There's just ONE stat for units? Uh oh...

[Dearmad]

"Power" and that's it? So spearmen aren't good against cavalry, or even better in defense than offense?

There's no more defense/offense at all? Until your unit has earned a "special abilitity?" This means the units are only differentiated by by one stat and takes out a lot of flavor... is this right?

 

[Dante Vergil]

Spearmen are good against horsemen. Not sure about the rest though.

 

[ogmoir]

If I have understood correctly, spearmen and other close combat units are best against mounted units, which are best against ranged units, which are best against close combat units. That will compensate for the lack of separate attack/defense values.

 

[Dante Vergil]

So basically its an advanced rock,paper,sissors. Reminds me of Empire Earth.

 

[Dearmad]

It might work out OK like that... as long as there IS an inate difference...

 

[Volstag]

There might be "behind the scenes" calculations going on... for example: a spear unit receives a bonus to their "power" when fighting cavalry.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I think any of the 41 different possible 'special abilities' may be with a unit to begin with. (I'm also fairly certian the abilities a unit can get upon promotion depend on the unit)

 

[Shillen]

I think any of the 41 different possible 'special abilities' may be with a unit to begin with. (I'm also fairly certian the abilities a unit can get upon promotion depend on the unit)

Yep, that's the way I've inferred it to work as well. So as soon as you build that spearman he'll already have a bonus against mounted units with the ability to earn other bonuses as he advances. There's probably a tree of abilities that each type of unit can choose from. So I'm betting there will still be units that are better at defense and others that are better at offense, etc. The only thing is every unit type won't be exactly alike. So one knight won't necessarily be equal to another knight because they may have picked up different bonuses when they advanced through the ranks.

 

[Dearmad]

Oh. Well if THAT'S how it works, ROCK ON!

 

[MrMahk]

yep, you nailed it shillen...instead of being regular > veteral > elite by hit point standards, when gaining a promotion, you get to choose from a big list (i believe maybe it was 40) of certain "upgrades" you can get - some of them were faster hp regeneration, ability to use enemy roads, use forest as a road, and also stuff like a bonus vs mounted units, bonus vs melee, stuff like that

i think it looks like it will be a good change

 

[Vietcong]

y build a spacific unit when u can just buld the unit with the higher stats??

for ex, y build spear man with atack and defens of 2, when a swords man has atack and defens of 3 or archers with atack and defens of 2 like the spear man?? whold the 10% atvantage aginst calvery make it even worth bulding??

 

[OxfordPferd]

y build a spacific unit when u can just buld the unit with the higher stats??

for ex, y build spear man with atack and defens of 2, when a swords man has atack and defens of 3 or archers with atack and defens of 2 like the spear man?? whold the 10% atvantage aginst calvery make it even worth bulding??

Who said it was 10%?

 

[Commander Bello]

Who said it was 10%?

Because the sword would be 50% more, automatically. It's unlikely, that the advantage for the spear against horses could cover this, no?

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

The reason is because you simply don't KNOW what you might be facing when your enemy turns up at your doorstep. You might build a WHOLE heap of swordsmen, only to get cut to pieces because your enemy was smart enough to intersperse his swordsmen with archers, spearmen AND horsemen. Everyone from Firaxis has stated, very clearly, that stacks of identical units is NOT the way to win battles anymore. Combined Arms ALL THE WAY!!!
The main reason I think they elminated defense strength and attack strength as seperate values is because it was causing player and AI alike to build ALL offensive units to invade other nations, whilst only building infantry and spearmen for defending your cities. Now, you will build and send out units based on a combination of the units Strength AND with a mind to coping with the vagueries of the battlefield terrain AND what your opponent might throw it you.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[ledfan]

Having only one power value could prove bad though, unless they have done a REALLY good job with the bonuses. A tank is going to have a much higher power than an infantry unit in offense, but tanks have bad defensive capabilities (in real life). So who would win if an infantry attacked a lone tank unit? Another example would be archers vs mounted units. If an archer unit is attacked by a mounted unit it would, in all liklyhood, lose, but if an archer unit attacked a cavalry unit - especially if by suprise - it would beat the mounted unit (by the time the mounted units were organised they'd be mostly wiped out)

 

[SniperDevil]

So basically its an advanced rock,paper,sissors. Reminds me of Empire Earth.

Oh My God!!! Thats the same thing i thought of. Lol. Empire Earth was a good game.

 

[Vietcong]

i HATE the rock paper sisours thing!!!!!
ee was a horible game.. as are all combat systems with the r p s system!!

play the game rise of nations, its good and well polished, but the combat sucks! becus tanks and hourse mounted units bouth fall under the umbreala of "calvery". so since a machin gun *witch has an advantage agisnt infantry on foot* is weak agisnt tanks cus ther armored... but since tanks and calvery fall under the same catagory, that means that mgs are allso weak aginst house men and knights!! i hated that!!! having machin guns killed by a knight in armor!!
allso pikemen upgrade to granadears*slower fireaing guys with muskets* since pikes have an atvantage agisnt calvery, that means guys with crapy muskets allso have an atvantage aginst tanks!! the system was just bad!!

the game is only good tell the enlitgement eror, once u get tanks, plains ect. the game is ruined!

 

[RoboPig]

Yep, that's the way I've inferred it to work as well. So as soon as you build that spearman he'll already have a bonus against mounted units with the ability to earn other bonuses as he advances. There's probably a tree of abilities that each type of unit can choose from. So I'm betting there will still be units that are better at defense and others that are better at offense, etc. The only thing is every unit type won't be exactly alike. So one knight won't necessarily be equal to another knight because they may have picked up different bonuses when they advanced through the ranks.

thats good, will allow more varied armies.

 

[Lkysam]

Keep in mind, tanks are only bad on defence if they sit still, but what smart commander would sit his tanks still on when defending? These individual units on the map represent thousands of men, which means that the tanks are only on the strategic defensive, they could easily be on the tactical offensive which means that they would be no worse on the (strategic) defense than on the offence.

 

[Reprisal]

I'm wondering how exactly combat will play out then... are they returning to the old style where if one unit is defeated in a stack, the entire stack goes down? Because, from where I'm looking, a stack of units vs. another stack of units means that the advantage still goes to the attacker since he decides what marches on the defender.

Do both attacker and defender choose which units are going to do battle if, say, three units inhabit the same square?

He's attacking me with horsemen, so I choose spearmen!
He's attacking with spearmen, so I choose archers!

How will that be worked out?

- Rep.