Unit Trades
Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators
-
- General
- Posts: 1431
- Joined: Jan 13 2005
- Location: Washington, DC
Re: Unit Trades
Guys, hate to come running in with a big bag of reality, but this is a GAME. Not even really a "simulation" but a GAME.
--Things are done for play balance (see Space Race techs, et al)
--Others are done to generally represent larger concepts (e.g., you don't have to build ever imaginable support unit just to make the tank battalion function)
--Units are generalized. If not you end up with a lot of regional/national bias built in (e.g., the IDF is always better than Somali Army; US is always better than Bolivia, and so on). That leads to a generally un-fun game (why play anyone but US or USSR?) and a very--VERY--rigid historical construct (things always happen the way they happened, because things are structure that way)
Having said that, the ability to offer $$ for gear on some sort of open market is a cool idea and one that would fit the game well. Regional military differences can be met by national units (US specific, USSR specific, etc.) that already exist in game. You can also put more $$ into training and maintenance, etc. which further makes your military better. The historical US Army is great in 2012, but what if they never decided to change over from the M4 Sherman? How good would they be now? The game answers that with specific units,etc. based on nation. I can only assume the Goats would dearly love to have every imaginable national unit in the game, but they are only a handful of guys, not Bethesda Softworks.
--Things are done for play balance (see Space Race techs, et al)
--Others are done to generally represent larger concepts (e.g., you don't have to build ever imaginable support unit just to make the tank battalion function)
--Units are generalized. If not you end up with a lot of regional/national bias built in (e.g., the IDF is always better than Somali Army; US is always better than Bolivia, and so on). That leads to a generally un-fun game (why play anyone but US or USSR?) and a very--VERY--rigid historical construct (things always happen the way they happened, because things are structure that way)
Having said that, the ability to offer $$ for gear on some sort of open market is a cool idea and one that would fit the game well. Regional military differences can be met by national units (US specific, USSR specific, etc.) that already exist in game. You can also put more $$ into training and maintenance, etc. which further makes your military better. The historical US Army is great in 2012, but what if they never decided to change over from the M4 Sherman? How good would they be now? The game answers that with specific units,etc. based on nation. I can only assume the Goats would dearly love to have every imaginable national unit in the game, but they are only a handful of guys, not Bethesda Softworks.
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Sep 04 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: Unit Trades
Bethesda Softworks?! RAGE! I rage everytime I hear that name. I've lost close to all respect for them, and have actually stopped playing Skyrim completely, and refuse to buy any future games released by them. But, that's a topic saved for another time. I agree with you. This is a game, and it seems some wish it was a simulator. I read another thread talking about increasing research times. I have some problems with that. If research times will be increased, then get rid of filler techs and techs that only lead to another tech. It would be very frustrating to research something for a year just to have it lead to another tech that's even longer. Also, make the techs mean more and have more of a significant impact to be in line with the time spent researching it.Aragos wrote:Guys, hate to come running in with a big bag of reality, but this is a GAME. Not even really a "simulation" but a GAME.
--Things are done for play balance (see Space Race techs, et al)
--Others are done to generally represent larger concepts (e.g., you don't have to build ever imaginable support unit just to make the tank battalion function)
--Units are generalized. If not you end up with a lot of regional/national bias built in (e.g., the IDF is always better than Somali Army; US is always better than Bolivia, and so on). That leads to a generally un-fun game (why play anyone but US or USSR?) and a very--VERY--rigid historical construct (things always happen the way they happened, because things are structure that way)
Having said that, the ability to offer $$ for gear on some sort of open market is a cool idea and one that would fit the game well. Regional military differences can be met by national units (US specific, USSR specific, etc.) that already exist in game. You can also put more $$ into training and maintenance, etc. which further makes your military better. The historical US Army is great in 2012, but what if they never decided to change over from the M4 Sherman? How good would they be now? The game answers that with specific units,etc. based on nation. I can only assume the Goats would dearly love to have every imaginable national unit in the game, but they are only a handful of guys, not Bethesda Softworks.
-
- Sergeant
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Feb 09 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: Unit Trades
Fistalis wrote:Ah yes I forgot the Mujahideen that sent the soviets packing were all college graduates, and the veitcong were all straight from harvard.
Saying the Arab soldiers were better trained than Isrealis shows your lack of knowledge. Officers and Generals in arab armies through the 50s and 60s were generally Political appointees rather than trained soldiers.
