Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (
More info?)
On Sat, 03 Jul 2004 11:46:01 -0400, P12 <nomail@all.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 03 Jul 2004 08:31:06 -0500, Jeffery S. Jones
><jeffsj@execpc.com> wrote:
>
>> I just did the Japanese conquest, and the Ninja get used massively
>>as well. Only catch is that they require a resource which is rare, so
>>I was able to cut them down by eliminating that resource from most of
>>my neighbors.
>>
>> I did discover a new odd thing, though: when the Takeda Ninja took
>>my city and burned it down, I was told that they did it, even though
>>it is hidden nationality and I wasn't told -- when they hit units
>>(esp. workers, they like that). As a secret attack option, using them
>>to take cities won't work -- though of course I don't know if the AI
>>will recognize this. But in a human vs. human game, you couldn't get
>>away
>>
>> In the Japanese conquest, I don't think that the invisible bug hurts
>>because the unit is hidden nationality. If they were merely
>>invisible, it would cause no end of problems by messing with all of
>>the military alliances unpredictably (how many civs in it? 18
>>opponents, I think).
>>
>> The AI love the invisible units -- I don't know what the deal is.
>>They aren't all that powerful, but the hidden nationality lets you
>>engage in war without being at war, and to pick apart allies.
>>
>> But like all hidden nationality units, they suffer (like the
>>privateer) from being too vulnerable when detected. If you use them
>>to attack in enemy/allied territory, they'll just get picked off.
>>
>> Unless you stack one of your own units with it, which seems to be a
>>bit unfair, because the game won't let you -- even with a stealth unit
>>-- attack the hidden nationality unit without triggering a war,
>>because it is now on a square held by your "friend".
>>
>> OTOH -- this is what worked well for me. Stack the Ninja with any
>>unit -- even a worker. When I hit something (with ROP or in my own
>>territory), I move that "cover" unit onto the Ninja, so that it may
>>not be attacked on the AI's turn.
>>
>> This was devastating for resource removal -- first thing I did was
>>to put a samurai with a ninja on my neighbor's jade resource, then
>>pillaged with the Ninja. Because we have ROP, I can stay there, and
>>because the Ninja is hidden nationality, there is no war trigger. I
>>think that I could actually pillage every road and key enhancement
>>easily this way.
>>
>> I don't think that the AI does this -- it uses the ninja for
>>standalone attacks, and the thing gets caught out eventually by some
>>unit able to see it. Or else, a random "move onto the square" attack
>>hits it -- not sure if the invisible unit bug catches that or not, I
>>suspect not but the Ninja is wimpy, so only the weakest attack units
>>would die.
>
>I haven't seen the AI do this in the Conquests. But they are
>perfectly capable of it. In PTW I had created a scenario where
>guerilla units where cheap and with hidden nationality. There where
>two civs left on my continent and only one had a right of passage.
>All of a sudden my cities started getting attacked. They where able
>to use their ROP over my railroads to attack any city they felt like
>without declaring war. When they failed to take my cities they
>started blowing out terrain improvements. It was obvious who was
>making them because they covered them with other units like you did.
Yeah, I think that they hid the ninjas under workers, who roam all
over the place.
>From there it got even wierder. Whenever I contacted them my advisor
>warned "they have attacked us before" when technically they never had.
>I started making my own and proceeded to blow out terrain improvements
>in their land. They quickly dropped from polite to furious and
>eventually we went to war.
I hadn't noticed any diplomatic penalty yet with ninjas. Maybe
because they are invisible?
>One difference with my experience is the units where not invisible.
>They probably figure they don't have to protect an invisible unit
>because you cannot see them.
Yeah, that makes sense. I found them hard to use that way -- either
the AI seems them, or its moves naturally let them run into them, they
attack (of course) automatically, and kill it.
>> As long as I'm onto the Sengoku Japanese conquest, it is one where
>>you have a King unit which is meant to be used in combat. The AI of
>>course never does, leaving it in the capital forever. Your Daimyo not
>>only is the best attacker early on, its special abilities (by
>>upgrades) keeps it there. So my King was basically wherever my combat
>>action was, or fighting barbarians to ramp up to Elite (Grandmaster).
>>BTW, the King *can* generate a leader, which I found interesting.
>>
>> OTOH -- doing this forced a few reloads ;-( Because if the King
>>dies, you lose the game, and as you know, even if the odds are in your
>>favor you can still lose. But if I left the guy safe at home, I would
>>have missed out on the fun (and the flavor) of the scenario.
>
>I hadn't tried this but it does sound interesting. Many civ leaders
>joined their forces in battle and often they where the best fighters.
I found the effect interesting. In the late game, the king gets
enslavement ability. I found an island with a huge barbarian camp
(about 30 on it), and repeatedly hit it in order to recruit more free
troops. If the ability was available earlier, it would be even more
useful. As it was, it gave my king unit a good use once the main
combat units were roughly comparable in power (he was still the best,
but not by much).
>> One more little bummer thing: You know that when the king goes, all
>>the cities of that civ are destroyed. That means you can't capture
>>the capital. Guess where all the wonders tend to be built? This is
>>doubly true in this one because of a small wonder which boosts
>>production -- I built mine in the capital, and I'm sure that the AI
>>did the same. That means we can't actually capture wonders in this
>>one (nor likely in the middle ages conquest, for the same reason --
>>they'll be destroyed rather than captured, though with three kings you
>>can pick the order to take them out).. I'd kind of like an option to
>>capture the city -- at least the one with the king in it -- rather
>>than destroying it, especially when it has a wonder.
>
>Yeah the best I can do in the middle ages was to capture the capital
>last so I can get all the weaker cities. The AI seemed to know this
>tactic but I am not positive. It would be interesting that if
>instead you automatically grab their remaining best cities while the
>smaller ones are destroyed.
It could be. I understand the game logic -- it gives you a way to
win by a single attack, so the advantage has to be less; also, if the
civ is "destroyed," and you don't get the cities, who *does* get them?
Civ3 doesn't have the Civ2 neutral "barbarian" tribe to take over
cities, though it does have barbarians.
In any case, I think that the AI does grasp the idea of taking ou
the king last, in order to capture more cities. It does complicate
the strategy, by making you choose to bypass what would otherwise be
the prime target, the enemy capital.
--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram