New Ideas on fighting

[Adler17]

Hello. I hope I don´t repeat ideas others had before me. But I had no time to look after. I´m sorry if this was already discussed.
My idea is to make a combat system in which you have some units which are only good fighting against certain other units. I mean you have a MG gunner fighting against tanks. He won´t have good chances. But a Panzerfaust soldier has. Or a sea mine. It is unvisible and if a ship moves to such a field it is damaged, sunk or has luck. The bigger a ship is the more likely it would be damaged. Only minesweeper can cope with them but they are a good prey for other ships.
This leads to a new point: Hiding. Not only stealth units but all (land) units should hide in certain terrains at least and if an enemy comes to that square it gets a malus and is attacked or must attack. This depends on the values of the hiding unit. A tank unit with 10.6.2 will attack with a bonus, a MG gunner with 3.12.1 will defend with a bonus. Only reconnaisance units can detect them- under certain circumstances
On this way you have to use armies and navies with many different units.

Adler

 

[Grand Cadfael]

Something that has been ameliorated is the battle system. It has been made to actually encourage (but not force) players to use the array of forces they have. Players will be able to group units, as an interface change. This has been changed so you will favor most different units, and not stick to your most powerful, for instance


A main priority also appears to be on mixed attacks, such as ground and aerial bombardments and not just on a single overwhelming stack of units (commonly known as the “Stack of Doom”). This brings more strategy to battles, and also makes them more realistic

Their already doing it

 

[Adler17]

I knew that. But what I meant is a system with tactical elements. Hiding units and units that can only be attacked by a certain other unit.

Adler

 

[sealman]

I knew that. But what I meant is a system with tactical elements. Hiding units and units that can only be attacked by a certain other unit.

Adler

While a decent idea, I think that this is too detailed for an "abstract" game like civ.

Just my 5 cents worth (I also over tip)

 

[sir_schwick]

Just my 5 cents worth (I also over tip)

Wow, 150% tip. You need to come eat at the resturant I work at.

While a decent idea, I think that this is too detailed for an "abstract" game like civ.

'nough said.

 

[Chazbagel]

I have something.... but it would take down the game... make it a different game.. just dreaming.. ok... well after you attack with ur unit... you go into a battle stage and it turns into like a medal of honor type game and you actually fight in the battle. Like as a Samarai or a tank or something. Just a thought. That would be really cool. lol

 

[sir_schwick]

I have something.... but it would take down the game... make it a different game.. just dreaming.. ok... well after you attack with ur unit... you go into a battle stage and it turns into like a medal of honor type game and you actually fight in the battle. Like as a Samarai or a tank or something. Just a thought. That would be really cool. lol

everyone on the suggestions forum has been a smartass since the Civ 6 - Photoeltric Effect and Civ XIII threads.

 

[Tom_Bombadil]

We need more stats! Only 2 more.

Armour and armour penetrating ability.

Attack, Defense, Hitpoints, Armour and Armour penetration. (with the usual pulling out for units iwth a higher movement)

For instance...

Spearmen A1 D2 H14 Ar2 Ap1
Light Cavalry A6 D1 H9 Ar1 Ap1
Knights A4 D3 H8 Ar3 Ap2
Musketeers A3 D4 H11 Ar2 Ap6

Spearmen wouldn't have trouble against light cavalry because of their superior massed formations (14 hit points) and they suffer no penalties damaging the cavalry as their armour penetration is the same as the cavalry's armour. The cavalry would have a hard time knocking hitpoints off the spearmen because of their small armour penetration bonus and would lose. Spearmen would have trouble against knights, even though knights have less attack, as they would find it difficult to penetrate their armour with their spears. The knights would still be fighting with their armour penetrating medieval weapons by the time light cavalry would have either fled or died and eventually kill off all of the spearmen. Come gunpowder and the knight's suddenly find their armour bonus non-existant and them standing with their ****s in their hands in the middle of a musket volley. Light cavalry on the other hand, even though they are just as vulnerable to musket fire, would stand a good chance of killing off the musketeers before they inflict their casualties. So why don't the defenders use both spearmen and muskets? Well they did, except they upgraded and used pikemen. The battle of Naseby (english civil war, 17th century) was fought with mainly light cavalry, pikemen, musketeers and cannon. The plot is thickenned, it isn't too complex and can be unit based.


It works for the machine gunner vs tank situation aswell...

Infantry A6 D8 H7 Ar1 Ap8
Machine gunner A3 D10 H4 Ar1 Ap10
Tanks A16 D4 H3 Ar 24 Ap 18

World war one melee consisted mostly of infantry charging entrenched infantry and most horrifically fortified machine guns. Infantry charging machine guns may do a lot of damage if they are lucky and knock off 1/4 of their hit points, but they will most likely get cut down. In real life a machine gun post would be overwhelmed if the infantry managed to close in and closing in would be a difficult task. Come tanks, the situation is sort of the reverse of the knights facing muskets. The defending machine gunners can't destroy the tanks and are destroyed easily because of their low hit points. As in real life the tanks would have more trouble attacking infantry because there are more of them, but are still likely to win. I also gave tanks a defense of 4 to represent how they are vulnerable as they frequently break down and don't have the initiative to react to an attack.

 

[Adler17]

Good idea, Tom! Nevertheless 2 Aspects kept out:
1. Hiding. Okay if you think that would be not a good idea for civ IV keep it out.
2. Certain units, especially the sea units, should only be able to be attacked ba certain other units. This is of much greater importance. I mean there are mines and subs and these units are only attackeable by certain other units. It is unrealistic to see a BB attacking a SS. Minesweeper or sub casing units are only allowed to do so. If a unit which can not attack the hidden unit moves on the same tile it is attacked by this unit.

Adler

 

[searcheagle]

Good idea, Tom! Nevertheless 2 Aspects kept out:
1. Hiding. Okay if you think that would be not a good idea for civ IV keep it out.
2. Certain units, especially the sea units, should only be able to be attacked ba certain other units. This is of much greater importance. I mean there are mines and subs and these units are only attackeable by certain other units. It is unrealistic to see a BB attacking a SS. Minesweeper or sub casing units are only allowed to do so. If a unit which can not attack the hidden unit moves on the same tile it is attacked by this unit.

Adler

1. would just require the submarine concept added to land units.
2. could be implemented easily according to his plan.

 

[Tom_Bombadil]

1. Hiding. Okay if you think that would be not a good idea for civ IV keep it out.
2. Certain units, especially the sea units, should only be able to be attacked ba certain other units. This is of much greater importance. I mean there are mines and subs and these units are only attackeable by certain other units. It is unrealistic to see a BB attacking a SS. Minesweeper or sub casing units are only allowed to do so. If a unit which can not attack the hidden unit moves on the same tile it is attacked by this unit.

Aircraft and modern artillery should be able to sink ships instead of decrease them to 1 hit point.

I think hiding is ok for stealth units, like submarines and stealth fighters. It would probably be good also for special units like guerillas and special forces. I agree that conventional units should not be able to hide, I don't see what's so wrong with units which can hide.


BB? SS?

"2. could be implemented easily according to his plan."

I think the rules for civ 3 engagements are suffice. My plan wouldn't stop a rifleman from destroying a fighter attack in civ2, but the idea of aircraft being airbase based or city based longe range artillery which covers an area in air superiority would be good for civ4. My plan doesn't cover the inability of some units to attack others, only their inability to defeat others.

 

[Adler17]

BB= battleship in the USN classification
SS= Submarine

Adler