C2C - Units

[Hydromancerx]

@Hydro (also): I gave some proposed sub-category sub-combats to siege on our document... can you check that and see if it sounds like it would work for us? I think our siege is in really strong need of being sub-categorized to clarify the intentions of the units and to help guide further promo developments and access structures.

*looks over chart*

- Defensive Siege
- Gatecrasher Siege
- Field Siege
- Urban Siege
- Early Siege
- Modern Siege
- Future Siege

Could you give some examples of what existing siege units are under which category?

Here is a list ...

- Log Ram
- Battering Ram
- Siege Ram
- Ballista
- Hwacha (Korean)
- Catapult
- Siege Tower
- Trebuchet
- Ancient Flamethrower
- Bombard
- Great Bombard
- Ribauldequin
- Falconet
- Culverin
- Organ Gun
- Cannon
- Mortar
- Machine Gun
- Vietcong (Vietnamese)
- Light Artillery
- Flamethrower
- Artillery
- Big Bertha (Steampunk)
- Railroad Artillery (Steampunk)
- Mobile Artillery
- Modern Flamethrower
- Rocket Artillery
- NLOS Cannon
- Walker Artillery
- Plasmathrower
- Hover Artillery
- Levitation Artillery

We also really need a Hovercraft Combat Class for the following ...

- Hovercraft
- Modern Hovercraft
- Hi-Tech Hovercraft
- Hover Artillery

 

[Thunderbrd]

Ok, we'll definitely add Hovercraft to the list then.

Might be easier to tell you what I was thinking:
- Defensive Siege
For units like the Ribauldequin and Machine Gun. They get setup in a fixed location and make that location hard as hell to capture by the enemy. But they cannot effectively be used in an attack.

- Gatecrasher Siege
For units such as Log Rams and Battering Rams that are only good for knocking down city defenses, not for any other sort of attack or bombardment against units.

- Field Siege & Urban Siege
I'd have to more carefully review on this one as its something I tend to self-categorize when I'm stocking up on siege weapons in my stacks but we have siege that are good at attacking units in the field and causing collateral but aren't as good at attacking cities as other contemporary comparables. One good example: Catapults vs Trebuchets. Cats are far better in the field (not BAD at city attacking but better in the field) than Trebuchets while a Trebuchet is much better than a catapult at attacking a city.



The next group of siege sub-categories may need further categories to flesh out... they are primarily a matter of trying to group them so that we can have a more simplified mechanism on our mounted units of flanking strike declarations. I added a flanking strike vs combat class tag and this is what this is for mostly.

For the most part, this is what I had in mind, and perhaps they could be renamed to suit somehow:
- Early Siege: Wood construction. Non-Gunpowder.
- Modern Siege: Metallic construction. Gunpowder driven ballistic weapons. (Modern in this context stretches back a ways! All the way to Bombards I'd say...)
- Future Siege: Highly advanced and uses alternative weaponry methods such as heat rays, electric blasts, frost weaponry, laser and ion cannons, etc... Could possibly begin with rocketry driven weaponry.

btw... not sure Flamethrowers would be best represented as a siege unit (was the best up to now but I think we can do better) and should instead perhaps be considered a fairly pure Flame Wielding CC.

 

[Hydromancerx]

So like ...

Defensive Siege
- Ballista
- Hwacha (Korean)
- Ribauldequin
- Organ Gun
- Machine Gun
- Vietcong (Vietnamese)

Gatecrasher Siege
- Log Ram
- Battering Ram
- Siege Ram
- Siege Tower

Field Siege & Urban Siege
- Catapult
- Trebuchet
- Bombard
- Great Bombard
- Falconet
- Culverin
- Cannon
- Mortar
- Light Artillery
- Artillery
- Big Bertha (Steampunk)
- Railroad Artillery (Steampunk)
- Mobile Artillery
- Rocket Artillery
- NLOS Cannon
- Walker Artillery
- Hover Artillery
- Levitation Artillery

Unknown
- Ancient Flamethrower
- Flamethrower
- Modern Flamethrower
- Plasmathrower

-----

And ....

