C2C Combat Mod Option: Hide and Seek

[Raledon]

If Without Warning is on, and they are set to ambush, then yes. But its not in time to deny the capture or death of the bait powerless units on the tile.

So the order is combat->move->capture->ambush (assuming all of these are possible)? Good to know, thanks!

 

[Thunderbrd]

So the order is combat->move->capture->ambush (assuming all of these are possible)? Good to know, thanks!

So far as it is now, yes. An adjustment to that order may take place yet but at the moment, that's basically accurate.

 

[raxo2222]

Pictures are broken on first post.

If I wanted to detect all animals, then what unit stack I would need?

 

[Thunderbrd]

Pictures are broken on first post.

If I wanted to detect all animals, then what unit stack I would need?

I'll be reviewing all the posts linked to the player's guide when I update it to v38 which will probably start happening this weekend.

Land animals tend to be camouflaged. Scouts, hunters, canines, strike teams, criminals are all fairly good at this. Canines the best.
Small ones tend to be hidden by size as well. High quality units are good at this as a base and then promos can help.
Naval animals are hard to spot due to submerge invisibility. Explorer boats are pretty good with this but promos can make a big difference for all types of ships here.

 

[raxo2222]

I'll be reviewing all the posts linked to the player's guide when I update it to v38 which will probably start happening this weekend.

Land animals tend to be camouflaged. Scouts, hunters, canines, strike teams, criminals are all fairly good at this. Canines the best.
Small ones tend to be hidden by size as well. High quality units are good at this as a base and then promos can help.
Naval animals are hard to spot due to submerge invisibility. Explorer boats are pretty good with this but promos can make a big difference for all types of ships here.

So war dog is best friend of hunter

 

[Thunderbrd]

So war dog is best friend of hunter

Absolutely. And the AI does know this if you are watching them carefully.

 

[raxo2222]

Absolutely. And the AI does know this if you are watching them carefully.

Is it possible to not lose any dogs/hunters even earliest ones and let them survive until end of times?

 

[Raledon]

Is it possible to not lose any dogs/hunters even earliest ones and let them survive until end of times?

Yes, but you will have to be careful. It's relatively hard to raise them, as if you have a lot of land, there are many barbarians that can kill them. If you try to go for it, I advise to turn SM off (or atleast, turn SM uncut on). That should help them survive being picked out by random units.
Otherwise, I advise (if possible, haven't checked) to give them a commander and a noble to make leveling faster.
Also, a lot of microing involved (so they don't wander into barbarians). Another issue is that hunters will wander into opponent's territory, and get killed in case of war.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Yes, but you will have to be careful. It's relatively hard to raise them, as if you have a lot of land, there are many barbarians that can kill them. If you try to go for it, I advise to turn SM off (or atleast, turn SM uncut on). That should help them survive being picked out by random units.
Otherwise, I advise (if possible, haven't checked) to give them a commander and a noble to make leveling faster.
Also, a lot of microing involved (so they don't wander into barbarians). Another issue is that hunters will wander into opponent's territory, and get killed in case of war.

This seems like you are using automated. None of my hunters wander anywhere. They only go where I tell them to.

 

[raxo2222]

Yes, but you will have to be careful. It's relatively hard to raise them, as if you have a lot of land, there are many barbarians that can kill them. If you try to go for it, I advise to turn SM off (or atleast, turn SM uncut on). That should help them survive being picked out by random units.
Otherwise, I advise (if possible, haven't checked) to give them a commander and a noble to make leveling faster.
Also, a lot of microing involved (so they don't wander into barbarians). Another issue is that hunters will wander into opponent's territory, and get killed in case of war.

Or play without barbarians alternatively

 

[Thunderbrd]

Is it possible to not lose any dogs/hunters even earliest ones and let them survive until end of times?

I do it by making hunting party stacks that include a hunter, a scout, a clubman (anti melee), a spearmen sometimes, a canine sometimes, sometimes a healer. Strong animals can still be a problem but a little fortune then goes a long ways.

This seems like you are using automated. None of my hunters wander anywhere. They only go where I tell them to.

And this.

 

[Raledon]

This seems like you are using automated. None of my hunters wander anywhere. They only go where I tell them to.

In general, yes.
But if you remove the war between barbarians and animals, you tend not to see the barbarians that lie below the animals (since hunter's first target is the animal). This leads to cases where you easily make a mistake in the long run, that will be the death of a unit.

 

[JosEPh_II]

But if you remove the war between barbarians and animals, you tend not to see the barbarians that lie below the animals (since hunter's first target is the animal). This leads to cases where you easily make a mistake in the long run, that will be the death of a unit.

I don't see that at all. In fact the Barbs and Neanders will show 1st over the Animals, at least they have in my Non automated games. And you should always check the tile your hunter is going to "hunt" if it has more than 1 "wild" unit on it. Always.

 

[Raledon]

I don't see that at all. In fact the Barbs and Neanders will show 1st over the Animals, at least they have in my Non automated games. And you should always check the tile your hunter is going to "hunt" if it has more than 1 "wild" unit on it. Always.

