Simply the expected changes on guerrilla can't be done because they're useless. The solution I've said seems to be the only one, but I must find a well-made unit. Otherwise, I'll leave everything as it is.
Rhye's of Civilization - the fastest loading mod Expanded
- Thread starter Rhye
- Start date
- Status
nighthidesnot
Chieftain
Fantastic mod, Rhye!!! Just one question: did you disable the ability to create Armies, or did you modify the equation for a victorious elite unit to create a leader?
Just wondering, because I'm up to the 1800s, and it seems like I've had at least 200 victories with elite units (I'm not counting victories against barbarian units).
Another question for you: I'm a newbie when it comes to creating maps and scenarios, but I'm learning a little more each day. I've been pondering creating a mod based on the characters and plot lines of the novel Atlas Shrugged : Wyatt's Torch, Atlantis (Colorado), etc. May I use your mod and map as a starting point? Of course, I'll give you full credit.
If there's anybody out there who's had the same crazy idea, let me know. It might be a great deal of fun, or it could be a complete waste of time. I've noticed mods and maps of LOTR, so I think its possible. Of course, there are far fewer devotees of Ayn Rand that play Civ3 than there are Tolkien fans. I've read both LOTR and Atlas Shrugged, and thoroughly enjoyed both.
Thanks again for a great mod, Rhye!!
Just wondering, because I'm up to the 1800s, and it seems like I've had at least 200 victories with elite units (I'm not counting victories against barbarian units).
Another question for you: I'm a newbie when it comes to creating maps and scenarios, but I'm learning a little more each day. I've been pondering creating a mod based on the characters and plot lines of the novel Atlas Shrugged : Wyatt's Torch, Atlantis (Colorado), etc. May I use your mod and map as a starting point? Of course, I'll give you full credit.
If there's anybody out there who's had the same crazy idea, let me know. It might be a great deal of fun, or it could be a complete waste of time. I've noticed mods and maps of LOTR, so I think its possible. Of course, there are far fewer devotees of Ayn Rand that play Civ3 than there are Tolkien fans. I've read both LOTR and Atlas Shrugged, and thoroughly enjoyed both.
Thanks again for a great mod, Rhye!!
I didn't modify anything about equations for creating leaders.
About my map, there are 2 versions: the 180x180 that you can find following the green link in my signature, and the 170x170, used in this mod. I suggest you using the first one (available in bic, bix and biq) because the latter is very customized (new terrains types, new resources, etc.). Unless you want to import my mod totally, included the rules, the terrain, the units, the text files etc.
Probably the best option for you is use the 180 map and then import into it the aspects of this mod that you need.
About my map, there are 2 versions: the 180x180 that you can find following the green link in my signature, and the 170x170, used in this mod. I suggest you using the first one (available in bic, bix and biq) because the latter is very customized (new terrains types, new resources, etc.). Unless you want to import my mod totally, included the rules, the terrain, the units, the text files etc.
Probably the best option for you is use the 180 map and then import into it the aspects of this mod that you need.
Aeon221
Lord of the Cheese Helmet
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2003
- Messages
- 1,995
I would suggest making the Guerrilla available with nationalism!
That is when the TRUE birth of Guerrilla warfare was!
Francis Marion (The Swamp Fox) was THE MAN who developed modern guerrilla warfare (and a South Carolinian, BTW!!)
If you saw The Patriot, you have a rough idea of who he was.
Anyway, make it available then! It will seem a bit out of place to start with, but by the time infantry is available it will make perfect sense.
Regardless, it would make an eggcellent unit for the game. I might attempt to implement it in just such a way, although I am not sure at what the tech limits are for the crips.
Good luck nighthidesnot (night hide snot or night hides not???)
If you want any help, I would love to assist in whatever way I can (I am learning too, but I have a good bit of experience messing with other peoples stuff. I would make my own, but I simply do not have the patience or the graphical skill)!
That is when the TRUE birth of Guerrilla warfare was!
Francis Marion (The Swamp Fox) was THE MAN who developed modern guerrilla warfare (and a South Carolinian, BTW!!)
If you saw The Patriot, you have a rough idea of who he was.
Anyway, make it available then! It will seem a bit out of place to start with, but by the time infantry is available it will make perfect sense.
Regardless, it would make an eggcellent unit for the game. I might attempt to implement it in just such a way, although I am not sure at what the tech limits are for the crips.
Good luck nighthidesnot (night hide snot or night hides not???)
