Vokarya's Workshop: Units

[Rezca]

I agree that the Hovercar model should be changed.

It looks more like a civilian craft than a recon or military craft, but then again with the nifty models we have for the other cutting-edge vehicles and weapons.... The Hovercar is still a bit on the silly side


Not a huge deal really, there's more important things to be looking after, but even so.

 

[Vokarya]

As has been pointed out, the two reasons that I created the Hovercar are that's it is the final extension of the Scout line (I didn't want Adventurer merging into Early Tank, and I use scout-type units in offensive stacks for Sentry and Medic promotions) and that I wanted to pull Automated Traffic out of one-trick-pony territory.

I called it the Hovercar because that was the best model I could find in the downloads database (I can't actually make new models, but I can reskin and put parts together). I went looking through the Sci-Fi units models and I found something else that might work. There is a Rover model available here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=17958.

Especially look at this screenshot:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads/unityrover_dMh.jpg

Would this be better? We can rename the unit to Rover as well.

 

[Rezca]

As has been pointed out, the two reasons that I created the Hovercar are that's it is the final extension of the Scout line (I didn't want Adventurer merging into Early Tank, and I use scout-type units in offensive stacks for Sentry and Medic promotions) and that I wanted to pull Automated Traffic out of one-trick-pony territory.

I called it the Hovercar because that was the best model I could find in the downloads database (I can't actually make new models, but I can reskin and put parts together). I went looking through the Sci-Fi units models and I found something else that might work. There is a Rover model available here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=17958.

Especially look at this screenshot:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads/unityrover_dMh.jpg

Would this be better? We can rename the unit to Rover as well.

I can model (Cinema 4D), just not very well ^^;

Mmm Rover looks cool, not sure how it can work into Automated Traffic, but maybe it's an unmanned recon unit?

 

[Arkatakor]

The Elephant Cavs and Bombardiers I wouldn't have a problem with (Superior strength aside) if AND had an 'Alternate Timelines' component like C2C has, what with the stronger but limited units like Deer Riders, Mammoth Riders, etc.

Which could be a solution - keep them as is but limit how many you can build.

Limiting how many you can have would also be a very viable solution. Lowering the strength of the elephant bombard and giving it collateral damage could prove interesting and give it a niche.

As for elephant cavalry I still think the notion of it being so strong compared to horse cavalry with guns is silly.

 

[<Nexus>]

As has been pointed out, the two reasons that I created the Hovercar are that's it is the final extension of the Scout line (I didn't want Adventurer merging into Early Tank, and I use scout-type units in offensive stacks for Sentry and Medic promotions) and that I wanted to pull Automated Traffic out of one-trick-pony territory.

I called it the Hovercar because that was the best model I could find in the downloads database (I can't actually make new models, but I can reskin and put parts together). I went looking through the Sci-Fi units models and I found something else that might work. There is a Rover model available here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=17958.

Especially look at this screenshot:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads/unityrover_dMh.jpg

Would this be better? We can rename the unit to Rover as well.

The blue Volkswagen is funny indeed, but I like the consept of extending the scout line.
I realy like the Rover. I am for the change.

 

[Noyyau]

I find the Rover to be a better alternative than the Hovercar (both graphically and in name).

As for Elephant Bombardier and Elephant Cavalry, they do seem a bit weird to me, but I wouldn't outright remove them. I'd limit them in proportion to owned Ivory resources though, if possible with the current code, something like 10 per each Ivory.

 

[aggri1]

Hi. If you're looking to simplify by removing a unit, I'd like to volunteer the Minigungatling gun, even though this unit has been fairly recently introduced. In my current game, I started building miniguns gatling guns, but then a few turns later I had machine guns available, which perform exactly the same role but are stronger... I think my personal preference is for units to last a little longer than that: perhaps the current minigun gatling gun should be renamed to Machine Gun (which it was originally wasn't it?), but this unit then gains a few strength at the tech' which currently allows the stronger Machine Gun. I was beelining Logistics, for its corporation.

Perhaps the tech' tree or units' requirements have changed in recent revisions, I'm still on a pre-700 version: I'll update when the current round of crashes are dealt with. ;-)

Just an idea, if anyone's looking for a unit to remove...

Cheers, A.

 

[Vokarya]

Hi. If you're looking to simplify by removing a unit, I'd like to volunteer the Minigun, even though this unit has been fairly recently introduced. In my current game, I started building miniguns, but then a few turns later I had machine guns available, which perform exactly the same role but are stronger... I think my personal preference is for units to last a little longer than that: perhaps the current minigun should be renamed to Machine Gun (which it was originally wasn't it?), but this unit then gains a few strength at the tech' which currently allows the stronger Machine Gun. I was beelining Logistics, for its corporation.

