What happened to movements rules ?

[rancorbeast]

Ok it's mister newbee again here. This is in reference to my previous "I got my ass whooped by archers" post.

I tought I had my border secured by placing a couple of stacks of riflemen next to each other diagonaly and fortified them in fortress that my workers had previously built.

Now here's the kicker... when mister big bad egypt decided to invade me for god knows what reasons ( he had been polite all along...go figure) His entire attacking force just slipped right between my line of fortified stacks and bang he started taking out the few defenders I had in the nearest cities and I was gone. So two question arises... Back in Civ 2 a unit could not move when another unit was in a 1 tile radius unless you attack it... and secondly... WHY THE HELL DID MY FORTIFIED UNIT JUST SAT THERE WATCHING !! shouldn't they attack !! I mean Geeeez

Thanks guys !

 

[Conrino]

Were you allied with Egypt?

 

[warpstorm]

That rule was removed. A guy fortified in a fortress or a unit with ZOC is allowed to take a pot shot at units moving from ZOCsquare to ZOC square next to him. If he misses (like riflemen with their poor attack are wont to do) you get no indication that he fired. If he hits he will only do one point of damage.

 

[rancorbeast]

Indeed I was... And I was trading all the time... I mean let's face it... I don't like was in civilization simply because the combat system is just plain unfair... bowmen and spearmen killing my riflemen I mean come on here !!

 

[Kayak]

Me again. In Civ3 units do not have zones of control like in Civ2. I think this is an inprovment personally. The best you can do is fast units have some % chance (I can't remember exactly) of attacking a unit as it passes. If they will they'll take off a hit point. Put a few cavalry in those fortresses that may help. Fortresses do not have the usefullness that they should. I hope CivIV has a solution to this. They should be so much better. There are lots of good suggestions in the ideas forum.

 

[Tomoyo]

Hey. The combat system is fine. You'll be thanking it when you're armed with spears and bows fighting infantry...

 

[punkbass2000]

Indeed I was... And I was trading all the time...

You may have drained their treasury through trade. If you trade an AI for some gold per turn (especially during their Golden Age), and they start losing income for whatever reason, they will go to war with rather than go bankrupt.

 

[Licentia]

Ok it's mister newbee again here. This is in reference to my previous "I got my ass whooped by archers" post.

I tought I had my border secured by placing a couple of stacks of riflemen next to each other diagonaly and fortified them in fortress that my workers had previously built.

Now here's the kicker... when mister big bad egypt decided to invade me for god knows what reasons ( he had been polite all along...go figure) His entire attacking force just slipped right between my line of fortified stacks and bang he started taking out the few defenders I had in the nearest cities and I was gone. So two question arises... Back in Civ 2 a unit could not move when another unit was in a 1 tile radius unless you attack it... and secondly... WHY THE HELL DID MY FORTIFIED UNIT JUST SAT THERE WATCHING !! shouldn't they attack !! I mean Geeeez

Thanks guys !

One example of how the AI (and in my opinion gameplay) has been improved. No more suicides on a defended unit.

 

[Licentia]

Indeed I was... And I was trading all the time... I mean let's face it... I don't like was in civilization simply because the combat system is just plain unfair... bowmen and spearmen killing my riflemen I mean come on here !!

Those are longbowman, with an attack of 4 compared to 6 defense. It's not really that suprising to see some win, but in a large war, you would lose less units then Egypt. It doesn't really suprise me LongBowman vs Riflemen. Against infantry, longbowman should very rarely be successful, and you will find they will rarely win.

 

[gunkulator]

Indeed I was... And I was trading all the time... I mean let's face it... I don't like was in civilization simply because the combat system is just plain unfair... bowmen and spearmen killing my riflemen I mean come on here !!

I think your expectations are unrealistic. You insist on 0 casualties in a war just because you have better units? Better units just means that you win most of the time, not always.

 

[Shadow Phoenix]

One example of how the AI (and in my opinion gameplay) has been improved. No more suicides on a defended unit.

oooh, i just loved to see them attack my lev12 city with 10 tanks in it.

 

[Licentia]

I think your expectations are unrealistic. You insist on 0 casualties in a war just because you have better units? Better units just means that you win most of the time, not always.

Good answer.

Look at it this way... An average Civ game lasts oh... 15 hours? In real history... there were smaller developments in weapons throughout real life history that gave technical advantages to one army over another. For example, the war between the Mexicans and Americans (Where the Americans took the entire SouthWest) was decided not because the Americans had Cavalry and Riflemen while the Mexicans only had Bowmen, but rather because the Americans had better bullets. Both countries had Cavalry and Riflemen, but one just happened to have better bullets. Did the Americans take casualties? Yep.

In a 15 hour Civ game, they don't try to represent all of those minor upgrades, therefore the difference between the American Riflemen and the Mexican Riflemen would be represented by the Mexicans not having Riflemen, but having Musketmen. You can't then expect that the technological difference would be that great that you should win every single battle.

 

[Willem]

WHY THE HELL DID MY FORTIFIED UNIT JUST SAT THERE WATCHING !!

Fortified units don't attack, that function is strictly for defence. If you want them to go after a unit passing by have them sentried, Shift-Y, and they will activate when an enemy comes next to them. Then you can open fire as they're passing.

 

[Cross777]

Why was zones of control taken out ? This just drives me nuts. And having the units shift-yed doesn't seem to work against allies, because I've had settlers walk right past my defenders.

 

[warpstorm]

Why was it taken out? Because people complained about it in the previous games. They thought it slowed the game down to much. I guess the moral of the story is either be careful what you ask for or you can't please all the people all the time.

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

Also, the Civ2 ZoC was entirely pointless - the human could always ignore it by using Caravans or Diplomats/Spies; once such a unit was on a tile, any of your units could go there as well. Throw in RRs, and it gets completely nonsense - one single Spy gave you access to anything. Of course, not only this was incredible tedious, but the AI was completely unaware of that (and, I think that would be pretty hard to program).
The Civ3 borders system works way better.

 

[predesad]

As others have said, the civ2 ZoC were bad, one of the worst exploits against the AI, IMHO, when you could still get wherever you wanted, but the AI could not. it takes a lot of forts to make the ZoC operate efficiently unless you have a narrow choke point like border.

 

[Willem]

Why was zones of control taken out ? This just drives me nuts. And having the units shift-yed doesn't seem to work against allies, because I've had settlers walk right past my defenders.

No, Shift-Y works only for enemy units. If you want to activate for any unit just press Y.

Even if they didn't activate, you should have seen those units coming. Just because you're not paying attention doesn't mean you should blame it on the game. No zone of control takes some getting used to, but it makes for a better game.

 

[Conrino]

I do not beleive so. I am sorry but that is just the way I feel about this particular issue. Sorry, I am a longtime CIV2 player, and old habits die hard. Also, the archers vs. rifleman issue I beleive is most unfortunate, and I wish that the wartime units could be more sophisticated to better clarify their technological superiority.