smarpoe
Unfriendly neighbor
southjerseyrisi said:The game already runs fine on my system.
I hope that this useless "patch" doesn't go and mess things up.
The game is fine as it is.
Then don't install it. Wait for feedback from other folks.
southjerseyrisi said:The game already runs fine on my system.
I hope that this useless "patch" doesn't go and mess things up.
The game is fine as it is.
Rad for you, don't install it.southjerseyrisi said:The game already runs fine on my system.
I hope that this useless "patch" doesn't go and mess things up.
The game is fine as it is.
onedreamer said:However if you build your army around chariots and I find bronze, you are dead meat quite fast.
Goosse said:Stone provides +1 production when worked right from the beginning. It was used by the earliest known civilizations. After Masonry, putting a Quarry on it, working it will give +2 Production, and +1 Commerce, and will cut the cost of some wonders.
Colonel Kraken said:1800s rifles could easily stand up to and break a cavalry unit. By the mid-1800s, Cavalry had been side-lined to recon, delay, and routing support by this time. Read about the Civil War.
I'd put a regiment of Civil War cavalry up against a medieval melee unit any day of the week. Do you think the cavalry would just ride up to the unit and slash with swords? Give me a break. They'd stop a couple hundred yards away, pop off some shots with their carbines until the unit came too close. Then they'd hop on their horses and ride out a ways, drop and shoot some more. Sounds to me like a no contest.
=DOCTOR= said:I think the argument for it would be that even though man has ridden horses for a long long time, at the very beginning neanderthal man would have simply seen them as any other animal.
Learning Animal Husbandry to reveal horses as a valuable resource therefore makes sense as this is simulating the point man appreciates the value of horses in other ways.
Plus, from a gameplay sense it gives more worth to that particular line compared to the obvious religious and bronze working paths.
Hermes said:Not to be nittpicking here - just an interesting tidbit of information:
Neanderthals were actually a different species than homo sapiens sapiens (what we are) - at the current level of understanding neanderthals and homo sapiens sapiens were results of a split in the evolution line around 400.000 years ago. There is evidence of homo sapiens sapiens and neanderthals living in the same general region in western asia around 40.000 years ago. What caused the neanderthals to die out is still a mystery...
Hermes said:There is evidence of homo sapiens and neanderthals living in the same general region
Hermes said:What caused the neanderthals to die out is still a mystery...
southjerseyrisi said:The game already runs fine on my system.
I hope that this useless "patch" doesn't go and mess things up.
The game is fine as it is.
DemonDeLuxe said:What you are referring to are dragoons, a sub-class of cavalry. Cavalry brigades in the American civil war were basically all dragoon units (mounted to be flexible, but fighting primarily not from horseback, but dismounted).
EvilGuy said:QFT
There are MANY unit unbalances, and i also find it a bit sad that so many units don't even get used because the techtree moves past them too fast.
Keep in mind that Firaxis gave ONLY Animal Husbandry for Horses as example for gameplay improvements... They said there were MANY.
I predict many units will have their strength revised, building costs, bonuses and counters adjusted etc...
Like... The Jaguar, is it just me or is this unit completely useless?? It replaces the swordsman but has -1 strength, has a useless jungle defence bonus and no city attack bonus ( I tell ya, when u play Montezuma, u better think twice before capturing cities in the early game without swordsman) . I dunno, give the Jaguar +1 jungle/forest movement rate and a bonus vs Archery and he'd be cool.
Well, considering most of my games end up with virtually no jungle or forest, it's pretty useless by the end game...Scotty Mack said:Regarding your point about units becoming obsolete because the 'the techtree moves past them too fast', have you ever tried playing on the preferred Epic game speed ?
And what's useless about a jungle defense bonus ?
Scotty
MarcAntiny said:Well, considering most of my games end up with virtually no jungle or forest, it's pretty useless by the end game...
According to the Civilopedia you need both The Wheel and Horses to build a Chariot. Horses arent available as a strategic resource until a Pasture is built. But The Wheel gives you roads on which to pull the carts you build. (People pull the carts.)player1 fanatic said:Well, isn't is kinda odd that with current ruleset you can get Chariots, pulled by horses, without having Animal Husbandry.
