Part_Time_Civer
Warlord
I labeled my ideas, because I want to be able to label sub-ideas. It makes it easier to discuss them (I hope) but is by no means intended as some sort of statement about their worthiness (such my idea is the number 1 idea or something like that). Maybe it would be a good idea for the administrators to label all ideas, so it becomes easier to make a list (for the purpose of voting for instance).
Idea 2: Turns, Ticks & Theaters
October 1942, El Alamein, North Africa. German general Erwin Rommel has just ordered his tanks to dig in. Allied general Montgomery shouts out: "Hey Rommel, are you done moving your tanks? So it´s my turn then? Don´t forget to press enter, thanks!"
Bizarre? Ludicrous? Absolutely. Yet this is the way every single Civ release so far works. In reality, both parties hand down orders to their troops, not knowing what the enemy will do. For instance, Montgomery might have told his tank divisions, move from here to there, if you see German tanks, engage if they´re Panthers, stay stationary and call backup if they´re Tigers, and withdraw if they have tactical air support. Of course he wouldn´t know for sure if his tanks would encounter any Germans at all.
How do we emulate this process in Civilization? To me, the solution is simple. Each turn in the game is divided in 2 phases. Edit: I just noticed that Windsor has proposed a similar idea (see his thread Combat between turns? ) only in less detail. Would love to have his feedback on my proposal.
In phase 1, each player (whether human or AI) tells his troops where to move, without actually being able to move them. Little arrows appear on the map, indicating where you units are ordered to go. With all the arrows, your map will look like you´re watching Great Commanders on the History Channel. Of course, you don´t see the arrows of you opponents (unless sufficient espionage has been done). You can however see what your enemy have done in their previous move. This is I propose- visible as little grey arrows.
In phase 2, the actual movement -of all players- takes place simultaneously.
First the strategical air units move. So Rommel bombs Alexandria (I don´t think he ever did that, but for the example´s sake let´s assume) at the same that that the Americans bomb some Pacific island (for instance). The point is, both events happen simultaneously.
Then the ground and sea units move. Units can obviously attack other (stationary) units, defend while being attacked, or encounter enemy units. What happens if they encounter an enemy? That depends on the Marching Orders (Sub Idea 2.1). I will get back to that.
Now, to calculate whether and where units encounter each other we need to keep in mind that some units are speedier than others. For this I propose to use the Tick System (Sub Idea 2.2).
Just as in previous Civ releases, each unit has a certain amount of movement points. I propose there will be 3 ´ticks´, and in every tick each unit spends one third of his movement points. The (rounded down) amount of Accumulated Points determine the actual movement. Any surplus is retained. After the move, the (unrounded) used movement points are substracted from the total.
Complicated? Well, the player doesn´t need to understand these rules in order to play. So playability is not at stake. The programmer does though, so let´s work out 3 examples.
Say you have a tank which has 3 movement points (assume). It has been ordered to move 3 tiles, simple terrain, so no hills or jungle or anything. At the first tick, the tank invests 1/3 of 3 movement points, which equals 1 Accumulated Point. The tank will move 1 tile on it´s chosen path. At the second tick, the unit invests 3/3= 1 movement point again. It will move one tile again, and so it will in the 3rd tick.
What if the tank´s chosen path includes a hill on tick 2? It needs 2 point to cross a hill tile, so in tick 2, it doesn´t move. Because it doesn´t move, it retains 1 point. In tick 3 it invests 1 point which is then added to the retained point totaling 2 points, which is enough to cross the hill.
Now, there is also a destroyer at sea, say 8 movement points, which has been ordered to move 8 tiles. At the first tick, 8/3= 2.67 movement points can be invested. The unit moves 2 tiles (rounded down). The unit retains 0.67 points. At tick 2, the destroyer invests 2.67 again. It´s total accumulation before moving is 2.67+0.67= 3.33. The unit moves 3 tiles and retains 0.33 points. At tick 3 total accumulation before moving equals 2.67+0.33 = 3. The unit moves 3 tiles, and Accumulated Points equals zero (this is always the case).
Let´s also assume that Gandhi has some phalanx running around somewhere. 2 movement points (suppose). In tick 1, the phalanx invests 2/3= 0.67 movement points. Rounding down yields zero, so the unit doesn´t move in the first tick. It gets to retain all it´s invested points though, because it doesn´t move. In tick 2, it invests 0.67 movement points again. Now the accumulated total is 0.67+0.67= 1.33. Rounding down yields 1, so the unit moves one tile. The unit retains 0.33 points. At tick 3, total accumulation before moving equals 0.67+0.33= 1. The unit moves 1 tile and Accumulated Points equals zero as before.
