Small Nitpicky Changes

[awesome]

Plus, it kind of weakens the already mediocre Ottoman ua. The East Indiaman can just replace the merchant ship or something.

The sea begger, rather.

 

[Snoopaloop]

Actually, historically, Privateers flew under the flag of the nation. They were private ships officially authorized to make war and seize property. They didn't fight secretly as Pirates. So the current ship actually better reflects historic use.

It doesn't make sense to begin with. Privateers aren't really pirates, they're closer to naval mercenaries. They fly the flag of their patron nation. If Francis Drake launches an attack on your trade ships it's obviously an act of aggression by the English.

Yes, you are both correct in some regard. Trying to fix the privateer unit in this game, I attributed some qualities of a pirate, fighting completely unaligned at all times (I was unclear about what I meant). What I did mean to show is that privateers had their "letters of marquis" to identify the nation they did fight for...but during the chase of a merchant ship, privateerss would often fly a false flag, or no flag (not a jolly roger/pirate flag) until right before they got close enough to attack. You might not know it was Drake until the moment the cannons fired.


So maybe your privateers fly under your country flag, can attack enemy shipping without declaring war, but can be preemptively attacked by anyone (again, without having to declare war). You also receive a big diplo penalty from anyone you attack (or maybe just from anyone who manages to destroy one of your privateers - kind of like the current "spy catching mechanic")

The capture ability is just "game-breakingly" bad. Build 1-2 privateers...steal a humungous navy and never have your cities need to build another ship the rest of the game.

In-game, I would rather see them used to be a pest to naval trade routes, than a part of the main naval force (doing the final damage on a frigate and converting one every turn).

Yes, I hate Saladin's UA...think it needs yet another change.

 

[nokmirt]

Hmm... thought I posted it, but anyhow - only nitpicky thing is to change the color of China, either red or yellow, instead of the current green. While someone has suggested the green is because of jade, I really think red or yellow is much more iconic for China than jade. If I remember yellow is the imperial color, while red is everywhere in Chinese culture.

Maybe they can switch it with one of the new civs...?

It is a greenish color in Axis and Allies, 50th anniversary edition.

I don't doubt they add a pirate ship.

 

[mitsho]

Going back to the OP, if you think of what a maritime city state actually does (providing food), having Ur as such actually makes a lot of sense. I can see "Sumeria" as a breadbasket providing for their allies. But then, 'maritime' is actually a pretty bad name for that CS type in general.

 

[Louis XXIV]

OK, that's a fair point.

And they were at least a coastal city.

 

[PhilBowles]

The capture ability is just "game-breakingly" bad. Build 1-2 privateers...steal a humungous navy and never have your cities need to build another ship the rest of the game.

I'm not sure that qualifies as "game-breakingly bad", it's a deliberate design feature, and the AI is programmed to use Privateers as well. Since Total War instituted naval battles those work in very much the same way (especially in Shogun 2, in which physically destroying ships is all but impossible for anything but a caravel). You might find it an odd way to play, not to mention more than a little unrealistic, but it doesn't break the game in either system.

 

[nokmirt]

I'm not sure that qualifies as "game-breakingly bad", it's a deliberate design feature, and the AI is programmed to use Privateers as well. Since Total War instituted naval battles those work in very much the same way (especially in Shogun 2, in which physically destroying ships is all but impossible for anything but a caravel). You might find it an odd way to play, not to mention more than a little unrealistic, but it doesn't break the game in either system.

Capturing should just have less chance of success. That would fix the problem. Besides privateers would take all the valuables off a ship and burn it in most cases anyway, no evidence remains. Sometimes all passengers and crew went down with the ship. A privateer should also have no chance of capturing a modern ship. 50 cals alone would sink the thing. I know because they blast wooden hulled drug boats from Haiti right out of the water. lol

 

[WChrisMullen]

Rename "Happiness" to "Stability" because it's obviously more than just your approval rating.

 

[mposyncckh]

I guess this is to much because it involves changing the voice over for a leader, but I hate how when you first meet Catherine she says привет(Hi) when she should say Здравствуйте(Hello) Privit(Hi) is informal and you would like to think that when meeting a major world leader she would be respectful and use formal terms.
Also show a picture of the Kremlin instead of St. Basil's. St. Basil's is not the kremlin

 

[Lira]

I just want to play with more than just 22 civilisations at a time. That's all I want, really.

Why can't I play with all of them? I don't care if it makes my computer sluggish, and I couldn't care less if a single game lasts a lifetime. The more, the merrier!

 

[smallfish]

People are still using Privateers to take ships?

The only good thing I find use for them these days... is to take coastal cities and act as ablative armor for me Frigates. Then again I find ironclads to be much better for said role.

 

[Arachnofiend]

People are still using Privateers to take ships?

