Unit requests thread

[dutchking]

Well, since Ambrevilla convinced you so fast of making an aircraft for him, here are some suggestions. I grouped them into categories and in each category I go from what I would like to see most to least

By no means do I expect you to do all of them, just take it as inspiration

Sikorski Vityaz

JN-4
Schuckert D-IV
Ki-10
I-15

B-10
Bristol Blenheim
A-26
Me-410
DH-98
Potez 630
J1N1
Bf-110
Whirlwind
Do-17
Do-215
Tu-2
Pe-2

P-80
Mystere
F-89
CF-100
Yak-15
Mig-9

Saab 35
Hunter
F-104
JF-17
F-100
Lightning
J-10
Rafale
HF-24
Etendard
Sea Vixen

F-22
T-50
X-36
X-35

I love you.
I will do all of them if I can.

 

[mamba]

You forgot the M-4 Bison and B-58 Hustler!

Believe it or not, but I intentionally left out as many units as I added (maybe even more) because I flat out did not like them or they were too similar

I don't think yours were among them, but the M-4 and B-58 are a whole new category I did not even start with (strategic bomber) as I do not use / intend to use it.

I did add a lot of two-enginged light bombers / heavy fighters though

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Just how many WWII German bombers do we need?

Evidently the Germans were the ones who needed more than they actually got.

Ambitious job, dutchking. One day you are really going to have to tell everyone where you're getting all these units...

 

[Wolfshanze]

Okay...

SERIOUS PROPOSAL BASED ON WIDESPREAD NEED
We've got a ton of custom fighters, and a very large number of multi-engined bombers as well for WWII use.

What I've seen a scarcity of, is single-engined light bombers for most WWII era-nations.

Here is a list of single-engined light bombers and the nations that flew them:

Fairey Battle (UK, Greece, Belgium, Turkey)
Loire-Nieuport 401 (France)
Vultee Vengeance (US, UK, India, Latin America)
Breda Ba 65 (Italy, Babylon, Portugal)
Fokker CV (Holland, Norway)
Sukhoi Su-2 (USSR)
Saab B17 (Sweden)

That list targets a specific group of WWII aircraft, that to my knowledge have not been covered in Civ4 by modelers and instead of making "yet another German bomber", maybe we could focus some efforts on this needed field, because I know a lot of mods use light bombers and/or fighter bombers which could use more models for nations that don't begin with "America", "Germany" or "England".

Plus that (dual-engine) Martin B-10 could be used by several nations as the main bomber.

 

[mamba]

Here is a list of single-engined light bombers and the nations that flew them:

Fairey Battle (UK, Greece, Belgium, Turkey)
Loire-Nieuport 401 (France)
Vultee Vengeance (US, UK, India, Latin America)
Breda Ba 65 (Italy)
Fokker CV (Holland, Norway)
Sukhoi Su-2 (USSR)
Saab B17 (Sweden)

That list targets a specific group of WWII aircraft, that to my knowledge have not been covered in Civ4 by modelers and instead of making "yet another German bomber", maybe we could focus some efforts on this needed field, because I know a lot of mods use light bombers and/or fighter bombers which could use more models for nations that don't begin with "America", "Germany" or "England".

Actually my list contains quite a few light bombers / heavy fighters, I decided to go with the twin-engine versions though as to me the single engine ones are too close to fighters (graphics-wise).

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Thanks for that list! Makes my job easier.

Also, if DK could make a generic transport plane, perhaps based on a popular model of the time, that would help.

 

[dutchking]

Evidently the Germans were the ones who needed more than they actually got.

Ambitious job, dutchking. One day you are really going to have to tell everyone where you're getting all these units...

Import>Modify>Export.

 

[Wolfshanze]

Actually my list contains quite a few light bombers / heavy fighters, I decided to go with the twin-engine versions though as to me the single engine ones are too close to fighters (graphics-wise).

So in otherwords, your list is completely differant then mine, because I specifically mentioned single-engined light bombers, which your list does not cover at all.

I made a seperate list covering a field not covered and nations not covered. Your list is a very differant kind of list, with differant types of planes. I chose single-engined bombers, because many/most can be used on carriers.

Nobody is going to confuse a Loire Nieuport 401 single-engined bomber for a "standard" or heavy bomber... every model for French bombers (used with the Civ4 "bomber" model for France is dual-engined... by choosing a single engine bomber, you avoid any possible confusion and add the realistic option of using it on a carrier as many mods do).

