the Zone Of Control (ZOC) poll

[Asharak]

I Like 'Em

Personally, I've got no qualms with the zones of control -- or lack thereof -- as they function now. I don't think it's realistic to HAVE to fight the unit in front of you to advance. What I WOULD like to see, however, is a little more tactical sense from the AI, sometimes... it's just not smart to head deep into enemy territory while completely ignoring every city and unit behind you... certainly, tactics of any sort are nice to see from an AI, but perhaps not ones that violate quite so many rules of warfare and common sense.

About the opportunity fire... a good idea, but not implemented well enough. I'd like to see slower units allowed to take pot shots (after all, its not like they're moving far enough to need the speed bonus), and I'd like to see the unit that is doing the passing be allowed to shoot back (a normal regiment can, after all, fire one way while moving another -- or detach a division or two to hold off the attackers). Sort of a skirmish kind of battle -- not a fight to the death. Say, 2 rounds of combat (and the passing unit gains its ground, regardless). That way only a wounded or conscript unit (on either side) could be destroyed in the action.

And I agree that opportunity fire should be expanded to include some air and naval units as well. Just makes sense, really...

[mfauzi]

I prefer them like in Civ 2, but just for fortresses (and maybe cities too) and not for fast units

But an interesting idea would be disallowing units from travelling in ZOC if only garrison units are in the fortress it but cause damage if only artillery-type units are in it. If both are in it, garrison units will take priority over artillery-type units on ZOC.

[Velociryx]

IIRC, didn't the French attempt a "civ2-like" ZOC during WWII?

I agree that the new system (very non-standard for the genre) is a bit tough to get used to when you're accustomed to being able to fortify/staff your borders to impassability, but I think this way lends itself to a more fluid, and IMO realistic experience, given the large amount of land area each tile likely represents--even if each unit was Divisional in it's size, if it's fortified and dug in, units in adjacent tiles would simply have the option of going around, as they do now (at the risk--for certain tiles/units) of suffering a passing shot.

Personally, I like the fluid nature it brings to the game....my only complaint is that for the upkeep you spend, Coastal Fortresses are not strong enough. I'd say either make 'em free (0 upkeep) and leave the strength alone, or bump the strength to make them viable in the late game (but I suppose that's veering a bit from the "core" ZOC discussion.

-=Vel=-

[Capt Dizle]

I haven't really read the thread but..

I have some strong feelings about fortresses and ZOC.

Here it is.

A fortress should have a base defense strentgh unmanned...lets say begining with one and going up to eight over the ages.

1,2,4,8. Each fortress should have hit points just like units, make them regular and let them gain experience. After all a fortress should represent a minimum garrison.

Now, you can fiddle with building costs and the techs that are needed to get the upgraded fortress.

Occupied fortresses should use the base combat value of the unit plus a fortress bonus.

A fortress should have a ZOC in which they always fire at units that move into. Roughly, for each age the fire should be equivalent to the artillery in the game...catapult, cannon, artillery, and radar.

When captured a fortress must be destroyed. The situation we have now is silly, fortressess are more dangerous to its builder!

Given these parameters fortresses would be meaningful in gameplay and would offer and excellant way for Soren to help the AI out on its defensive woes. As well as add a lot of spice to multiplayer.

Basically fortresses were historically the very focus of war until the motarized age and in Civ they are essentially worthless. Must beef up.

[Sarxis]

Though I do like the idea of giving fast units and forts a little more advantage then what they have now, I also like the way the new ZOCs work. Making opposing units paralyzed while in enemy ZOCs is silly, and makes for boring interdiction tactics.

Besides, it has happened in wars that enemy armies have passed one another by without exchanging fire. With the old ZOC rules, this was rediculously impossible.

[Trifna]

BUT the possibility or not to let pass someone should be given.

Two armies that aren't enemy may just pass without everyone attacking everyone, no?

[Venger]

I would make gunpowder and 2 move units have an enforceable zone of control - any unit coming into contact must break contact to continue moving, or defeat the controlling unit.

That said, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater here, opportunity fire should stay - if a unit enters a hex adjoining mine, I think opportunity fire should occur for all post gunpowder units.

A combination of the Civ2 and Civ3 method would yield really good gameplay.

Venger