So far so good, but what if units encounter each other?
Basically, if you ordered your tank to move 3 tiles, at each tick a couple of things may happen:
a) No enemy units are encountered.
b) Allied or friendly units are encountered.
c) Neutral units (belonging to a civ with whom you are not at war) are encountered.
d) Stationary enemy units are encountered.
e) You pass through a tile through which enemy units pass as well, but at a different tick.
f) You pass through a tile through which enemy units pass as well, at the same tick.
g) You pass through a tile through which enemy units, as well as allied or friendly units, pass as well, at the same tick
h) You pass through a tile through which enemy units, as well as allied or friendly and neutral units, pass as well, at the same tick .
In scenario a, b, c and e no combat takes place. It is totally possible for multiple units (whether friendly or allied or neutral) to pass through or even end up in the same tile. The notion that a tile the size of Belgium cannot contain multiple tank divisions has always eluded me. As you will see later, the stack of death is not always a viable strategy though (I will explain in the Supply Lines section).
In scenario d, combat takes place as it always has. I suggest we return to the previous ADM (attack strenght-defence strenght-movement point) system, because in my view, it does make a difference whether you´re attacking or defending (that difference being the element of suprise). Combat worked fine in Civ2 in my opinion, with 1 notable ommission; we are dealing with soldiers, who are thinking human beings. That means they will (try to) withdraw if losing the fight. Unless they´re Japanese-style kamikaze warriors, I will get back to that in the Marching Orders section.
Withdrawing occurs when hit points get close to zero and only if at the particular tick there is no enemy unit (besides settlers/workers) in the previously occupied tile. Defending units can withdraw as well, if sufficient movement points remain (always the case as we´re talking about a stationary enemy unit), they will move to the opposite direction. For example, if you attack an enemy unit from the south-west and they are losing the fight, they will withdraw to the north-east. If that´s not possible (because of terrain or enemy units blockading their retreat path) they will move either north or east depending on the presence of friendly (from their perspective) units.
In scenario f combat will take place if at least on of the passing units is willing to engage the enemy. That´s right, units will decide themselves if they fight or not, but their decision depends on the Marching Orders. Let´s assume for now combat takes place. Now who´s attacking and who´s defending? Neither party is, so combat probabilities depend not on Attack nor Defence strenght, but on a new metric which I propose we coin Encounter Strenght. Unit stats are thus decribed according to the ADEM system instead of ADM. Maybe Encounter Strenght is simply the average of Attack and Defence strenght. I leave that for the programmers to decide.
If sufficient movement point are left, the losing unit will withdraw if possible (see above). A unit cannot withdraw more than once during a turn though (so if it withdraws in tick 1 it can´t withdraw in tick 2 or 3).
In scenario g and h the same thing happens, but multiple units take place in combat.
Multiple friendly (or allied) units always create synergy while fighting. Some units have particularly high synergy percentages. Such as tanks and helicopters. Neutral units don´t affect the outcome, they just pass through or remain stationary in that particular tile.
Now here is an important point. Multiple units create synergy, so that means it is good strategy to make sure several of your units pass an area at a particular point in time. And this is exactly what real generals do. Watching military documentaries, you often hear the commentaror saying army group A was supposed to meet army group B at location XYZ etc. This sort of planning is what I would like players to engage in.
Sub Idea 2.1: Marching Orders
As mentioned before, combat takes place if 2 opposing units are present in a tile (by movement or by simply being fortified) at the same tick, and if either of them (or both) decides to engage the other. How does that work? Well, the decision to engage in combat is based on the assesment of succes. Think about this, if you are a (low ranking) officer in any army at war, and you see the enemy you will only engage them if you think you´re going to win. Chances of succes are calculated the same as they are now. How high must the probability be to engage? That depends on the Marching Orders. A cautious player with a small army may tell it´s troops that it should be at least 70%. Other players with excess (obsolete) units may go for 60%. A player may assign an engagement percentage of 80% to a very expensive (highly upgraded unit. So you can differentiate between units. Anything less than 60% only works with particular units, i.e. special forces, such as marines, SAS, Jaegers and the like. They are willing to fight against the odds. Anything less than 40% may only work with religious fanatics (they think they go to paradise), or with special forces of a fascist state (they fight at gunpoint).
