Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

[r16]

we all didn't misunderstand . ı once returned 100 turns back because one of my armies (single unit , has a boost of 8 health bars) autoproduced in a city had came out while there was no barracks and it was such an eyesore in company of the 3 others , set aside to have a longbow equivalent . If you people are really keen , ı can try it in my current game . Delete 3 armies so that ı can have a new army , put an elite defensive unit , place it outside the cities to see how many enemy units it takes if "trained" or "veteran" .

 

[RobS]

For what it's worth, I have not noticed differently labeled Armies actually behave differently since I became aware of the labeling differences, which leads me to think that this is indeed just a leftover artifact from perhaps an earlier version of the game where Firaxis perhaps thought that Armies as a whole might change their labels according to the proficiencies of units within them, but then abandoned the idea but forgot to remove this labeling thing.
In my experience, it made no difference whether an Army was labeled "Regular", "Veteran", or did not have a label, they all behaved as expected. I'm sure if none of the more nuanced and experienced players have brought up this issue, or elaborated on it, it does not affect actual game play.

 

[Arexander]

Technically the veterancy of a unit improves retreat odds, if retreating is possible, so maybe there's a difference? Would need testing to figure out if retreat chance of an Army is based on the Army unit itself or the units inside.

It would also be interesting to see what happens with the missing label of a Military Academy built Army if you promote it through lethal bombardment, though that would require a modded game to test out.

 

[justanick]

Notice that underneath my customized name of the Army, it says "Veteran". Unlike the Samurai Army above, this Army was originally created by a leader inside a city that did have a barracks.

If that were the case, then it should be easy to replicate it with the Napoleon Scenario. When i use one of the french MGL in a city with barracks to create an army, then it says "Regular" after adding a unit to the army.

Creating an army with a MGL seems to work similar to enslavement: The newly created unit is "Regular". If your unit is produced in a city it is also "Regular" without barracks and "Veteran" with barracks. Units without hitpoints donnot display it, except for the movement circle on top.

For what it's worth, I have not noticed differently labeled Armies actually behave differently since I became aware of the labeling differences, which leads me to think that this is indeed just a leftover artifact from perhaps an earlier version of the game where Firaxis perhaps thought that Armies as a whole might change their labels according to the proficiencies of units within them, but then abandoned the idea but forgot to remove this labeling thing.

I donnot believe that this is what happened. It simply is so that every unit has an experience level. For some units like workers this experience level has no effect. For units with hitpoints the main difference is hitpoints and the secondary one rethreat odds. For armies the second one may remain, but it matters much less.

 

[RobS]

I'm not sure what MGL is and I didn't know that Leaders or Empty Armies had experience levels, but maybe I'm misunderstanding the latter.
Regardless, I, for one, am not going to "test" anything. I'll leave that up to the bean counters, if they feel like it.

 

[r16]

mgl is the "military great leader" that makes armies . SGL is the science one that rushes great wonders .

 

[Theov]

mgl is the "military great leader" that makes armies . SGL is the science one that rushes great wonders .

... and the 'science age' is broken.

 

[r16]

science age was not broken in some releases that might not have been "official" . But ı don't exactly know why ı should be returning to what like made me famous here back in 2009 or so .

 

[Civinator]

The bug in Science Age was fixed in the Antal1987 patch and is fixed in the Flintlock mod.

 

[WeirdoJoker]

What is the "Age of Science" supposed to do, anyway? And can you (at least theoretically) have more than one?

 

[Takhisis]

In theory, it gives you faster research i.e. makes your techs take fewer turns to be completed.

In practice, you get told that the tech will be done in, say, 6 turns instead of 8 but then it will be stuck at ‘1 turn remaining’ for 2 turns until you reach the 8th turn.

So, unless you want to try patched versions of the game made by fans, just use the Science Leader to get wonders built in a single turn and laugh at how half a dozen AIs that were building, say, the Hanging Gardens suddenly have to turn 250 shields into a swordsman each.

 

[r16]

back in 2009 , in my desktop 486 with windows XP , ı had 5 techs researched in 20 turns with the science age in action , compared to 4 without . It is meant to reward nerds who build up instead running amok to invade the world with stacks of Swordsmen .

