Unit creation idea

gskyes

Warlord
Joined
Nov 15, 2002
Messages
197
I have been tossing around an idea about unit creation. These ideas have been brought up before, but in different places/threads. I'll link to them after I explain my idea.

I think that your military units and weapons should be produced seperately. Anyone that has played Colonization would be familiar with this. Basically, I would tell my city to build a military unit, which would be a generic warrior. It would take a # of turns for the unit to be complete. There would be a separate place/structure to produce weapons, which would also take a certain # of turns. Or, the city could build the weapons if it had the required structure and resource, and a separate structure would train troops.

The basic solider would still be like a warrior, but wouldn't require any weapons (it would fight with a stone or a big stick or a whatever). A basic solider would be regular, could be conscript if hurried, or veteran if trained in a town with a barracks. Once complete he could be given whatever weapons that were available in that town, or travel to a different town with different weapons available. So if I wanted an archer, I would build bows and arrows in a town and recruit a solider and equip them. If I wanted a tank, I would build the tank and assign a soldier to drive it. Simple weapons like bow and arrow or spear shouldn't require an special buildings or resources. Swords and Pikes would require a blacksmith and would require iron. More advanced weapons such as tanks or rifles would require factories or magazines for example. Certain weapons could be melted down into raw materials that could be turned into other weapons (ancient era swords -> midieval longswords or pikes). The process of creating a unit could be streamlined by just requesting a particular unit and the game trains the solider and equips him automatically, or could be micromanaged as well.

Horses and mounted units would be a special case. Almost any unit could be mounted to become a different unit. A warrior could be mounted to become a horseman, an archer to a skirmisher, or a swordsman to an ancient calvary, etc. Certain restrictions should apply that prevent a player from turning EVERY unit they have into a mounted one with a single supply of horses.

Upgrading units would be a simple as moving a unit to a town, removing its weapons, and equiping it with new ones. A swordsman cound even become a longbowman in this case.

Weapons, once built, could also be sold or traded to other civs.

This idea also works well with the idea that resources be quantitated instead of 1 iron = as many swordsman as you can build/support. The idea is that 1 iron deposit should be able to produce 20, 50, or a variable amount of iron. I think that a better method would be 1 iron deposit makes 1 iron/ turn, but that is just my opinion. Then, 1 swordsman should require a soldier and a sword which required 1 iron unit to build. Swords could even be melted down into iron again to use to build a different kind of weapon.

Unique units could still be done with this method. Each civ could have 1 weapon that is different and better than the others, like German Panzers instead of tanks. However, this doesn't work that well for units like the Chinese Rider or Greek Hoplite. These units were special because of special training or tactics, ect. Another way to do this would be to have a certain combination create a different unit just like the way UU's replace standard versions in Civ3. For example, if the Romans gave a soldier a sword, he would have a Legionary instead of a swordsman.

That pretty much sums up my idea for now, though I may add to it later. Like I said at the beginning of this post, these ideas have been brought up before, I just wanted to add my thoughts and combine it all together into a coherent post.

I realize that it would be too much micromanagement for some players, though other players seem to enjoy more of it. I have no problem with the current game, though, and I would not be dissapointed if the developers decided to keep the unit production system the same as it is now.

Links...
Military Idea (GeZe)

New Unit Production Idea (sir schwick)

A new resource system (Shyrramar)
 
Basically a modular approach where you build systems in a generic template (basically like SMAC).
 
I am impressed by the organization of this thread. You even have links to major ideas you had from other threads to help supplement your thoughts. It is kind of funny to look back at what I thought in the good old days. It is one of the first threads of mine someone did referenced that I did not whore out. Also, my opinions have changed considerably since then, but I nontheless flattered. If more people actually did research this would be a squeaky clean forum.

Anyway...............................

Atlhough you do have interesting points, your proposed system is a bit cumbersome considering unit production levels in the late game. However it has given me some ideas to explore. Sorry for making this a multi-topic thread.

_________________________________________________________________

Non-Renewable Resource Quantity:

The number on a resource basically lists how plentiful it seems. Each application(some domestic from cities, some for units, some misc) would tax 'x' number of resource points as evenly as possibly from avaliable resources. The amount of taxation on a resource determines the probability that the resource number will decrease. This goes for non-renewable luxury and bonus resources as well as strategic resources.

Spoiler EXAMPLE A :

Suppose you have an Oil field with quantity 20.

Right now it is not being used in any significance because of technology. That means 0 units are taxed a turn. The probability of the Oil field reducing in quantity is 0/20 or 0%.

