Civ 4 resistance - Partisans or resisting citizens?

[Jarred]

Why not make as long as a war is present enemy territory "Neutral Territory" in which both nations can use roads, etc...?

[Arrian]

If we're going for more realism:

Resistors should break stuff. Instead of not being able to build things in the city (current CivIII model), you should be able to build things (more likely rush 'em), but the resistors should be able to break them.

Partisans should make a comeback too, though I think they shouldn't really do much in terms of combat, but have all terrain as roads (ATR) ability and stealth. Thus, each partisan could wreak havoc via pillaging & sabotage missions (I'd give them some of the abilities of the old CivII spies - whilst leaving most espionage an abstract thing you do from a menu). The stealth ability should not just make them invisible, but also allow enemy units to move right through the tile they're on w/o engaging them - there should be a percentage chance of battle. This would make them difficult to root out.

HOWEVER, I'm not really sure that would be *fun*

It would be a pain in the ass, and thus more realistic, but would it be fun?

-Arrian

[GePap]

I think a mix is best- when a city is taken you have resistance by the citzens-this gives you a certain chace that each turn, this will turn into a guerrilla unit that will attack your forces in the city or go around ripping up the area. If it attacks the city, it would have an attack bonus equal to the percentage of the citzens that are resistant (so, while normal attack is 6, if 50% of citizens resist, attack is 9, if 100% of citizens resist, attack will be 12). These units woul fall under 2 types-either free barbarian type units (random partisans simply fighting the invader) or controlled by the civ that once owned the city (partisans of the Soviet model). Obviously, the random partisans might attack the government controlled partisans.

Throuhg espionage you could get some of the barbarian partisans created-but not ones controlled directly by you.

[Heffalump]

I like the Civ3 model better than the Civ2 model. Partisans were just an annoyance and had no real game value.

To further flesh out the value of a risisting citizen: resisting citizens should be able to act as spies at a basic level and be able to conduct spying and espionage missions in the city at hand.

[Panag]

hi ,

Let's keep the resisting citizens of Civ 3!
The player should be able to fund guerrilla warfare and sabotage in lost cities.
We need a complex resistance model with collaborators, death squads and hostage situations.

a mix of all would be intresting

have a nice day

[Whoha]

I ignore resistors in play as it stands(don't even bother garrisoning the city until the host civ is annihilated). If the city flips back send a tank/cav/horsie/swordsman back in to take the city, then move the tank right back out again.

Partisans I'd have to fight against, and given civ 3's wierd combat model they'd actually be useful as opposed to the civ2 partisans.

edit: this is all from vanilla, never got c3c or ptw, don't know if resistors cause any problems other then for the city that they are in, or if the combat model has been fixed.

[star mouse]

possible ideas:

* Resistance should be a combination of partisans leaving to fight from without, partisans becoming resisters to fight from within, and partisans aiding your espionage efforts.

* If any enemy city has citizens of your nationality, you should be able to spy in that city more easily (a greater probability of success) than other enemy cities, and conduct spy missions more easily. If you spy in this method, there is a chance that one population point of your citizens will be lost (the spies are caught and executed).

* Bring back partisan units. Make them invisible - think of guerrilla warfare and the like. These partisans should change according to tech level.

* Bring back diplomat/spy units. The abstraction of spying in CIV3 isn't the same as the thrill of smuggling a spy unit to an enemy city.

* Resisting units in a city should fight the occupying garrison fairly - no more flips! We want to see the fighting. Resisters should fight the garrison as if the resisters were guerrillas and the garrison was defending. However, because the combat takes place between units occupying the same tile, the defenders should have defense penalties such as no fortification bonus. It also follows that the city should lose population points when it happens, with the losses taking place among citizens of the appropriate nationality.

[star mouse]

Much as I hate to reply to my own post:

Resisters should fight the garrison as if the resisters were guerrillas and the garrison was defending. However, because the combat takes place between units occupying the same tile, the defenders should have defense penalties such as no fortification bonus.

Possible defense penalties for defending troops in a city under resistance:
* Troops heal as if the city is enemy territory. In CIV3 terms, no healing unless Battlefield Medicine is available.
* No bonus if the troops are fortified.
* Fewer defense points.
* Damaged troops would not enjoy the protection of less damaged troops. That is, damaged troops in the stack can be targeted.

This would make it quite dangerous to fortify damaged troops in a captured city under resistance!

These only apply to defense vs resisters. Against enemy troops attacking the city, a more normal set of rules would apply.

It would be interesting if the resisters could also aid the troops attempting to liberate the city. A good way to do this would be to allow the targeting of damaged troops but to retain other defensive bonuses.

More notes on this idea:
* It should also be possible for a city to lose some defending troops to resistance each turn, but not all of them.
* Resistance should be more active. Something should happen each turn in a city under resistance.

[realpolitic]

Partisans should not be allowed to garrison a city unless they helped take it. Otherwise, they should continue as troublemakers, until caught!

[alva]

Originally posted by Arrian
If we're going for more realism:

Resistors should break stuff. Instead of not being able to build things in the city (current CivIII model), you should be able to build things (more likely rush 'em), but the resistors should be able to break them.

Partisans should make a comeback too, though I think they shouldn't really do much in terms of combat, but have all terrain as roads (ATR) ability and stealth. Thus, each partisan could wreak havoc via pillaging & sabotage missions (I'd give them some of the abilities of the old CivII spies - whilst leaving most espionage an abstract thing you do from a menu). The stealth ability should not just make them invisible, but also allow enemy units to move right through the tile they're on w/o engaging them - there should be a percentage chance of battle. This would make them difficult to root out.

HOWEVER, I'm not really sure that would be *fun*

It would be a pain in the ass, and thus more realistic, but would it be fun?

-Arrian

The question one could ask though, is should everything in a game like CIV be fun?
You could argue that part - if not most - of the fun is overcoming (some) of the (little) annoyances.

That's why I like culture flipping even though it annoys me to no end at times.