pick your PG combat system

[weltraeumer]

so, since ciV has peeked on the panzer general series, have a guess which combat elements will be applied:

* one unit per tile (confirmed)
* movement of units enranged (confirmed)
* no or no likley instant death of units in combat (confirmed)
* units with ranged attack (confirmed)
* units need supply (ammo, fuel)
* infantry units got a transport mode to move further but are more vulnerable to attacks
* aircrafts move like every other units and can stay outside of airports for several turns (until fuel runs out)
* outside aircrafts can then be attacked with fighters, flak units or mobile AA guns
* there will be two types of damage (soft and hard)
* there will be supression damage (no kills but weakend for every other attack the same turn)
* land units can turn into transport ships when standing on coastal tiles
* paratroopers can turn into a transport planes when standing near an airport
* friendly fire: artillery (or flak) autmatically shoots first, when the unit next to it is attacked
* units will retreat several tiles when deafeated in combat
* movement is handicapped when passing through enemy units
* each turn, no movement results in stronger entrenchment
* each attack will lower the defenders entrenchment
* Sea Units can bombard land units
* submarines can only be sunk by destroyers
* wounded units can be reinforced in cities
* experience is gathered with each combat
* experience rises the maximum ammount of soldiers (normal full health: 10, max experience full health: 15)
* each unit has a ton of stats like: movement points, movement type, initiative, hard attack, soft attack, air attack, ground defense, air defense, ammo, fuel,...
* general greater diversity of a certain troop type: heavy tanks, light tanks, recon tanks, anti tank tanks,...


add anything I missed...

 

[Silverdawn]

The PC Powerplay article that is being mentioned today (http://www.weplayciv.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2830) appears to confirm the "land units can turn into transport ships when standing on coastal tiles".

 

[The_J]

* Sea Units can bombard land units
[...]
* experience is gathered with each combat

Ship bombardment has been mentioned here, and that units gain experience was in one of the interviews confirmed.

 

[Thormodr]

Not too thrilled about the instant transport rule.

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

so, since ciV has peeked on the panzer general series, have a guess which combat elements will be applied:

* one unit per tile (confirmed)
* movement of units enranged (confirmed)
* no or no likley instant death of units in combat (confirmed)
* units with ranged attack (confirmed)
* units need supply (ammo, fuel)
* infantry units got a transport mode to move further but are more vulnerable to attacks (applied to sea/river transport)
* aircrafts move like every other units and can stay outside of airports for several turns (until fuel runs out) (probably not)
* outside aircrafts can then be attacked with fighters, flak units or mobile AA guns
* there will be two types of damage (soft and hard) (probably not)
* there will be supression damage (no kills but weakend for every other attack the same turn) (likely)
* land units can turn into transport ships when standing on coastal tiles (probably only available in a city)
* paratroopers can turn into a transport planes when standing near an airport
* friendly fire: artillery (or flak) autmatically shoots first, when the unit next to it is attacked
* units will retreat several tiles when deafeated in combat (probably not, 1 tile only)
* movement is handicapped when passing through enemy units
* each turn, no movement results in stronger entrenchment
* each attack will lower the defenders entrenchment
* Sea Units can bombard land units (confirmed)
* submarines can only be sunk by destroyers
* wounded units can be reinforced in cities (probably)
* experience is gathered with each combat (confirmed)
* experience rises the maximum ammount of soldiers (normal full health: 10, max experience full health: 15) (very likely)
* each unit has a ton of stats like: movement points, movement type, initiative, hard attack, soft attack, air attack, ground defense, air defense, ammo, fuel,... (probably not)
* general greater diversity of a certain troop type: heavy tanks, light tanks, recon tanks, anti tank tanks,...(probably not)


add anything (he) missed...

I have added my sentiments and conclusions from the many reads of the previews

 

[Ahriman]

My guess: none of these.

* infantry units got a transport mode to move further but are more vulnerable to attacks
* aircrafts move like every other units and can stay outside of airports for several turns (until fuel runs out)
* outside aircrafts can then be attacked with fighters, flak units or mobile AA guns
* there will be two types of damage (soft and hard)
* there will be supression damage (no kills but weakend for every other attack the same turn)
* friendly fire: artillery (or flak) autmatically shoots first, when the unit next to it is attacked
* units will retreat several tiles when deafeated in combat
* movement is handicapped when passing through enemy units
* submarines can only be sunk by destroyers
* experience rises the maximum ammount of soldiers (normal full health: 10, max experience full health: 15)
* each unit has a ton of stats like: movement points, movement type, initiative, hard attack, soft attack, air attack, ground defense, air defense, ammo, fuel,...
* general greater diversity of a certain troop type: heavy tanks, light tanks, recon tanks, anti tank tanks,...

These have no business in a civ-type game, especially one that is trying to model thousands of years of warfare, not just WW2.

Suppression effects? When there are no automatic weapons until the late 19th century? WTH?

 

[sputnik323]

These have no business in a civ-type game, especially one that is trying to model thousands of years of warfare, not just WW2.

Suppression effects? When there are no automatic weapons until the late 19th century? WTH?

Catapults and arrows can have a suppression effect. tell me, would you rather hide under your shield or just run head on into a wall of arrows?

In civ IV modern combat sucks, which is why most ppl just try to end the game before that era (its just like the last eras with new shiny toys). So I disagree... they have every business to try and make a great game throughout all eras, not just early ones.

 

[Gliese 581]

I don't remember units retreating several tiles in PG, one tile only or surrender if surrounded as I recall. Of course if they retreated due to full suppression and was then subsequently attacked by a new advancing unit they would then retreat 1 tile again if possible and so on unless they were destroyed.

