Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fixing the enemy units behind-the-lines problem

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by demipomme
    I think that the 'land' problem is more problematic than the 'unit' problem. (Snip) If it were the case, and I have already suggested it, that control of a square reverted to its original owner unless held for several turns, then a single enemy unit wouldn't be able to take large swathes of my territory. The second advantage is that the enemy unit would have to stay still to gain anything and thus I can track it down while its stays still.

    I think this solution is realistic as it models for the change of local government & police etc. of the square. The same can be applied for province capitals i.e. you get to keep the entire province if you hold the capital for several turns.
    Hi demi pomme:

    I agree that we still have problems in this area that need to be fixed. However, I don't think you're idea is very practical since it requires an awesome amount of micromanagement. Every time I move a unit I would need to decide if I want to have it sit for the requisite number of turns on each of the squares in its path. I think your idea would require significant AI tweaking also.

    My best guess for what we should do now to fix the "land" part of the problem is to have squares revert to the original civ quite easily if certain criteria are fulfilled. A square would be likely to revert to the original civilization if all these conditions are fulfilled:
    1. it had significant affinity for the original civilization (for example same ethnic group), and to a lesser extent had minimal affinity for the conquering civ.
    2. Units of the conquering civ are not too close by (say one turn movement)
    3. The military power balance nearby does not favor the conquering civilization (nearby means say within a five square radius, or three turns movement, or something like that).
    4. There would be a bonus to reversion if there is at least one square of the original civ ownership adjacent to the conquered square.

    What the rules above would do is that a few individual units loose inside your civilization would still be an irritation, but could be safely ignored from a "land" standpoint. Just to be clear, I don't mean for any of these criteria above to be completely rigid, for example the "not too close by" criterion in #2 above would not go from "yes" to "no" when a unit was exactly 1 turn of movement away. But rather then when the unit is one movement turn or closer this criterion would be fulfilled at a high level, where as beyond 1 turn of movement the level of satisfaction for this criterion would rapidly diminish toward zero. The reversion chance would depend on something like the psalm all the levels of satisfaction of the first three criteria.

    I'd also like to add that in demo 8.1 we should have the "move to enemy TF" command active, which will make hunting down enemy units much easier. Laurent, please correct me if I am wrong. I think this may even be implemented, I have to apologize but I haven't been able to check code updates for the last few weeks.

    Alms, we of course always have your idea for a generalized provincial defense force as a backup if our other approaches don't work. However, I think my proposal covers several real-world situations better. For example when Sherman marched to the sea in his southern campaign during the American Civil War his army lived off the land and controlled the local territory wherever it went. That army was too big for the defending Southern armies to directly attack, or a least defeat. However, Sherman was of course not able to retain control of all the territory that he went through because as soon as his army had moved beyond a certain range the locals immediately reverted back to their desired civilization, the CSA. I think my approach handles this correctly, where as the generalized provincial defense idea, at least as originally proposed, would leave Sherman in control of that large string of territory since the defense forces wouldn't be able to eliminate him.

    What do you guys think of my idea both in terms of at least temporarily fixing problems in the game, and also in terms of difficulty to code and clock cycle usage?
    Project Lead for The Clash of Civilizations
    A Unique civ-like game that will feature low micromanagement, great AI, and a Detailed Government model including internal power struggles. Demo 8 available Now! (go to D8 thread at top of forum).
    Check it out at the Clash Web Site and Forum right here at Apolyton!

