Supply Rules - can you treat Civ2 like a wargame?

[techumseh]

I was wondering how people would respond if a scenario had additional rules, outside the game engine, that a player had to follow?

For example, one of the weaknesses of the Civ2 game system in portraying military operations has always been the lack of supply rules. This is evident in trying to design a scenario covering operations in Burma during WWII.

What would people think about rules which required them to only move and attack with units starting the turn next to a supply (freight) unit, which must then be disbanded? This would enhance the realism of the scenario, but would it reduce the enjoyment of the game?

Other, more detailed rules could also be considered, including adding HQ units and requiring units to trace a LOC before attacking. There are lots of alternatives.

[McMonkey]

This may not appeal to the casual gamer but then how many of them are there still playing CivII? I think most of us are pretty dedicated. I for one would love to see ideas like this implemented as it would add a new level of realism to the game. An army marches on its stomach and without fuel, ammo and spare parts it is going nowhere! With rules like this even the dumb AI could unwittingly outflank you and cut your supply lines causing chaos

When I play a CivII scenario I often create my own self imposed limitations to keep things withing the boundaries of realism so for me this would just put a structure in place for me to follow. I enjoy the organizational and logistical aspects of running an army. This would emphasize the need to plan ahead and allocate limited resources where they are most needed. Go for it

[curtsibling]

Yep - Like McMonkey says, if there is a linear reason why the 'outside' rule must be followed, and the extra rules make sense, the regulars would go along with it...Although be prepared for secret cheats!

I had always wished there was a 'land only' helicopter type unit. As this would nicely represent (a little abstracted maybe) the effect of supply lines, etc...

A scenario with no ocean tiles might still offer that chance, or make the unit a galley, with galley loss chance at 100%...

[curtsibling]

Another idea is to make the combat units 'settlers' that draw food from particular logistical 'supplier' cities...

The normal settler functions in would be nulled in 'game' text, and changed to reflect the scenario flavour...

It would require tweaking, but events could be used to produce units that use up the food surplus,
enemies to interdict the food tiles and have CIV2's engine disband the far units on the supply chain...

Just an little idea I had explored...

Would need work to make it useful in a war scenario, and not mess up the other game aspects...

[techumseh]

This is a good idea also - Captain Nemo used it in Second Front. The problem with both ideas is that they only work for the human player (otherwise you have Tiger tanks irrigating and founding cities). So either you have a non-symetrical scenario, in which the AI ignores rules that the human player must observe, or you have a 2 player PBEM scenario. Comments?

[Harry Tuttle]

Will the AI rehome units if the home city loses shields to support?

[McMonkey]

If I was making this scenario I would use your original supply idea and make the game playable for the Allies only, have a fierce Japanese event driven attack that will test the defensive qualities of the human player to their limits and beyond, then if they survive they have the opportunity to push the Japs back. If it goes well and you have the time and enthusiasm then you could work on a Japanese version.

The helicopter and settler ideas are interesting but create as many problems as they solve. In the past I have considered using Settler-Infantry Battalions who can dig their own tranches, build roads and so on to represent their organic Engineering units. I also considered making Hoplites "settlers" to represent the resources a city had to put into their production and provision. In the end I gave up on both ideas as building large army would empty entire cities. Maybe there is a way to get around this by increasing food production in the supply depot cities!?

[Harry Tuttle]

Food routes could boost the supportable settler units. Use an intermediary city if you want the routes to be destroyable.

[Exile]

In Dracula of Transylvania the evil footsolidiers are in the settler slot.

In that one it worked because I didn't want the player to produce excessive amounts of infantry. It worked because too many units produced would, as stated above, empty cities.

The soldiers used the modified settler ability to create "Impaled" terrain (in one turn).

But it was a small scenario.

[techumseh]

Would anyone play a 2-person PBEM scenario which had additional rules, like supply units? It could be short (10-20) turns, with lots of scope for manoeuvre.

[Cyrion]

Would anyone play a 2-person PBEM scenario which had additional rules, like supply units? It could be short (10-20) turns, with lots of scope for manoeuvre.

With that description, I probably would!

[McMonkey]

Would anyone play a 2-person PBEM scenario which had additional rules, like supply units? It could be short (10-20) turns, with lots of scope for manoeuvre.

I have been thinking about trying to start a ToT PBEM for a while now so yes I would play. Jerec and I had an awesome head to head game of Pablostuka's Spanish Civil War and it worked really well as with two players you can normally play a turn a day. I think it helped that Jerec was in the States and I was in the UK as when one of us was asleep the other one was playing their turn. There is a BIG difference between playing against the inept AI and a scheming, ruthless and focused human opponent!

[curtsibling]

A PBEM would be fun, as long as people stay dedicated to the cause.

A shorter scenario (a River Chir type) would be most suitable...

[Exile]

I've toyed with the idea of making Battle scenarios; no tech, no econ, no diplo, just a "chessmatch." Simplicity, and easy to put together, like Chir, (Blenheim, Austerlitz, Gettysburg, Pavia, etc. ) but it would require two humans. The AI just can't manage such things.

[McMonkey]

McMonkey is always ready for a scrap. Not sure how much of a challenge I would be, but I always fight to the bitter end!

I know some of the Webring boys would be up for head to head battle games too so they would not go to waste.