 

[justanick]

back in 2009 , in my desktop 486 with windows XP , ı had 5 techs researched in 20 turns with the science age in action , compared to 4 without . It is meant to reward nerds who build up instead running amok to invade the world with stacks of Swordsmen .

Chances are that ceteris paribus was violated. So far no convincing evidence was submitted to suggest that the science age is working in any version except those that were modded for it.

Ceteris paribus - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[WeirdoJoker]

So ... just use the Science Leader to get wonders built in a single turn and laugh at how half a dozen AIs that were building, say, the Hanging Gardens suddenly have to turn 250 shields into a swordsman each.

Oh, I was doing that anyway. Of course, it's no fun to have a game with 0 SGLs, compared say to the game I had in which I generated something like 7 of them (no idea how that happened).

 

[r16]

am getting tired of this argument that something was changed or something . Offered two saves back in 2009 , same turns with doing nothing for all 20 , keeping everything the same . With science age on ı got one more tech in 20 turns , 5 instead of 4 . Already accepted that my copy was not regular , right ?

which in the usual run of things mutated self out of existance long ago , too . Currently only my armies have a zone of control because ı am cheap enough to place multiple units on the path of incoming enemy stacks to save artillery usage to redline them if possible . My horses in the LotM were the first , dragons came later in losing the ability . My Balrogs would have zone of control until last week . The civ .exe is from installation in 2013 , the scenario remains unchanged since 2019 but ı can see what ı see ...

 

[Theov]

What is the "Age of Science" supposed to do, anyway? And can you (at least theoretically) have more than one?

it was supposed to give you a boost in science, but when they broke it, it actually did nothing.

 

[RobS]

Is there any way to delete/destroy one's own airbase?
I can't think of a "technical" reason to do so, because any underlying roads, railroads, irrigation, etc. that were destroyed when the base was built can be rebuilt with the base remaining intact, so there is nothing that is lost by a base being there. I just want to do it for aesthetic reasons, because airbases are fairly ugly.
I know that enemy units moving into a square containing an airbase will destroy the base, as will change of ownership of the square.
I tried destroying it with a unit in the normal manner that units can destroy improvements, but the airbase seemed indestructible.
Is there any way that the owner of an airbase can destroy it themselves?

 

[r16]

"double tap" ... Pillage the place again .

 

[Lanzelot]

I know that enemy units moving into a square containing an airbase will destroy the base, as will change of ownership of the square.

That doesn't destroy the base. I vividly remember a multiplayer game, where I captured an enemy's airbase with a marine and then flew in a big stack of units in the same turn...
But as r16 said: just keep pillaging... once the everything else is pillaged, the airbase will go last...

Edit: for reference: as seen in the following discussion, bombardment is what's needed, not pillaging...

 

[RobS]

That doesn't destroy the base. I vividly remember a multiplayer game, where I captured an enemy's airbase with a marine and then flew in a big stack of units in the same turn...

That's entirely possible. I practically never build airbases and I thought I read somewhere that they had to be in one's own territory or they are destroyed.

But as r16 said: just keep pillaging... once the everything else is pillaged, the airbase will go last...

This did not work for me. I was using an Army to pillage the square. Everything else had been destroyed and I kept pillaging, but the base could not be destroyed. I will try it again, as I'm still playing this game.
Edit: I just loaded the game and tried again - no joy.
Here's a pic:

In the center of the picture, there are actually 10 Modern Armor on top of the base. There are no air units at the base. One of the Modern Armor was able to pillage the Railroad, Road and Irrigation, but was not able to destroy the base with its remaining movement point. In fact, after having pillaged the improvements, I no longer get the Pillage option (notice the menu doesn't have the Pillage symbol). I then let a turn go by, but there was no change. I also tried with the nearby Army - no joy.
(When I said previously that "I kept pillaging" with the Army when I first encountered this a few days ago, I was not being accurate, because as can be seen, the Pillage option is not there after the improvements have been destroyed.)
I'm playing the Iroquois and the GoG Complete version of the game.