Early Siege
- Log Ram
- Battering Ram
- Siege Ram
- Ballista
- Hwacha (Korean)
- Catapult
- Siege Tower
- Trebuchet
- Ancient Flamethrower

Modern Siege
- Bombard
- Great Bombard
- Ribauldequin
- Falconet
- Culverin
- Organ Gun
- Cannon
- Mortar
- Machine Gun
- Vietcong (Vietnamese)
- Light Artillery
- Flamethrower
- Artillery
- Big Bertha (Steampunk)
- Railroad Artillery (Steampunk)
- Mobile Artillery
- Modern Flamethrower
- Rocket Artillery

Future Siege
- NLOS Cannon
- Walker Artillery
- Plasmathrower
- Hover Artillery
- Levitation Artillery

Note you may want to seperate Modern Siege into 2 groups. So like ...

"Something" Siege
- Bombard
- Great Bombard
- Ribauldequin
- Falconet
- Culverin
- Organ Gun
- Cannon
- Mortar

Modern Siege
- Machine Gun
- Vietcong (Vietnamese)
- Light Artillery
- Flamethrower
- Artillery
- Big Bertha (Steampunk)
- Railroad Artillery (Steampunk)
- Mobile Artillery
- Modern Flamethrower
- Rocket Artillery

 

[Dissonance]

Wow... sounds like we could use some of these stepping stones from history to flesh things out a bit more. Very nice. Now... if only we had proper graphics for those

Those Scorpions, or Spear Throwers sound interesting... if I'm not mistaken, perhaps we could use a unit between skirmisher and arsonist? Or perhaps these are simply 'skirmishers'.

This particular super-siege tower could also make for a VERY interesting Global Unit unlocked by a wonder?

I don't know anything whatsoever about Civ IV modelling, so I can't help there (But I should look into it; I like amateur 3d modelling). Instead, I'll try and help out via thinking and research.

If you are looking for an earlier variety for siege weapons, there is this thing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gastraphetes

This is the "Belly Bow", a huge, rudimentary crossbow/ballista that you would literally brace against yourself and fire

Scorpio - an elementary spear thrower; essentially, the first machinegun ever
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scorpio_(weapon)

This weapon was a first step in differentiating siege weapons. Previously, they would be used to assault fortifications. This one was an emplacement weapon meant to kill the enemy directly. Technologies used here were based on earlier catapults

Epic Siege Tower, Helepolis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helepolis

If you want to pursue it being a specialist weapon, you could include this guy as a hero, or a namesake to a workshop wonder:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyidus_of_Thessaly

This could be a special unit he constructs, a specialty promotion, or even a heroic siege tower of its own right.

Ok, we'll definitely add Hovercraft to the list then.
btw... not sure Flamethrowers would be best represented as a siege unit (was the best up to now but I think we can do better) and should instead perhaps be considered a fairly pure Flame Wielding CC.

You may well know this, but Flame Throwers were mostly used as bunker-busters. The weapon was extremely dangerous to everything, including the user, but the fire would be used to flood enemy fortifications and either force them out, or cook them alive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamethrower#Early_20th_century

Does that count as a siege weapon? I personally would say no. In terms of game mechanics, I can see it being a unit with attack bonuses vs hills, forests, cities, a lot of first strike and retreat chance. Maybe even some light collateral damage. Not made to kill, but rather weaken.

Alternatively, with some coding, this could be a unique unit that FORCES a defensive retreat chance on the enemy in combat. Which means a successful attack would make the enemy break fortification and move to a nearby tile. To certain death.

EDIT: I just realized I never looked at anything post medieval. Apologies if my ignorance of in-game flamethrowers shows.

 

[Thunderbrd]

So like ...

Defensive Siege
- Ballista
- Hwacha (Korean)
- Ribauldequin
- Organ Gun
- Machine Gun
- Vietcong (Vietnamese)

Gatecrasher Siege
- Log Ram
- Battering Ram
- Siege Ram
- Siege Tower

Field Siege & Urban Siege
- Catapult
- Trebuchet
- Bombard
- Great Bombard
- Falconet
- Culverin
- Cannon
- Mortar
- Light Artillery
- Artillery
- Big Bertha (Steampunk)
- Railroad Artillery (Steampunk)
- Mobile Artillery
- Rocket Artillery
- NLOS Cannon
- Walker Artillery
- Hover Artillery
- Levitation Artillery

Unknown
- Ancient Flamethrower
- Flamethrower
- Modern Flamethrower
- Plasmathrower

-----

And ....