 

[Malakai55]

I'd like all of them to be included. I'm a great fan of the PG games and I enjoyed Civ back in the day.

The great thing about PG's combat system is that it manages to mirror real life scenarios using simple mechanics. For example, I remember the stalingrad map being long and having to battle through heavy soviet defenses. Despite having superior units, I ended up losing the map because I kept running out of fuel and supplies. The soviet's strategy of attrition had worked, just as it did in real life.

Even when the more powerful armor units became available, infantry was still very important for urban combat. An infantry unit that has taken the time to entrench themselves became quite formidable and just like in real life, required bombardment to "soften".

Having different types of attack values, one for soft and another for hard targets helps create a wider diversity in unit strenghts and weaknesses and can help solve some of the tech disparity issues where a spearman could take down a tank. A spearman could have a hard attack value of 0.

I had lost interest in Civ years ago, but the adoption of some of PG's mecanics has once renewed my interest in a couple of old favorites.

 

[bearbomber]

* no or no likley instant death of units in combat (confirmed)

* experience is gathered with each combat (confirmed)

I can see the way to exploit this. In multiplayer two warmonger players can start a fake war just to let their units level up without the risk of loosing them.

 

[Gliese 581]

I can see the way to exploit this. In multiplayer two warmonger players can start a fake war just to let their units level up without the risk of loosing them.

That is assuming they can heal for free like in cIV though. In PG unit losses had to be replaced with the PG currency, prestige. Elite replacements that did not lower overall experience cost 4 times as much as green recruits.

 

[cf_nz]

* aircrafts move like every other units and can stay outside of airports for several turns (until fuel runs out) (probably not)

That's how it works in Civ Rev (fighters have two turns; bombers, four) so it could be a possibility.

 

[Padje Dog]

I am eager to play the game.

 

[pi-r8]

I hope they don't include fuel and supply limits. Those are just a headache to keep track of, and not fun at all.

 

[weltraeumer]

I don't remember units retreating several tiles in PG, one tile only or surrender if surrounded as I recall. Of course if they retreated due to full suppression and was then subsequently attacked by a new advancing unit they would then retreat 1 tile again if possible and so on unless they were destroyed.

guess you´re right, couldn´t recall that correctly


I really hope they´re adding the friendly fire... battles get way more difficult and a good tactic is even more appreciated...

 

[Ahriman]

Catapults and arrows can have a suppression effect. tell me, would you rather hide under your shield or just run head on into a wall of arrows?

Suppression requires a constant stream of fire, and it is designed to make people seek *cover*, not use shields. You can still advance just fine while holding a shield, whereas you cannot advance when seeking cover behind an object or in a trench.

Pre-modern warfare did not use cover to any significant extent (excepting castle defenders).

As for suppression from a catapult... uhh, no.

they have every business to try and make a great game throughout all eras, not just early ones.

I completely disagree that most of these changes would improve gameplay. They are needless complexity that add little, and many of them are very limited in era-scope, or would be downright tedious (having to keep track of fuel levels is Not Fun).

 

[sputnik323]

Suppression requires a constant stream of fire, and it is designed to make people seek *cover*, not use shields. You can still advance just fine while holding a shield, whereas you cannot advance when seeking cover behind an object or in a trench.

Pre-modern warfare did not use cover to any significant extent (excepting castle defenders).

As for suppression from a catapult... uhh, no.



I completely disagree that most of these changes would improve gameplay. They are needless complexity that add little, and many of them are very limited in era-scope, or would be downright tedious (having to keep track of fuel levels is Not Fun).

Well you kind of put words in my mouth. I did not say "suppression fire" from catapults or arrows, I said EFFECT. A shield in many eras would not cover adequately to protect from arrows while advancing (until romans with their "turtle" formation), soldiers would have to stop and have to hide under the shield otherwise take casualties.

I never stated that any of those specific changes would improve gameplay (some might, its good to keep an open mind on a game we haven't played) - in fact I agree with not having to keep track of fuel and unit supply (Im pretty sure this would be tedious). However, you advocated (in the previous post) not including things in the modern era that may be unique to that era. I disagree with this... War evolves just like man and I want a game that the end is fun and unique, not the same as the beginning of the game with new art for units.

 

[LDiCesare]

* units need supply (ammo, fuel)

I hope this won't be in. Supply is too much micromanagement for what it's worth at this level. If you need 1 horse resource in order to build/upkeep 1 cavalry, I think it's enough to represent ammo/fuel/logistics. Being connected to the resource would be nice to show supply lines, but having a fuel figure that gets up with time, at the scale of Civ, please no.
One thing I'd like is artillery/archery defensive support fire. Makes for interesting combined arms tactics.

 

[ArataWata11]

Liked all combat aspect in PG, looking forward for the FIRAXIS to incorporate this combat system in the civ.

 

[Gliese 581]

I hope this won't be in. Supply is too much micromanagement for what it's worth at this level. If you need 1 horse resource in order to build/upkeep 1 cavalry, I think it's enough to represent ammo/fuel/logistics. Being connected to the resource would be nice to show supply lines, but having a fuel figure that gets up with time, at the scale of Civ, please no.
One thing I'd like is artillery/archery defensive support fire. Makes for interesting combined arms tactics.

The supply system in PG was very simple though. In normal terrain a unit would get half their ammo and fuel (or was it all the fuel?) refilled by spending a turn without taking any action. In rough terrain like deserts or if enemy units was adjacent the amount of supply would be reduced.
The thing that makes it all work in PG though is the limited time factor. You're always trying to achieve your goal of capturing key targets within a set amount of turns and thus not using a unit for a turn has an obvious drawback which becomes the cost of the supply.
In ciV there would most likely be much less time pressure most of the time so I'm not sure that the PG system would translate well.