What about making it possible to "modify" your troops. With that i mean that you should be able to change the specifics of a unit. For example, you want to build a Battleship, you should then be able to decide how thick the armour should be(decidig the def. points) how big and how many the guns should be (deciding the off. points) and the propulsion system (deciding the movement rate). The bigger the ship the higher the cost to produce it. When you have produced it you should also be able to name the unit. Building units like this you get closer to reality. You get for example diffrent classes of ships. Perhaps a second class cruiser or a forth class Battleship. You can specialise your units more. For example when you are making a destroyer.
1. You can make a lighter one with a higher moving rate, for scouting and perhaps
sub-hunting.
2. You can make one with a little bit more fire power and armour for escort service for your transports.
3. Or you can make one with a higer degree of firepower to use as coastal artillery support for your attacks.

This was done in some degree in Alpha Centauri, but it can be done in a better and more advanced way.

However, there is one more objection that I would like to raise to a system that would allow you to tinker endlessly with your units. Such a system was ok in SMAC because SMAC is a fantasy game, but Civ3 being based on earth, should not have such an ability. After all, who ever has heard of a horsed legion?

I would like to see a system like this implemented for the scenario editor, there it would be a real blessing. However, I would object to having such a system in the main game.

Ship of the Line (wooden armour), grade 2 (more advanced carpentring)

Ironclad (Steel armour), grade 3 (early steel producing techonology)

Destoyer (Steel armour), grade 4 (more modern steel production)

And you can use the grades by using a hitpoint system. Lets say;
Trireme Not modified HP 10
Ship of the Line Not modified HP 25
Ironclad Not modified HP 40
Destroyer Not modified HP 80

And the you can multiply teh HP with the armour grade.

So lets now say that you build one Ironclad with a thicker armour, which gives a HP of 65. You then take 65*3 and you get a hit point of 195. You then build a Destroyer with wore firepower and less armour, which gives a Hp 65. that gives 65*4 which is 260.

you have now built to boats from different eras, the older one specialized i armour and the new one specialized in firepower. Even then the newer boat is far better then the older one.

This system could be a starting point on trying to take away the "phalanx-bomber" problem.

What do you think?

About this fear of "SMAC like" Unit Workshop in CIV III now I have the feeling that often people that are against it are unhappy because units could have silly names.

That could be addressed easily, because we haven't so large numbers of different combos (special features apart). It's not too difficult to link every main att/def/mov mix to a historically proper name, leaving the more strange (and probably less likely) units to composite names and/or renamed by player.

I agree some other problems must be addressed:
- the ugly SMAC Unit Workshop interface
- the AI ability to design useful units and properly use them
- a better balancing from building a new unit vs upgrading an older one. This was historically a main military "management decision" with ships, planes, artillery and mechanized units, as technology evolve.

That said, I'm against overdetailed choices. Blomman, IMHO armour thickness is not an independent factor building tanks or ships. We can't simply add more expense, because to be realistic you should related armour to engine power, chassis resistence, manuvrability, etc. etc.

We are managing fleets of ships, or groups of tanks. Fine tuning of singular unit will be lost on the strategical scale of the game.

You really got me there with the horsed legions

Perhaps there would be some merit in a SMAC - like system for designing units, but if there is a fixed number of historical names that we can attach to units, then why not just define all those units?

I would completely support support a design workshop that will allow to make special modifications to the unit such as
"add engineering ability" or
"reinforced defence mechanism".

However, I still feel that shifting the entire unit production system to the design workshop basis will be a mistake for Civ3

quote: if there is a fixed number of historical names that we can attach to units, then why not just define all those units?

I meant that we should have a "backbone" or "predefined list" of default (historically realistic) units, at least just to help novice players and AI.

Still this doesn't limit players to personalize them a bit, adding of course a name of choice or relaying on the name generator a la SMAC

E.g. adding the "NBC trained" special to a plan Mech.Infantry (it nullify the attack bonus of enemy unit provided with "Nerve Gas") you will get proposed the name "NBC Mech. Infantry".

That mean that you must have more hints on unit power that you see at map, because no name nor graphics will help a lot.
Call them "scout info" or "intelligence info", they should appear as a help tip when you left your mouse pointer over an enemy unit for a couple of seconds.