The only good thing I find use for them these days... is to take coastal cities and act as ablative armor for me Frigates. Then again I find ironclads to be much better for said role.

Yes, actually. Recently had an archipelago game where I was DOW'd by three people at once, including Liz. At first I thought they were going to crush me before I could get my act together but then I stole all of Liz's SotL's and made her naval superiority mine.

 

[nokmirt]

Yes, actually. Recently had an archipelago game where I was DOW'd by three people at once, including Liz. At first I thought they were going to crush me before I could get my act together but then I stole all of Liz's SotL's and made her naval superiority mine.

See this kind of thing should change. Privateers should have a less chance to capture ships. Stealing ships to keep from being stomped is a pretty lucrative loophole. On every sea map it is the order of the day. I am thinking they should reduce the chance to 20% success chance to capture a equal or smaller ship. With promotion it should go up slightly from there. Forty to sixty percent success rate is a bit too high. Also, trying to capture a far larger ship like a SotL/frigate should be harder to accomplish, say 10 or 15% chance for capture. Not all of these privateers have Horatio Hornblower, Jack Aubrey, or Alan Lewrie nautical skills after all.

To offset a lower capture chance, a privateer should also have a chance to capture gold from the ship attacked. When the ship is at low health and the outcome of combat decides the fate of the ship. Either it is captured, destroyed, or gold is captured from it or not. Many times they would go over and fight for control of a ship, capture all of its valuables, take prisoners mostly for ransom purposes, and then burn the ship. This should happen more often than not.

I also feel that captured ships should be able to be sold for prize money. Prisoners could be auctioned off as slaves or exchanged for privateer prisoners, or gold. Perhaps in CiIV, eh?

 

[ferretbacon]

Bombers and fighters need to stop taking damage when they attack an infantry, tank, etc.

The only way I sort of justify this is by telling myself the damage they are recovering from is really just refueling.

Honestly though, let's put the superiority back in air superiority.

The only things that ought to damage a bomber/fighter are:

1. Fighters
2. AA units
3. Cities

In the case of cities, I'm of the opinion that cities should only have a built in air defense system after a certain technology, or perhaps as part of a defensive building, such as a Military Base. If I've totally outstripped another civilization is terms of technology, SUCH THAT I AM ABLE TO FLY OVER THEM AND DROP EXPLOSIVES ON THEIR HEADS, I shouldn't be penalized for doing so.

The advent of flight changed warfare and the side that controlled the skies, to paraphrase Themosticles, had command of everything. With the current system it's often better to just build a ton of tanks and do a ground blitzkreig rather than waste resources on air units that get shot down by Lancers.

 

[Matthew.]

With the current system it's often better to just build a ton of tanks and do a ground blitzkreig rather than waste resources on air units that get shot down by Lancers.

Are we playing the same game? Repair comes very quickly and a bomber stack will drop anything in a single turn. I find it the complete opposite in that my tanks have difficulty keeping up and need to go from city to city because they are dropping so fast.

Great War Bombers without promos are a bit weak, but really so are landships without promos. Get some XP buildings and make sure to send out fighters to soak up AA, and bombers become crazy powerful.

 

[ferretbacon]

Meh, exaggeration aside, I still don't want to see lancers throwing torches at my bombers. I don't really care how fast or slow the healing is, damage should not occur unless I was stupid enough to do something like bomb a city garrisoned with an AA gun and a complement of fighter planes.

As for the tanks... are we playing the same game? Tanks are stupid powerful.

 

[Matthew.]

I agree on how silly it is for spears to be attacking stealth bombers. I think from a balance stand point they do need to be careful because the ability to stack multiple bombers on a single tile make up for the relatively weaker damage (rocket artillery drop cities faster than bombers).

I wish I could say how awesome tanks are, but my naval and air is so powerful by that point they often are used to cap cities and that is it.

 

[ferretbacon]

Huh, maybe my use of tanks is some sort of genetic holdover from my German ancestry.

In any case, my military heading into late game is generally tanks/artillery with as many battleships as I can build.

 

[Matthew.]

Well I just recently found out I likely am more Dutch than German. Perhaps that is why I get such a kick out of sailing along the coastlines and bombarding.

I don't know if it qualifies as smalll, nitpick change but I'd like to see either the air animations sped up or the ability to have multiple animations going at once. It is agonizing to play with animations on in late-game warfare because of it. Watching each bomber out of a stack of 20 is a lot of time wasted.

Besides, it would look awesome watching multiple bombers fly out at the same time.

 

[ferretbacon]

I can agree to that. Even if they implemented the changes I recommended to the letter, it still wouldn't change the fact that attacking with a set of bombers is excruciatingly slow. They could either speed up the animation or just allow you to send the entire stack at a city all at once.