Rhye's of Civilization - the fastest loading mod Expanded

[Rhye]

What about an air transport as an upgrade for the balloon?

 

[Asclepius]

What about an air transport as an upgrade for the balloon?

I don't like the fact that tanks and mech Infantry can be airlifted from city to city. If you implement air transport as well then it has the effect of creating "paratroop" tanks and mech Inf which IMHO is even worse! The AI has no idea how to use air transport effectively which means the human player has an even easier time invading distant targets.

 

[Rhye]

OK, thanks.
I'm lucky that the holes in my knowledge of civ3 mechanics are filled by you!

 

[Asclepius]

OK, thanks.
I'm lucky that the holes in my knowledge of civ3 mechanics are filled by you!

LOL! Only trying to help!

 

[Lachlan]

Can i hve screenshots of Techs Tree in the four eras ?

 

[Khift]

Is scientific method OK?

It would be, yes, so long as it was moved back to the 17th and 18th century, IE. off of or near Physics in the normal game.

...Actually, Physics would be the ideal spot for it.

There seems to be a lot of unit development from the Middle Ages up to the end of the Industrial Age but then very few changes in the Modern Era. I think there should be more progressive development of the units, not dozens of new units, but just a few to show progress and make the end game more interesting. So here's a few ideas for making the end game more fun.

Early Aircraft Carrier (transport 3) upgrades to Modern CV (trans 6?) bombers can't land on CV's.

Early CV appears with Flight

When Modern CV appears, Anti Aircraft ship should appear called SAM Destroyer upgrades to AEGIS for the USA.

Cruise Missile Destroyer appears with Rocketry, can carry say 2 missiles.

Transport upgrades to Assault Ship in the Modern Era, with beter defence and the ability to carry 1 helicopter as well as ground units.

Infantry upgrades to Modern Infantry (foot unit) NOT mechanized Inf. Mech Inf should be a seperate expensive unit.

Tanks and Mech Inf should not be air transportable (Yes, I know I've said this one before!)

There seems to be a gap in the development that should be filled with units from around the 1960's so;

Fighter upgrades to Early Jet, say Phantom, then the F16 then Stealth/JSF (or whatever). It might be nice to introduce a special Carrier Jet like the Harrier when Modern CV's appear.

Tank upgrades to Chieftan (or M60 etc, 1960's era) then Modern Armour (Merkava for Israel)

Bomber should upgrade to Long Range Bomber (say B52) then Stealth Bomber.

Artillery should upgrade to Self Propelled Artillery (SP Artillery) with a movement of 2 before the Radar Artillery appears.

The same applies to Flak which should be self propelled before Rocket SAM's appear - SP Flak.

Might be nice if there was an Anti Submarine Helicopter (ASW Helicopter) that could be carried on some destroyers and CV's. Just a unit that detects Subs furthur away than the Destroyer.

I think that's enough new units (12) without being overwhelming. If there was more variety in the end game then people might play until the end instead of giving up at the start of the modern era.

A couple of small points about biq .11: Helicopters should be with advanced flight not amphibious war, or better yet another tech in the modern era. Aircraft carriers were developed almost immediately flight was discovered so I'd put them in with Flight - it also gives you time to build a carrier before the Jet age arrives! The partisan unit looks totally out of place with Military Tradition, I don't think the Guerilla needs a previous unit.

Comments anyone? I'd like to know what anyone thinks about extending the modern era like this.

My opinions:

- The Early Aircraft Carrier sounds like a good idea. Definitely a big difference between modern and WW1 carriers.

- The SAM Destroyer sounds redundant to me.

- The Cruise Missle Destroyer is brilliant, although personally I think Destroyers and Cruisers should naturally be able to hold one Cruise Missile and Battleships two.

- The Assault Ship sounds great.

- The Modern Infantry sounds redundant with the TOW Infantry, although I guess it might not be. Maybe Modern Infantry would take the stats of TOW Infantry, then we bump TOW down a little and make Guerillas upgrade to it?

- Of all the 1960's units you mentioned, the only ones I really cared for were the SP Artillery and Flak. The rest sound redundant.




Personally, though, I would like to see America's second UU be the B-52. It was a bad-ass crazy bomber, and is definitely UU material as opposed to the A-Bomb Rhye talks about. I'd also like to see the Ironclad scrapped and replaced with the Dreadnought, the ship that sparked the pre-WW1 naval arms race. It was a huge step in naval technology, completely outdating it's predecessors and giving all countries a hope to catch up and build a new navy.

