Removing hitpoints and firepower

LuKo

The Royal Guard
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
1,524
Location
Poland
The combat mechanics is rather complicated in civ2 and it's mostly fine but I find both hitpoints and firepower as ideas which bring more harm than good. They obscure true statistics of an unit (e.g. that Musketeer attacks better than Legion) and I feel that the developers didn't grasp the idea perfectly (e.g. HP of Armor and firepower of Howitzer seem out of place). Therefore, I would like to remove these attributes (flatten across all units) and compensate with basic statistics. Surely it will cause some changes in powerlevel but I think it is worth it. However, I still want to keep it as similar to vanilla combat as possible and I wonder whether anybody analyzed how the new statistics should look like in such a scenario. E.g. the Musketeer has currently A&D of 3 with 2 HP. Simply doubling A&D would make it significantly stronger, while changing it to 4 would nerf it. I guess A&D of 5 is the most appropriate but if there are any additional considerations you can share with me it would be much appreciated.

Similarly, if there is a reason why nobody is messing with these two attributes, please let me know.
 
I do like the depth firepower and hitpoints are giving in civ2.
This allows canonglasses units and many other combinaisons, which we wouldn't have with a flat system.

On the other side, I won't condamn microprose on its choices for particular units, as I can't remember in years of basic game playthroughs as a child blaming a lack of balance on this point.

Just another point of view.
 
This allows canonglasses units and many other combinaisons, which we wouldn't have with a flat system.
Glasscannon can be easily done in this system, e.g. 16ATK/1DEF (1/1 HP/FP). With one-stat system (vide Civ4) it is much harder, but HP/FP is not needed. Giving Howitzers additional HP&FP actually increases its defence.

However, if there are any other roles which will be lost its good to know. E.g. I know about the Pearl Harbour rule which nerfs ships in port and is based on those statistics but I feel that it is not that relevant and possibly can be reproduced with just DEF nerf once we have C# based Civ2...
 
Glasscannon can be easily done in this system, e.g. 16ATK/1DEF (1/1 HP/FP).
This is not a canonglass (realising the correct word in english is glass canon, I'll alter from there).

Both 4,2, 1,4
and 2,4, 1,4 are.
 
I agree with LuKo, that was a complication that doesn't really add fun to the game. According to how combat works and the laws of probability, 3/3 musketeers with 2xHP should perform roughly the same as 6/6 musketeers with normal HP.
You can easily try it by editing the rules.txt. Set everything to 1h,1f, and instead use them as multipliers for attack/defense; for example, Fighter would become 16/8.
I've never tried because I'm used to the default units anyway. It was a useless complication for newcomers
 
According to how combat works and the laws of probability, 3/3 musketeers with 2xHP should perform roughly the same as 6/6 musketeers with normal HP.
I disagree.

Then, with what kind of effect on repetition of fights and the ability for the unit to sustain as such ?

exemple.png
 
Last edited:
I agree with LuKo, that was a complication that doesn't really add fun to the game. According to how combat works and the laws of probability, 3/3 musketeers with 2xHP should perform roughly the same as 6/6 musketeers with normal HP.
You can easily try it by editing the rules.txt. Set everything to 1h,1f, and instead use them as multipliers for attack/defense; for example, Fighter would become 16/8.
I've never tried because I'm used to the default units anyway. It was a useless complication for newcomers
In my experience through testing, 2 Hit Points instead of 1 seems to increase both the offense and the defense of the unit by approximately x 1.44. Thus a Musketeer has an adjusted offense of about 4.33 and defense of about 4.33. Based on the game's description of what Hit Points (supposedly) do, i had predicted a 6/6, but it became clear to me that Catapults with 6 attack hit much harder than Muskets. Pretty sure i had tested the overall offense of crusaders (5 attack) as stronger than Muskets and Knights/lElephants (4 attack) as weaker, but it has been a fair number of years.
 
Last edited:
Ok I found an explanation. My calculations are based on what the manual says:
probability to hit = your strength / (your strength + their strength)
But the manual lies! It is explained here:
The real mathematics are absolutely obscure and crazy. You just can't adjust the musketeer's strength with a simple number, because it also depends on the enemy's values.
I'm even more convinced that this was a useless complication.
What about FreeCiv? did they replicate this strange system or the manual's rule?
 
I'll preface by saying that the OP seems to be suggesting aping Civ3, which did away with HP/FP in favour of augmented base stats. I've actually been chipping away at a "Civ2.5", so if I can get upgrade lines properly sorted we can see how well this translates to the old engine.

The details of the maths largely fly over my head, but I'd actually argue HP/FP are phenomenally underutilized. Civ2 introduced the stats to address the phalanx-beats-battleship scenarios of the original game, with later-era units generally becoming overall 'tougher': gunpowder infantry are standardized 2HP, artillery's bonus firepower can punch through walled defenders, and tanks are the durable powerhouses we'd expect. Vanilla mods have mostly followed this frame, but as I highlighted once before, one scenario took a creative approach of giving foot soldiers low FP but high HP and armoured vehicles the opposite. The effect balances tanks' high ATK/DEF against infantry with better staying power: vehicles hold initiative in open fields (like IRL), but terrain/city defensive bonuses mean entrenched soldiers can actually withstand armoured assaults. It leads to more tactical play, as tank spam is no longer a cost-effective strategy when going toe-to-toe against units a fraction of their production cost.
 
Yes and no: Simplified Combat removes HP/FP but doesn't modify basic strength to compensate, so later-game units actually perform worse. It also reduces combat to the all-or-nothing die-roll of Civ1, whereas the OP still wants damage to be a thing: "1 HP" translates as 10 hitpoints in the actual battle calc, so there's still a safety check on phalanx-beats-battleship flukes.
 
Top Bottom