    Comment


    • #17
      3. The military power balance nearby does not favor the conquering civilization (nearby means say within a five square radius, or three turns movement, or something like that).
      I like this one. I'd like units to "project" their power around them and based on this projected power, a square would know whether or not it's safe to revert or outright rebel.
      Clash of Civilization team member
      (a civ-like game whose goal is low micromanagement and good AI)
      web site http://clash.apolyton.net/frame/index.shtml and forum here on apolyton)

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Mark_Everson
        Alms, we of course always have your idea for a generalized provincial defense force as a backup if our other approaches don't work. However, I think my proposal covers several real-world situations better. For example when Sherman marched to the sea in his southern campaign during the American Civil War his army lived off the land and controlled the local territory wherever it went. That army was too big for the defending Southern armies to directly attack, or a least defeat. However, Sherman was of course not able to retain control of all the territory that he went through because as soon as his army had moved beyond a certain range the locals immediately reverted back to their desired civilization, the CSA. I think my approach handles this correctly, where as the generalized provincial defense idea, at least as originally proposed, would leave Sherman in control of that large string of territory since the defense forces wouldn't be able to eliminate him.
        I don't want to get into that discussion again. I'm tired of explaining stuff. The approaches taken thus far have done minimal changes to the problem, so continue down that path and who knows, maybe sometime next year the problem will be solved.

        Comment


        • #19
          My best guess for what we should do now to fix the "land" part of the problem is to have squares revert to the original civ quite easily if certain criteria are fulfilled. A square would be likely to revert to the original civilization if all these conditions are fulfilled:
          1. it had significant affinity for the original civilization (for example same ethnic group), and to a lesser extent had minimal affinity for the conquering civ.
          2. Units of the conquering civ are not too close by (say one turn movement)
          3. The military power balance nearby does not favor the conquering civilization (nearby means say within a five square radius, or three turns movement, or something like that).
          4. There would be a bonus to reversion if there is at least one square of the original civ ownership adjacent to the conquered square.
          It would be nice if say the unit disbanded and the population integrated into their from the army would affect then the affinity for the civilization if they were too far away from home.

          The bonus for #4 should be cumulative though, but overall should be neglible so a province that really hated the original civ won't revet 99% of the time.

          Also another thing to condier, is rather than staying under the current rule, if they decide not to revert, is to simply become an autonomous region.
          Which Love Hina Girl Are You?
          Mitsumi Otohime
          Oh dear! Are you even sure you answered the questions correctly?) Underneath your confused exterior, you hold fast to your certainties and seek to find the truth about the things you don't know. While you may not be brimming with confidence and energy, you are content with who you are and accepting of both your faults and the faults of others. But while those around you love you deep down, they may find your nonchalance somewhat infuriating. Try to put a bit more thought into what you are doing, and be more aware of your surroundings.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Lord God Jinnai
            It would be nice if say the unit disbanded and the population integrated into their from the army would affect then the affinity for the civilization if they were too far away from home.
            Sorry, not sure exactly what you mean here.

            The bonus for #4 should be cumulative though, but overall should be neglible so a province that really hated the original civ won't revet 99% of the time.
            Agree. And yes, the bonus was more meant to boost squares that would like to revert anyway.

            Also another thing to condier, is rather than staying under the current rule, if they decide not to revert, is to simply become an autonomous region.
            Good point.
            Project Lead for The Clash of Civilizations
            A Unique civ-like game that will feature low micromanagement, great AI, and a Detailed Government model including internal power struggles. Demo 8 available Now! (go to D8 thread at top of forum).
            Check it out at the Clash Web Site and Forum right here at Apolyton!

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Mark_Everson


              However, I don't think you're idea is very practical since it requires an awesome amount of micromanagement. Every time I move a unit I would need to decide if I want to have it sit for the requisite number of turns on each of the squares in its path. I think your idea would require significant AI tweaking also.
              Micromanagement is good grounds for an objection, AI tweaking is not (unless you're trying to make a rush bodge game like all the other civ clones which you obviously aren't cos you're not finished yet, not that I'm complaining, I just think its worth getting it right).

              Micromanagment is only a problem if you want to take a province square by square. If you want the whole province, take the capital and hold that for x turns. Micromanagement = v. low. I agree with alms comment that holding for 1 turn is long enough.

