unit request sticky

[davbenbak]

Could a unit request sticky be added to this forum? First, so that requests are posted in (or can be moved to) the correct place. And secondly, so that requests don't get immediatley buried in the main forum since it is very active.

 

[Kael]

[ removed ]

 

[Mumin]

I agree. Such posts are only interesting for those who make graphics anyway, so it would be good to collect them in one place.

 

[Red Door]

This should be moved to main C&C forum as this section is for completed units only.

 

[WildWeazel]

Or better yet, edit the first post and make this the request thread.
btw, who's going to be the first Civ4 unit librarian?

 

[JoeB]

If this is the right thread to ask in...

I'd like to know if there was some way to make the size of the existing units smaller. I think they look oversized in relation to the towns.
Or is there some way to make them smaller in proportion to the town size when you zoom in on the map ?

 

[a4phantom]

I have a request for you. How about a bomber that costs less than the current (heavy) bomber, has shorter range and lower strength and bombardment value (against city defenses), and that can operate from carriers and has a bonus against ships instead of a penalty? The purpose of carriers is to attack land targets and other ships, not just to provide Combat Air Patrol, and the best way to kill other ships is with planes, or at least that was the case in WWII when airpower became a real factor and where the bomber and fighter unit are probably meant to date to.

 

[MeteorPunch]

I'd like to know if there was some way to make the size of the existing units smaller.

Use the graphics scaling tool here.

 

[The End Is Nigh]

Could we have a C-130 Hercules or B-17 Globemaster to transport mech units?

Please?????

 

[Rufus T. Firefly]

 

[davbenbak]

If this is the wrong forum then for the love of God could a sticky be created in the correct forum? That's all I'm asking. Hopefully atleast one of the people who took the time to post "wrong forum" has reported my posts and the site administrators are hard at work to address my transgression!

 

[Mumin]

Actually, it would be nice if a moderator put a sticky clean thread here and then moved this thread.

Ouch! That animation is truly annoying, Rufus! (Perhaps the idea? )

 

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Ouch! That animation is truly annoying, Rufus! (Perhaps the idea? )

If you are annoyed by my picture, simply put the thread on right forum.

About sticky, I had already contacted the mods.

 

[flobi]

I have a request for you. How about a bomber that costs less than the current (heavy) bomber, has shorter range and lower strength and bombardment value (against city defenses), and that can operate from carriers and has a bonus against ships instead of a penalty? The purpose of carriers is to attack land targets and other ships, not just to provide Combat Air Patrol, and the best way to kill other ships is with planes, or at least that was the case in WWII when airpower became a real factor and where the bomber and fighter unit are probably meant to date to.

Except the bonus against ships (cause I don't know and I'm not anywhere near the game to find out), the fighter is exactly what you've described.

 

[davbenbak]

Hey, whatever it takes. I'm more interested in creating a solution than a problem.

 

[blshear1]

What about some better ship units I mean come on the battleship looks horrible!!! and no crusier what is wrong with these ppl?

 

[Tommy1234567890]

wrong fourm