[DLL] (7-NS) Bombing cities beyond their HP has a chance to destroy Buildings

[Xaviarlol]

Proposal
Bombing cities when the city is at 0 health will now have a chance to destroy buildings, with the % chance based on the damage output that would have been inflicted. Eg. If your ranged attack would have done -10 damage to the city, it has a 10% chance to destroy a random building. Some Defensive buildings will now provide additional resistance to building damage. Wonders cannot be destroyed. Successfully destroying buildings adds to warscore.

Rationale
There are limited ways to hurt another Civs economy, punish them or pressure them in to making peace, outside of taking cities directly. This will allow bombing civs in to submission without having to invade their cities.

AI usage
AI's will prefer doing this if they do not want to take cities.

Notifications
You will receive the usual notification bubble on the right side of the screen if you successfully destroy a tile improvement or building, which tells you the building that was destroyed. For both aggressor and victim.

 

[Rekk]

I feel like we rejected this proposal in a previous Congress.

 

[Recursive]

I feel like we rejected this proposal in a previous Congress.

It was not sponsored: https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...t-to-destroy-buildings-and-population.686277/

It can be proposed again, however.

 

[Recursive]

Some Defensive buildings will now provide additional resistance to building damage.

Successfully destroying buildings adds to warscore.

How much?

 

[Rekk]

No warmonger penalties for this war crime?

Some Defensive buildings

which defensive buildings?

 

[Tekamthi]

I think we should do different buildings at different hp thresholds -- something like walls disappear below 50% hp etc.

Not sure what the right thresholds are, but for walls in particular its kind of odd that after years long siege, city loses all it's hp to zero, but it still has walls in pristine shape ready to do the job? C'mon

 

[Rekk]

I think we should do different buildings at different hp thresholds -- something like walls disappear below 50% hp etc.

Not sure what the right thresholds are, but for walls in particular its kind of odd that after years long siege, city loses all it's hp to zero, but it still has walls in pristine shape ready to do the job? C'mon

You lose the walls when the city is captured.

 

[CppMaster]

You lose the walls when the city is captured.

He said about 0 hp, not capture.

 

[Tekamthi]

You lose the walls when the city is captured.

Yes but until that moment, say defender recovers and hangs on at the 11th hour, those walls are still functional as they ever were.

Say for example walls are destroyed if city drops below 50% hp: defender might hang on but with some damage to redirect hammers towards.

Maybe attacker can't get a really tough city in a single thrust, and instead wears it down over successive waves, popping some of the defenses on the first attack, to make a return a few turns later a little easier, etc. I think past games gave some buildings their own hp -- this is probably more granular than necessary, just tying to city hp might have a nice effect if done right

Alternative to HP % it could be tied to the HP the building actually gives to the city: walls gives x hp so after city loses x hp, that's it walls are gone. We'd just need to create an order of priority of which building goes in which order

 

[Xaviarlol]

How much?

There are a few approaches imo:
- Use the devastation mechanic from tile pillaging (for unhappiness, as well as Warscore (does pillaging tile improvements increase warscore? I can't remember.)
- Apply a linear warscore value per building destroyed, expressed a fraction of total buildings. Eg. if target has 100 buildings in total, each building is 1% equivalent warscore.

I'm not super familiar with the warscore calculations, so perhaps someone can make a better suggestion.

In terms of defensive building bonuses to building resistance, on second thought they already indirectly lower the damage done to the city, which in turn reduces the probability of a building being destroyed. So perhaps that part is not even needed.

I feel like we rejected this proposal in a previous Congress.

This is a slightly simplified version of my older proposal (the old one included losing pops)

I think we should do different buildings at different hp thresholds -- something like walls disappear below 50% hp etc.

Not sure what the right thresholds are, but for walls in particular its kind of odd that after years long siege, city loses all it's hp to zero, but it still has walls in pristine shape ready to do the job? C'mon

This would be cool, but I didn't suggest that because the dev effort might be quite large, unless we base it off of the production cost, and give some defensive buildings a bonus.

 

[Xaviarlol]

Please note I have adjusted the proposal to include being able to air-strike tile improvements.

 

[azum4roll]

You can't even target an empty tile when attacking.

 

[Tekamthi]

Pretty sure one of the whoward mod components enabled this, though I am not aware if that code was ever replicated in VP. See https://www.picknmixmods.com/mods/CivV/Units/Ranged Pillage.html

It's a desirable feature to civ franchise veterans, as some of the past iterations allowed attacks on tile improvements directly, and it feels very thematically satisfying to bomb a railroad or manufactory. Gameplay balance considerations and AI probably much trickier than just copying in the code, however

 

[pineappledan]

This is going to break all sorts of modmods and dummies etc all over again.

What a nightmare.

Rationale
There are limited ways to hurt another Civs economy, punish them or pressure them in to making peace, outside of taking cities directly. This will allow bombing civs in to submission without having to invade their cities

It is enough that you can pillage and block tiles and make them buckle under war weariness

 

[Xaviarlol]

You can't even target an empty tile when attacking.

If it's totally not doable, I can remove the tile improvement bombing out of the proposal.

 

[N.Core]

Instead of randomly destroying any buildings, just destroy buildings that are set to being able to be destroyed. So not all buildings can be destroyed, like UB example (to maintain compatibility with custom civs). If not, it could also destroy dummy buildings which could cause issues for modmods. The buildings that can be destroyed must be listed.

That event that could randomly destroy any random building is already annoying enough for modders. We don't need to add more mechanics that can randomly destroy buildings in the city,

But I rather we add a repair mechanic for buildings. Because rebuilding a building definitely will take time. We can make repairing a building only take 1/4 of the production cost of that building. The building is rendered unusable while destroyed, so it needs to be repaired to make it functional again.

 

[CppMaster]

But I rather we add a repair mechanic for buildings. Because rebuilding a building definitely will take time. We can make repairing a building only take 1/4 of the production cost of that building. The building is rendered unusable while destroyed, so it needs to be repaired to make it functional again.

Makes sense! Civ6 also have building repair. Could be also implemented for destroyed buildings during city capture.

 

[azum4roll]

War weariness/war score should be limited to what you can lose (the city and all its tiles). This proposal introduces unlimited war weariness/war score farming (technically not unlimited, just a LOT over the city's value) that's unprecedented.

The loser is also left with a crippled city that they can't remove.

 

[ma_kuh]

I think this idea would be better realized as an event that the city-owner can choose from. You get your roll-back on buildings, but it's somewhat in the defender's control, and makes use of an under-loved tool in the game.

Something like:
"[CITY NAME] is under siege! Resources are strained and you cannot afford to save every building. Which building should we sacrifice?" And then a list of the highest-tier buildings in the city.

Using events I think side-steps a lot of the problems of letting indiscriminate shelling not accruing warmonger penalty, war weariness balance, etc. And it also puts a kind of meter on how often it would occur.

 

[Stalker0]

I disagree with the core of the OP's rationale, that we should have more ways to hurt a city outside of conquering a city. I simply disagree. If you want to wreck a city's economy, than pillage everything around it. If you want to hurt the city itself, take it and raze it. We don't need a new option.


MAGI: This proposal is really two in one. The city bombardement is completely seperate from the Aircraft being able to bomb and pillage tiles, the OP needs to split these out. @Xaviarlol