Perhaps the tech' tree or units' requirements have changed in recent revisions, I'm still on a pre-700 version: I'll update when the current round of crashes are dealt with. ;-)

Just an idea, if anyone's looking for a unit to remove...

Cheers, A.

Gatling Gun isn't going anywhere. (Gatling is the first unit in the Machine Gun line. Minigun is the Modern Era version.) I really think what we actually need to do is slow down research a bit during the Industrial Era. The Ancient Era and the Industrial Era are the two places where I don't think we get enough time to play with new stuff before even more new stuff becomes available.

 

[Vokarya]

I can model (Cinema 4D), just not very well ^^;

Mmm Rover looks cool, not sure how it can work into Automated Traffic, but maybe it's an unmanned recon unit?

I'm willing to be flexible as far as Transhuman Era assignments go. It is all mostly speculation anyway, so I think this is a fine place.

 

[Vokarya]

The reason that I introduced the gunpowder Elephant units (Elephant Bombardier and Elephant Cavalry) was to remedy the problem of Elephants merging into the horse cavalry lines. War Elephant originally upgraded to Mailed Knight, which I thought made even less sense than having the Elephants continue until both horses and elephants are replaced by vehicles.

The Elephant Rider and War Elephant have a role of being one of the heaviest but slowest pure-attack units on the pre-gunpowder battlefield. They only move 1 and they don't receive defensive bonuses, so offensive strength is about the only role they can provide. I chose to extend that to the Elephant Bombardier and the Elephant Cavalry. I think that Elephant Bombardiers are very strong initially but quickly get overshadowed by Gunpowder units. Arquebusier is an okay match at 15 vs. 16, and Musketman is stronger at 20 vs. 16. Elephant Cavalry has a counter unit in Rifleman; with the 50% bonus against Mounted units, Rifleman is 39 vs. 32, definitely in the Rifles' favor on defense.

I find that horse cavalry still has a role despite the elephants; I use horse cavalry to hunt down enemy raider units (when at war with a neighboring AI, they tend to send in units to pillage) and as "cleaner" units to finish off a stack or city and then retreat back to the safety of the stack. I also need horse cavalry's greater speed to hunt down spare enemy units when Require Complete Kills is turned on. I often have to find and kill a stray Explorer or two to finish off an AI.

 

[JosEPh_II]

The reason that I introduced the gunpowder Elephant units (Elephant Bombardier and Elephant Cavalry) was to remedy the problem of Elephants merging into the horse cavalry lines. War Elephant originally upgraded to Mailed Knight, which I thought made even less sense than having the Elephants continue until both horses and elephants are replaced by vehicles.

The Elephant Rider and War Elephant have a role of being one of the heaviest but slowest pure-attack units on the pre-gunpowder battlefield. They only move 1 and they don't receive defensive bonuses, so offensive strength is about the only role they can provide. I chose to extend that to the Elephant Bombardier and the Elephant Cavalry. I think that Elephant Bombardiers are very strong initially but quickly get overshadowed by Gunpowder units. Arquebusier is an okay match at 15 vs. 16, and Musketman is stronger at 20 vs. 16. Elephant Cavalry has a counter unit in Rifleman; with the 50% bonus against Mounted units, Rifleman is 39 vs. 32, definitely in the Rifles' favor on defense.

I find that horse cavalry still has a role despite the elephants; I use horse cavalry to hunt down enemy raider units (when at war with a neighboring AI, they tend to send in units to pillage) and as "cleaner" units to finish off a stack or city and then retreat back to the safety of the stack. I also need horse cavalry's greater speed to hunt down spare enemy units when Require Complete Kills is turned on. I often have to find and kill a stray Explorer or two to finish off an AI.

+1 totally agree.

JosEPh

 

[<Nexus>]

Just a quick question:

Is there any sense of limiting dreadnoughts to 3/civ? Once you can get them it doesn't really matter if you have 3 or 13. Especially, since nanite cloud/swarm is not limited, altough stronger.

Also:
Is it necessary to limit trade caravvans to 5/civ? Maybe 10 or 20? Or even unlimited, like missionaries?

 

[Rezca]

Just a quick question:

Is there any sense of limiting dreadnoughts to 3/civ? Once you can get them it doesn't really matter if you have 3 or 13. Especially, since nanite cloud/swarm is not limited, altough stronger.

Also:
Is it necessary to limit trade caravvans to 5/civ? Maybe 10 or 20? Or even unlimited, like missionaries?

Nanite Clouds are insanely powerful, even if they are an endgame unit.

Caravans I don't know. I guess it's AI's don't know how to use them anyway (just treats them like a recon unit) so it can also be to limit how much the player can abuse them in one way or another - like so you can't just mass them in preparation for a coming wonder and then just auto-finish it in one turn by having fifty of them standing by. They don't know how to use Treasure(s) either - just massing them in their cities until the end of time or until that city is captured. Don't use them to rush production, build museums, or to "mini-culture bomb" cities, so it's yet another unit the player can use that the AI is clueless about.