What's that, wild horse chariot racing?
I like your last paragraph. It is an interesting thought. I havent read the strategy or game balance threads yet. I was guessing that people were complaining about seeing horses before they had any use (besides planning city location).Leuf said:What's your point? The argument is that the player knows the horse resource gives him something, therefore it must be hidden until he has the tech to use it so he does not tailor his strategy towards something he shouldn't know yet. The player knows stone is useful for something other than +1 hammer. Seeing it on the map could alter his strategy. You cannot chose to apply this logic in one place and then not in another.
My argument is essentially this: People say knowing they have a resource advantage in advance is too big of an advantage for them. I say having a resource advantage is an advantage regardless. Knowing you are at a resource disadvantage is the only defense. Knowing you don't have something ahead of time is a bigger advantage than knowing you do have it. Thus showing the resources helps to even the playing field, not unbalance it more as people are arguing.
Who among us in Civ 3 never built a city out in the middle of a bunch of hills/mountains on spec that iron might show up there? With expansion more limited now you really can't do that anymore. But you are forced to research all the techs that reveal the resources first or you are screwed. What is the point of making me go through the same motions at the start of every game? They wanted to speed up the game, and people are complaining parts go too fast now. I say this early resource revealing stuff is an area that can be eliminated leaving more time for when you actually have units and cities to do something with. The early techs are really more about killing time while you explore and your capital builds up. Other than going for an early religion does it really make any difference whatsoever what order you research the early techs in? You can't trade them, and you need all of them.
Anyway it's a brilliant move by Firaxis. Everyone was complaining about the crashes. They put out a patch to fix the crashes and throw in this little nugget about horses. Now everyone is complaining about horses instead of crashes. By the time we get sick of this the patch will be out and the crashes will be fixed. Just brilliant.
I would like to see a game with subclasses like you mentioned. But unfortunately the game was simplified by generalizing many of the classes. And how do you pick the attributes for the class? You pick examples that are common and representative, or ones that exist for any subclass and work for game balance.DemonDeLuxe said:What you are referring to are dragoons, a sub-class of cavalry. Cavalry brigades in the American civil war were basically all dragoon units (mounted to be flexible, but fighting primarily not from horseback, but dismounted).
There were other sub-classes, however: cuirassiers (armored riders with heavy swords), hussars (light cavalry with sabres) and lancers. The famous "charge of the light brigade" at Balaclava (Krim) 1848 was a frontal charge of a sword-swinging cavalry brigade on enemy artillery - no rifles were used by the riders (that attack got famous, however, because it was one of the most horrendous tactical stupidities ever).
It is not true that cavalry was "side-lined to recon, delay, and routing support by this time". This had ALWAYS been the role of the LIGHT cavalry. Some subclasses (hussars e.g.) had been established expressively for that purpose: To recon and to wipe up fleeing forces. The "heavies", however, were drilled for massive shock attack, which could have a devastating effect on infantry with low morale. Whether cavalry was superior to infantry depended heavily on the discipline of the latter. It was also at Balaclava where the famous "thin red line" (a company of highlander riflemen) stopped a hill-down cavalry charge by pure cold-bloodedness. The same was true for the square formations Wellington put to use against Napoleon's elite cuirassiers at Waterloo 1815. However, these are famous examples because the rule was true until the end of the 19th century that only the most disciplined and courageous infantry could withstand the sheer impetus of the charge of 500 or more horses.
MarcAntiny said:Well, considering most of my games end up with virtually no jungle or forest, it's pretty useless by the end game...
Randle said:Once you advanced the turn, was the memory released?
Goosse said:I would like to see a game with subclasses like you mentioned. But unfortunately the game was simplified by generalizing many of the classes. And how do you pick the attributes for the class? You pick examples that are common and representative, or ones that exist for any subclass and work for game balance.
Goosse said:So, in essence, both you and Colonel Kraken have valid points that can be used for game design. But Colonel Kraken makes a good point in that the Cavalry in the game can realistically have the attributes specified in the game.