Millitary Design Modules

[DarkCloud]

Just like I mentioned in my Millitary Design Post the game Civ III should be run by modules much like SMAC.

Some early ideas...

Land Unit Models and (Weapons)---
-Warrior (Spear)
-Advanced Warrior (Jagged Spear)
-Biological Warrior (Spear dropped in Smallpox Blood)
-Fire Warrior (Spear with wood set on fire)

----
1.The basic warrior would be 1-1-1
2.The advanced warrior would be 1-1-1 but the opponent would take 10% more damage per hit.
3.The Biological Warrior would be 1-1-1 but if the opponent is hit 5 times then they will contract smallpox and die.
4.The Fire Warrior would be 1-1-1 and if you are in a forest, burn the forest down after x number of hits on opponent.

-Please post your ideas and modules here.

[Shadowstrike]

I don't think early civ would know how to poision with smallpox, maybe a toxin, but not smallpox. Maybe a "poision damage" would do (i.e. unit with poision takes a small amount of damage each turn unless it is treated in a city or hut)

The fire spear seems unrealistic too. Maybe you could have a unit with a stone spearhead that does additional damage.

[Youngsun]

what about this?

quote: Stone axe +3 melee Hunting spear +2 melee +1 support Primitive bow +2 support Bronze spear +4 melee +1 support Bronze sword +5 melee Bronze armour +1 armour -1 mobility Iron spear +5 melee +1 support Iron sword +6 melee Iron armour +2 armour -1 mobility Wooden shield +1 armour Bronze shield +2 armour -1 mobility Iron shield +3 armour -1 mobility Composite bow +3 support Horse armour +1 armour -1 mobility Marius's mule allows a unit to fortify -1 mobility Light Horse +6 mobility(no armour allowed) Medium Horse +5 mobility(armoured men allowed) War Horse +4 mobility(Horse armour allowed) Chariot(arse) +2 mobility Chariot(horse)+3 mobility Elephant +2 mobility -2 enemy melee(only cavalty) Long sword +7 melee Pike +5 melee X2 melee vs mounted(only inf) Lance +5 melee X2 melee vs mounted(only cav) Plate armour +4 armour -2 mobility Mace +5 melee ignores enemy armour 50% -1 mobility Longbow +5 support ignores enemy armour 60%(inf only) Crossbow +3 support ignores enemy armour 80% Stirrup +2 melee(only mounted)auto upgrade if discovered If your culture/social system is primitive, then you can only mobilise primitive men Melee/support/armour/mobility Primitive men 1/0/0/3 Ancient men 1/0/0/4 Renaissance men 1/0/0/3 Modern men 1/0/0/2 Melee:basic fighting power/close combat ability Support:when accompanied with melee units add bonus to the melee units Armour:absorb some of enemy hit including enemy support fire Mobility: this is not map(strategic) mobility this is battlefield mobility. 1~4 Bf mobility equals 1 map mobilit 4~8 Bf mobility equals 2 map mobility 8~12 Bf mobility equals 3 map mobility Battlefield mobility affects actual battle as a combined arms effect and map mobility ,as you know, reflect how many square you can move.

As you may have noticed the heavier the armour gets the more severe mobility penalty it receives thus leaving you with dilema how you going to put the emphasis for your army. mobility or heavy armour?-for Infantry

With extensive usage of heavy horse you may arm your mounted force with heavy armour without necessarily taking the mobility too much away from it thus shock troops now available in your stock.

Only after the invention of longbow & crossbow, heaviliy armoured cavalry will be properly countered.(those arms are capable of penetrating armour)

All the weapons after Stone Age will require metal resources to be produced. I'm not so sure how detailed the production mechanism should be.

1.Complicated mineral/energy resource(copper,Iron,coal,oil etc.)

2.or just simple metal points represented by number? ie. metal:100pts enegy:50pts.
[This message has been edited by Youngsun (edited August 11, 2000).]

[Evil Capitalist]

This looks worryingly like those games where you get a 100 page book of weapons and another of rules, with special parts like:

weapon causes two hits, with 16 damage in melee, but 24 at range if range is less than two with 36 damage if range is more than two unless you are playing with cloud cover rules and add 2 damage if there is an r in the month... ad nauseum.

[Adm.Naismith]

I'm sorry to Youngsun, but I share Evil Capitalist fear.

