Units must NOT fully recover

Do you agree with what I've just said here?

  • Yes, absolutely, you're a genius!

    Votes: 2 3.9%
  • No, do you even know what Civ is?

    Votes: 37 72.5%
  • What if I agree without thinking you're a genius??

    Votes: 12 23.5%

  • Total voters
    51
  • Poll closed .

Fachy

Prince
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Messages
393
Location
Egypt
hi there it's my first post I've always loved civ bla bla bla, now to the serious stuff:

I know the idea might "shock" some perfectionists like me, who take every little thing too seriously. But you must admit: units should not fully recover after a combat!

Think of it this way: units represent a group of warriors, right? So, if your 4-hp archer (or, say, 4-men archer in CivIV) got reduced to 1-hp archer, that's like saying that 3/4 of the archer's "legion" has been KILLED, or at least unable to fight.

Let's assume that among those 3/4; 1/2 are injured, while 1/4 are actually DEAD. So, the dead guys shouldn't be recoverable. Also they cannot be recovorable for a cost of sh... uh, hammers, because they wouldn't have the "experience bonuses" attributed to the rest of the "legion"

Changes alot eh? 1/3 of the forces you used to invade Persia with shouldn't have even existed!
 
[party] welcome to CFC... bla bla bla...

it depends on the way you think about it. If you think of the dead hp as wounded or incapacitated, or perhaps as damaged equipment then it makes sense to come back

I choose option 3
 
Well, theoretically.
But as the troop gets refreshed in a city (e.g. new men join the legio so that it grows again to 6000 soldiers), the veterans share their experiences to a part with the new young soldiers.
So, it should be perfectly possible to recover a unit. If you want realim, you can give them a small malus, but that's it.

mitsho
 
thats the way i took it...ie unit going back getting new arms and men.
this "perfectionist" idea is kinda of fuzzy - perfectionism as defined by what and whom?
 
Fachy said:
hi there it's my first post I've always loved civ bla bla bla, now to the serious stuff:

I know the idea might "shock" some perfectionists like me, who take every little thing too seriously. But you must admit: units should not fully recover after a combat!

Think of it this way: units represent a group of warriors, right? So, if your 4-hp archer (or, say, 4-men archer in CivIV) got reduced to 1-hp archer, that's like saying that 3/4 of the archer's "legion" has been KILLED, or at least unable to fight.

Let's assume that among those 3/4; 1/2 are injured, while 1/4 are actually DEAD. So, the dead guys shouldn't be recoverable. Also they cannot be recovorable for a cost of sh... uh, hammers, because they wouldn't have the "experience bonuses" attributed to the rest of the "legion"

Changes alot eh? 1/3 of the forces you used to invade Persia with shouldn't have even existed!

I think units only fully recover when they're in a city with a barracks, otherwise they tak 2-3 turns to heal, not just one.
 
It could also be that every soldier has lost both arms and one leg. The unit recovering then makes perfect sense as it represents them growing back their lost limbs.
 
I just treat that tiny little bar as unit morale.

If I'm outnumbered and on the red, I either flee (broken will) or fight to the death (strong willed, determined or just plain crazy :p )
If I have support and on the red, I make my stand
If I'm on ZERO, I'm too demoralized which leads to my death or capture :p

Healing I consider regaining my composure. Army units healing faster I consider troop morale being boosted under good leadership (wounds gets patched up, etc.)

Healing fully in cities I consider determination to hold the fort. Barracks makes for better training, which makes for better troops, which makes them better disciplined and less likely to surrender without a fight, hence complete healing in a city with barracks. :)

Hmm, casualties and wounds are factors of morale so with this thinking, I don't even require a new civ-morale system :)

-Pacifist-
"Sometimes one must follow in order to lead"
 
lol, thats great! :D
 
I would like to see units fully repair at a city. I would like to see an indicator bar which reduces effectiveness. I would like to see a health bar which represents the health of those living. These bars would limit a push into newly conquered territory.

I would, also, like to see recruitment into the military affect that city by reducing population.
 
like civ3's system hope all that they change inm the new one is make # of units=Helth bar
 
mitsho Then if I have 1 full and experienced legion, I can split it to make of it 4 full and experienced legions at no cost? I don't think so! Not even that, but then you can split those 4 to make 16 full and experienced legions..etc. That's impossible, even with hammers, as the experience is "gained" in battle not taught.

Troy So why can't you get "new arms and weapons" for a "null" unit and create free new units if it's that easy? And perfectionism in civ would be realism as much as possible. And units growing back their dead for free isn't realistic to say the least.

xia It shouldn't be done in a xillion turns, dead don't rise in this life :)

apathiest I'm not sure how does that make sense? First lost limbs don't grow back, and second in what battle does a legion lose 1/2 of its strength but happens not to have one dead soldier? Then when it recreates it gains all its dead for free?

