Apolyton Archive  |  Preserved copy of the Apolyton Civilization Site forums as they ran on Ultimate Bulletin Board, 1998–2001. Read-only; nothing here can be posted to or replied to.  |  Forum index |  About this archive |  The 2005 site & forums

  Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
  Civ3-General/Suggestions
  How about a 'guard' or 'escort' function?

Post New Topic  Post A ReplyPost A Reply In A New Window

profile | register | preferences | faq | search next newest topic | next oldest topic bottom of page
Author
Topic:   How about a 'guard' or 'escort' function? Format for Better Printing
Ilkuul
Warlord
of Thame (UK)
Mar 2000
posted April 10, 2001 17:37   Click Here to See the Profile for IlkuulClick Here to Email Ilkuul  send a private message to Ilkuul Visit Ilkuul's Homepage!
Edit/Delete Message    Reply To And Quote This Message
IP: Logged, Admin Access Only

We all know the dangers of sending non-combative units out into hostile territory (settlers, diplomats, caravans, etc.) - and it's often necessary to send an accompanying defensive unit with them. Which means that you have not one, but two (or more) units to keep moving along the same route, with the defensive one always ending up on the same tile as the one it's intended to guard (not automatic when the units have different movement rates). Plus, how often does it happen that it's the defensive unit that is ready to move first, when you always want that unit to follow the other?

Now in Warcraft 2 you can click on a unit, then right-click on another and move it, and the first unit will follow the second wherever it goes. Why not a similar 'guard'/'escort' function in Civ3? It would save a lot of unnecessary manual unit-movement in situations like these. Just send out your settler, diplomat or whatever, and order a second unit to escort it. You then only have to manually move the first unit - the second will always wait till that one has moved, and then follow the same route itself. (Of course, you'll have to make sure the first unit doesn't exceed the second's movement rate, or you'll leave it behind - nothing the game can do about that!)

I can see this being very useful, not only for the non-combative units, but also, for instance, to guard low-defence units like catapults, cannon, etc. And since settlers are going to be so valuable in Civ3, it'll be doubly important to have them guarded when they go out to found new cities.

What do you think?

SerapisIV
Warlord
Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Feb 2001
posted April 10, 2001 18:24   Click Here to See the Profile for SerapisIVClick Here to Email SerapisIV  send a private message to SerapisIV
Edit/Delete Message    Reply To And Quote This Message
IP: Logged, Admin Access Only
Couldn't you you stacked units to perform this function? A defensive unit would protect the weaker unit
Ilkuul
Warlord
of Thame (UK)
Mar 2000
posted April 10, 2001 18:33   Click Here to See the Profile for IlkuulClick Here to Email Ilkuul  send a private message to Ilkuul Visit Ilkuul's Homepage!
Edit/Delete Message    Reply To And Quote This Message
IP: Logged, Admin Access Only
quote:

Originally posted by SerapisIV on 04-10-2001 06:24 PM
Couldn't you you stacked units to perform this function? A defensive unit would protect the weaker unit

This would come close, but maybe not quite all the way. If I'm moving a diplomat or spy into enemy territory accompanied by a defensive unit with a lower movement rate, I often use the full movement rate of the diplo/spy to investigate surrounding territory, but end up on a tile the defensive unit can still reach. I don't quite know how stacks will work in Civ3, but I imagine they would be limited to the lowest movement rate in the stack. Presumably to get the full movement value out of your diplo/spy you'd have to 'un-stack' it, move it, move the defensive unit to the same tile, then re-stack them. This seems rather more cumbersome than the 'escort' function I'm proposing.

SerapisIV
Warlord
Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Feb 2001
posted April 10, 2001 18:41   Click Here to See the Profile for SerapisIVClick Here to Email SerapisIV  send a private message to SerapisIV
Edit/Delete Message    Reply To And Quote This Message
IP: Logged, Admin Access Only
I don't think diplo/spys should be escorted, their goal is to be sneaky to begin with. What do you want, an armored spy, ala SMAC?

Caravans don't need to be escorted, the AI already leaves them alone knowing that they're mutually beneficial. I can't think of any other Civ2 units that would need the escort.

Zanzin
Chieftain
Sydney, Australia
Mar 2001
posted April 11, 2001 05:20   Click Here to See the Profile for ZanzinClick Here to Email Zanzin  send a private message to Zanzin
Edit/Delete Message    Reply To And Quote This Message
IP: Logged, Admin Access Only
quote:

Originally posted by SerapisIV on 04-10-2001 06:41 PM
I don't think diplo/spys should be escorted, their goal is to be sneaky to begin with. What do you want, an armored spy, ala SMAC?

Caravans don't need to be escorted, the AI already leaves them alone knowing that they're mutually beneficial. I can't think of any other Civ2 units that would need the escort.

Couldn't agree more. And we can't really speculate how stacks are going to work in civ3...hell, we don't even have concrete evidence for sure that will be stacks.

vgriph
Settler
Norrköping, Sweden
Apr 2001
posted April 11, 2001 06:06   Click Here to See the Profile for vgriph   send a private message to vgriph
Edit/Delete Message    Reply To And Quote This Message
IP: Logged, Admin Access Only
I like the ability to guard settlers. All the time I play in Civ II both the barbarian's and the AI's primary target seem to be my settlers.
SerapisIV
Warlord
Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Feb 2001
posted April 11, 2001 09:18   Click Here to See the Profile for SerapisIVClick Here to Email SerapisIV  send a private message to SerapisIV
Edit/Delete Message    Reply To And Quote This Message
IP: Logged, Admin Access Only
quote:

Originally posted by vgriph on 04-11-2001 06:06 AM
I like the ability to guard settlers. All the time I play in Civ II both the barbarian's and the AI's primary target seem to be my settlers.

Ahhh, now I see the idea. The problem is, who is the controlling unit of the stack? If you put a phalanx and a worker together, do you have to control the phalanx while the worker just follows, or can you control the worker, while the phalanx follows (and fortifies when not moving, that would be a nice bit of AI programming)

Ilkuul
Warlord
of Thame (UK)
Mar 2000
posted April 12, 2001 19:39   Click Here to See the Profile for IlkuulClick Here to Email Ilkuul  send a private message to Ilkuul Visit Ilkuul's Homepage!
Edit/Delete Message    Reply To And Quote This Message
IP: Logged, Admin Access Only

Thanks, Serapis, you've nicely re-interpreted the 'escort' idea in terms of stacks... Yes, if you're able to choose the dominant (or 'first') member of a stack, and have the other(s) following and fortifying (if their movement rate allows it), that would emulate the escort function I had in mind.

Presumably fortifying would (1) depend on whether the unit's movement rate allowed it; and (2) would automatically cease when the dominant member is moved again.

Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
> > > Civ3-General/Suggestions Forum

next newest topic | next oldest topictop of page

All times are EDT

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic | Top
Post New Topic  Post A ReplyPost A Reply In A New Window
Hop to:

Contact Us
Apolyton Civilization Site

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.44a
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

AltaVista Type or paste text or Web address (beginning with http://) here:
Powered
by Systran
Translate from: 

Front Page | Civilization III | Dinosaurs | Civilization II | Call to Power | Call to Power II | Alpha Centauri | Alternative Civs | Misc | Links | About ACS | GameStats
GameLeague | Scenario League | HAC | Civilization Scenario Collection | Spanish CivII Site | Clash of Civs | CtP Maps | Art of War | WesW's Ctp1/2 Site