Marching Orders do not merely include the engagement percentage. They also prescribe if a unit will withdraw. Normally units do withdraw if they are in dire straits, but special forces and the like can be told not to, and fight to the death.
Sub Idea 2.2: Tactical Air Support
Units with are about to engage in battle (whether voluntarily or not) can call for air support, if any tactical bomber (such as Stukas, Mig15s, Phantoms and the like) are nearby. Those air will decide whether an where to fight on their own, based on a certain order of preference. Suppose 1 tank division within the operational range of a fighter is about to engage in combat. The fighter will help the tank, improving it´s combat statistics. Suppose there´s a tank and a cavalry unit, it will help the tank (it´s more expensive). Suppose there are 2 tank divisions within the fighter´s range, it will help the one who is closest, unless 1 tank has preferential rights (you assign that to units which are important to you, for instance units that have a lot of upgrades.
Sub Idea 2.3: Artillery Support
Artillery Support works the same way as Tactical Air Support. Artillery units can be ordered to move like any other unit, and will decide when to fire and at whom the same way as fighters do. Firing doesn´t cost movement points and can be done during any tick, only 1 time per tick though.
Sub Idea 2.3: Theathers of Action
So what if you supplied orders to all of your units and you press enter? Think of the real world. You´re playing the WW2 scenario as the Germans. The Americans fight the Japanese. Should you be able to see the action? Yes, because your Japanese allies would inform you. You fight the Russians. Do you see the action? Of course, it´s your own troops. How does that work, considering the fact that events take place at different parts of the world? This is where the concept Theathers of Action comes into play. Ideally, the game would assess where there´s fighting and then define separate parts of the map to be viewed by the player(s) in order. So first you´d see the Americans do their bombing on in the Pacific, then you´d see a U-boot sink a freighter in the Atlantic, and then you´d see the Russians capture Stalingrad on the Russo-German frontline. The whole sequence of events may be saved afterwards, so you can enjoy your brilliant tactics later on.
Now, the establishment of theaters (deciding which contested tile belongs to which theater) requires some intelligence built into the program which may well be impossible or not feasible from a performance viewpoint. If so, an alternate method would be for the computer to pre-define Theathers of Action during map generation. I leave that for the programmers to decide.
Summarizing, the whole combat system is overhauled and deepened for fanatical players, while easy to grasp for novice/occasional players. The former may play without extensive knowledge of the combat system, where the latter may develop complicated tactics and than save and display their battles on this site and brag that Zhukov would be proud.
Idea 2: Turns, Ticks & Theaters
October 1942, El Alamein, North Africa. German general Erwin Rommel has just ordered his tanks to dig in. Allied general Montgomery shouts out: "Hey Rommel, are you done moving your tanks? So it´s my turn then? Don´t forget to press enter, thanks!"
Bizarre? Ludicrous? Absolutely. Yet this is the way every single Civ release so far works. In reality, both parties hand down orders to their troops, not knowing what the enemy will do. For instance, Montgomery might have told his tank divisions, move from here to there, if you see German tanks, engage if they´re Panthers, stay stationary and call backup if they´re Tigers, and withdraw if they have tactical air support. Of course he wouldn´t know for sure if his tanks would encounter any Germans at all.
How do we emulate this process in Civilization? To me, the solution is simple. Each turn in the game is divided in 2 phases. Edit: I just noticed that Windsor has proposed a similar idea (see his thread Combat between turns? ) only in less detail. Would love to have his feedback on my proposal.
In phase 1, each player (whether human or AI) tells his troops where to move, without actually being able to move them. Little arrows appear on the map, indicating where you units are ordered to go. With all the arrows, your map will look like you´re watching Great Commanders on the History Channel. Of course, you don´t see the arrows of you opponents (unless sufficient espionage has been done). You can however see what your enemy have done in their previous move. This is I propose- visible as little grey arrows.
In phase 2, the actual movement -of all players- takes place simultaneously.
First the strategical air units move. So Rommel bombs Alexandria (I don´t think he ever did that, but for the example´s sake let´s assume) at the same that that the Americans bomb some Pacific island (for instance). The point is, both events happen simultaneously.
Then the ground and sea units move. Units can obviously attack other (stationary) units, defend while being attacked, or encounter enemy units. What happens if they encounter an enemy? That depends on the Marching Orders (Sub Idea 2.1). I will get back to that.
Now, to calculate whether and where units encounter each other we need to keep in mind that some units are speedier than others. For this I propose to use the Tick System (Sub Idea 2.2).