 

[Chukchi Husky]

It would be, yes, so long as it was moved back to the 17th and 18th century, IE. off of or near Physics in the normal game.

...Actually, Physics would be the ideal spot for it.

Manned balloons first appeared in the late 18th century.

In 1783 Joseph and Étienne Montgolfier at Annonay, Fr., confirmed that a fabric bag filled with hot air would rise. On June 4 of that year they launched an unmanned balloon that traveled more than 1.5 miles (2.4 km). At Versailles, they repeated the experiment with a larger balloon on Sept. 19, 1783, sending a sheep, rooster, and duck aloft.
On Nov. 21, 1783, the first manned flight took place when Jean-François Pilâtre de Rozier and François Laurent, Marquis d'Arlandes, sailed over Paris in a Montgolfier balloon. They burned wool and straw to keep the air in the balloon hot; their flight covered 5.5 miles (almost 9 km) in about 23 minutes. In December of that year the physicist J.-A.-C. Charles, accompanied by Nicolas-Louis Robert, flew a balloon filled with hydrogen on a two-hour flight.
Military uses for balloons were soon developed. Anchored observation balloons were used by Napoleon in some of his battles and by both sides in the American Civil War and in World War I. The powered airship developed from balloons, but, while the airship was eventually supplanted by the airplane, balloons have continued to find useful applications. During World War II, balloons were anchored over many parts of Britain to defend against low-level bombing or dive-bombing.

 

[Rhye]

Personally, though, I would like to see America's second UU be the B-52. It was a bad-ass crazy bomber, and is definitely UU material as opposed to the A-Bomb Rhye talks about.

I think America shouldn't have 2 unique air units

Manned balloons first appeared in the late 17th century.

late 1700 is late 18th century.

Can i hve screenshots of Techs Tree in the four eras ?

I have a scheme written on paper. I haven't still altered the biq

 

[Chukchi Husky]

late 1700 is late 18th century.

I know, I wrote that accidentally. It's changed now.

 

[Khift]

Manned balloons first appeared in the late 18th century.

Close 'nough!

 

[Aeon221]

How about Continental Marines for America? Or simply a stronger marine unit? America was involved in more small wars conflicts than I care to remember (I THINK over 180 interventions between 1870-1970), and the Marines were called out for duty in all of those. Yet America does not get a UU marine unit...?

Just a thought; I am not in favor of a nuclear UU, and I think it is simply LUCRIDOUS to suggest giving them two air UUs; thats just insult to injury ;p

I mean consider the German Panzer vs the American Fighter Jet thingy. Which one is better? Or the legion? Or just about anything besides the British Man o War before enslave... that was just cruel.

So I am pushing for an American ground pounder; either the Marine (higher attack or +1 hp) or the Doughboy, a cheaper infantry, with slightly higher attack or defense.

Just consider it, please ;p

 

[Khift]

I think America shouldn't have 2 unique air units

The problem with that, though, is that the B-52 is the only useful UU I can think of for the Americans. We all know that the F-16 is useless, the Aegis Cruiser wouldn't be of much use either, and I honestly doubt that the A-Bomb will be used often enough to make it worth anything. The B-52, however, would be very useful to the player.

 

[Rhye]

Is the ability to build A-bomb before everybody can build tactical nukes so bad?

 

[Khift]

How about Continental Marines for America? Or simply a stronger marine unit? America was involved in more small wars conflicts than I care to remember (I THINK over 180 interventions between 1870-1970), and the Marines were called out for duty in all of those. Yet America does not get a UU marine unit...?

Just a thought; I am not in favor of a nuclear UU, and I think it is simply LUCRIDOUS to suggest giving them two air UUs; thats just insult to injury ;p

I mean consider the German Panzer vs the American Fighter Jet thingy. Which one is better? Or the legion? Or just about anything besides the British Man o War before enslave... that was just cruel.

So I am pushing for an American ground pounder; either the Marine (higher attack or +1 hp) or the Doughboy, a cheaper infantry, with slightly higher attack or defense.

Just consider it, please ;p

This is true. The US does have good Marines, and we have relied on them in several wars.

Is the ability to build A-bomb before everybody can build tactical nukes so bad?

Yeah, most people won't even use nuclear weapons anyways. I know I wouldn't, and America needs a good UU to counteract that F-16 nonsense.

Also, technically speaking, the A-Bomb is a flying unit too, considering it was dropped from a plane.

I mean consider the German Panzer vs the American Fighter Jet thingy. Which one is better? Or the legion? Or just about anything besides the British Man o War before enslave... that was just cruel.