              You suggested reversion, however my suggestion is not about reversion but conquering. In the scenario Attila, where I have had most problem with this, an enemy horsemen rides up and down my road covering I think 6 squares and "conquers" all of them. Realism = v.low.

              A compromise suggestion is: only keeping the square you end your turn in? This way mobile units wouldn't conquer the entire world instantaneously and infantry units would move and conquer normally.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Lord God Jinnai
                It would be nice if say the unit disbanded and the population integrated into their from the army would affect then the affinity for the civilization if they were too far away from home.
                I guess this means that if an enemy unit dispand in your square, its ethnic group joins your population and increases the squares affinity to the enemy civilisation.

                One point I missed from the above post is that I don't disagree with reversion. I think undefended enemy squares should revert if the conditions are favourable.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by demipomme
                  Micromanagment is only a problem if you want to take a province square by square. If you want the whole province, take the capital and hold that for x turns. Micromanagement = v. low. I agree with alms comment that holding for 1 turn is long enough.
                  Sometimes you need to take ground square by square. FE If the provincial capital has walls and you don't have local resources to besiege.

                  You suggested reversion, however my suggestion is not about reversion but conquering. In the scenario Attila, where I have had most problem with this, an enemy horsemen rides up and down my road covering I think 6 squares and "conquers" all of them. Realism = v.low.
                  We were talking about solving the "land" problem. Both proposals are potential solutions to that issue. Your example though is certainly compelling in terms of illustrating the problem.

                  A compromise suggestion is: only keeping the square you end your turn in? This way mobile units wouldn't conquer the entire world instantaneously and infantry units would move and conquer normally.
                  Perhaps we could have two movement modes, pure movement and conquest movement. There would be a TBD tick penalty for the conquest part but you would gain control of the squares traversed. That would at least be less MM than what I'd been thinking of. The movement mode could just be a switch that you set in orders. Lets see what Laurent and others think, you've convinced at least me that it'd be worth trying.
                  Project Lead for The Clash of Civilizations
                  A Unique civ-like game that will feature low micromanagement, great AI, and a Detailed Government model including internal power struggles. Demo 8 available Now! (go to D8 thread at top of forum).
                  Check it out at the Clash Web Site and Forum right here at Apolyton!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by demipomme
                    I guess this means that if an enemy unit dispand in your square, its ethnic group joins your population and increases the squares affinity to the enemy civilisation.
                    Yes, as long as their civ isn't close by, which would be relative based on technology, but with some maximum even for modern day.

                    And i wasn't saying 100% no matter where, but if you disband a unit, without proper technology breakthoughs, even in your own civ, anywhere far from where they originated, say more than two squares minimum, then a certain percentage would stay there. This would increase signifigantly if it was in another civ.

                    However, reguardless of the number that stayed or left, such movements should be represented in the population by the next turn so we don't haveto continue to keep track of such small number of people.

                    Thus essentially they'd settle wherever they could reasonably move to in 1 turn, primarly for their own civ (their own square if possible), secondarily, an area that liked them, next to an indifferent populated area, then to settling down where they were. Some might move to the neigbring squares FE, but the majority would stay put, or go home if possible.
                    Which Love Hina Girl Are You?
                    Mitsumi Otohime
                    Oh dear! Are you even sure you answered the questions correctly?) Underneath your confused exterior, you hold fast to your certainties and seek to find the truth about the things you don't know. While you may not be brimming with confidence and energy, you are content with who you are and accepting of both your faults and the faults of others. But while those around you love you deep down, they may find your nonchalance somewhat infuriating. Try to put a bit more thought into what you are doing, and be more aware of your surroundings.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Mark_Everson Sometimes you need to take ground square by square. FE If the provincial capital has walls and you don't have local resources to besiege.
                      Also if the rural population resists quite strongly
                      Which Love Hina Girl Are You?
                      Mitsumi Otohime
                      Oh dear! Are you even sure you answered the questions correctly?) Underneath your confused exterior, you hold fast to your certainties and seek to find the truth about the things you don't know. While you may not be brimming with confidence and energy, you are content with who you are and accepting of both your faults and the faults of others. But while those around you love you deep down, they may find your nonchalance somewhat infuriating. Try to put a bit more thought into what you are doing, and be more aware of your surroundings.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Pure and conquest

                        Originally posted by Mark_Everson


                        Sometimes you need to take ground square by square. FE If the provincial capital has walls and you don't have local resources to besiege.
                        Hadn't thought of that. Good point.