Pacifict You're totally ignoring death casualties
 
i dont think that this is a good idea, for the following reasons:

-if a unit is seen as a group of warriors, and some of them die, then you would have to pay less maintenance costs for them. But this would mean that a unit could only cost a minumum of not 1 gold, but of a different number, if you do not want decimals used, and possibly game mechanics arent decimal-friendly in civ4. So the first reason why this isnt a good idea is a mathematical one

-a unit in the civ games isnt seen as a band of warriors, or even as a single warrior, either: if it was then it would have to die after 1 turn in the ancient era, and after only a few turns in most of the other eras as well. It can only be seen as a regular army, for which you pay regular upkeep costs, and you have to imagine that its warriors are being replaced with time.
 
Maintenance isn't realistic in civ anyway. Is a warrior's maintenance same as a helicopter's? How about a pilot's salary, is it the same as a swordsman? (even if both existed at the same time, in civ you'd pay them the same for maintenance). Also veteran's maintenance is the same as conscript...

This "turn" concept is a whole new idea, for me I think that one turn on the tactical map could equal a day or a few days, but a turn in technology research (which is what the number of years per turn was decided upon) can vary from 50 yrs to 1 yr depending on the era

Units are replaced over time? Then why aren't the totally destructed units (aka who lost in battles) replaced over time? That's right, because they're DEAD. So we're cheating by assuming that a "wounded" unit doesn't have any deaths, while a defeated one has
 
well, they arent ofcourse depicting it, i am just saying what you can imagine that is going on. Afterall most of the game is in your imagination, and not the computer screen.
A unit that has been killed entirely does not cost you any maintenance anymore, that is logical, and i do not really think that micromanagement of the military is the most serious of civ's problems. Army modability (as in alpha centauri) could be a better idea to implement, ie you could decide if you would make a single or a multi-unit, with more costs ofcourse. Also if you would focus on defence-offence on any given unit.
 
mitsho said:
Well, theoretically.
But as the troop gets refreshed in a city (e.g. new men join the legio so that it grows again to 6000 soldiers), the veterans share their experiences to a part with the new young soldiers.
So, it should be perfectly possible to recover a unit. If you want realim, you can give them a small malus, but that's it.

mitsho

Yeah, I would go with full recovery. Even in enemy territory your equipment could be replaced by pillaging the local population, farms, mills, etc. - and even men could be replaced with captured foreigners (especially in earlier times).
 
But you guys don't get it, why then can't you build units for free using other untis? You can restore a 2/4 unit to 4/4 unit for free, but you can't CREATE a 1/4 unit for free?? The whole thing doesn't make sense. I demand atleast that recovering units would (partially) cost you something just like building them would
 
lol ok sorry, I should delete my reply to you then so others won't think I'm stupid :p
 
Fachy said:
Pacifict You're totally ignoring death casualties
I did not ignore casualties. I hate to quote myself but ... :)

Pacifist said:
If I'm on ZERO, I'm too demoralized which leads to my death or capture"


If you are talking about casualties with regards to the unit health bar however, the concept of casualties is implied in my previous reply.

Using my thinking of health equals morale ...

Units with low health I consider having its wounded/casualty ratio to be HIGH in wounded, LOW in casualty -- "recoverable"
Units reaching ZERO health I consider having its wounded/casualty ratio to be LOW in wounded, HIGH in casualty -- "unrecoverable"

Using the color-code of health, I will illustrate the representation of wounded/casualty ratio as well as my "imaginary" morale system :p

Green
ZERO wounded/ZERO casualties -- HIGH morale

Yellow
LOW wounded/LOW casualties -- AVERAGE morale

Red
HIGH wounded/LOW casualties -- LOW morale

ZERO health/No color
LOW wounded/HIGH casualties -- ZERO morale (not to be confused with NO-health units such as Workers)

"Recoverable" units would require plenty of rest. ONE turn of not doing anything is sufficient recovery time since at a minimum, ONE "turn" is equivalent to ONE "year". Enough time to patch up the wounded, retrieve/bury the dead, repair the equipment and rally the troops, once again motivated to get on with things.

In cities with barracks, the "instant" recovery is what I consider to be due to the military organization, immediate access to supplies/equipment and population. You can just imagine that wounded troops are better taken care of when things are more organized, supplies are nearby and have a little more time to do things behind the city walls, all this minimizing the casualty rate. Unrelenting attacks from the enemy puts pressure on this, making it possible to breach a city and defeating their garrisons (ZERO health).

"Unrecoverable" units are just that, no chance of recovering, too many casualties, the wounded having little or no support & eventually die and morale being at an all time low.

A Civilization game covers a wide view of how Civilizations rise and fall (military being one aspect) so all this must be represented in a fairly simple manner. I think the health bar system is fairly simple and the recovery system quite good as is.

-Pacifist-
"War is not about who is right, it is about who is left" -?
 
Top Bottom