In-depth City battle

[ULTIMATEGP]

I think this could be a custom game option. Basiclly when you attack a city it turns into a half RTS-half Turn based. If the city has walls or other defenses like that(hill sea to land attack.) Then it is a RTS where you try to get into the city somehow. When you finally get into the city it goes turn based. The larger the city the larger the map. You move your units around the city taking parts of the city until you clear it of resistence. If the city has alot of happy people then citizens may rise up and defend. So what do you think. Should any changes be made?

 

[sligo]

Interesting idea. Reminds me of the add-ins to Sim City where you fly a helicopter through the city that you built.

This idea would definitely slow the game down, but would add an interesting concept to the whole combat process. I wouldn't do this just for the cities, but for the all battles.

It would be cool to see a stack of archers, axemen and swordsmen threading their way through a forest tile chasing down opposing units. Instead of the one-unit to one-unit combat system, you'd be able to fight with all the units in your stack against all the units in the opponent's stack. Your horse archers and cavarly would truly flank the opponent's positions. Tanks would actually steamroll weak infantry units...

Ah, but we dream, but we dream. This idea appeals to me because I enjoy games like Ages of Empires and Command and Conquer.

- Sligo

 

[sligo]

Ah... but you miss the point, my friend. Not only do I want to run my battles in detail, but I want the whole civ picture along with it.

I'd love to see crushing my enemy's longbowmen and macemen with my marines!

On the otherhand, with this, I could actually defend against advancing cavalry with my spearmen and win, if I can outwit my opponent. (Spearmen vs tanks? we all complain about it, but with this type of combat, we'd have a much more realistic outcome, and if the owner of the spearmen units can outwit the tank units owner, then the tank guy deserves to lose!)

- Sligo

 

[Rainlife]

i think a lot of people like the civseries just because it's not RTS (or am i the only one with that opinion ?)
personally i think their is already put to much effort in the warfaring part of the game, instead of seeing battles get more complex or in-depth or whatever, i would prefer diplomacy to see extended

 

[sligo]

Having a long background in war gaming, this idea intrigues me. When I was but a child, my brother and I got involved with the old Avalon Hill war games- D-Day, Stalingrad, Richtofen's War, Diplomacy, etc etc. We even played the Civilization board game (still do, once in a while, actually). Those board games ran the gamut from top-down strategy to diplomatic role playing to one unit = 1 man detail level (Squad leader, Panzer, etc)

Anyway, add to that the influence of role-playing - Dungeons and Dragons, Tunnels and Trolls. So, when these games rolled into computerized scenarios, I was a natural to follow along. I enjoy a good first-person-shooter as much as this turn-based strategy. It's all about simulation gaming and how I spend my "spare" time, right?

So, could there actually be a game out there that incorporates all this together in one package? The problem with it, of course, is it would be simply unmanageable to play.

Say I've got 50 units attacking Alex in 6 or 8 battle groups. A couple groups seiging a city, some skirmishers picking off stray units and pillaging, and a few back defending Alex's assault on one of my cities. In Civ IV, these battles are conducted, win or lose, in about 15-30 minutes. Whereas, we handle each battle as it's own real-time strategy game, we'd be talking an hour or two per battle. Suddenly, it now takes a week just to play out a short war with a neighbor.

So, though the idea intrigues me, I don't really think it's practicle in this type of game.

- Sligo

 

[ULTIMATEGP]

That's why I said it could be a option. It's optional so if somebody wants a short war they don't have to do. Also it would be awesome to outwit your oppenent.

 

[warpstorm]

That's why I said it could be a option. It's optional so if somebody wants a short war they don't have to do. Also it would be awesome to outwit your oppenent.

Ah, the "option that isn't really an option option" rears its ugly head again this week. If this were implemented you would use the tactical resolution if it gave any advantage over not using it (and it sounds like you assume that it would). Since you would always get an advantage by using the tactical resolution, it is no longer actually an option if you want to win.

i think a lot of people like the civseries just because it's not RTS (or am i the only one with that opinion ?)

Oh, yeah, Rainlife, you are not the only one. The version of Civ that implements this is the first in the series I don't buy (and I enjoy RTSs).