While I agree that some Unit workshop can add a bit more diversification to units without too much harm (if the workshop will be properly developed, that is), I will forever be a pain in the neck remembering we are modelling a Civ (empire management) game, not a wargame. I love wargames, simply they are another genre and required to be modelled taking into account detailed armours&weapons as you write into your interesting list.

Look, also SMAC manual show as a more complex armour model (dividing from armour that can defend against energy weapons, bullet weapons or both) has been discarded into the released game.
I don't know if Firaxis did it because of balancing problem, AI unable to cope with, beta testers feedback or anything else, still it should be an alert to us .

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant

[Evil Capitalist]

I just think that the modules idea is based on 20th century thinking. Think about land war from 1492-1914:

Initially pikes, arquebuses, light cavalry, heavy cavalry and culverin style artillery.
Wheelock Musket replaces arquebus, cavalry get pistols, line tactics evolve, firelock replaces wheelock, and is replaced by flintlock, cannon get better barrels.
Bayonet replaces pike, premeasured cartridge introduced. Cannon gets more mobile.

Do you notice something there? You never go back to older weaponry. Napoleon's marshalls never thought of using a regiment of matchlocks, it would be stupid.
The best system I've seen is that of Imperialism II- designated catagories which can be upgraded and have similar abilities. You get the variety, but don't have the absurdity of unrealistic combinations. The only uses I can see for a workshop are the following:
1)Special abilities: e.g. police training. These only come in later, so make it not so important. You could just train it in to an existing unit.
2)Level of weaponry: the number of guns on warships is important to its strength, but only is a real issue c.1648-1865.

[DarkCloud]

Evil Capitalist

You see, these weapons would only be additions such as modules in SMAC. Each unit could only have up to 2 modules in any one age and no, you would not go back to older units, this would only give you greater variety in units.

Shadowstrike

About the fire warrior, I guess it is a little unrealistic, so I stand corrected.

However, ancient people did know how to use germ warfare. There is evidence of seiges of cities in the BC eras when the attackers threw dead animal carcasses over the walls to infect the enemy.

Smallpox was primarily used by the American settlers in America to infect the Native Americans by giving them rugs infected with the virus. (I know, I can't believe they did it but they did.)

Youngsun

Thanks for your ideas!

Naismith

The system would not be more complicated than Alpha Centauri's as you can probably see and Alpha C was NOT a complicated game.

It could be a Wargame/Strategy Hybird, it is already in some respects.
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited August 11, 2000).]

[DarkCloud]

Okay Here are the models so far.
{With thanks to Youngsun for some of the Phalanx ideas! Keep them coming!}

Land Unit Models and (Weapons)---
------------------------
WARRIOR
-Warrior [Basic] (Spear)
-Advanced Warrior (Jagged Spear)
-Biological Warrior (Spear dropped in Smallpox Blood)

1.The basic warrior would be 1-1-1
2.The advanced warrior would be 1-1-1 but the opponent would take 10% more damage per hit.
3.The Biological Warrior would be 1-1-1 but if the opponent is hit 5 times then they will contract smallpox and die.

PHALANX
Phalanx (Bronze Spear and Bronze Shields): 1-2-1

Wooden Phalanx: 1-1-2 (Wooden Shields, Travels fast like a real Roman Legionaire would, 30-40 miles a day. Hey they did it!)

Archer Phalanx: 1-1-1 r1 (Uses shields to defend heads while each row fires barrages. Ranged attack of 1 square if they are on higher ground than the defender)

Engineer Phalanx: 2-2-1 (Engineers make elaborate traps for the enemy to fall in and dig better trenches than most units. Attack Advantage)

Germ-Warfare Phalanx: 1-2-1 regular +25% attack on city walls (Heave carcasses over city walls during seiges.)
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited August 11, 2000).]

[Youngsun]

Evil Capitalist

Sure it looks like but not the same as others which you might think of.

When you disband your units in CivII, you throw away men and weapons altogether. My suggestion corrects this and you can arm your men with better weapons.

Civ is not wargame and it's like a combination of running an empire,managing economy and raging a war things so we need to incorporate the military aspect of the game with others. Heavy conscription should create social and economical burden to your civ but you can still prepare total war without significantly damaging your economy by producing and stockpiling weapons.