You discover a couple applications and now 2 units of Oil are taxed each turn from the Oil field. The probability of the Oil field reducing in quantity is 2/20 or 10%.

Some turn later you hit that 10% on the dice roll and now you have a size 19 Oil field. You are still taxing the same 2 units of Oil each turn. Now the probability of reducing the Oil field in quantity is 2/19 or 11%.

Your society starts driving a lot and now taxes 10 units each turn. The probability of the Oil field reducing in quantity is 10/19 or 50%.

Pretty soon your Oil field is now only size 18. The same 10 units each turn is taxed and the probability of field reduction is 10/18 or 55%.

Your consumption doubles so you now tax this site 20 units a turn. It has also reduced to size 17 because of heavy use. Now the probability of reduction is 20/17 or 117%. This means that the first unit is automatically lost. There is a 3/17 or 117% chance of a second unit of quantity being lost.

Several turns later the overtaxed Oil field has reduced down to size 10 while consumption remains at size 20. Now the chance of reduction is 20/10 or 200%. THis means the Oil field will automatically fall two units in quantity. Also, no resource can be more than double taxed its current quantity.

A turn later the Oil field has reduced down to size 8 and only 16 units of consumption can occur.

Four turns after that the Oil field has dried up and now has 0 quantity.

A technology that can uncover 'deep deposits' comes about. Some squares have one or two levels of 'deep deposits' which are accessible after certain technology. This Oil field had that and now gets an addtional 30 units of Oil.

This whole cycle starts over, but hopefully your nation has found other Oil sources so this one is not so heavily taxed.


Renewable Resources:

Renewable resources are usually more certain than non-renewable resources in quantity. They also regrow and replenish themselves, meaning slightly different mechanics are at work. The renewable resources you tax from a tile are gone when you tax them. However the tiles generates new resources of the same kind based on the number of untaxed resources. Also, whenever the density of renewable resources is too high in one square, it will put the excess in another square.

Spoiler EXAMPLE B :

Horses generate 1 new Horse for every 4(rounded up) untaxed Horse in the tile.
The maximum number of Horses in any square is 30.

A tile starts with 2 horses.

After the fifth turn of uninhibited growth there are 9 Horses in the tile. Then the capitol city draws off 2 Horses for agricultural needs. This leaves 7 Horses in the tile.

The next turn there are once again 9 Horses, but the capitol simply takes two. Eventually the capitol will need more and the tile will run out of Horses. Leaders in the capitol manage to get a source of cheap foreign Horses for five turns.

Now there are 24 Horses in the tile and the capital needs them again. It now taxes 4 Horses a turn for agricultural needs. This reduces the Horse population to 20 Horses.

The next turn there are 25 Horses in the tile and the capital only takes 4, leaving 21 Horses.

The next turn there are 27 Horses and the capitol taxes 4, leaving 23 Horses.

The next turn there are 29 Horses and the capitol takes 4, leaving 25 Horses.

Next Turn:
The capitol now taxes 4 Horses total
Starting Horses - 30 Horses - 2 Horses
Taxes - 4 Horses - 0 Horses
Finish Horses - 26 Horses - 2 Horses

Next Turn:
The capitol now taxes 4 Horses total
Starting Horses - 30 Horses - 3 Horses - 3 Horses
Taxes - 4 Horses - 0 Horses - 0 Horses
Finish Horses - 26 Horses - 3 Horses - 3 Horses

Next Turn:
The capitol now taxes 5 Horses total
Starting Horses - 30 Horses - 4 Horses - 4 Horses - 3 Horses
Taxes - 5 Horses - 0 Horses - 0 Horses - 0 Horses
Finish Horses - 25 Horses - 4 Horses - 4 Horses - 3 Horses

Next Turn:
The capitol now taxes 5 Horses total
Starting Horses - 30 Horses - 5 Horses - 5 Horses - 4 Horses - 2 Horses
Taxes - 5 Horses - 0 Horses - 0 Horses - 0 Horses - 0 Horses
Finish Horses - 25 Horses - 5 Horses - 5 Horses - 4 Horses - 2 Horses

Next Turn:
The excess from the original square equal 2, but cannot be accessed.
The capitol now taxes 5 Horses total
Starting Horses - 30 Horses - 7 Horses - 7 Horses - 5 Horses - 3 Horses
Taxes - 3 Horses - 1 Horses - 1 Horses - 0 Horses - 0 Horses
Finish Horses - 27 Horses - 6 Horses - 6 Horses - 5 Horses - 3 Horses