Your list is just differant... not sure why you perceived my list was so similar to yours... not one of my suggestions is on your list, and all of mine are of one type... single-engined bombers... which are lacking on your list.

Hey... we do concur on the Martin B-10.

 

[mamba]

So in otherwords, your list is completely differant then mine, because I specifically mentioned single-engined light bombers, which your list does not cover at all.

Well, if we call the category light bomber, then part of my planes fall into that category, those are other planes than the ones you put in your list though

If you see single engine light bombers as a category of its own then yes, there is no relation.

Fairey Battle
LN 401
A-31
Ba 65
Fokker CV
Su-2
B17

There, this is better at getting DKs attention

 

[Wolfshanze]

If you see single engine light bombers as a category of its own then yes, there is no relation.

I'm focusing on single-engined light bombers, because we have a lot of dual and quad engine heavy bombers... what makes one two-engine bomber a "light bomber" and another two-engine bomber a "heavy bomber"?

I'm just saying it's easy to avoid bluring the line if you opt for single-engined light bombers... there's no chance of confusion... and you can always put a single engined bomber on a carrier... most dual-engined bombers are too big and/or cumbersome to operate from a carrier.

I think the list I provided above is a very good list to get a lot of nations a clear light-bomber that couldn't be confused for a heavy bomber and operate from carriers to boot.

Currently, I only know of the Avenger, Kate, Val, IL2 & Stuka as the only equivelant Civ4 models now in existance (if there's more, I'd like to know, especially if not models for America, Japan, Russia and Germany).

(EDIT: I forgot about the IL2, so that would push the Su-2 down on the "need" list).

P.S.
Oh... the Fairey Swordfish might be nice for England as well.

 

[dutchking]

Thanks for that list! Makes my job easier.

Also, if DK could make a generic transport plane, perhaps based on a popular model of the time, that would help.

I was going to do that too...

 

[mamba]

I'm focusing on single-engined light bombers, because we have a lot of dual and quad engine heavy bombers... what makes one two-engine bomber a "light bomber" and another two-engine bomber a "heavy bomber"?

The size, the engine, the design, the fact that they may have 4 engines but two propellers (like the He-177 DK just did).

What makes one single-engine plane a fighter and another a light bomber ?

 

[Wolfshanze]

The size, the engine, the design, the fact that they may have 4 engines but two propellers (like the He-177 DK just did).

Okay cute-boy... you wanna debate for no other reason then to waste time? List-off the number of four-engine/two-propeller bombers made during WWII, then list the number of two-engine bombers that have the same number of propellers as the He-177. Define the distinction in combat roles between a He-111 (two engine) and a He-177 (four engine).

What makes one single-engine plane a fighter and another a light bomber ?

Purpose of build, ability... also in Civ4 the options will be differant between a fighter and bomber on the control panel... however a dual-engine light bomber and a dual-engine heavy bomber will have the SAME mission options in the Civ4 menu.

If you'd like to continue being cute, count the number of carrier-operable two engine bombers in WWII and compare that with the number of carrier-operable single-engine bombers in WWII... please tell me which has the higher number and in what percentage.

I didn't even mention your list when I made mine... I made a very specific request and was very deliberate in defining "single-engined light bombers"... it's like you took some offense that I had a differant list then yours and you've been trying to prove ever since that your list is practically just like mine or fills the same need. It's not, and it doesn't.

Single engine light bombers are a very specific breed of plane... where-as the line between dual-engine bombers (between heavy and light) is much more murky.

Besides, at the rate DK is going, he could probably have your list and mine done before the morning... also, DK thinks I'm fat and will probably do your list first anyways...

Maybe he'll at least do the Martin B10 first since we both agree on that.

 

[GOBLES]

Can't wait for those units...

 

[Healz]

I know, now we have a flamethrower infantry unit but how about a flamethrower tank? I wouldn't mind if it was based off the Sherman (ie Sherman Crocodile) or the Russian T-34 as there was an OT-34 used during WW2 as a flamethrower. Could be a few different ones around. A German flamethrower tank of WW2 vintage would be good. Also the flamethrower could be good made into different units like Japanese, English, American, French, German, etc.

Also I might be missing something with Unit Addition but where does the .nif etc. get referenced? I couldn't find this listed in the tutorials. Thanks, Healz.