Early Siege
- Log Ram
- Battering Ram
- Siege Ram
- Ballista
- Hwacha (Korean)
- Catapult
- Siege Tower
- Trebuchet
- Ancient Flamethrower

Modern Siege
- Bombard
- Great Bombard
- Ribauldequin
- Falconet
- Culverin
- Organ Gun
- Cannon
- Mortar
- Machine Gun
- Vietcong (Vietnamese)
- Light Artillery
- Flamethrower
- Artillery
- Big Bertha (Steampunk)
- Railroad Artillery (Steampunk)
- Mobile Artillery
- Modern Flamethrower
- Rocket Artillery

Future Siege
- NLOS Cannon
- Walker Artillery
- Plasmathrower
- Hover Artillery
- Levitation Artillery

Note you may want to seperate Modern Siege into 2 groups. So like ...

"Something" Siege
- Bombard
- Great Bombard
- Ribauldequin
- Falconet
- Culverin
- Organ Gun
- Cannon
- Mortar

Modern Siege
- Machine Gun
- Vietcong (Vietnamese)
- Light Artillery
- Flamethrower
- Artillery
- Big Bertha (Steampunk)
- Railroad Artillery (Steampunk)
- Mobile Artillery
- Modern Flamethrower
- Rocket Artillery

Exactly. Absolutely perfect. Not sure what to name that early modernistic group though. Lacking for an appropriate moniker here!

We'd also need to break down our Field and Urban categories. One unit shouldn't really have both of those CCs.

My only complaint on that list is that I just cringe to see flamethrowers as a siege at all. I agree completely with this:

You may well know this, but Flame Throwers were mostly used as bunker-busters. The weapon was extremely dangerous to everything, including the user, but the fire would be used to flood enemy fortifications and either force them out, or cook them alive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flameth...y_20th_century

Does that count as a siege weapon? I personally would say no. In terms of game mechanics, I can see it being a unit with attack bonuses vs hills, forests, cities, a lot of first strike and retreat chance. Maybe even some light collateral damage. Not made to kill, but rather weaken.

Alternatively, with some coding, this could be a unique unit that FORCES a defensive retreat chance on the enemy in combat. Which means a successful attack would make the enemy break fortification and move to a nearby tile. To certain death.

Huh... go figure I've already coded exactly that and with exactly that intention but not all shared our view that would be appropriate for flame wielding units.

The tag for that ability is iKnockback. On promos its iKnockbackChange. When a unit with knockback successfully pushes out a unit defending a city, rather than fleeing the city, it simply loses all fortification bonus (which is also a side effect when they flee in the field.) So its mostly a way to get through heavily fortified positions. Which is exactly what flamethrowers were used for - agreed.

(Check out the 3rd Combat Mod introduction page - link provided on the first post of the Modder's Documentation thread.)

 

[Dissonance]

I have been reflecting on the (very) early units, and I would like to suggest a review:

Starting clubman - I only see those on "custom" games, is that intended? Anyways...
This bothers me as this unit makes no sense. This unit also allows for very early pillaging of barbarian cities single-handed. My suggestion is to make it a "Tribal Hero" unit - an unbuildable unit similar to the Tribal Guardian. My mind's vision is a brute wielding a tree trunk.

My suggestion:
- Keep the 2 strength, but remove the 25% bonus vs melee. This would slightly increase the difficulty of fighting barbarian cities
- Allow it to upgrade to clubman for cheap/free when possible.

Stone Throwers are absolutely worthless; they can only defend against other stonethrowers. They DO provide very handy bombard, but that's about it. Furthermore, the Slinger upgrade is quite a distance away. I have on principle been building a stonthrower early, and they are still only useful for the once-in-a-blue-moon successful bombard.
(On reflection, their main purpose is to defeat attacking Brutes; I have never seen this to be relevant so far)

I also noticed they are a/the only ranged unit without first strike.
My suggestions are:
- add 0-2 first strikes (or any range inbetween) to give them a chance at a lucky victory
- add 25%-50% vs animals to provide very early hunting. Stones were in fact a primitive hunting weapon.