Next Turn:
The excess from the original square equal 4, but cannot be accessed.
The capitol now taxes 10 Horses total because of military and new city.
Starting Horses - 30 Horses - 8 Horses - 8 Horses - 7 Horses - 4 Horses
Taxes - 7 Horses - 1 Horses - 1 Horses - 1 Horses - 0 Horses
Finish Horses - 23 Horses - 7 Horses - 7 Horses - 6 Horses - 4 Horses

Next Turn:
The excess from the original square equal 0, but cannot be accessed.
The capitol now taxes 12 Horses total because of military and new city.
Starting Horses - 29 Horses - 9 Horses - 9 Horses - 8 Horses - 5 Horses
Taxes - 9 Horses - 1 Horses - 1 Horses - 1 Horses - 0 Horses
Finish Horses - 20 Horses - 8 Horses - 8 Horses - 7 Horses - 5 Horses

Next Turn:
The excess from the original square equal 0, but cannot be accessed.
The capitol now taxes 12 Horses total because of military and new city.
Starting Horses - 25 Horses - 10 Horses - 10 Horses - 9 Horses - 7 Horses
Taxes - 8 Horses - 1 Horses - 1 Horses - 1 Horses - 1 Horses
Finish Horses - 17 Horses - 9 Horses - 9 Horses - 8 Horses - 6 Horses

Next Turn:
The excess from the original square equal 0, but cannot be accessed.
The capitol now taxes 12 Horses total because of military and new city.
Starting Horses - 22 Horses - 12 Horses - 12 Horses - 10 Horses - 8 Horses
Taxes - 6 Horses - 2 Horses - 2 Horses - 1 Horses - 1 Horses
Finish Horses - 16 Horses - 10 Horses - 10 Horses - 9 Horses - 7 Horses

Next Turn:
The excess from the original square equal 0, but cannot be accessed.
The capitol now taxes 12 Horses total because of military and new city.
Starting Horses - 20 Horses - 13 Horses - 13 Horses - 12 Horses - 9 Horses
Taxes - 5 Horses - 2 Horses - 2 Horses - 2 Horses - 1 Horses
Finish Horses - 15 Horses - 11 Horses - 11 Horses - 10 Horses - 8 Horses

Next Turn:
The excess from the original square equal 0, but cannot be accessed.
The capitol now taxes 12 Horses total because of military and new city.
Starting Horses - 19 Horses - 14 Horses - 14 Horses - 13 Horses - 10 Horses
Taxes - 5 Horses - 2 Horses - 2 Horses - 2 Horses - 1 Horses
Finish Horses - 14 Horses - 12 Horses - 12 Horses - 11 Horses - 9 Horses

Next Turn:
The excess from the original square equal 0, but cannot be accessed.
The capitol now taxes 12 Horses total because of military and new city.
Starting Horses - 18 Horses - 15 Horses - 15 Horses - 14 Horses - 12 Horses
Taxes - 4 Horses - 2 Horses - 2 Horses - 2 Horses - 2 Horses
Finish Horses - 14 Horses - 13 Horses - 13 Horses - 12 Horses - 10 Horses

Next Turn:
The excess from the original square equal 0, but cannot be accessed.
The capitol now taxes 13 Horses total because of military and new city.
Starting Horses - 18 Horses - 17 Horses - 17 Horses - 15 Horses - 13 Horses
Taxes - 3 Horses - 3 Horses - 3 Horses - 2 Horses - 2 Horses
Finish Horses - 15 Horses - 14 Horses - 14 Horses - 13 Horses - 11 Horses

Next Turn:
The excess from the original square equal 0, but cannot be accessed.
The capitol now taxes 13 Horses total because of military and new city.
Starting Horses - 19 Horses - 18 Horses - 18 Horses - 17 Horses - 14 Horses
Taxes - 2 Horses - 3 Horses - 3 Horses - 3 Horses - 2 Horses
Finish Horses - 17 Horses - 15 Horses - 15 Horses - 14 Horses - 12 Horses

Next Turn:
The excess from the original square equal 0, but cannot be accessed.
The capitol now taxes 13 Horses total because of military and new city.
Starting Horses - 22 Horses - 19 Horses - 19 Horses - 18 Horses - 15 Horses
Taxes - 2 Horses - 3 Horses - 3 Horses - 3 Horses - 2 Horses
Finish Horses - 20 Horses - 16 Horses - 16 Horses - 15 Horses - 13 Horses


Actually this took so long I am going to quit here for now, more coming tomorrow.
 
I like this idea but we need to make shore theirs not to much micromanaging involved.
gskyes said:
Weapons, once built, could also be sold or traded to other civs.
another good one but you should have to have a corect tech first,i'td be stupid if a guy with knights was given ten rifles by someone. I think it would be neat if their was a unit seprate from an average one that could strip and cary weapons from defeated foes(in the ancient age it get swords and horses etc. BUT only one at a time
 
Make the governor micromanage the weapons.
 