Training means everything. For some countries the best educated are the Military due to the education they receive as part of their training.
Training isn't just boot camp... there are things such as military academies.. this isn't something one only finds in places where the population is educated as a whole.
But, lets assume your theory is correct.. then shouldnt Bhutan have the best military in the world?
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu_e ... gdp-capita
They spend more as a % of GDP per capita per student than any other country...
Or Maybe its Cuba who has the highest literacy rate...
Or maybe we should go by pure $ amount of expenditures.. then Canada is for sure the Super power we should all fear. Those canadian soldiers are so educated they can catch bullets with their teeth and spit them back at you with their advanced knowledge of physics.
While education can reduce the amount of training required to make a competent soldier, its does not replace training. IF that were the case then the first thing people would do in any war is draft the PHDs rather than give college students deferments.
Just give all the brain surgeons a rifle and send them to the front line. I'm sure they'll do fine, they are well educated they don't need any training.
Mujahideen?! Why not kamikadze? Do you know how many men mujahideen lost in Afghanistan? Do you know about soviet losses? Plus, ussr is bad example here - third world country vs hell, that's what it was. And ussr lost technological race with usa by the end of 70's and had no effective air support for their troops: no night vision for strike airplanes, for instance. USSR never had effective social structure to talk about, they've won their wars by superior numbers.
CUBA is good example! They won war in Angola vs very good boer. Not bad army at all, limited resources, but they have very good army even now, there would be second Panama long ago otherwise. But no democracy = non-effective social organization)). Small negative bonus. But I'm not talking about "literacy", though this factor should count too. Technological level of the country, the level that only effectiveness of social organization of the population can provide.
And don't tell me stories about arabs))))) Look at modern syrian army in their civil war: they fail at every level of their organization. And they had every opportunity to train. They didn't learn during the course of the war either. If you compare their effectiveness in fighting rebels in the cities to lets say americans in fallujah... monkeys could be trained to fight better.
-
- General
- Posts: 3315
- Joined: Jun 23 2009
- Human: Yes
- Location: x:355 y:216
- Contact:
Re: Unit Trades
Yes, Cuba trumped a far more educated South African Army in Angola.icbm78 wrote: CUBA is good example! They won war in Angola vs very good boer. Not bad army at all, limited resources, but they have very good army even now, there would be second Panama long ago otherwise. But no democracy = non-effective social organization)). Small negative bonus. But I'm not talking about "literacy", though this factor should count too. Technological level of the country, the level that only effectiveness of social organization of the population can provide.
And don't tell me stories about arabs))))) Look at modern syrian army in their civil war: they fail at every level of their organization. And they had every opportunity to train. They didn't learn during the course of the war either. If you compare their effectiveness in fighting rebels in the cities to lets say americans in fallujah... monkeys could be trained to fight better.
And you just made my point.. the syrian army to this day lacks good training. Just because you have the Time to train, doesn't mean the government is properly supporting soldiers being well trained.
Its quite common for Foreign Nations to send troops to be trained in the U.S. Because the U.S. Training regime is supported much better than what other nations can afford. Not because they will magically be more educated by training here. Even more Common these days is to send U.S. troops to train other nations militaries. This doesn't make them more educated.. it does make them better trained.
(also you ignored the fact that a wholly uneducated group of farmers in vietnam held out against not only better educated french but also American army for how many years?)
But really I see this conversation is going no where. So i'll just state I don't believe that education or cultural spending levels on the general populace should effect the efficiency of units. Thats what military training spending is for.
I think we have derailed this conversation enough. Since the main topic was unit trading.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
my Supreme Ruler mods Site - May it rest in peace
my Supreme Ruler mods Site - May it rest in peace
- Zuikaku
- General
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Feb 10 2012
- Human: Yes
- number47
- General
- Posts: 2655
- Joined: Sep 15 2011
- Human: Yes
- Location: X:913 Y:185
Re: Unit Trades
You mean: we need unit training BACKZuikaku wrote:Yes, we need unit training
(Oh my God, what have I done? )
Last edited by number47 on Sep 26 2012, edited 1 time in total.
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
- General George Patton Jr
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22107
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: Unit Trades
Actually, he wants more detailed unit trading. There is already unit trading.