If you want any help, I would love to assist in whatever way I can (I am learning too, but I have a good bit of experience messing with other peoples stuff. I would make my own, but I simply do not have the patience or the graphical skill)!
I know that guerrilla was invented with nationalism. But that unit uses a gun that is out of place in 1800. Anyway, bringing guerrilla back to nationalism doens't solve the problem that crippled civs won't build it: they will build medieval units, this is the reason for the need of a medieval guerrilla, possibly two of them (one armed with sword or club or anything else but without armor, and another with a gun/musket/rifle)
EL_OSO
Warlord
Not to dispute the tactics used during the American revolution but there are plenty of examples of what one could classify as guerrilla warfare long before that time. I suppose you never heard of Spartacus?
I've always associated the tech, Nationalism, with the fever that was present in Europe that led to the First World War. I've noticed it usually plays out pretty close on this map to the late 1800s - early 1900s.
Eddiit
King of Nothing
Well we need to figure this crippled cics thing out...have to find some way to keep them in it nominally.
Yes, the word nationalism means that period (late 1800s - early 1900s). But with its collocation in the civ tech tree and the units it allows, I think that the authors were thinking to the Napoleonic era, the first time when a nation was mobilized
The word guerrilla "little war" was first invented during spanish resistance those years. Before that, resistance is always existed
You need the Conquests in their folder. In this case you've probably moved or deleted Age of Discovery.
Restore it in its location or if you can't, reinstall the game
Restore it in its location or if you can't, reinstall the game
EL_OSO
Warlord
I would disagree. The rifleman is not a Napoleonic era unit and it actually fits well within the dates I described as well as the ability to sign MPP. The MPP that were present at the time is what forced the whole affair after a silly assassination. Wasn't the musket still the basic infantry weapon during the Napoleonic era? It was still standard issue for the most part here in the USA for our civil war.
Thanks for the tidbit on the word, "guerilla".
Aeon221
Lord of the Cheese Helmet
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2003
- Messages
- 1,995
Spartacus is one of my favorite movies. I am sure that you would hesitate to dispute that Francis Marion is the father of guerrilla warfare had you read his memoirs.
Although the T'ai Kung and Ssu-ma Fa advocate tactics very similar to his, other Chinese military theorists (most of whom I am rather familiar with, and same with European ones) most others, like Wei Liao, disputed these tactics for their brutality and the random nature of resposes to them.
Francis Marion was not the first theorist to envision such tactics; he was merely the first individual in the modern world to successfully utilize them. And I will say that with absolute certainty.
If you go back and actually look at Spartacus, you will realize that not a single thing he did involved guerrilla warfare. He continued to utilize the set piece combat (stage three of Mao Tse-Tung's system) favored by the Romans.
Please do not try to lecture me on military theory. You will find that I am well versed in it, and have read all of the great theorists, from the Chinese, to the Romans, to a few memoirs of Xenophon, to Clausewitz and Machiavelli, to Mao and Swarzkopf (or however you spell the bloody man's name). I am also well versed in many other texts on combat and strategy, and I own a copy of the USMC Small Wars manual (out of print well before Vietnam sadly), and can quote verbatim from many of the texts that I have read.
My goal is a career in the military, and I have prepared myself accordingly.
Although the T'ai Kung and Ssu-ma Fa advocate tactics very similar to his, other Chinese military theorists (most of whom I am rather familiar with, and same with European ones) most others, like Wei Liao, disputed these tactics for their brutality and the random nature of resposes to them.
Francis Marion was not the first theorist to envision such tactics; he was merely the first individual in the modern world to successfully utilize them. And I will say that with absolute certainty.
If you go back and actually look at Spartacus, you will realize that not a single thing he did involved guerrilla warfare. He continued to utilize the set piece combat (stage three of Mao Tse-Tung's system) favored by the Romans.
Please do not try to lecture me on military theory. You will find that I am well versed in it, and have read all of the great theorists, from the Chinese, to the Romans, to a few memoirs of Xenophon, to Clausewitz and Machiavelli, to Mao and Swarzkopf (or however you spell the bloody man's name). I am also well versed in many other texts on combat and strategy, and I own a copy of the USMC Small Wars manual (out of print well before Vietnam sadly), and can quote verbatim from many of the texts that I have read.
My goal is a career in the military, and I have prepared myself accordingly.
EL_OSO
Warlord
Websters Online defines guerrilla as such:
Main Entry: 1guer·ril·la
Variant(s): or gue·ril·la /g&-'ri-l&, ge-, g(y)i-/
Function: noun
Etymology: Spanish guerrilla, from diminutive of guerra war, of Germanic origin; akin to Old High German werra strife -- more at WAR
: a person who engages in irregular warfare especially as a member of an independent unit carrying out harassment and sabotage.
