3 sets of attack and defense values

[Bibor]

Guys and gals, you know what the most horrifying fact is?
.
.
.
.
v

SMAC had all this already.



-Kirby

 

[sir_schwick]

Guys and gals, you know what the most horrifying fact is?
.
.
.
.
v

SMAC had all this already.



-Kirby

I agree with you completely, but it seems many of the players of the CFC forums couldn't handle it or have never played SMAC. I'm not sure why they removed some of the better parts of SMAC,but I'm guessing they are not returning. For now we will have ot amuse ourselves with a modified bonus system.

 

[CivEconomist]

I enjoy the complications of chess and the time i t takes to piece together a good combat plan for just one turn

 

[ybbor]

as stupid a bump that was i'm glad it was there, this definitly needs to be looked at as this can solve lots of problems

 

[AtomRipper]

Didnt read all the posts, but it is an excellent idea, i think the bonuses vs the different units should behave similar to the terrain bonuses that your units recieve.

 

[LouLong]

AFAIC I would rather limit the combat values to 1 (apart morale if morale is implemented).

Each unit would have a value good for both attack and defense). Then it would have bonus linked to 1/ terrain 2/ the class of units he is fighting against (mounted, armored, bows and assimilated, phalanx infantry, light infantry.....).

Those who have played DBA should know what I am talking about. The others could go and check at www.dbaol.com how the system work.
This would allow for more strategies in the field. On the other hand there should be something specific for siege.

 

[GoodGame]

I like your idea of recognizing unit classes, but to simplify it, just note a percentage by which the OFF/DEF would be modified for those situations.
It'd simply be like:
ANTI-AIR X%
ANTI-NAVAL Y%
ANTI-LAND Z%
with the OFF/DEF of the unit modified as a whole for that combat, based on the opponent unit.


I'd also add situations for territory---attacking into territory type / defending in territory type. Mainly it'd apply to land units---but it'd also apply to subs in shallow water (lower DEF).
COASTAL X%
FOREST Y%
etc..

So the Cavalry unit might have a neg.% for forest, but the Infantry unit might have a pos.% for the forest, and the Artillery unit might have a neg.% (bombardment is less productive with all the forest cover).


For sub-classes (Tank vs. Inf, etc..):
I'd still try to emphasize creating unit abilities rather than OFF/DEF scales, since unit abilties make it easier to maintain an expandable modular set of units.

I'd add:

Charge (+% of the OFF is applied for the first rounds of combat): used to simulate cavalry/mechanize attacks but keep it proportionate to the units native OFF strength).


SuperSonic like charge, but with a greater OFF % bonus, to simulate jets or high speed missiles

DIGITAL-CONTROLED negates and voided by SuperSonic. But also is +OFF by OFF% if against a non-SuperSonic opponent.

ARMOR (Decrease OFF strength of opponent unit by 50% of their OFF strength, for combat; countered by ANTI-ARMOR).
Refering to Tanks and related.
ANTI-ARMOR

FORMATION +DEF as % of DEF strength versus land
units. For fighting in tactical formations.


SuperSearch/Anti-Invisible Search for the invisible units to a much broader area than current Civ3C. Also adds +DEF as % of unit's DEF.


Anti-Bombardment 50% Chance to intercept and destroy bombarding units (of any type) within radius of unit. Radius is secondary number that is unit dependent.

Stack Bombardment Remotely stacked to another unit's combat (i.e. Bombarder sited somewhere, linked to a normal unit, and automatically bombard's that unit opponent during combat---bombard effects occur during second round of combat).


SplashBombardment Like current Nukes, attacking all units in a stack simultaneously but without Pollution, but with tile improvement/terrain damage.

Terror Causes enemy unit to have 50% to automatically flee like Retreat, but is also yellow-lined in the hitpoints.


SuperStealth Negates current Civ3C stealth, and readuces Active Search success to about 10%.


UnOrthodox A super +% OFF for anything Infinitely more powerful then convential might of the scenario. Basically something like super-terrorism, Nuclear, Biological, Gas. Un-Negatable

SuperShield Reduces base OFF of all opponents to 10%, except for UnOrthodox, and doesn't negate any abilities.

and still have another lower level of Invisibility (stealth) vs. Detection to same radius as current Civ3C.

and possibly a SpeedOfLight to be even more powerful OFF bonus than Charge/SuperSonic, for future/satellite weapons.

Etc...As long as differences between types of units aren't simply a unit vs. unit OFF/DEF difference (e.g. no need for a FLAME ability unless it's some kind of magic scenario)

think I just came up with an idea to make the combat system more flexible and realistic. Units could have 3 sets of attack and defense values. For instance, land units would have attack and defense (a/d) versus foot units, mounted units and air units. Mounted units would include both horse units and tank units. Foot units would include all infantry, including mechanized infantry. This would allow for very flexible combat by allowing tanks to have high values versus tanks but lower values versus infantry and thus make it tough for tanks to take cities by themselves. It would be possible to create an anti-tank unit with very high defense versus tanks but poor defense versus infantry, etc. Also this system would be very flexible in dealing with units with anti-aircraft capabilities.

For naval units there should also be 3 sets. A/D versus surface ships, A/D versus submarines and A/D versus aircraft.

 

[GoodGame]

It varies. WWI Tanks were specifically intended (failed in the design somewhat) to do this

WWII and beyond----tanks sometimes were for breaking the lines, but war also became less linear (less battlefronts, and more depth) so that striking deep and strategic also became the tanks benefit.
Modern combined armor (meaining like Bradleys and Abrams), and supported by aerial bombardment is pretty much like a small army in miniature, with a lot of firepower of course..

Here is what I know about Tanks and Knights and Cavalary, they are both considered Heavy Cavalry. Heavy Cavalry is designed to handle heavy fire for short durations and create a hole in the enemy line. They breakthrough, they don't maintain a fight. Infantry's role is to carry on the longer fight. Anti-Heavy Cavalry Troops (Polearms, Heavy Infantry) have the advantage whenever the Heavy Cavalry loses its mobile advanatage, such as when the Heavy Infantry defends. This is especially true in difficult terrain

 

[GoodGame]

Terror Causes enemy unit to have 50% to automatically flee like Retreat, but is also yellow-lined in the hitpoints.

ANTI-TERROR would fit too to negate Terror. Although it seems silly, this could represent the use of something not quite convential but not super-science/UnOrthodox, and also the use of a counter. Like Poison Gas and Gas Masks