-
- Sergeant
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Feb 09 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: Unit Trades
Fistalis wrote:Yes, Cuba trumped a far more educated South African Army in Angola.icbm78 wrote: CUBA is good example! They won war in Angola vs very good boer. Not bad army at all, limited resources, but they have very good army even now, there would be second Panama long ago otherwise. But no democracy = non-effective social organization)). Small negative bonus. But I'm not talking about "literacy", though this factor should count too. Technological level of the country, the level that only effectiveness of social organization of the population can provide.
And don't tell me stories about arabs))))) Look at modern syrian army in their civil war: they fail at every level of their organization. And they had every opportunity to train. They didn't learn during the course of the war either. If you compare their effectiveness in fighting rebels in the cities to lets say americans in fallujah... monkeys could be trained to fight better.
And you just made my point.. the syrian army to this day lacks good training. Just because you have the Time to train, doesn't mean the government is properly supporting soldiers being well trained.
Its quite common for Foreign Nations to send troops to be trained in the U.S. Because the U.S. Training regime is supported much better than what other nations can afford. Not because they will magically be more educated by training here. Even more Common these days is to send U.S. troops to train other nations militaries. This doesn't make them more educated.. it does make them better trained.
(also you ignored the fact that a wholly uneducated group of farmers in vietnam held out against not only better educated french but also American army for how many years?)
But really I see this conversation is going no where. So i'll just state I don't believe that education or cultural spending levels on the general populace should effect the efficiency of units. Thats what military training spending is for.
I think we have derailed this conversation enough. Since the main topic was unit trading.
You are still wrong . According to your logic, if you train somalian warlords in west point they will fight exactly like american officers. But those people don't even understand such concept as 'nation', they can fight for their clan, tribe, religion only. They don't give a damn about their countrymen.
And why do you think americans buy military equipment for afghan and iraqi armed forces from former soviet block countries? Because natives can actually operate those simple designs. It requires certain level of education to maintain modern equipment. That's a factor too.
I agree that there is no sense in further discussion on this topic or it can be separated from unit trade.
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22107
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: Unit Trades
@icbm78 - things were nicely back on topic until your post. I haven't read the previous ones but since drifted I feel the need to read and respond
So, back on topic, we're all fine with the current trade system right? No one looking for changes right? All quiet here?
That is a factor of their situation and cultural upbringing. If they spend multiple years at west point without outside culture differences then yes, they could be the equal of Americans. To state otherwise is to say that Somalis are less capable because they are Somali. That would be judging based on race which I don't believe you intended.icbm78 wrote:...if you train somalian warlords in west point...They don't give a damn about their countrymen.
Agreed.Fistalis wrote:... So i'll just state I don't believe that education or cultural spending levels on the general populace should effect the efficiency of units. Thats what military training spending is for.
So, back on topic, we're all fine with the current trade system right? No one looking for changes right? All quiet here?
- Zuikaku
- General
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Feb 10 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: Unit Trades
Hey, that was a nice tryBalthagor wrote:
So, back on topic, we're all fine with the current trade system right? No one looking for changes right? All quiet here?
Ofcourse we are not fine with lottery unit trade system.
Are there any changes planned (finally) ?
Please teach AI everything!
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22107
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
- Zuikaku
- General
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Feb 10 2012
- Human: Yes
- number47
- General
- Posts: 2655
- Joined: Sep 15 2011
- Human: Yes
- Location: X:913 Y:185
Re: Unit Trades
Not directly connected with topic since we want unit trade system expanded but would modding the numbers in "market avail." column in .UNIT file increase the likelihood of that unit being offered by AI through sale in the current trade system? (If yes, should the number be higher or lower? What is the range in that column?)
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
- General George Patton Jr
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22107
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: Unit Trades
Higher will make it more likely for a region to offer it. If zero, it will never be offered. Our values for market availability are probably off on lots of units, it's an area we don't often have much time to review. This would certainly improve the existing system.
Also, what could be expanded on is having the value change over time based on conditions. Today the US would never sell an F-22. But 30 years from now...
Also, what could be expanded on is having the value change over time based on conditions. Today the US would never sell an F-22. But 30 years from now...
- Zuikaku
- General
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Feb 10 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: Unit Trades
The easiest way is to just enable unit trade- the selective one
There is no point in waiting for right offer- especially if you have allies and friends and you are attacked. Need air defense?!
Tell your allies that you need some.... let them sell it to you...
There is no point in waiting for right offer- especially if you have allies and friends and you are attacked. Need air defense?!
Tell your allies that you need some.... let them sell it to you...
Please teach AI everything!