How will terrain effect battles?

[Sarxis]

Hmm, its a good concept, but its not too realistic and it would overcomplicate the game. Maybe to help simulate this- units within their own borders might get bonuses. But just because Siberians are fighting in snow doesn't mean that no one else should be able to fight well in snow.

Veitnam War is a good example: I don't think the Vietnamese did so well against U.S. soldiers because of the terrain, but more because it was their homeland.

[Xmudder]

What happened in Vietnam was largely China's fault. We knew if it looked like we were winning the war China would come pouring across the border, like they did in Korea. Johnson was an criminally incompetant. He got us into a war we could not win.

As for Civ III, a defensive bonus for operations within your culural area would be good. Didn't SMAC have something like that?

EDIT: Mixed up name

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
Besides, invaders get a movement penalty when they move through your territory - they dont get any bonus from roads or railways.

Yah, I think that is probably enough of a bonus to simulate "home-field advantage".

And to those who want a script language. Civ III is still going to be highly modifiable, but by changing the fundamental rules of Civ III, it's not Civ III anymore. At that point, you're just taking advantage of the engine Firaxis has given you in order to make your own game. Be a programmer, that way you can make a game that suits you perfectly.

[Rasbelin]

Originally posted by Gramphos
Let's admit it; We hardcore Civ players want each turn to be one day.

Shouldn't we move from turnbased to realtime?
More time to play, if every second would be counted.

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by Xmudder
As for Civ III, a defensive bonus for operations within your culural area would be good. Didn't SMAC have something like that?

No, not necesarily. Certain improvements, as well as the sensor towers, would impart an 'in border' bonus to defense.

[Rasbelin]

Originally posted by Lorizael
Be a programmer, that way you can make a game that suits you perfectly.

Good! Shortly in a nutshell.

[Jusbaummer]

Originally posted by Jason Beaudoin
I don't like the idea of allowing certain civs to be better at attacking or defending in certain climates because there would be too many variables to calculate when going to war. Already, with the introduction of culture, it's going to be difficult to wage war as it is.

Besides, on a historical side, armies usually adapt to climate eventually. Even if an army had an advantage at first, at one point, the other side would overcome climatic obstacles.

Yes, I thought that this terrain thing would make too many variables to calculate when going to war, but two examples of climate stopping invaders: Napoleon against Russia and Hitler against Russia. Both times winter stopped attackers.

Note: I'm not Russian.

[Faboba]

Originally posted by Grumbold
I got the impression that the people like me who don't like fixed UU's becasue they are nonsensical were the ones more in favour of allowing civilizations to 'grow' their own bonuses depending on where they lived and how they acted. It was the 'keep it simple' and 'Civ is a game, not history sim' camps who were less in favour of this approach.

As far as I understand that is very much the way the resource system is going to make it. Those who live on plains, with horses will build more cavalry type units thus adding to realism and reacting to their placement regardless of their historical origins ( i.e - worldmap iroquois will probably have lots of horsemen.

[Faboba]

Yes but that can be covered by giving the tundra terrain defense bonuses ala civ 2 and will be added upon now by the prevention of foreign units utilisting domestic transportation networks ( Russias a big place - You attack it in a ww2 scenario and it's going to be a long hard road to moscow. )

Just thought of something - now that they've changed the rues about using other people roads, the importance of paratroopers will be emphisised. Think I'm gonna do that as my next

[Trifna]

I think it would be a good idea to implement such a feature, but question is more how to applicate it.

I guess that firstly, a unit that is on a hostile terrain since a certain time could gain resistance on that kind of field? Or a unit that was made in a city with lots of jungle around could get an advantage in jungle? Temperature (latitude and ese) could also have some effects.

The thing is that to put this idea correctly, NORMALY, it would demand to build a way to make more realistic maps, making less tiles distributed less aleatorily. For exemple, a continent may have more chances of having this or that in the middle, etc, etc. By this way, we wouldn't really consider the tile on which a unit is, but the area in which it is. Now, I guess an area thing like this would demand some theoric modeling before beeing made correctly...

[Jusbaummer]

But hey, is war that simple after all...?

[Dry]

Originally posted by Faboba
Yes but that can be covered by giving the tundra terrain defense bonuses ala civ 2 and will be added upon now by the prevention of foreign units utilisting domestic transportation networks ( Russias a big place - You attack it in a ww2 scenario and it's going to be a long hard road to moscow. )

I guess this 'long hard road' will be simulated by the fact that culture range is city specific.
Imagine that in a ww2 scen, as German, you take Minsk, then next turn Smolensk. You are at the gates of Moscow, but behind, Minsk and Smolensk cultural ranges are still 0.
Some sneaky soviet partisan manage to cut the railroad...

BTW: what will you build first in a city you've just taken? City walls to help defenders? Temple to extend cultural border?

[Gramphos]

Originally posted by Rasbelin
Shouldn't we move from turnbased to realtime?
More time to play, if every second would be counted.

No I don't like RTS.

[Theben]

Originally posted by Jusbaummer


Yes, I thought that this terrain thing would make too many variables to calculate when going to war, but two examples of climate stopping invaders: Napoleon against Russia and Hitler against Russia. Both times winter stopped attackers.

Note: I'm not Russian.

Ever had a combat where you knew you were going to win, only to lose- sometimes badly? Bad enough to consider reloading?

There's your 'Russian winter'.

[Grumbold]

I was playing CtP2/Medmod recently and had an army lined up to attack. As soon as I discovered Gunpowder and got the 25 turn feat of wonder advantage I declared war and invaded. The first city fell easily. I hit the end of turn button eager to continue the advance on to the enemy heartland. I had forgotten to adjust the city morale with entertainers. The city rebelled immediately and slaughtered my invincible 12 unit army instantly. I suddenly realised that my last save was in 4000 BC so it was a case of endure or start from scratch