Those weapons I showed are not that civ specific(no gladius or sarissa there)and its rather highly generalised and categorised with Ages(Stone->Bronze->Iron->etc) so makes it applicable to all civs in the world.

Furthermore CivI and CivII are already stat based as far as military units are concerned.
Att/Def/Fp/Hit

With present military stat, archers can roam around without heavy inf escort(Archer 3/2/1/1) because CivII does not differenciate melee & support concept. My suggestion encourage combined arms effect and balanced unit stack(Heavies,Skirmishers,Support and Shock troops). This also can be extended to modern warfare(Inf,Recon,Artillery and Armour) and this 4 major military branches need arms for themselves and that was what I listed above.

Right resource allocation of war production is the key for victory and we all know Hitler ruined it so lost the war and you shoud examine your social and economical situation of your empire first for where to concentrate your war effort.

[will be continued.... now I have to go somewhere]

[Youngsun]

[I'm back and little bit drunk too ]

quote: Initially pikes, arquebuses, light cavalry, heavy cavalry and culverin style artillery. Wheelock Musket replaces arquebus, cavalry get pistols, line tactics evolve, firelock replaces wheelock, and is replaced by flintlock, cannon get better barrels. Bayonet replaces pike, premeasured cartridge introduced. Cannon gets more mobile.

Doesn't have to be that specific

Musket(arquebus with rest)
Musket(Napoleonic one with bayonet)
Rifle(Napoleonic one/pre WWI)
Rifle(WWI)
Rifle(WWII)
Rifle(post WWII)
Rifle(Modern)

would be enough I reckon.

quote: You never go back to older weaponry

That's the point Evil capitalist so we can sell those inferior arms to less developed civs as today's USA does.

quote: You get the variety, but don't have the absurdity of unrealistic combinations.

Anything bizzare you see from my suggestion? triple convexed composite bow or flaming sword?(just kidding) Anything combined from the suggestion above will end up as one of the 4 major branches(heavies,skirmishers,support and shock troops).

When I say unit workshop please don't imagine SMAC style one because I don't like SMAC style workshop too.(Admiral knows ) Actually if there is any way to make an unit with consripts and stockpiled weapons I don't think we need a unit workshop.(Colonisation style perhaps?) Also you can restrict the number of designed models like MOO/MOOII so you don't have to hassle with too many similar unit models.

DarkCloud

I surely share your enthusiasm but things like archer phalanx are too weird to me and it is historically incorrect. Archers are archers nothing more/nothing less and the same goes to Phalanx too. Also using germs for siege warfare thing shouldn't be part of unit characteristics but kind of auto upgrade for every unit when you discover proper tech thus we don't have design a unit for that.

Anyway General suggestion section needs energetic person like you. Keep the heat pal as long as you can.

[Evil Capitalist]

As a point of information on the firearms this is how I'd do it. This would define the era (as in era 1, era 2, era 3, etc. If you've played Imperialism you know what I mean).

Arquebus- generic middle ages firearm c.1300-c.1550
Musket- Wheelocks, firelocks, early flintlock c.1550- 1715 (if I remember right)
Later musket- Flintlocks, bayonets with paper cartridges 1715- 1860
Early rifle- Flintlocks and percussion caps c1750- 1860
Breech loader rifles- bolt action, percussion cap with bullets not musket balls. 1860- 1890
Magazine rifle- Bolt action with magazine 1890- 1940
Semi Automatic rifle- Semi auto, like an M16 or AK47 1940- 2000
Advanced rifle- The stuff the US has just said it's going to buy with attatched grenade launcher-like weapon.

[DarkCloud]

Gord

Well thanks for the support Gord.
How do you do that quote thing, I saw it once but forgot.

Youngsun

Well, after reading your most recent model, I have to agree with Evil Capitalist, it is just too many weapons, I don't propose exactly SMAC's design workshop, I only propose we use some of its options like the Body- Warrior, Phalanx and the Modules- 2 per character.

Youngsun

Who knows what the ancients may have done, archer phalanx and all. And who here wouldn't like the advantages of an archer phalanx?

Could you please explain unit upgrades for germ warfare? The way I see it is most units would think that it was beneath themselves to heave carcasses over walls and would only commit a small contingent to do such and thus not fully receive a bonus. With a specialized unit this could be easily accomplished because they would not be so posh as to think it beneath themselves.

