C2C Combat Mod Introduction - Step II (New Promotion Types)

[cammcken]

Has the argument over "Unit=individual" vs "Unit=group" been resolved yet?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Has the argument over "Unit=individual" vs "Unit=group" been resolved yet?

Stuff introduced by TB means that unit = both. We just don't have a way of displaying that on the screen. Especially so when players can choose the option to only show single figures removing the first and easiest way of showing the difference by actually having different numbers in the display of the unit.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Stuff introduced by TB means that unit = both. We just don't have a way of displaying that on the screen. Especially so when players can choose the option to only show single figures removing the first and easiest way of showing the difference by actually having different numbers in the display of the unit.

On size matters you do have a way to tell how many individuals roughly are in the unit - just look at the volume combat class. I would like to eventually tie the # of figures shown to that unitcombat as well - not sure it can be done but it'd be a neat trick.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

On size matters you do have a way to tell how many individuals roughly are in the unit - just look at the volume combat class. I would like to eventually tie the # of figures shown to that unitcombat as well - not sure it can be done but it'd be a neat trick.

Yes but it is not shown on the screen as the units race towards your defensive position

I would show an individual as a single figure, two figures would probably be a squad, four a battalion and five a hoard for example. However to do that at the moment would mean having different units for each size and warning those who use the single figure option that they are loosing out on information.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Yes but it is not shown on the screen as the units race towards your defensive position

I would show an individual as a single figure, two figures would probably be a squad, four a battalion and five a hoard for example. However to do that at the moment would mean having different units for each size and warning those who use the single figure option that they are loosing out on information.

Yeah, that's in essence what I'd like to do... have the number of figures = the volume rank. In theory it probably wouldn't be too hard to do really since the information on how many figures a unit should use should be just as manipulable in terms of where the code goes to get its information as any other loaded tag. But if it is done in some committed order that denies the ability to reference the actual in-game unit as opposed to only the underlying unit data then it may not be possible.

 

[tmv]

What would be the difference between a slightly damaged horde and a complete battalion?

 

[Thunderbrd]

What would be the difference between a slightly damaged horde and a complete battalion?

The rest of the injured in the horde can still heal and are not left behind. Therefore, given a little time, the horde will be much stronger once recovered. The battalion would need more people to fill out its ranks to become a horde.

 

[tmv]

Sorry, I meant the graphical representation. With DH's numbers, both might have four figures.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Sorry, I meant the graphical representation. With DH's numbers, both might have four figures.

Probably a miss-type on my part, I was just throwing an idea out there.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Sorry, I meant the graphical representation. With DH's numbers, both might have four figures.

Oh... injury would not reduce the group volume therefore would not reduce the amount of figures.

 

[cammcken]

I just hope you keep Civ a top-down game.
When I play, I always assumed that a damaged unit "healed" by recruiting or conscripting from the local populace to replace the dead casualties, and the injured recovered.

 

[tmv]

Oh... injury would not reduce the group volume therefore would not reduce the amount of figures.

Right now it happens that way, I think. A unit I have (usually 3 figures) gets damaged a little, the first figure is gone. When the unit is heavily damaged, the second figure is gone as well. That's one reason why I don't play with single figures, the state of the unit (sorry if that expression is wrong) is somewhat represented by the number of figures.

Of course, the proposed way would be much better. I have played with units being two or three group size levels apart, and all of them presented alike seems ... strange. But could the information about damage be retained as well, without using FPS-like graphics? Or is the graphical representation of damage hard-coded in the exe, in which case group size would have to be displayed differently? Another option might be a banner for the unit, a bit like NATO symbols, where each group size gets a certain icon.

 

[Noriad2]

Armies need a lot of support: soldiers need equipment, training, transport, daily supplies, those supplies need to be moved to them, taxes will have to be generated and collected to pay them, a bureaucracy is needed to oversee everything, there must be medical staff etc. etc.

It is not unusual that for every soldier that carries a weapon in the field, there are as many as 20-50 people supporting him.

That means that replacing a bunch of soldier that have fallen in battle is much easier than starting a new army from scratch, as the support structure for those soldiers is already there.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Right now it happens that way, I think. A unit I have (usually 3 figures) gets damaged a little, the first figure is gone. When the unit is heavily damaged, the second figure is gone as well. That's one reason why I don't play with single figures, the state of the unit (sorry if that expression is wrong) is somewhat represented by the number of figures.

Of course, the proposed way would be much better. I have played with units being two or three group size levels apart, and all of them presented alike seems ... strange. But could the information about damage be retained as well, without using FPS-like graphics? Or is the graphical representation of damage hard-coded in the exe, in which case group size would have to be displayed differently? Another option might be a banner for the unit, a bit like NATO symbols, where each group size gets a certain icon.

I think you're right, come to think of it. And without doing serious digging I'd think it would probably remain so that injury reduces the number of figures. So it wouldn't be completely reliable to just look at the # of figures to judge group size but for healthy units it would reflect accurately.

There are a lot of limitations based on the exe but without looking I can't say what can or cannot be done yet.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I think you're right, come to think of it. And without doing serious digging I'd think it would probably remain so that injury reduces the number of figures. So it wouldn't be completely reliable to just look at the # of figures to judge group size but for healthy units it would reflect accurately.

There are a lot of limitations based on the exe but without looking I can't say what can or cannot be done yet.

I forgot about that.