It has to be a heck of a governor if it can staisfy me. The usual governor-functions in games like Civ are a real pain in your behind. You rather end up dealing with micromanagement than letting the governor do the job.
 
This suggestion looks like a way of letting in the SMAC unit workshop by the back door. The reasons for not having a smac style workshop have already been discussed to death.
 
For those who didn't follow that discussion (me i.e.): you have a summary of the outcome? I don't agree with your summary of gskyes idea btw.
 
In brief...

To be fair, your system isn't an exact clone of SMAC, but it has many of the same flaws...

- It requires players to keep track of dozens more resources, specifically stocks of every weapon ever produced.
- It will require modular unit graphics
- It will prevent modders from creating custom units and fantasy monsters easily.
- It is an extra step between the player thinking "I want a knight" and actually having it ready to fight.
- It forces open non-historical unit armament choices. Non-historical arms choices are generally non-historical because they would have been ineffective, but a modular system can't reflect that.
 
Thanks to rhialto for the summary, I also didn't see those discussions.

Unfortunately, I never played SMAC so I am unfamiliar with the unit workshop. If I had played it, I either would have liked that system very much, or would have been more aware of it's shortcomings.

I will concede that this system would make modding new units either very difficult or impossible. It was something that I just hadn't thought of at the time.

As for being too cumbersome or unhistorical, I was thinking along simpler lines. The weapon would not have any A/D values of it's own, only the unit created. So a swordsman would still be 3.2.1 and a rifleman 4.6.1. But if a rifleman was given a horse, the resulting calvary unit would be 6.3.3. Also, certain unit types would be uncreatable (TOW infantry on horses?). So basically it would be 1 weapon makes 1 unit type, which may or may not be able to be mounted. The # of weapons available would not be too overbearing, and the combinations would result in only a few more units than civ3 currently has (which civ4 will probably have anyway).

I also like Grand Cadfael's idea about a unit that picks up used weapons from defeated foes. It also make me think about capturing enemy soldiers and selling them back. But we always run into a problem between what would be "cool" and what would actually work in the game and be fun. More is not always a good thing.

Anyway, like I said, it was just an idea I had been tossing around in my head, and I am sure it has it's problems. I only decided to write it up because I was soooooo bored at work yesterday and needed something to do. (I can't civ at work :( , but I can surf the internet)
 
While your idea is too much original SMAC, I did have an idea that has some of the basis.

You are not automatically granted military units when you research techs that put together the necessary 'parts', as you would describe them. Instead you must divert research time towards 'Military Research'.

Here is an example of 'Land Combat' troops and the options you can choose in research.
Spoiler EXAMPLE A :

- Manpower - This determines whether the unit has a building requesite related to training. It also determines the weapons systems that can be utilized. It also allows for things such as 'fast' infantry troops, etc.
- Movement - This is more an option whether to use infantry or some other chassis types. That includes 'light horses', 'war horses'(requires more stuff), 'chariots', 'half-tracks', 'light vehicles', 'tracked', 'armour'.
- Weapon System - This is a very broad option referring to everything from bow and arrow/club all the way to AT Guns/Infantry combat packs.
- Special - There would be various specials for your troops to upgrade them. They only work in tandem with certain weapon systems and many could be Civ unique.


While it looks like I replaced the SMAC system, there is one key difference. Making new units to build requires research time. Design is no longer free but an applied science that is not cheap. This means if you are realtively safe or isolate it is a waste of time to develop modern arms when antiquated ones will work. Being on a hot border will make military develop more important, although it slows down tech advancement. Also, you will now only design units for what you percieve as future needs instead of automatically getting them as part of tech advancement.
 
gskyes said:
I also like Grand Cadfael's idea about a unit that picks up used weapons from defeated foes.

For Sale! Used chainmail armour. One previous owner, Some cleaning required...

Sorry, but any serious soldier in search of decent weapons can safely assume that any equipment used by the guys he killed was inferior to what he was already using :)
 
How about a unit creation screen, where you select the bonuses! You research each bonus individually and the different bonuses you select add more shields to the total cost of the unit you are creating and become obsolete when their replacements arrive allowing units to be upgraded.