(MORE UNIT DESIGNS TO COME!)

[Gord McLeod]

quote: Originally posted by Shadowstrike on 08-10-2000 08:43 PM I don't think early civ would know how to poision with smallpox, maybe a toxin, but not smallpox. Maybe a "poision damage" would do (i.e. unit with poision takes a small amount of damage each turn unless it is treated in a city or hut)

Actually it's quite simple; you bombard them with diseased corpses and other refuse. This was very commonly done in times of war.

quote: The fire spear seems unrealistic too. Maybe you could have a unit with a stone spearhead that does additional damage.

Flame was also a very common weapon of war; the early greeks had flame weapons we still, to this day, do not know how to reproduce. Greek Fire is a mystery to modern people but was a devastating weapon centuries ago.

[Youngsun]

Evil capitalist

Would you mind put the lists for hitorical development of cannons(primitive bombard~)or armours(MkI~)? and thank you for the firearms list.

DarkCloud

I'm sorry if I offended you(certainly didn't mean it).

quote: Who knows what the ancients may have done, archer phalanx and all. And who here wouldn't like the advantages of an archer phalanx?

So are you suggesting we make an unit based on assumption and guess rather than using data collected and compiled by archeologists and historians?

Advantage? How can you think giving a bow and arrows would be an advantage to a phalangist?
To aim and shoot freely they need more space within the troop which is highly contradictory to the doctrine of Phalanx not to mention the extra weight they have to carry. I know some of later pikemen used bows along with long pike but they carried much less weight compared to that of Phalangist.

Also you know very well it's usually specialisation which brings out the full potential of each armed force not generalisation and all-round usage. Romans and Greeks knew this very well and always followed this principle.(no archer legionnaire or hoplite)

quote: Could you please explain unit upgrades for germ warfare? The way I see it is most units would think that it was beneath themselves to heave carcasses over walls and would only commit a small contingent to do such and thus not fully receive a bonus. themselves.

and that's the way it should be and this may be simulated as providing bonus to besieging army who possess the knowledge of using germ.

If you can bring a reference to historical existance of specialised germ phalanx I will happily accept your proposal.

quote: just too many weapons,

Most of them I suggested above are related to the units of CivII in some ways with few exceptions such as chariot(arse & horse)and how general can they be more than that? Do you really want damn simple list like Stone Axe->Bronze sword->Iron sword->musket-rifle?
If the weapon list gets civ specific it can be enlarged up to several hundreds of items and I reduced them to the maxium simplicity with reasonable degree of historic representaion. Please suggest any viable alternative to my list then we can make compromise.

[Evil Capitalist]

I'm not too sure on the cannons, but tanks:

Basic tanks- 1917-1940: From MkI to Matilda. Mk I male version has guns and machine guns, female just machine guns. between world wars swivel turret appears, and side turrets disappear. Early engines go up to about 4 mph, by WW2 they can do c.20 (I think).
Heavy Tanks- 1920s-1950s: Conquorors, JS3s, etc. Heavy gun, slow movement, thick armour. Lose popularity when good, all round tanks appear.
'Blitzkrieg' tanks- 1935-1970s: Wider tracks, heavier guns than early tanks, but move considerably faster. Later ones include sloped armour, etc. examples: Tiger tanks, Shermans, T34s. Phased out in most armies by the 70s, but still in use in some areas.
MBTs (Main Battle Tanks)- 1945- : Tanks like the centurion, T55, M48 etc. faster, better armoured and better armed than WW2 tanks. Important step up in armourment for western tanks with the introduction of the L7 105mm gun. Many still in service today, forming the backbone of the majority of poorer nations' armoured divisions.
Modern tanks- 1970s- : The next generation of tanks, including M1s, Challengers, Leopard IIs. Make use of bigger guns (usually 120mm), better engines (usually capable of about 50mph), better ammunition (eg APFSDS- armour piercing fin stablisized discarding sabot) and advanced armour,, notably chobham (layers metals, ceramics and plastics designed to defeat APDS rounds).

I'd go into light tanks and APCs but I'm not too sure about them. There's a good site for various modern tanks at http://battletanks.com
[This message has been edited by Evil Capitalist (edited August 13, 2000).]