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

Exactly. Trade Caravans are limited because they could be abused and AI doesn't know how to use them (even in vanilla Civ, I think).
As for Dreadnought Armor, they're limited because they're powerful. But you're wrong Sogroon, Nanite Cloud is also limited and Nanite Swarm is weaker than Dreadnought Armor.

 

[Rezca]

Exactly. Trade Caravans are limited because they could be abused and AI doesn't know how to use them (even in vanilla Civ, I think).
As for Dreadnought Armor, they're limited because they're powerful. But you're wrong Sogroon, Nanite Cloud is also limited and Nanite Swarm is weaker than Dreadnought Armor.

I don't think BTS had Caravans though? AI would use merchants and artists, but not Caravans/Treasures.

I think he was referring to the Nanite Cloud specifically, which IIRC has a Str value of 320

 

[oldnooob]

@ Vokarya, Now that I have achieved Explosives, Is it safe to turn on Automatic Upgrade again?

The reason That I am asking is because of the nasty surprise I received at Calvary Tactics. That cost me two turns and well over two thousand mouse clicks to remedy.

I would have closed this mod and uninstalled it had I been a first time player.
The loss (conversion) of two hundred seasoned troops garrisoned in 39 cities that took hundreds of turns to enlist at only one city would most certainly be a game breaker for many new players.

I suggest that you find a way to provide advance notification IN THE GAME that will make players aware that they MUST turn off auto updating before the advent of Calvary Tactics so they can avoid loosing their foot soldiers.

By the way, is it even possible to fire a matchlock rifle from horseback?

 

[Rezca]

Seems a bit of an extreme course of action to take for something that can just as easily be acomplished manually by Alt-Clicking on any one unit. Either way they all get upgraded, but in the latter it's to a unit of your choosing and can be done so when you feel is ready (What if you're having financial issues when the upgrade period comes around?)

 

[oldnooob]

@Rezca, I do not know what you are talking about. the upgrade for Arquibuster is Dragoon only. I had 200 skilled arq wiped out in an instant at the Calvary Tactics tech.

I think it is irresponsible to introduce such a dramatic event into this mod with NO ingame notice.
And over two thousand mouse clicks and two turns is what it took to restore the game.

 

[Rezca]

What I'm saying is why do you even need to use Auto-Upgrade in the first place when Alt-Clicking on an unit when upgrading them does the same thing except for gives you the choice of when you want to upgrade, if you can afford to upgrade them right away, and in cases like this - which type you want to upgrade to.


There's been plenty of warning ahead of time in the forums before this was introduced, and with each new addition users are asked "Does anyone have a problem with this before I/we continue?"

 

[Vokarya]

There is a problem here, though. It's not just the Dragoon; if the logic holds, Riflemen are going to auto-upgrade to Mounted Riflemen and Infantry to Motorized Infantry. This is going to repeat wherever we have a unit with multiple upgrade paths. I want to keep the ability to upgrade foot to mounted defense, but I admit that Auto-Upgrade isn't working the way we want. I don't use Auto-Upgrade myself, so I didn't see this coming. I do believe there was a similar problem with allowing Agent to upgrade to Special Agent/Top Secret Agent: because the latter two are National Units, auto-upgrading would use up your entire supply and not allow you to build fresh ones.

The only solution that I can think of -- and I don't quite know how to code it -- is a subtag in the upgrade code. Call it <bNoAutoUpgrade>: if it's turned on, then units can manually upgrade to this unit, but can't auto-upgrade. It would look something like this:

<UnitClassUpgrades>
	<UnitClassUpgrade>
		<UnitClassUpgradeType>UNITCLASS_MUSKETMAN</UnitClassUpgradeType>
		<bUnitClassUpgrade>1</bUnitClassUpgrade>
		[COLOR="Blue"][B]<bNoAutoUpgrade>0</bNoAutoUpgrade>[/B][/COLOR]
	</UnitClassUpgrade>
	<UnitClassUpgrade>
		<UnitClassUpgradeType>UNITCLASS_DRAGOON</UnitClassUpgradeType>
		<bUnitClassUpgrade>1</bUnitClassUpgrade>
		[COLOR="Blue"][B]<bNoAutoUpgrade>1</bNoAutoUpgrade>[/B][/COLOR]
	</UnitClassUpgrade>
</UnitClassUpgrades>

I think with the way I have it written out, we wouldn't need to include this in every single unit XML; only the paths that we want to auto-disable.

Also, from a tactical perspective, mounted defense units aren't using weapons from horseback (that's cavalry). Mounted defense units ride to the battlefield, dismount, and have three troops out of four fight while the fourth holds the horses. This is how they get defensive bonuses; they are not trying to fight from horseback.