 

[jefmart1]

I'm looking for post-apocalyptic units:

Technicals with a more mad max look, biker gangs, a bike with a sidecar mounted machine gun, survivors with only pistols, an SUV technical, a technical made from a bulldozer, cultists in black robes, survivalists, etc.

 

[danrh]

I know, now we have a flamethrower infantry unit but how about a flamethrower tank? I wouldn't mind if it was based off the Sherman (ie Sherman Crocodile) or the Russian T-34 as there was an OT-34 used during WW2 as a flamethrower. Could be a few different ones around. A German flamethrower tank of WW2 vintage would be good. Also the flamethrower could be good made into different units like Japanese, English, American, French, German, etc.

Also I might be missing something with Unit Addition but where does the .nif etc. get referenced? I couldn't find this listed in the tutorials. Thanks, Healz.

I do wonder about the inclusion of a flamethrower unit. Given the abstract nature of combat in Civ a unit usually represents something of the order of at least a battallion but more likely a brigade or division. Flamethrowers were a support weapon deployed in platoon or smaller sub-units in support of larger operations. A flamethrower division would seem excessive. They should more properly considered as an integral part of a units TOE just as one would assumes mortars are present with your infantry units.

Dan

 

[Healz]

Mamba just in case anyone is wondering is putting up for the Swedish B-17 Dive-Bomber that looks a bit like a Harvard with heavy Spats on the Wheels to me. But they aren't really there in the game. Also the Artillery is heavily inaccurate to real-life. The artillery actually even in the modern era doesn't have any real range to it. I know you will talk about balance but that is balanced in the modern era by the ability to use aircraft to damage that artillery and then long-range ground units to take it out. Another example, in Civ IV unless it is modified the Battleship has to go right in next to shore to Bombard a city when from all accounts the Battleships were able to bombard from offshore things such as fortresses etc. Therefore I think your argument that they are support weapons is a bit inaccurate in the way Civilization works. Besides I figure that bonuses can be given against Infantry and Fortifications which makes the unit a useful one. Given that Civilization doesn't really have the ability to modify the units to really represent that, it needs to be added in as best as possible. But then each to their own. I know I would use a flame-tank if there were one, but it is up to you to decide what you want to put in your Civilization game. By the way, special units such as great people are depicted exactly the same as other units when they would rarely be seen this way in real life.

 

[mamba]

Okay cute-boy... you wanna debate for no other reason then to waste time?

Hey Wolfshanze, relax, just teasing

Purpose of build, ability... also in Civ4 the options will be differant between a fighter and bomber on the control panel... however a dual-engine light bomber and a dual-engine heavy bomber will have the SAME mission options in the Civ4 menu.

oh, so the difference between a single-engine fighter and a single-engine bomber is the control panel in civ. Too bad I cannot see the control panel of enemy planes

I made a very specific request and was very deliberate in defining "single-engined light bombers"... it's like you took some offense that I had a differant list then yours and you've been trying to prove ever since that your list is practically just like mine or fills the same need. It's not, and it doesn't.

Single engine light bombers are a very specific breed of plane... where-as the line between dual-engine bombers (between heavy and light) is much more murky.

I am not arguing against your list and certainly am not taking offense to it. We both have included light bombers in it, which to me is the only overlap there is, asking for units built for a similar purpose. I focused on the twin-engine ones whereas you focused on the single-engine ones, nothing wrong with that.

I chose the twin-engine ones because then it is easier to graphically distinguish between fighters and bombers in civ (granted, it won't be any easier to differentiate between light bombers and regular ones).

And that actually was all I am saying, I prefer the twin-engine light bombers over the single-engine ones as we are used to bombers always having multiple engines in civ.

Yes, the differentiation on the twin-engine ones is a bit blurry, but hey, you have two different unit types for them, which is about the same differentiation as having a different control panel

Mamba just in case anyone is wondering is putting up for the Swedish B-17 Dive-Bomber that looks a bit like a Harvard with heavy Spats on the Wheels to me.

Wolfshanze is putting up for it, I just commented on it.

 

[Healz]

Ok, I agree with the heavy bombers being better in Civ IV because look at the fact that there is a reason most bombers are two or more engined as they can carry more bombs a greater range. Still some attention needs to be paid to the naval strike-force. I never build carriers as I find the fighters on them to be pathetic. You are better off wasting some Navy Seals in a first strike or using bombers based from somewhere close to soften up targets...