                        Originally posted by Mark_Everson

                        Perhaps we could have two movement modes, pure movement and conquest movement. There would be a TBD tick penalty for the conquest part but you would gain control of the squares traversed. That would at least be less MM than what I'd been thinking of. The movement mode could just be a switch that you set in orders. Lets see what Laurent and others think, you've convinced at least me that it'd be worth trying.
                        Like the pure/conquest idea. But it's got me thinking...

                        -Every square should have a certain number of law enforcement personnel
                        -Number of law enforcement personnel related to amount invested in law enforcement by owning government
                        -Invading units kill or disband existing law enforcement – some loss of personnel to invading army (1st reduction of stray unit power)
                        -In pure movement mode, invading unit moves to next square leaving previous square in hands of original civ, but in economic turmoil as no law enforcement
                        -In conquest movement mode, invading unit moves to next square leaving behind some personnel in previous square (2nd reduction of stray unit power)

                        Also:

                        -for realism, pure and conquest should be the same speed
                        -law enforcement also reduce riots
                        -border police – can select to have higher law enforcement on border

                        Advantages:

                        -realism
                        -simple choice between pure and conquest
                        -stray enemy units diminished in size by moving through many squares
                        -stray enemy units diminished further in size if they conquer squares

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I said I liked this:
                          3. The military power balance nearby does not favor the conquering civilization (nearby means say within a five square radius, or three turns movement, or something like that).
                          Here's what I propose, and an illustration of it.
                          If armies of owning civ are "stronger" in a given square than the invaders, then that square xon't change hands. The "stronger' means there is a strong attack force nearby. It's a kind of power projection. The image shows in red squares where the Carthaginian military influence is stronger, in green where the Romans are stringer. Several roman squares have been conquered by a stray carthaginian archer. The proposal is to prevent the squares from changing hands if they are in the green area of influence. The power projection I used in this screenshot is (total attack of army)/(time in ticks to reach square + 10). This means an influence of 1 where you are, 0.5 where you'd be in one turn, 0.33 in 2 turns. I limited the computation to 2 turns of movement but could do more.
                          As for reversion, I'd like it to be handled by the social model. The nationalistic feeling is not coded, but it could probably handle that.
                          Clash of Civilization team member
                          (a civ-like game whose goal is low micromanagement and good AI)
                          web site http://clash.apolyton.net/frame/index.shtml and forum here on apolyton)

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I forgot to attach the image.
                            Attached Files
                            Clash of Civilization team member
                            (a civ-like game whose goal is low micromanagement and good AI)
                            web site http://clash.apolyton.net/frame/index.shtml and forum here on apolyton)

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I really like the way the hills look gray in the bottom right of that pic, Laurent, that's what I wanted all tiles to look like whenever you turned on one of the filters, except those that are colored by whatever filter you are looking at.

                              -Edit-
                              Also, I think it would look better in the long run if only the terrain tile & terrain overlays were colored (not roads, cities, units, etc.)
                              Last edited by alms66; February 12, 2005, 14:08.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                I like your implementation idea Laurent, sounds like it will help a fair amount, even if it doesn't completely solve the problem.
                                Project Lead for The Clash of Civilizations
                                A Unique civ-like game that will feature low micromanagement, great AI, and a Detailed Government model including internal power struggles. Demo 8 available Now! (go to D8 thread at top of forum).
                                Check it out at the Clash Web Site and Forum right here at Apolyton!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X