Just as in previous Civ releases, each unit has a certain amount of movement points. I propose there will be 3 ´ticks´, and in every tick each unit spends one third of his movement points. The (rounded down) amount of Accumulated Points determine the actual movement. Any surplus is retained. After the move, the (unrounded) used movement points are substracted from the total.
Complicated? Well, the player doesn´t need to understand these rules in order to play. So playability is not at stake. The programmer does though, so let´s work out 3 examples.
Say you have a tank which has 3 movement points (assume). It has been ordered to move 3 tiles, simple terrain, so no hills or jungle or anything. At the first tick, the tank invests 1/3 of 3 movement points, which equals 1 Accumulated Point. The tank will move 1 tile on it´s chosen path. At the second tick, the unit invests 3/3= 1 movement point again. It will move one tile again, and so it will in the 3rd tick.
What if the tank´s chosen path includes a hill on tick 2? It needs 2 point to cross a hill tile, so in tick 2, it doesn´t move. Because it doesn´t move, it retains 1 point. In tick 3 it invests 1 point which is then added to the retained point totaling 2 points, which is enough to cross the hill.
Now, there is also a destroyer at sea, say 8 movement points, which has been ordered to move 8 tiles. At the first tick, 8/3= 2.67 movement points can be invested. The unit moves 2 tiles (rounded down). The unit retains 0.67 points. At tick 2, the destroyer invests 2.67 again. It´s total accumulation before moving is 2.67+0.67= 3.33. The unit moves 3 tiles and retains 0.33 points. At tick 3 total accumulation before moving equals 2.67+0.33 = 3. The unit moves 3 tiles, and Accumulated Points equals zero (this is always the case).
Let´s also assume that Gandhi has some phalanx running around somewhere. 2 movement points (suppose). In tick 1, the phalanx invests 2/3= 0.67 movement points. Rounding down yields zero, so the unit doesn´t move in the first tick. It gets to retain all it´s invested points though, because it doesn´t move. In tick 2, it invests 0.67 movement points again. Now the accumulated total is 0.67+0.67= 1.33. Rounding down yields 1, so the unit moves one tile. The unit retains 0.33 points. At tick 3, total accumulation before moving equals 0.67+0.33= 1. The unit moves 1 tile and Accumulated Points equals zero as before.
So far so good, but what if units encounter each other?
Basically, if you ordered your tank to move 3 tiles, at each tick a couple of things may happen:
a) No enemy units are encountered.
b) Allied or friendly units are encountered.
c) Neutral units (belonging to a civ with whom you are not at war) are encountered.
d) Stationary enemy units are encountered.
e) You pass through a tile through which enemy units pass as well, but at a different tick.
f) You pass through a tile through which enemy units pass as well, at the same tick.
g) You pass through a tile through which enemy units, as well as allied or friendly units, pass as well, at the same tick
h) You pass through a tile through which enemy units, as well as allied or friendly and neutral units, pass as well, at the same tick .
In scenario a, b, c and e no combat takes place. It is totally possible for multiple units (whether friendly or allied or neutral) to pass through or even end up in the same tile. The notion that a tile the size of Belgium cannot contain multiple tank divisions has always eluded me. As you will see later, the stack of death is not always a viable strategy though (I will explain in the Supply Lines section).
In scenario d, combat takes place as it always has. I suggest we return to the previous ADM (attack strenght-defence strenght-movement point) system, because in my view, it does make a difference whether you´re attacking or defending (that difference being the element of suprise). Combat worked fine in Civ2 in my opinion, with 1 notable ommission; we are dealing with soldiers, who are thinking human beings. That means they will (try to) withdraw if losing the fight. Unless they´re Japanese-style kamikaze warriors, I will get back to that in the Marching Orders section.
Withdrawing occurs when hit points get close to zero and only if at the particular tick there is no enemy unit (besides settlers/workers) in the previously occupied tile. Defending units can withdraw as well, if sufficient movement points remain (always the case as we´re talking about a stationary enemy unit), they will move to the opposite direction. For example, if you attack an enemy unit from the south-west and they are losing the fight, they will withdraw to the north-east. If that´s not possible (because of terrain or enemy units blockading their retreat path) they will move either north or east depending on the presence of friendly (from their perspective) units.
In scenario f combat will take place if at least on of the passing units is willing to engage the enemy. That´s right, units will decide themselves if they fight or not, but their decision depends on the Marching Orders. Let´s assume for now combat takes place. Now who´s attacking and who´s defending? Neither party is, so combat probabilities depend not on Attack nor Defence strenght, but on a new metric which I propose we coin Encounter Strenght. Unit stats are thus decribed according to the ADEM system instead of ADM. Maybe Encounter Strenght is simply the average of Attack and Defence strenght. I leave that for the programmers to decide.