You stated in your first post that the TRUE BIRTH of guerrilla warfare occurred in the American War for Independence. I would hardly call slithering down a cliffside on vines under darkness and slitting the throats of your opponent "regular warfare". I suppose pillaging and plundering the countryside doesn't qualify either. Not a single thing he did eh? The set piece combat tactics did occur later which unargueably led to the defeat of the slave revolt.
I haven't personally read Francis Marion's memoirs but have seen the Patriot. If the movie is even remotely close to the facts, I would call the tactics he used to be very similar to the above. Furthermore, I won't dispute that Mr. Marion did use guerrilla warfare tactics with the Continental Army.
Just to make this clear. I am not claiming Spartacus as the creator of guerilla tactics. It was just one example of many to dispute your opinion that Francis Marion invented it. Since when is the era that the American Revolution took place in classified as modern?
Who's lecturing who? I'm offerring healthy debate and you want to compare who has the biggest xxxx. I out grew that mindset years ago. I'm not trying to insult your intelligence, but some of the things you claim are debatable. I offer my sincerest apologies for aggravating you.
I wish you the best of luck in your military career.
I'm sure that Firaxis with that nationalism means the period after the franch revlution, when a new warfare was developed. The rifleman it allows seems to me the American civil war rifleman, the XIX century rifleman.
The fact that nationalism allows mobilization and draft fits well the first time when a nation (the giacobine republic) was completely at arms. (I don't know the english spelling, could it be nation-at-arms?)
To prove my words, read the civilopedia entries for nationalism and rifleman.
Otherwise, it would be completely in the wrong place. The true nationalism of end 800- beginning of 900 coincide with Imperialism (in my opinion a missing tech) and it should be after steel (after the 2nd industrial rev.) and before repleaceable parts (which allows the WWI infantry).
The fact that nationalism allows mobilization and draft fits well the first time when a nation (the giacobine republic) was completely at arms. (I don't know the english spelling, could it be nation-at-arms?)
To prove my words, read the civilopedia entries for nationalism and rifleman.
Otherwise, it would be completely in the wrong place. The true nationalism of end 800- beginning of 900 coincide with Imperialism (in my opinion a missing tech) and it should be after steel (after the 2nd industrial rev.) and before repleaceable parts (which allows the WWI infantry).
Anyway, what should I do?
I have three choices now:
1) Include the A-Bomb available only to the owner of Manhattan Project: produced with a 7 turns period until the discover of Satellites.
And include a (still to be found) medieval unit that requires no iron. The cheaper version of medieval infantry would be available only to crippled civs and it would be 3/3/1 with ignore mov. cost. The other civs instead will have only access to Medieval inf. (no changes: 4/3/1 + iron).
This is due to the fact that crippled civs will hardly reach industrial ge
Then, the same split will happen with repleaceable parts: infantry only for america, france, ottomans, china, etc., and guerrilla (with ignore mov. cost) only for crippled civs. In this way, if a European nation can't get rubber, it will build riflemen instead of guerrilla in defense of its cities.
1b) No added medieval unit but only split infantry/guerrilla (not much useful anyway)
2) Do none of the above, release the patch as it is (and it contains a long list of fixes) and leave the problem for a future patch
3) Include only one of the two additions
I have three choices now:
1) Include the A-Bomb available only to the owner of Manhattan Project: produced with a 7 turns period until the discover of Satellites.
And include a (still to be found) medieval unit that requires no iron. The cheaper version of medieval infantry would be available only to crippled civs and it would be 3/3/1 with ignore mov. cost. The other civs instead will have only access to Medieval inf. (no changes: 4/3/1 + iron).
This is due to the fact that crippled civs will hardly reach industrial ge
Then, the same split will happen with repleaceable parts: infantry only for america, france, ottomans, china, etc., and guerrilla (with ignore mov. cost) only for crippled civs. In this way, if a European nation can't get rubber, it will build riflemen instead of guerrilla in defense of its cities.
1b) No added medieval unit but only split infantry/guerrilla (not much useful anyway)
2) Do none of the above, release the patch as it is (and it contains a long list of fixes) and leave the problem for a future patch
3) Include only one of the two additions
Lachlan
Great Builder of Civs !
I vote 1)
Point13
Like a ton of bricks!
1 i like the A-bomb idea...
Eddiit
King of Nothing
1
- Status
