Unit Numbers

duckofspades

duckofspades

Warlord
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
118
I noticed in some civ rev screen shots unit's had numbers. 1st Legion, 7th Armor etc. I don't know if this was something the game did or just a player nameing them.

I have always wanted the game to Auto number your units like that, adds flavor. With less units on the map, I would love to see this. Mabye they can patch it in later.
 
That actually sounds really cool. It would help getting attached to a highly promoted unit who's been around for eras. Maybe if they kept their names when upgraded? Having a 7th Legion in the industrial era? Not incredibly realistic, but could be justified through the maintenance of tradition.
 
This was actually one of my favorite features of the BUG mod for Civ 4
 
That would be nice. I remember back in the day when I was a hardcore bleach fan I named my first 13 cities after the military squads and numbered each unit they produced as captain, 2nd seat, etc.

It really adds to the roleplaying element when you can see without having to micromanage where a unit comes from, how long they have existed compared to other units, and so on.
 
duckofspades said:
I noticed in some civ rev screen shots unit's had numbers. 1st Legion, 7th Armor etc. I don't know if this was something the game did or just a player nameing them.

I have always wanted the game to Auto number your units like that, adds flavor. With less units on the map, I would love to see this. Mabye they can patch it in later.
Click to expand...

Just because it was in Civilization Revolution doesn't mean it should be in Civ5. And yes the game auto named them like that. I prefer civ 4's way of doing it personally.
 
Schuesseled said:
Just because it was in Civilization Revolution doesn't mean it should be in Civ5. And yes the game auto named them like that. I prefer civ 4's way of doing it personally.
Click to expand...

I agree that CivRev looks like at terrible game (it may not be) and that I don't ever plan on playing it.

But it is possible there are some good aspects. I don't even think civ4 had a system for naming units (BUG added in the city they were built) but I really don't see any downsides to this. You won't have massive numbers of men like in civ4 and they should last a while so the numbers would likely end up meaning something to the player.

I'd honestly like to hear if some people wouldn't like it and why though. I've hardly thought this through to the fullest extent.
 
Schuesseled said:
Just because it was in Civilization Revolution doesn't mean it should be in Civ5. And yes the game auto named them like that. I prefer civ 4's way of doing it personally.
Click to expand...

What is the downside of putting this in. If you like nameing your units then your gona change the name anyways. But it is far more time consuming to figure that your new unit should be 34th infantry.
 
I never said civ rev looks like a terrible game, its fine, has both good and bad points. But i'd rather play Civ 4 any day of the week.

Main reasons being 1 number is better than 2 numbers for strength in my opinion, and civ rev has no large maps or slower time periods, too simplified for its own good.

Its good points, stunning graphics (although really annoying sounds, bingu bingu, awibo nos, and other such jibberish, mute!), Detailed civlopedia, unique bonuses for civs (i still prefer civ 4 bonuses though, civ 3 even more than that, dammit where by arigculture trait!) lifelike advisors and rival civ leaders (except the sounds. hate hate, gives me a headache.)

Overall, for me its just not as good, but it wasn't designed to be civ 5, its a console game, which does what it says on the tin, ut ill stay away from civ console games in the future i think.

duckofspades said:
What is the downside of putting this in. If you like nameing your units then your gona change the name anyways. But it is far more time consuming to figure that your new unit should be 34th infantry.
Click to expand...

The downside is that its equally time consuming to remove the 1st, 2nd, 3rd labels. If it was included as an option in the op[tions menu (default of off) then there is no downside, gotta love the options.
 
Schuesseled said:
I never said civ rev looks like a terrible game, its fine, has both good and bad points. But i'd rather play Civ 4 any day of the week.

Main reasons being 1 number is better than 2 numbers for strength in my opinion, and civ rev has no large maps or slower time periods, too simplified for its own good.

Its good points, stunning graphics (although really annoying sounds, bingu bingu, awibo nos, and other such jibberish, mute!), Detailed civlopedia, unique bonuses for civs (i still prefer civ 4 bonuses though, civ 3 even more than that, dammit where by arigculture trait!) lifelike advisors and rival civ leaders (except the sounds. hate hate, gives me a headache.)

Overall, for me its just not as good, but it wasn't designed to be civ 5, its a console game, which does what it says on the tin, ut ill stay away from civ console games in the future i think.



The downside is that its equally time consuming to remove the 1st, 2nd, 3rd labels. If it was included as an option in the op[tions menu (default of off) then there is no downside, gotta love the options.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. I don't paln on playing civrev though. The simplification scares me. And I'm very close minded when it comes to this game.
 
I have played it, and I can confirm that Civ V is special ;)
 
Dammit, guys, I was trying to lessen the hype to make the wait less painful. Why did you have to go and ruin everything.
 
Schuesseled said:
The downside is that its equally time consuming to remove the 1st, 2nd, 3rd labels. If it was included as an option in the op[tions menu (default of off) then there is no downside, gotta love the options.
Click to expand...

I would be fine with that for the most part. I like a strong list of options. I just want to make sure the list dosen't include a endless sea of them to sift through.

Also it wouldn't be equally time consuming to delete the tag. You would quickly delete it. I would have to fiqure where the count was currently at then add it.
 
This sounds like another good mechanic they are bringing from Panzer General. Being able to see at a glance that you are moving the 6th Infantry Division gives you a lot more periphery memories about what they unit has been doing and where it came from, even where you intended it to go.

Having tons of un-named units spread all over a large to gigantic map can get pretty confusing.
 
uhh not really have you played civ rev, infantry number 1 is only more significant in that is was created earlier than unit number 68. That doesn't make it better, or give yuo a flashback of its history and achievements.

Having tons if un-named units is homogenous and easy to understand. Having them all with different names, thats confusing.
 
It wouldn't be confusing seeing 2nd Infantry and 34th Artilliary. The Infantry and Artillairy tags is what really matters. But if I have 2nd Infantry and 34th Infantry, 2nd having upgrades to city attack and 34th to Mountain fighting. Now the number tags work. I can just remember 2nd is my urban assualt division. 34th is my Mountain divison. If you find the numbers confusing then you would just look at the unit abilities making the number tags meaningless. If found the name Royal Mountain Inf or whatever you would change it from 34th Infantry. Vs changing it from Infantry.
 
I don't see all the issue with this. With less units its nice to see them more personalized. Besides, if the numbers are automatic but we can rename them ourselves it becomes an even bigger non-issue, does anyone complain that every city you found initially has some name?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
New Unit Function - autofire
Replies
0
Views
245
DeckerdJames
D
J
unit control issues
Replies
0
Views
304
Javaze
J
B
Unit Production AI Improvements (v 3.1)
Replies
5
Views
860
azum4roll
A
K
New to Civilization 4
Replies
5
Views
1K
f1rpo
f1rpo
S
Is it possible to make new Commander types & abilities?
Replies
9
Views
647
Smayo
Smayo
Back
Top Bottom