Since you're overhauling combat anyway...

Mouthwash

Mouthwash

Escaped Lunatic
Joined
Sep 26, 2011
Messages
9,370
Location
Hiding
I'd just like to say that I've always dreamed of having archers (instead of siege units) cause collateral with their bombard attack. That's really how it should have been done in vanilla imo. Is this remotely possible given the current plans or am I just dreaming? :mischief:
 
May not be a BAD idea but that's a fairly major shift for archers to take. What they have now is, if the RevDCM page Bug option is on, is Archer Bombard. Sounds like you may be aware of that already. My point though is that collateral damage is done with an actual attack by a unit that dishes out collateral. If I'm not mistaken, this includes siege weapons, as in no unit is doing 'collateral' with just a bombard.

Archers and siege weapons aren't really something I envision coming in to attack at the front of an army anyhow. So what part of the next Combat Mod phase will include will be Support Promotions. These were developed elsewhere on the site and I think they will be very appropriate to include soon. To explain it in short, it means that when you have multiple unit types in a stack, each is adding a bit of its own element to the unit making an attack. Therefore, if I have Siege weapons in my stack and I attack with my swordsman, that swordsman will have a support promotion that gives it some collateral damage, for example.

Extending on the idea would be sets of skill promotions that grant enhanced support promotions so you can develop some units to be 'better' supporters in the actual fight than others.

But back to your suggestion, you seem to be saying we should add a little collateral damage on a successful bombard attack as a possible effect and I don't see that being a bad idea. I'll have to check to see if this is already happening on siege weapons now but I don't think it is. If so, however, I'll see what is making it work that way and then take a look at what we can do to work that in to archers as well.

One thing we might wish to do in general is give archers at least the ability to earn skill promos that give them some collateral ability too.
 
azurial said:
Talking about overhauling combat, any chance to see battles in a Tactical Battle Map?

There was an attempt here... for that mod http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=441280.
Click to expand...

Bad idea. I would be quitting if that happened. The game is large enough as it is without adding hyper-dimensionality to every single combat. Tactical maps would probably also have to involve the defender making choices as well, which really doesn't play well with certain base styles of Civilization (I think you would have to completely lose hotseat and play-by-email if you did that).
 
@vokraya

I think this is very good idea as gameoption for city attack

Now city attack is so unrealistic and sometimes takes lots of turns and each units attack
Play city attack on tactical map will be much much much more interesting
 
Nimek said:
@vokraya

I think this is very good idea as gameoption for city attack

Now city attack is so unrealistic and sometimes takes lots of turns and each units attack
Play city attack on tactical map will be much much much more interesting
Click to expand...
Have you played Heroes of Might and Magic? The battles are long on a tactical map too if you have a big army. Way more than a simple turn with building, exploring.
 
Yes i played.

I said only that city attack/defense will be more realistic and interesting on tactical map with 1upt
 
We need a Total War RTS combat system. :yup:
 
Nimek said:
Yes i played.

I said only that city attack/defense will be more realistic and interesting on tactical map with 1upt
Click to expand...

Realistic? Yes. Interesting? Well, if it would work, sure.

However, it won't work. Say you attack with 50 units, and all of these could occupy only one tile... That would certainly be interesting. Also, you would have to define unit sizes, since horses are larger than humans, and catapults are larger than horses and so on. You would have to define command range for generals and for healers. You would have to come up with all sorts of definitions to make the map look context realistic (rivers, forests, terrain types, resources, hills; for cities alone there are tons of defensive buildings that would need to be made into visual elements in a siege). The game would turn into AoE or HoMM. It would take a huge amount of time to play through each siege. Also, as someone said, it would not work with Play by Email or some other types of multi player, since the defender has to make choices. Another thing is that if you can't see the battle mini map before the combat, how will you know if the area has a good defensive position? Unless all mini maps would look the same, which they can't with the above argument, you would need to look at each tile's mini map to decide things like where to defend, which would make the game take even longer.

It is just not for this game. If you want to play siege, look for games such as Stronghold.
 
On one hand, having played the original Masters of Mana that came out around the same time as Civ I that operated battles on a tactical map, I loved it and overall REALLY like the concept.

On the other hand, it would make multiplayer play really silly. It would also introduce a hundred and one new issues to work out from a design standpoint that would probably make the mod impossible to ever load on any computer. It would have to be a gameoption because too many would balk at its inclusion at all. You'd need a defined game map for EVERY tile (we're already trying to push the tile limits on our current maps). It'd basically be like having 100000 mini games within the larger and the design would be just as complex.

All that said, maybe in a decade or two I might like to see such a modmod option exist for c2c. It'd probably take that long to play a decent game of it too.
 
Thunderbrd said:
On one hand, having played the original Masters of Mana that came out around the same time as Civ I that operated battles on a tactical map, I loved it and overall REALLY like the concept.
Click to expand...
Master of Magic (which I assume you mean) came out around 3-4 years after Civ I and yes, it was a fantastic game, one of my favorites of all time. But its mechanics were meant for turn based tactical battle from the ground up. Among other things the number of units was more limited than what you would get in C2C, including a limit of 9 units per tile (on the strategic map, 1 unit per tile on the tactical one).

While I think we would get proper mechanics done, it would seriously slow down turns.
I'd say we should rather get improved stack based combat mechanics done (or more stacks at once).
 
I know that is impossible to add it now.

But you must admit that combat style (excluding hopeless AI) from Civ 5 is much more interesting.

Now all my hope in Combat Mod and bigger maps.
Thunder I count on You ;)

What do you think a stack combat style from call to power 2
Stacks have 16 units max (4x4) and every unit played diffrent role on first second third line. Fourth line was for siege units and archers. It was possible to have more than 16 units per tile but max 16 can work as one stack and stack attack takes one click.
 
Mouthwash said:
We need a Total War RTS combat system. :yup:
Click to expand...

We could use a lot of things, doesn't mean we're getting them.

I'm not sure you realize just how hard that would be to mod in. Also, how annoying it would be. If I wanted to play a game with an RTS combat system, I would go all the way and play a total war game.
 
The Combat Mod does include a stack support game option that would radically alter the way combats are planned for and fought IF the option is preferred.

I have not yet explained it due to the fact that there has been such resistance to ideas already that I don't believe its a good idea to further bewilder, confuse, and argue over something that will be left for a later further development anyhow. In short, I'm not quite ready to 'go to war' over it quite yet.
 
Stack support works great in Realism Invictus

Everybody can test it in that mod.

I dont think that argue is needed.
I belive that Combat Mod only looks complicated but in reality will be simple to use.
 
Nimek said:
Stack support works great in Realism Invictus

Everybody can test it in that mod.

I dont think that argue is needed.
I belive that Combat Mod only looks complicated but in reality will be simple to use.
Click to expand...

"install" uses two L's. Because you misspelled it in your sig. Sorry, I'm just obsessive over spelling. :mischief:
 
:lol:
"Engrish" :p is Not Nimek's native language MW. ;)

JosEPh :mischief: :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
Combat mechanics overhaul tied with the three eras
Replies
4
Views
1K
wolverine2112
W
AOS9001
A case for a revised naval unit tree
Replies
10
Views
2K
banzay13
banzay13
T
review after winning twice on deity marathon
Replies
0
Views
1K
tsuneomai
T
F
The perfect army
Replies
5
Views
2K
Fins
F
A
[Strategy Discussion] Transcend Morgan – Help me with Super-City build (Thinker Mod)
Replies
1
Views
363
civac
C
Back
Top Bottom