Tweet
Three things:
Unit strengths/weaknesses. I Civ2, pikemen were twice as powerfull against mounted units as other unit. This was removed in Civ3, fo no good reason. I believe the idea is sound enough, but I also believe it could be refined further. If some of you have played Panzer General series by SSI, you might know what I mean. Example, you don't roll to cities with tanks, if you're smart, infantry is more effective. AT unit is effective in defence against tanks, but not very effective in offence.
Also, consider entrenchment, or fortificating, in civ terms. Bombardment could have, in addition to inflicting casualties, the effect of also reducing the fortification ("F" key...
) levels of enemy combatants, thus reducing the bonuses they receive from it. Same for suppression. Also, a think nabbed from Pacific General, the massing of forces, example, if you try to take out a city with one infantry, your... attack power is 10. Now, if you position another infantry unit adjacent to the enemy, and set it to "suppressive fire" or something, ending it's turn, your assaulting infantry would get a percentage bonus on it's attack. Surround the enemy, and get even more bonus.
Also, fast units should be able to use hit'n run tactics, to attack the enemy with lesser attack power, but also be more likely to run away, after, say, one hitpoint worth of damage has been delt to the enemy. Nible away, so to speak.
Now, that was just the first thing...
Artillery, again from experience with PG2. An attacking unit could be totally annihilated, without even fighting the defending unit, if enough artillery was positioned in range, giving supporting fire against the enemy. For this to work, one would need to have ammo, and general supply implemented in the game. Who knows...
Last, the most complex thing, manpower and military equipment. Instead of regular units, build in time in in cities, how about just building bows and arrows, tanks and guns.
Example: You receive a message, saying your neighbour in the west has instituted mobization, which will be ready in 2 turns. (This info could be false, too... Or the agression might not be directed at you.)
Or you get a visit from the other civ, demanding this and that or else.... And when you politely refuse, since you cannot necotiate (They should implement negotiations, too..."You can't have New York and 100 gold, but maybe you'd settle for Seattle and 150?"), they declare war, and you get the message warning of mobilization in 2 turns.
So you pop up your military screen, where you can see detailed information on your weapons stockpiles, and the amount of able-bodied men your current conscription levels (from everybody serves to the US way) give you at the moment, based on you population. You can then call to active duty the amount you desire, keeping in mind, that growth and happines is hampered if you get everybody out to fight. Then again, if you have too small force to defend with....
Now, based on the tech level and amount of equipment, you can have different units of different combat value, example would be few elite tanks with hi-tech equip, and some mid-tech infantry with regular experience. You can do this manually, or let the cpu do it, like 50% of manpower to 40% infantry, 20% armor etc.
Naturally, if really pressed, you can call everybody to arms, and give them whatever weapons you have. You could have 1 modern armor and 2 spearmen, plus assortments of in-betweens, question is, could the manpower of those two regiments of spearmen be more usefull in building more tanks?
Equipment and ammo and such, fuel, oats and MRE's, could naturally be bought from others. And sold, or donated, if it suits your... goals.
Any obvious holes, problems in implementation? Would this need actual intelligen AI?
Unit strengths/weaknesses. I Civ2, pikemen were twice as powerfull against mounted units as other unit. This was removed in Civ3, fo no good reason. I believe the idea is sound enough, but I also believe it could be refined further. If some of you have played Panzer General series by SSI, you might know what I mean. Example, you don't roll to cities with tanks, if you're smart, infantry is more effective. AT unit is effective in defence against tanks, but not very effective in offence.
Also, consider entrenchment, or fortificating, in civ terms. Bombardment could have, in addition to inflicting casualties, the effect of also reducing the fortification ("F" key...
) levels of enemy combatants, thus reducing the bonuses they receive from it. Same for suppression. Also, a think nabbed from Pacific General, the massing of forces, example, if you try to take out a city with one infantry, your... attack power is 10. Now, if you position another infantry unit adjacent to the enemy, and set it to "suppressive fire" or something, ending it's turn, your assaulting infantry would get a percentage bonus on it's attack. Surround the enemy, and get even more bonus.Also, fast units should be able to use hit'n run tactics, to attack the enemy with lesser attack power, but also be more likely to run away, after, say, one hitpoint worth of damage has been delt to the enemy. Nible away, so to speak.
Now, that was just the first thing...
Artillery, again from experience with PG2. An attacking unit could be totally annihilated, without even fighting the defending unit, if enough artillery was positioned in range, giving supporting fire against the enemy. For this to work, one would need to have ammo, and general supply implemented in the game. Who knows...
Last, the most complex thing, manpower and military equipment. Instead of regular units, build in time in in cities, how about just building bows and arrows, tanks and guns.
Example: You receive a message, saying your neighbour in the west has instituted mobization, which will be ready in 2 turns. (This info could be false, too... Or the agression might not be directed at you.)
Or you get a visit from the other civ, demanding this and that or else.... And when you politely refuse, since you cannot necotiate (They should implement negotiations, too..."You can't have New York and 100 gold, but maybe you'd settle for Seattle and 150?"), they declare war, and you get the message warning of mobilization in 2 turns.
So you pop up your military screen, where you can see detailed information on your weapons stockpiles, and the amount of able-bodied men your current conscription levels (from everybody serves to the US way) give you at the moment, based on you population. You can then call to active duty the amount you desire, keeping in mind, that growth and happines is hampered if you get everybody out to fight. Then again, if you have too small force to defend with....
Now, based on the tech level and amount of equipment, you can have different units of different combat value, example would be few elite tanks with hi-tech equip, and some mid-tech infantry with regular experience. You can do this manually, or let the cpu do it, like 50% of manpower to 40% infantry, 20% armor etc.
Naturally, if really pressed, you can call everybody to arms, and give them whatever weapons you have. You could have 1 modern armor and 2 spearmen, plus assortments of in-betweens, question is, could the manpower of those two regiments of spearmen be more usefull in building more tanks?
Equipment and ammo and such, fuel, oats and MRE's, could naturally be bought from others. And sold, or donated, if it suits your... goals.
Any obvious holes, problems in implementation? Would this need actual intelligen AI?
Comment