Would the Panzer be better than a longer range, 14 or 16 damage bomber? I don't know about you, but I'd love to have that.

 

[Aeon221]

I agree... so lets change the American UUs to the B-52 (which I think is a wonderful idea) and the Marines, who are simply awesome fighting machines. I left my MC Small Wars Manual at home, so I dont have all the data at hand, but I can assure you that they certainly more than deserve to be represented.

I would advocate a colonial marine of some sort for Britain too, but it seems they are full up in the UU dept.

Also, why not make sailing ships capable of transporting one unit to represent shipboard marines? That was something ridiculously common back in the days of the Phoenicians, and is still common today; transports are for large scale things.

As to making all modern ships cruise missile capable... I am wary of doing so to the battleship, simply because destroyers (and cruisers even more so) would be made even less useful. Keep the battleships as is, medium range coastal arty support and sea domination, and go wild with the others.

That said, I still like the idea of a cruise missile ship capable of holding six or eight of the things... how about a sub? The sheer quantity held would make them the premier weapons of choice for sea-to-inland barrages.

Rhye, that map looks almost perfect for a PBEM game!

Americans yes (probably end up WWI style) or no (probably end up colonial war style)?

To back up Khift, the only time I used nukes was in Vanilla, and I loaded immediately after because the result was so negative (damage to enemy severe, but not worth war with all others and retaliation)

 

[KingOfCiv]

A-Bomb sounds cool! I'd drop it..lol!

KOC

 

[Rhye]

Strangers passing in the street
By chance two separate glances meet
And I am you and what I see is me

One of my favourite songs!

Overhead the albatross hangs motionless upon the air...

I agree... so lets change the American UUs to the B-52 (which I think is a wonderful idea) and the Marines, who are simply awesome fighting machines. I left my MC Small Wars Manual at home, so I dont have all the data at hand, but I can assure you that they certainly more than deserve to be represented.

So what do you think of B-52 + something else?
Aegis cruiser or A-Bomb or marines.

Americans yes (probably end up WWI style) or no (probably end up colonial war style)?

I still don't know.

 

[Blasphemous]

to Blasphemous->can you tell me more of the big gun you were talking about? An appropriate name, and the detailed info (some links would be good)

Remind me on thursday or any later and I will (I may remember myself but I don't trust myself on this kinda thing)... Haven't got time to do much before thursday.

RE Rome being 6 on the power scale, I see this as a good thing... Rome was the most prominant empire in Western history, like it or not. In non expansion RoC they have no chance at all of rising to empire when played by the AI, and as one who'se tried to do it with human ingenuity, it's darn hard to get through the Byzantines alone by the time that you're supposed to already own half the known world. So let Rome be powerful enough to reach historical status, but have it suddenly crippled at the start of the middle ages, so crippled that there's a good chance of the northern nations hitting it back (because they will be given a nice boost a bit earlier).

The legionaries could replace spearmen, but be available from next tech. Then they can upgrade to Pikeman (still 3/3/1?) or I could remove the pikemen from the Romans (just like Carthage in the standard game, as it has the superior Num.Mercenary) and let them go straight to fusiliers.

I like this idea, but I still think the Romans should be powerful enough to rise to historical empire or something near it... And btw, why do they get the Ballista AND the War Wagon?

Just had a thought (as I'm reading through the thread)... Romans could have a different Warrior than usual, same as the rest stat-wise, but upgrading to Legion which replaces Spear and Sword at Iron Working (if you wanna keep Legions in Sword line, then give the romans a seperate Spearman that upgrades to Legion while the rest upgrade to Pikeman, if you wanna move it to Spear line then there's no problem.)

Also in general I think the xpack is a good chance to break away from the civ3 tradition of all UUs completely replacing their normal counterparts... Some UUs should be available a bit later than the normal version, there's nothing wrong with this and it shouldn't be a rare occurance.

RE American B-52: Sounds like a better UU than the current one... I support the idea of replacing the current Useless Unit with the B-52, and for second UU giving them the Doughboy or better marines.

 

[Rhye]

Here's a first sheet of the new tech three.
It's not definitive: it's open to any suggestions of adding/removing.
It may heavily change in case of implementation of the religions or of addition of some new gov't.
Please keep in mind that it was done in a way to balance the number of techs with the number of turns. Now they are 22,23,17,21: porportional to the number of the turns of each era. No era should be more than 24 techs. Remember that this is a 400 turns game!!


Techs in italic are not required for era advancement



EDIT: removed

 

[Khift]

What is Imperialism doing after Enlightenment...? Wouldn't that be tied to Naval Tactics?