It's the tile, and all tiles surrounding that. It's possible, to an extent, but requires a lot of microing. It doesn't take much to forget, fudge up and get the unit killed, was my point. Not that it's impossible.

 

[JosEPh_II]

It's the tile, and all tiles surrounding that. It's possible, to an extent, but requires a lot of microing. It doesn't take much to forget, **** up and get the unit killed, was my point.

Diligence is required, yes.

 

[Thunderbrd]

It's the tile, and all tiles surrounding that. It's possible, to an extent, but requires a lot of microing. It doesn't take much to forget, **** up and get the unit killed, was my point. Not that it's impossible.

What you're calling microing in this case, I call the essence of the early game to be played. The prehistoric is a lot about embracing the conflict of the hunt and striving to do it as well as you can. This is the strategic cutting edge as much or more than plotting your way through the tech tree or choosing which buildings to build. This IS the game at this point, is how to survive and thrive in the wild. It's what captures the essence of the era. We strive for there to be something for each era to make the era have a unique signature so you're not just always playing the same basic game at a different level. Trying to gloss it over or sidestep the focus on it is really missing the point. Not saying you're advocating that. But for any good conflict, there must be a lot of risk variation to different decisions. If we fail to keep you on your toes, you really can just go on mental autopilot and then the game becomes more a meditative focus than a battleground. The more attention you demand of a player in a strategy game, the more successful that strategy game is at fulfilling its goal of interesting its audience.

 

[Morlark]

So far as it is now, yes. An adjustment to that order may take place yet but at the moment, that's basically accurate.

How does this work when there are multiple ambushers on the tile?

My observations from my current game seem to indicate that, contrary to all expectations, the game doesn't actually choose the best defender to take part in the combat. Instead it seems like the ambushers simply go in some specific, but not player-known, order. I had three ambushers on one tile, when two enemy units attempted to enter their tile. In the first combat, my Unit 2 took part and killed the enemy. In the second combat, Unit 2 again took part, and because he was severely weakened, he was defeated. Unit 3 then ambushed the second enemy and killed him. Unit 1 never even got a look in, despite the fact that he was the strongest of the three.

Per the standard rules of Civ combat, I'd expect that Unit 1 should have taken part in the first combat, and either Unit 2 or Unit 3 in the second (they were identical). As a result of this not happening, I unnecessarily lost a unit, and I'm struggling to explain why.

 

[Thunderbrd]

How does this work when there are multiple ambushers on the tile?

My observations from my current game seem to indicate that, contrary to all expectations, the game doesn't actually choose the best defender to take part in the combat. Instead it seems like the ambushers simply go in some specific, but not player-known, order. I had three ambushers on one tile, when two enemy units attempted to enter their tile. In the first combat, my Unit 2 took part and killed the enemy. In the second combat, Unit 2 again took part, and because he was severely weakened, he was defeated. Unit 3 then ambushed the second enemy and killed him. Unit 1 never even got a look in, despite the fact that he was the strongest of the three.

Per the standard rules of Civ combat, I'd expect that Unit 1 should have taken part in the first combat, and either Unit 2 or Unit 3 in the second (they were identical). As a result of this not happening, I unnecessarily lost a unit, and I'm struggling to explain why.

What happens is:
1) The 'attacker/unwitting ambushee' walks onto the tile not knowing the assassins are there.
2) The game detects a hidden ambush ready unit exists (3 of them)
3) Thus before the move function gets any further, the function is interrupted and the best defender, meaning unit with the best odds against the attacker, not necessarily the one with the best generic odds all around (perhaps some combat class factor made it possible to select the second unit first?) is 'revealed'.
4) At this point the revealed unit defends (though under special circumstances that instruct stealth combat modifiers and stealth strikes to apply for the defender and no first strikes, if there are any, to apply to either unit's benefit.)
5) In your example, that selected defender was unit 2. He killed the enemy.
6) At this point, Unit 2 is still revealed. Units 1 and 3 are still hidden.
7) Therefore when the second enemy walks in and attacks, Units 1 and 3 remain hidden and unseen because they will never reveal and ambush unless there are no other visible defense-capable units on the tile. Thus Unit 2, even heavily injured, being visible and capable of defense, is now a sitting duck target and is no longer gaining the stealth combat benefits either.
8)So normal battle takes place against Unit 2 and Unit 2 perishes in the fight. Then, as per normal, the combat ends with an attempt for the attacker to complete the move onto the tile.
9)Since there are still 2 hidden ambush-capable units on the tile, one more, Unit 3, reveals himself. And it sounds like he takes advantage of the wounded state of the unit that dispatched Unit 2, along with his fresh stealth combat modifiers and stealth strikes applying, and eats Unit 2's destroyer for breakfast. Here's to letting your wounded buddy get sacrificed as you get in position to pounce and eliminate any chance of harm to self!

 

[Morlark]

Ah, I see. Thanks for the explanation. That makes sense.

 

[raxo2222]

Pictures on first post aren't fixed yet