If sufficient movement point are left, the losing unit will withdraw if possible (see above). A unit cannot withdraw more than once during a turn though (so if it withdraws in tick 1 it can´t withdraw in tick 2 or 3).
In scenario g and h the same thing happens, but multiple units take place in combat.
Multiple friendly (or allied) units always create synergy while fighting. Some units have particularly high synergy percentages. Such as tanks and helicopters. Neutral units don´t affect the outcome, they just pass through or remain stationary in that particular tile.
Now here is an important point. Multiple units create synergy, so that means it is good strategy to make sure several of your units pass an area at a particular point in time. And this is exactly what real generals do. Watching military documentaries, you often hear the commentaror saying army group A was supposed to meet army group B at location XYZ etc. This sort of planning is what I would like players to engage in.
Sub Idea 2.1: Marching Orders
As mentioned before, combat takes place if 2 opposing units are present in a tile (by movement or by simply being fortified) at the same tick, and if either of them (or both) decides to engage the other. How does that work? Well, the decision to engage in combat is based on the assesment of succes. Think about this, if you are a (low ranking) officer in any army at war, and you see the enemy you will only engage them if you think you´re going to win. Chances of succes are calculated the same as they are now. How high must the probability be to engage? That depends on the Marching Orders. A cautious player with a small army may tell it´s troops that it should be at least 70%. Other players with excess (obsolete) units may go for 60%. A player may assign an engagement percentage of 80% to a very expensive (highly upgraded unit. So you can differentiate between units. Anything less than 60% only works with particular units, i.e. special forces, such as marines, SAS, Jaegers and the like. They are willing to fight against the odds. Anything less than 40% may only work with religious fanatics (they think they go to paradise), or with special forces of a fascist state (they fight at gunpoint).
Marching Orders do not merely include the engagement percentage. They also prescribe if a unit will withdraw. Normally units do withdraw if they are in dire straits, but special forces and the like can be told not to, and fight to the death.
Sub Idea 2.2: Tactical Air Support
Units with are about to engage in battle (whether voluntarily or not) can call for air support, if any tactical bomber (such as Stukas, Mig15s, Phantoms and the like) are nearby. Those air will decide whether an where to fight on their own, based on a certain order of preference. Suppose 1 tank division within the operational range of a fighter is about to engage in combat. The fighter will help the tank, improving it´s combat statistics. Suppose there´s a tank and a cavalry unit, it will help the tank (it´s more expensive). Suppose there are 2 tank divisions within the fighter´s range, it will help the one who is closest, unless 1 tank has preferential rights (you assign that to units which are important to you, for instance units that have a lot of upgrades.
Sub Idea 2.3: Artillery Support
Artillery Support works the same way as Tactical Air Support. Artillery units can be ordered to move like any other unit, and will decide when to fire and at whom the same way as fighters do. Firing doesn´t cost movement points and can be done during any tick, only 1 time per tick though.
Sub Idea 2.3: Theathers of Action
So what if you supplied orders to all of your units and you press enter? Think of the real world. You´re playing the WW2 scenario as the Germans. The Americans fight the Japanese. Should you be able to see the action? Yes, because your Japanese allies would inform you. You fight the Russians. Do you see the action? Of course, it´s your own troops. How does that work, considering the fact that events take place at different parts of the world? This is where the concept Theathers of Action comes into play. Ideally, the game would assess where there´s fighting and then define separate parts of the map to be viewed by the player(s) in order. So first you´d see the Americans do their bombing on in the Pacific, then you´d see a U-boot sink a freighter in the Atlantic, and then you´d see the Russians capture Stalingrad on the Russo-German frontline. The whole sequence of events may be saved afterwards, so you can enjoy your brilliant tactics later on.
Now, the establishment of theaters (deciding which contested tile belongs to which theater) requires some intelligence built into the program which may well be impossible or not feasible from a performance viewpoint. If so, an alternate method would be for the computer to pre-define Theathers of Action during map generation. I leave that for the programmers to decide.
Summarizing, the whole combat system is overhauled and deepened for fanatical players, while easy to grasp for novice/occasional players. The former may play without extensive knowledge of the combat system, where the latter may develop complicated tactics and than save and display their battles on this site and brag that Zhukov would be proud.
