Combat

[vingrjoe]

Combat needs to be more in depth. Instead of just haveing generic Attack and Defense, units should have specific capabilities against other units. Example would be a destroyer. It would have a high attack versus subs, because that's a destroyers role, is sub hunting. But a destroyer would have a lower attack versus a battleship since a battleship has bigger guns, more armor, and more displacement. Civ4 needs to have units that have a counter to other units. Right now, Civ3 just builds whatever unit that has the most bang for the buck, and combat is really shallow.

 

[Civrules]

I think they already said that units will have some unique abilities against other units.

 

[REX GRACCHVS]

i think they should bring back the thing from civ2, pikemen had the double defence vs monted flag, while aegis cruisers had the double defence vs air...
they should bring that sort of thing back

 

[rhialto]

Combat needs to be more in depth. Instead of just haveing generic Attack and Defense, units should have specific capabilities against other units. Example would be a destroyer. It would have a high attack versus subs, because that's a destroyers role, is sub hunting. But a destroyer would have a lower attack versus a battleship since a battleship has bigger guns, more armor, and more displacement. Civ4 needs to have units that have a counter to other units. Right now, Civ3 just builds whatever unit that has the most bang for the buck, and combat is really shallow.

Actually, you have that bass ackwards. A "destroyer" is short for "battleship destroyer", in the same way that a "dreadnought" is short for "pre-dreadnought". That destroyer name kind of implies that they were designed to attack battleships.

ETA: Given that the "destroyer" unit in civ is intended to coer a wide variety of real world ships, it probably isn't a good idea to give it a specific strength. Early destroyers were intended to be used against battleships. Modern ones are more focused on ASW work. And then we have modern "missile destroyers", which are designed to lob missiles long distances.

But before we make any new units or give ships specific abilities, we need a reason to build a navy in the first place. CUrrently, beyond "stack a battleship on top of your transport", there is no reason to build any navy at all.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I think you're on the right track, though, in regards to your Chassis idea Rhialto. It would allow a very easy way for players to know how well, or badly, the unit they are building will fare against various other unit types. No fuss, no muss as they say !

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Kosez]

we need a reason to build a navy in the first place. CUrrently, beyond "stack a battleship on top of your transport", there is no reason to build any navy at all.

That is why I never play England. No use of their Man-of-war.
Navy should have bigger role in CivIV.

And theory that is being developed here is compatible with my claims that mounted units shoul not be able to perform in certain circumstances.

 

[Commander Bello]

I have to disagree with Rhialto about the history of destroyers.

They were NOT invented to fight battle ships, but to combat torpedo boats which were too small to be engaged by the liners of the Royal Navy (Great Britain).
This required ships which were consirably smaller than the great battleships, but large enough to carry guns with which they could take out this new threat at large enough distance to avoid them launching their torpedoes.
With the invention of the submarine, they took over the role of sub hunter as well.

Therefore, it is a valid argument that destroyers should have a special strength in fighting subs.
Unfortunately, this would lead into the concept of paper-scissors-stone, which, as I understood from Soren's presentation as of last year, seems not to be included.

This I regard as a pity, but maybe there have been more thougths about this in the meantime.

 

[rhialto]

Oops. Major blunder on the history of destroyers. Please disregard what I said in that post regarding their roles.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

What I think units Should have is just a few more features besides Attack-Defense (things like Hide-Seek... so a Sub would have a high Hide rating and a Destroyer a high Seek rating... which means a battleship could wander over a sub and never notice it, until the sub attacked, but a destroyer would be able to engage the sub 1st (using its attack v. the sub's defense))

This way a certain combination of stats (high hide, attack and movement would make a unit a Hit and run type)

Now I'd also allow units to be in the same tile if one of their Hides was large enough (think Guerillas/Partisans/Rebels...and Subs)

 

[Dreadnought]

I don't know, Krikkitone...if the battleship went over the sub, wouldn't the sub fire back? Also, if a tank went near guerillas, don't you think that they'll attack the tank?

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well not if they are just in the same square (the idea is enemy units should be able to occupy the same square without neccessarily engaging in full scale combat... so the sub/guerilla (because its on high 'Hide') might take a hit+run attack at the battleship/tank but both would still be in that square at the end of the turn

 

[searcheagle]

I don't know, Krikkitone...if the battleship went over the sub, wouldn't the sub fire back? Also, if a tank went near guerillas, don't you think that they'll attack the tank?

Well, thats the thing. Units that specialize in ambush, such as guerrillas, special forces, and submarines, choose when they are attacked. Simple passing through the territory would not be enough to activate an attack. This often leaves them vulernable if they are discovered and attacked by an overwhelming force.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

You see, this is an idea that I really support. I would love it if everyone got to move first then, if 2 sets of units occupy the same square, they can engage one another. Of course, each of the units involved would need to be able to see one another-which is where subs and guerillas would get a MAJOR advantage-as they can launch quick sneak attacks-and then possibly slip away before they suffer much return fire !

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.