people posting that the game could be made more realistic, but Infrogames has a reason to not do so. It could certainly affect the way the game is played compared to the way that people find it the most enjoyable and manageable. otherwise, how would they sell a game thats all about accuracy but not much like a GAME.

 

[jwill]

Well, seemingly, keeping the aspects of a game and realistic aspects is a hard thing to balance, but this game is seemingly supposed to be accurate historically. It achieves that goal to an extent. First of all, units should look different depending on the culture of the civilization - that would seem better. Civilizations should be able to have more than one unique unit - for example, the Americans should get minutemen and F-15s, and the British should get redcoats and Men-o-War. Civilizations should also be able to get more than two specialties - the Americans should be scientific as well - a lot of inventions were made by American people. Romans should be industrious as well - they did have very good road systems. There's my two cents.

 

[Inventor_of_Mac]

Originally posted by MajorFallout
Oops, forgot this major tweak to the units thing....

Leaders
Replace their function with just hurrying wonders, and helping with population unrest. Maybe even to help mobilize the population to increase production in a city.

Armies
With the advent of the Military Academy, there could be an off-shoot unit from that tech with the ability to create armies, eg. 1 army 'General' unit per 4-5 cities in your empire, with a max of say 6-8 armies in all. I think this unit would take a long time to create, as in real life it takes to produce a experienced/career General, eg. the same amount as a battleship. So that it is not really unfair to other civs.
Also, increase the number of units that can go into an army, to 5 or 6.

it could be nice if u could load armies into armies !!

 

[nmcul]

Something tells me that we all will be SEVERELY dissapointed with the limitations of the 1.21 editor when it comes out (which at this rate will be the week after that watchamacalem cult proves that they cloned a human).

 

[jwill]

Well, I'm not too sure about being disappointed. As long as it allows map creation and the creation of new units, Ill be satisfied.

 

[DiamondzAndGunz]

Originally posted by jwill
As long as it allows map creation and the creation of new units, Ill be satisfied.

Yes, you'll be able to create maps. But the PC 1.21 editor was not able to create units, I believe. The 1.29 patch was the first one where units could be added, IIRC.

 

[jwill]

Well, creating maps works for me too. I'd like to put all the resources in a place so that I don't have to destroy somebody for it.

 

[DiamondzAndGunz]

Originally posted by jwill
I'd like to put all the resources in a place so that I don't have to destroy somebody for it.

Awe, comon! Destroying someone is the best part!

I seriously hope, though, that the next patch isn't too far off. Adding new units/resources is something I've been waiting for for a while. Although I can do that using the PC editor, it's really slow in VPC (as mentioned before). That's also the patch, I believe, that allows new civs w/ custom Foreign Advisor leaderheads. I've added a couple civs to my game, and it always crashes if they're on the Foreign Advisor screen, because those are hardcoded till 1.29.

 

[jwill]

I know gettin rid of them is good, but sometimes, when you're trying to fix your economy instead of your military, it gets annoying.

 

[Inventor_of_Mac]

WHEN IS THE EDITOR GOING TO BE OUT????

 

[neoruski]

They must replace the cossack with a decent unit. Am I the only Russian on here. Please is the only thing they can think of a cossack. At least they should have made the Russian UU the T34 at least. The best would be a REAL nuke. It is kind of dumb that they stay with nuclear fission with tatical nukes and ICBMs, when instead it should be nuclear FUSION which is 1000 fold more powerfull.

 

[dixonbm]

Many of you have mentioned an engineer. What about a unit (engineer) that could build bridges/underground tunnels whether it be to connect two continents separated by one or two squares of water or to cross a lake.

In the real world we see this both in New Orleans and the bridge connecting Denmark and Sweden.

Thoughts or comments?

 

[jwill]

Originally posted by dixonbm
Many of you have mentioned an engineer. What about a unit (engineer) that could build bridges/underground tunnels whether it be to connect two continents separated by one or two squares of water or to cross a lake.

In the real world we see this both in New Orleans and the bridge connecting Denmark and Sweden.

That would be perfect. Even though airports have the "airdrop" feature which is most likely faster than anything else, that would be cool too.

 

[Inventor_of_Mac]

"ghosts" would be nice,ever played starcraft?yea,ghosts,just like that,so that they could "cloack" and ot seen by the enemy,only visible for SAM batteries(or how r they called?)

 

[Inventor_of_Mac]

Originally posted by Inventor_of_Mac
"ghosts" would be nice,ever played starcraft?yea,ghosts,just like that,so that they could "cloack" and ot seen by the enemy,only visible for SAM batteries(or how r they called?)

oh yes,im good,and so that they could,when cloaked and close enough to the enemy,"call" cruise missiles and tactical nukes(spelling?)to the enemy!!!

 

[Inventor_of_Mac]

Originally posted by Inventor_of_Mac

oh yes,im good,and so that they could,when cloaked and close enough to the enemy,"call" cruise missiles and tactical nukes(spelling?)to the enemy!!!

O,maybe u should call them"nukers",or "nuke speciallists"
That unit would RULE!
too bad we dont have it!

 

[Inventor_of_Mac]

wut u think?ill post a poll on who wanna have that unit!

 

[Inventor_of_Mac]

Originally posted by neoruski
They must replace the cossack with a decent unit. Am I the only Russian on here. Please is the only thing they can think of a cossack. At least they should have made the Russian UU the T34 at least. The best would be a REAL nuke. It is kind of dumb that they stay with nuclear fission with tatical nukes and ICBMs, when instead it should be nuclear FUSION which is 1000 fold more powerfull.

net,ti tut ne edinstvenni russki chelovek,kak ti eto uze znaesh!