Redone vehicles

[sonofkong]

Often when i have a ship full of archers or rifleman I wonder why these people don't fight back on the submarine attacking. My answer is that if ranged or artilllary units are on board an attacking or defending vessel they factor in attack and even have an animation.

This also allows an even more favorable option, which has no mounted units and instead treats horses as vehicles like ships. Units will go on top of the mount and treat it like normal, with different mounts for different civs. (India has elephant, europe has horses.) And pre-columbian civs either instead using a hard to explain fast runner.

 

[Lockesdonkey]

Please recall: This game is about rewriting history, not redoing it. The reason that the Indians developed war elephants and Europeans didn't was that there are elephants in India but not in Europe. That is not guaranteed in a game of Civ; the English (for example) might be plopped in a subtropical starting position next to a massive herd of elephants, while India might be placed on the edge of an antarctic tundra with a source of horses nearby. (Oh, and if you think that the Indians didn't have horse cavalry, you're dead wrong).

Similarly, the native peoples of the Americas never developed cavalry for the simple reason that the Americas were devoid of horses (the great herds of wild horses in the American West are actually feral). If, say, the Aztecs have a starting position next to horses, then why would they ever not use them? That's just silly.

As for your other proposal: One supposes that this is about game balance. As things are, Civ V disposes of dedicated transport ships altogether.