Wood Spearmen, at least with my playstyle, are obsolete almost the moment they are built. I like the texture and the idea, and would like to see them used more.

My suggestion
- Move them to Gathering, and make them require the Stick Gatherer
- Reduce strength to 2

This way, it is a viable alternative to Wanderer for engaging animals, and it can challenge larger creatures to help get the Master Hunter. This unit would however usually die to the Clubman which comes shortly after.

If this is implemented, Wanderers could be changed to full Recon units that can only defend, to vary early unit composition/hunting strategies.

Lastly, being lower on the tech tree would make barbarians have those earlier. And that would make barbarians more deadly, for better (more fun for the player) or worse (dead AI players)

Slinger with strength 2 dies very easily to early melee units. I understand the purpose of the low strength though, perhaps they should receive a greater bonuses to Hill defense and to City defence

Atl-Atl - Conversely, this unit is very strong - stronger than everything else. If I am the first of my neighbours to hit that tech, I just build a few and send them pillaging. They are quite difficult to dislodge without cavalry or more atl-atl units of your own. Should they be scaled back to 3? This would be more inline with other units (such as Archer 5/Axeman 5/Maceman 5)

A personal point to pick, I don't like Atl-Atl being the transitional archery unit. From everything I know (and wiki confirms [link]) rudimentary bows crowded out the atl-atl almost immediately in most of the world. As such, I would rather see a strength 3 primitive archer and strength 4 culture-based atlatl, but that's not very important.


I'm pretty happy with the units in Ancient age, and with what I've seen of Classical age so far.

 

[Hydromancerx]

@Dissonance

1. I believe the starting clubman is given when you play with minor civs on (can someone confirm this?). At toolmaking you can make more of them. Personally I think it should be a brute but then again we don't want an animal to kill you when you start the game. So yeah your Hero unit would be cool since it would make more sense than something you cannot build yet. Also having a tree branch is basically what a clubman is. Perhaps just a Brute with boosted stats and a different look.

2. Stone Throwers do work well on hills and city defense. Of couse eh Tribal Guardian makes it really hard to attack a city early on. They have their place and really everything in the beginning is weak, because you have to start somewhere.

3. Wood Spearmen are at the earliest possible place without not making sense to the techs. Having them at Gathering would not make sense since the Clubman is basically a guy with a stick. If anything it should require a stick gatherer. The Wooden Spearman is the first time your shaping wood so it makes sense to have a sharpened stick.

4. Possibly more bonus for the Slinger but you have to remember you can't add too much because then you would have to keep adding more and more to all the units after that. I have tried to keep the prehistoric stuff still in balance with the units we inherited from RoM/AND (with a few tweaks here and there).

5. Atl-Atl should be better now that the Obsidian units are made. have you played the SVN or are you on v30? If not SVN this should be a lot more balanced for you.

 

[Dissonance]

@Dissonance

1. I believe the starting clubman is given when you play with minor civs on (can someone confirm this?). At toolmaking you can make more of them. Personally I think it should be a brute but then again we don't want an animal to kill you when you start the game. So yeah your Hero unit would be cool since it would make more sense than something you cannot build yet. Also having a tree branch is basically what a clubman is. Perhaps just a Brute with boosted stats and a different look.

I was thinking of that, yeah. A good, generic name for that character could be Strongman or even Chief. I'm thinking of just a slightly larger Brute with larger muscles (ala Arnold Schwarzenegger)

5. Atl-Atl should be better now that the Obsidian units are made. have you played the SVN or are you on v30? If not SVN this should be a lot more balanced for you.

Ah... how can I do that?

EDIT: I see the SVN thread now. I'll try to figure it out.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Ah... how can I do that?

EDIT: I see the SVN thread now. I'll try to figure it out.

I wouldn't at the moment. There is to a problem that a number of us are getting where we can't get to the next turn.

 

[Dissonance]

I wouldn't at the moment. There is to a problem that a number of us are getting where we can't get to the next turn.

May as well try, thanks for the heads up.

EDIT: Got the SVN and exported, but I'm getting a specific file related error message on launch. Where should I log that?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

May as well try, thanks for the heads up.

