Civ4 Units

[Jon Miller]

How should units work in Civ4?

Should there be armies, stacked combat?

What units should be in Civ4?

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

links to other relevant threads

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=103349

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=103218

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=103316&pagenumber=2

Jon Millwe

[Jon Miller]

this is probably related to trade

but I was thinking about letting a certain class of unit form trade routes

it would be along the same idea as an exploration unit and would be capable of combat

but would be weaker than the straight combat troops

you could move it towards a city of a nation you were not at war with, and than it would give you the option to make a trade route with that city (and your unit would disappear)

similiar ideas to caravans, just also able to fight barbarrians and the like some

I actually don't love this idea, just thought of it

(I would prefer two types of trading in this idea, one civ2 like and one civ3 like)

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

this is also trade related and I will post it in the trade thread when that comes about (maybe I will make one soon??)

but when trade routes are made (however they are made (by units or diplomacy)) and whatever they transfer (only civ3 style resources or also civ2 style benefits)

have uncotrollable units exist to show that trade route (similiar idea as is found in CTP actually)

(actually I would suggest having the civ 2 benefits increase if a city has more trade routes going into it)

these uncontrolable units cuold be raided (in time of war or by things like privateers or bandits)

so basically I am suggesting a new unit category called commerce raiders

these would be

privateers
bandits

maybe others?

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

while I have started to get use to civ3 UU

I am still not the biggest fan of them

and would prefer none

or getting them as benefits (like if you build a certain world wonder you get to build immortals instead of swordsmen or if you learn a certain tech first you get to build the UU that is associted with it(like if you are the first to learn flight, later you wil be able to build F-15s instead of the normal fighters), or if you are the first to go arround the world you get to build Men of War)

Jon Miller

[Fosse]

My Opinion

My dream Civ IV combat system hinges on two things: simultaneous moves and stacked combat.

Simultaneous Moves

This is important to me for several reasons, but mostly for increased realism. In real life, armies act at the same time. The Union Army didn't attack for six months out of the year, and then fortify so that the Confederates could attack for the rest of the year.

I would like my turn to be as follows:
I set my build priorities, tinker with my economy, and debate several multilateral trade treaties with my eight way alliance, which represents about 40% of the total remaining Civs.

But I'm fighting a war, so I look at the front, select my armies, and issue broad orders that are refined with conditional tactics.

For example, my 32nd Assault Division is near a critical enemy stronghold, so I order it to move to that position, and it doesn't move yet, instead simply gets an outline to show me it has orders.
Then I decide that I want to take the city very quicly, and I think that I outnumber the enemy. So I tell them Move at Full Speed - which makes them more vulnerable to enemy attack, Do Not Retreat, Accept Enemy Surrender, etc.


Now, I end my turn, everyone else issues their orders, and the Resolution phase begins. I see my units move, I see enemy units I can detect move, and I get battle reports. During the resolution I cannot interefere, and when it's over I adjust strategy appropriatly.


Advantages of this approach: AI can plan its strategy during player turn, surprises can happen, less downtime in Multiplayer mode, more realistic, and cooler.



Stacked Combat
I know, it's being debated in the links Jon Miller provided. Organizing units into armies makes the above system feasible because I can now command many units with fewer - and more signifigant - clicks.


Really... what I want unit and combat wise is exactly what they have over in Clash of Civilizations. Check out their forums here at Apolyton.

[Jon Miller]

while it can be found in the links

I am oik with civ3 style armies

but don't want ctp style stacks

or infiinte stacks

I would also like to see less units being the norm to move arround, like usually 30-40 and no more than 60

I want less stacks overall, make it a bad thing to stack troops

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

some sort of simultaneous move thing could be cool

the phase idea is there of course, but has less immediate results

how it is done in Civ3 and Smac has the problem of being dependent on who moves their unit first

this has the plus of showing who has initiative, but feels a little bit clunky and like there is a better way to do things

[Fosse]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
some sort of simultaneous move thing could be cool

the phase idea is there of course, but has less immediate results

how it is done in Civ3 and Smac has the problem of being dependent on who moves their unit first

this has the plus of showing who has initiative, but feels a little bit clunky and like there is a better way to do things

Agreed, that's why I lvoe this approach. But what do you mean about the "phase thing" with less immediate results, I'm unclear on what you're saying there.

[Jon Miller]

you have two phases in your idea

orders phase, and movement phase

in a way it is turnbased, it is just that each turn has different phases

Jon Miller

[Fosse]

Gotcha. I didn't realize you were talking directly about my post!
Right... when I say "Simultaneous Moves" I don't mean "Turnless" like in PtW. I mean that everyone takes turns and issues orders, then the results happen at the same time. Don't mean to cause any confusion, especially since I love one idea and loathe the other.

[Brent]

I want armies, and I think I want bigger ones.

I want every civ to have a landbased combat unique unit as well as one of any other kind, could be a warship, transport, aircraft, missile, some sort of explorer, or a second land combat unit. I want each civ's two unique units to become available in different eras. I want each culture group to have a unit uniquely shared between the civs in that group.

I want caravans.

Be able to build units with any combination of abilities, let there be a combined settler/ combat unit. Units consist or components like some number of human beings, animals, vehicles, weapons, equipment. Rightclick menus would allow you to divide units.

[Asmodean]

Please try to keep ideas in the single idea thread for now. It will make my job a lot easier when I start to distribute the ideas to the category managers.

In the coming weekend I start doing just that, and then next week, threads are opened by the category managers for each and every category.

If you wish to be category manager, then please sign up in the sign-up thread

Asmodean

[Jon Miller]

why can't the category manager just take over this thread?

why should we be forced to post in a thread which will be ignored after next week?

why the delay?

why should we listen to you?

and please don't threadjack

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Brent
I want armies, and I think I want bigger ones.

I want every civ to have a landbased combat unique unit as well as one of any other kind, could be a warship, transport, aircraft, missile, some sort of explorer, or a second land combat unit. I want each civ's two unique units to become available in different eras. I want each culture group to have a unit uniquely shared between the civs in that group.

I want caravans.

Be able to build units with any combination of abilities, let there be a combined settler/ combat unit. Units consist or components like some number of human beings, animals, vehicles, weapons, equipment. Rightclick menus would allow you to divide units.

despite my vocalism against the stack, I am ok with the idea of combined arms as the game progresses

sort of like your idea, make up your force with whatever parts you want to (limited I would say to certain factors related to tech and other such things)

however I don't like the idea of including numbers of humans, and equipment, and ect

that just seems to spreadsheatish and micromanagementy

I mean, EU sort of does this

but they can get away with it because they only have like 3 types of units

Jon Miller