Idea for future game: Unit attrition

[Optimizer]

Do you ask for a reason to introduce unit attrition?

Exploration, colonization and offensives would become more difficult and expensive. In the existing civ games, those have been far too easy. Civ strategy is just about expansion, since building and conquering new cities always pay more than developing the ones you have.

It is realistic, too. Soldiers who cannot find food or shelter in the terrain will eventually die. Ships will sooner or later run out of supplies. A band of warriors shouldn't be able to cross the Sahara without special equipment or training.

[Urban Ranger]

Okay, but this requires an entirely new layer to be introduced. You have to consider season, terrain, experience, training, availability of medicine (including herbal medicine), supplies, money, etc. All sorts of nitty gritty details.

This brings up another point about units. For the longest time there was no standard for units. That means there weren't any units, unless you count armies of varying sizes (as in Europa Univeralis) as units.

[Optimizer]

You don't need that much details. It just needs a few new parameters.

Just give each terrain type an attrition ratio - which will be the probability of losing a hit point, and give some units the flag to avoid attrition.

[Urban Ranger]

It's not that simple. Could a warrior unit learn a thing or two in some kind of terrain in 20 years? Remember, a turn can be as long as 20 years. Or, could I say I give units special training before sending them out? Afterall, it doesn't take years to cross a few kilometers.

[DrSpike]

Remember it's all an abstraction anyway.......if you start thinking about it too much in terms of realism you will get nowhere fast. The key issue is that the defender should gain some advantage.........maybe unit attrition for most units (at a low level) is not a bad way to implement it.......it is hard to say without playtesting. The danger would be making warmaking too unattractive.

[Trifna]

There's no danger of making "warmaking too unattractive" if anyway you balance all the rest to keep some sense to it (war has a sense in reality, so if done well it can't go opposite in the game).

[DrSpike]

Once again it's a game. An abstraction. It is perfectly possible for the addition of a 'realistic' feature to unbalance the game.....I have seen it happen time and time again. Just because something is realistic doesn't mean for a second it necessarily works well in a game.

[Dauphin]

I don't like the idea of unit attrition. I think the idea of increased costs for units outside of your territory holds merit.

Civ3 took the step of making it much easier to defend since only the owner could use a road network

Not only that - units don't repair when inside enemy territory. I think that c/should be replace by not repairing when outside home/allied territory.

[Panag]

hi ,

good idea , all we need now is a way to fix those injured units , .... maybe a mobile repair shop or so , or the allies could fix it , .....

have a nice day

[Trifna]

Well they should just fix themselves... they have medics within their troops and that's all...

The point is: do they battle as well after passing all this jungle/forest/else? And it could be represented (should be in a balanced way, like anything in a game). Remember, this is not only on the opponent's territory when you attack! It's also on your own territory if there isn't roads or anything. So it doesn't necessarily add an advantage to attacker, but simply an interesting thing about roads and all.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Trifna
Well they should just fix themselves... they have medics within their troops and that's all...

The point is: do they battle as well after passing all this jungle/forest/else? And it could be represented (should be in a balanced way, like anything in a game). Remember, this is not only on the opponent's territory when you attack! It's also on your own territory if there isn't roads or anything. So it doesn't necessarily add an advantage to attacker, but simply an interesting thing about roads and all.

hi ,

, a medical unit should be good for foot soldiers

a mobile workshop or so for tanks and mech infantry

have a nice day

[Optimizer]

You should keep the attrition model as simple as possible.

Instead of adding new units, attrition should be decreased by advanced technology.

And panag, I would appreciate if you started using capital initials and punctuation. That would make your post easier to read.

[Dauphin]

hi ,

optimizer,

, many have and said that, ...... and asked panag to make sense

it will not change

have a nice day

[Optimizer]

LOL

[Trifna]

Think we got caught by this bot...