EDIT: Got the SVN and exported, but I'm getting a specific file related error message on launch. Where should I log that?

That sort of error goes in the bug thread single player is here

 

[Thunderbrd]

Do we start with a clubman when we're in the prehistoric start?

The brute is something I've been considering some ways to make balance better with the current implementation of the stone thrower. I've been thinking it would be cool to give it some VSBarbs. We could have an early line of pugilists that carry on from the brute that maintain this as their core ability. Why would pugilists be good against Barbarians? (non-animal ones btw...) Because they specifically fight as strategically as possible without weapons to aid them. Thus they use their minds as much as their arsenal, and they challenge leaders of the barbarian units to duels which are tough to ignore where they gain a rapid upper hand. In summary, they represent an early expression of 'civilization' and use this in every way they can against those less civilized.

Additionally, since they don't require the collection/fabrication of any weaponry, just training, I'd suggest to put their cost at half of what it currently is, making it also 'the cheap unit option'.

While they could then go on to become Clubmen as they do, another 'step' up the line or two could be envisioned.

Grunt, Strongman, Wrestler, Pugilist, Boxer, Martial Artist etc... All could be names used as part of a growing line that could then intersect and interweave with Entertainer, Criminal and Strike Force lines down the road.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

... intersect and interweave ....

This is why the SevoPedia Unit Upgrades page is basically useless in C2C.

 

[Thunderbrd]

This is why the SevoPedia Unit Upgrades page is basically useless in C2C.

It's certainly a bit of a mess... but I've been wondering... is that something we can 'craft' via tag use or python or is it all an automatic affair right now? I think it really can be cleaned up a bit. But if its all automatic, that will make it a bit more difficult.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

It's certainly a bit of a mess... but I've been wondering... is that something we can 'craft' via tag use or python or is it all an automatic affair right now? I think it really can be cleaned up a bit. But if its all automatic, that will make it a bit more difficult.

It is all python code and is based on the "upgrades to" tags on the unit. Basically each unit is a node and the "upgrades to" is the link between them.

 

[Thunderbrd]

It is all python code and is based on the "upgrades to" tags on the unit. Basically each unit is a node and the "upgrades to" is the link between them.

I see... well... perhaps when the lines are made a bit more clear it might help some. We may need to alter the coding in the python to really make it work better and it may take a cloned 'upgrades to' tag where the positioning of the unit on the tree won't be affected by that relationship but otherwise works in all the same ways... just draws a line between but doesn't adjust the placement of the unit.

 

[Hydromancerx]

@Thunderbrd
With the talk about healing walls in the other topic I was thinking about healing units. Perhaps non-organic units like siege weapons and tanks should not be healed by healers but need to be "repaired" by mechanics or siege engineers. Or possibly have them have 2 healths, 1 health for the humans/animals that pilot/control the unit and then a damage/repair bar for the other part of the unit.

Might even be interesting to ingrate the siege unit capture stuff into this so you can take siege units when the people are dead. Or alternatively you can capture the units when the siege unit is broken.

What do you think?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I see... well... perhaps when the lines are made a bit more clear it might help some. We may need to alter the coding in the python to really make it work better and it may take a cloned 'upgrades to' tag where the positioning of the unit on the tree won't be affected by that relationship but otherwise works in all the same ways... just draws a line between but doesn't adjust the placement of the unit.

Then you will just get lines everywhere. No the whole thing needs to be rethought. Either units don't upgrade through each other and there are distinct upgrade lines eg throwing line, hitting line, riding line and so on. Currently a Stone Thrower can upgrade to anything so there are no clear lines.

Maybe if we split it by Eras, ie show only the units in the one era on a page with the last upgrade from the previous era and the first from the next era it would be better?

edit maybe if we remove the cultural units it would help. Not sure how to do that.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I like the idea of splitting up by era...

Probably easily done... clone what we have with each clone representing an era and with each having a prerequisite filter of 'if unit's required tech's era == page's era through page's era +1, then display'.

 

[Hydromancerx]

edit maybe if we remove the cultural units it would help. Not sure how to do that.

Yeah I have wanted a "hide from unit upgrade tree" tag on culture units for a long time now. In fact maybe as long as there have been culture units that do not replace normal units.