Frame: infantry, cavalry
Infantry selected...
Armour: leather, leather and bronze helmet, bronze breast plate and helmet
Weapon1: Club, sinew bow, composite bow bronze axe, bronze spear, bronze pike, hoplite pike
Weapon2: leather shield, wooden shield, bronze shield, hoplite shield

Frame: infantry, special ops, armoured vehicle, tank, helicopter, stealth fighter, stealth fighter-bomber, stealth bomber
Infantry selected...
Armour: camouflage, kevlar vest and camouflage
Weapon1: cheap automatic firearms, modern firearms
Weapon2: none, landing craft, 155mm artillery, 81mm artillery, SAM, AAA

?
 
I mean, you produce the weapons, then arm your military men, they are expected to learn how to use these new weapons because you pay them 1 gold each turn. You can start with a group of warriors, whom kill some barbarians and become veterans, then you can arm them with spears who then join a newly trained army and take a city from persia and become crack, you then get hold of iron and produce short swords and you arm your elite with these swords etc etc..

I like schwicks ideas on resources, but I think they should be simplified more, just to keep players from having to get out ms calculator in order to make choices.
 
The argument I've been hearing is that the system allows for weird and unhistorical combinations (like TOW calvary). Why not use the bright idea they had with SMAC (not the whole system, just this idea) prohibit certain weapons modules from being used with certain frames?!?! Even in SMAC, you could not attach a conventional missile payload to a Hovertank, or a Terraforming Unit to a missile. Just extend that system: TOW cannot be attached to calvary frame, sword cannot be attached to Light Vehicle frame (trucks/humvees), etc., etc., etc.

If this unit creation system is used, mechanized units would have to be treated differently; for example, you build a Tank, and its operator.
 
Lockesdonkey said:
The argument I've been hearing is that the system allows for weird and unhistorical combinations (like TOW calvary). Why not use the bright idea they had with SMAC (not the whole system, just this idea) prohibit certain weapons modules from being used with certain frames?!?! Even in SMAC, you could not attach a conventional missile payload to a Hovertank, or a Terraforming Unit to a missile. Just extend that system: TOW cannot be attached to calvary frame, sword cannot be attached to Light Vehicle frame (trucks/humvees), etc., etc., etc.

If this unit creation system is used, mechanized units would have to be treated differently; for example, you build a Tank, and its operator.

I'm not infavor of this concept. I think it is way to much micromanagement.

HOWEVER: If this concept was adopted, I would have no problem seeing nonhistorical units produced. Why could a horse not carry TOW equipment? They probably would except for the production of vehicles which are more efficient and faster? Swords would be attached to the soldiers not to the truck, so that makes sense too. (Although if you have trucks, you probably have more advanced weapons too, so why crease swords.) Why can't missiles be added to a hovertank- they are attached to everything else. Terraforming on a missile- I agree with you- it should be prevented. (a missile leveling terrain, one shot change, um still no)

One of the advantages of this is the fictional units could be created to prevent resource poor civs from being excluded from the game because they don't have oil. They can still create powerful units without oil.
 
TomBambadil said:
I like schwicks ideas on resources, but I think they should be simplified more, just to keep players from having to get out ms calculator in order to make choices.

Under resources would be a little box with this info:
Taxation/Quantity
% Chance Depletion

That way you can take a quick look w/o a calculator(same in resource advisor screen).

searcheagle said:
HOWEVER: If this concept was adopted, I would have no problem seeing nonhistorical units produced. Why could a horse not carry TOW equipment? They probably would except for the production of vehicles which are more efficient and faster? Swords would be attached to the soldiers not to the truck, so that makes sense too. (Although if you have trucks, you probably have more advanced weapons too, so why crease swords.) Why can't missiles be added to a hovertank- they are attached to everything else. Terraforming on a missile- I agree with you- it should be prevented. (a missile leveling terrain, one shot change, um still no)

What if you are Alexander the Great and subsidize research on Steam Engines early? Then you have a vehicle chasis without gunpowder weapons. You could still use them as LFVs or APCs which would require Swords. Add Catapults or other bits. Also, during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, plenty of militias used horses extensively with missles and other light weapons, especially for hunting Soviet tanks and aircraft.
 
I think the current system, where many units have a resource cost, is sufficient-but with the following alterations. Firstly, that resources are no longer 'near-infinite', and where building LOTS of units with a resource requirement-in a single turn-can place that resource under strain (thus increasing its disappearance chance). Same with units that require a resource on an ongoing basis (such as tanks and oil, or nuclear subs and uranium). The more of these units you have, the more likely these resources might disappear (even MORE likely if the units are in enemy territory).
Second, another 'resource cost' for many units should be 'manpower'. When you build units, you should have to 'pay' for it with some of your city's population. Certain higher tech units, though, may only reduce your population by a fraction of less advanced units. This, I admit, might require a different method for calculating population.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
 
Back
Top Bottom