Level of Realism in War

[paulmagusnet]

Supply: Given the time frame and scale of the game, is this a valid issue? There has to be quite a lot of assumptions when the minimum turn is length is one year, the average occupied area is 10k sqmi and a combat unit represents a full army.

In practical game play, you could have a support level that declines as suggested, but that could mean recycling whole stacks of units on a regular basis.

I would suggest that the present situation is not bad, and simply a change in perspective is necessary. Armies of this size always have some residual renewal capability. 'Damage' accrued in combat should reflect only repairable injury, beyond which the unit is destroyed. ie, the present system. Forts should be given an ability to accelerate restoration.

Currently you can blockade a city and starve it by occupying its resource squares. Trade routes can be cut by the units themselves. Again, the current systme.

Completely surrounding (occuping every square) a unit outside a city or fort could result in its dissolution unless it is selfsustaining. But if I have that much firepower, why not just stomp on the offending unit?

Battle: The land combat system of Imperialism I&II would be ideal for CTP.

Leaders: Leaders and other non-combat units can not be considered individuals, given the time frame. This means you are looking at the quality of your officer corps, rather than a particular personality. It would be better to note a unit as being 'officered' rather than have an individual unit.

Units: Should be allowed to upgrade.

Spear chuckers should be incapable of affecting
tank or jet fighter squadrons.

Even later, no muzzle loading cannon equiped ship can harm a monitor class ironclad.

Tactics: Early firearmed units still used the tactics of the Roman legeons, resulting in high casualty rates. Cannon fire and artillary were deadly against these.

Changes in methods and the introduction of connical ammunition made indirect fire proportionally less effective.

[paulmagusnet]

Another issue is the motivation for war. One important motivation lacking in the current game is special resources. Not that there are none, they simply are not valuable enough. Imagine the value of an oil resource if you can't build a refinery without one. The old CIVII allowed hydro power only near elevated water. I would suggest building upon the ideas of Imperialism(I&II) and Deadlock II.

[paulmagusnet]

Other Resource notes: A possible idea is that you need an elephant special resource to produce elephant units, unless you convert it to food.

Some technology could be acquired by contact. Observing chariots kind of gives you an idea of what you want, capturing one gives you specifics.

Winning a battle could also result in material booty.

Nationalism should give observable national boundaries and some other political benefits.

Spies should be allowed to assasinate other non-combat units and damage/subvert/lower moral combat units.

[DarkCloud]

The way I mean to implement the idea is this; when you click to attack a unit you have a screen on the type of attack; this will give a small advantage depending on what you have researched.

You can only use upgrades tactics if you are Veteran or higher:

The Feint will grant 5% against a green unit if you are Veteran.
The Feint is useless against others

The Blizkreig will grant 10% against green, 5% against Veteran, 0% against Commando,Elite,etc.

[Dom Pedro II]

quote: Supply: Given the time frame and scale of the game, is this a valid issue? There has to be quite a lot of assumptions when the minimum turn is length is one year, the average occupied area is 10k sqmi and a combat unit represents a full army.

It is VERY much a valid issue! Whether we like it or not, supply has been an important and often decisive part of war. Many of the greatest invasion forces in the world have been brought down because they lacked good supply lines. It devistated the Nazi advance in the Soviet Union. Even the grandest army can not survive without food or rearmament.

I definitely don't think that it should be as complicated as having the food deplete per turn and many of the super micromanagement things suggested. It's not important since it is a 1-year turn at the least.

quote: Currently you can blockade a city and starve it by occupying its resource squares. Trade routes can be cut by the units themselves. Again, the current systme.

That is NOT a blockade. Besides, military ships can not block ocean squares. There has to be a more complicated system of siege and blockade that will be coupled with the vastly superior market economy. Please God let there be a superior market economy in the new game!

[Shogun Gunner]

quote: Originally posted by Dom Pedro II on 11-20-2000 11:09 PM It is VERY much a valid issue! Whether we like it or not, supply has been an important and often decisive part of war. Many of the greatest invasion forces in the world have been brought down because they lacked good supply lines. It devistated the Nazi advance in the Soviet Union. Even the grandest army can not survive without food or rearmament.

Right on Dom Pedro II!!!! Let's not forget Napoleon going over the same ground with the same results one hundred years earlier!

Supply is a must.

[Mike the Nuke]

Great stuff!

I agree that units should be allowed to upgrade. A phalanx from the early parts of the game should be upgraded, at some cost, to a newer item. Defray the phalanx cost off the full price of the new item. I've had these items sitting around in the game in the later stages, having forgot about through most of the game. Propellar aircraft should be updated to jets, etc. In a way this was already done (somewhat). Whenever you disbanded an item, you gained production shields that help speed up the building of newer items. But, in time of war, this was highly inefficient at best. Units like aircraft carriers, submarines, tanks, etc, could be upgraded as time goes on, to more modern versions (ie USS Hornet type carrires to modern day battle fortresses USS Lincoln Nuclear Carriers with air defenses and anti missle defenses. etc. Modern tanks are a far better than the orginal WWI and WWII counterparts. Modern day submarines can go almost undetected by most known sonar ship (destroyers...crusisers,etc), except when they come up to shallower depth so fire missles or torpeeds. This could be similated in the game by having a player place the unit in the 'invisible mode' where it could not be seen or attack. You would then charge the unit one movement point to become 'normal', on epoint to fire and one to return to 'invisible'. The sub would then be required to be within at least two squares of it's target (ship) in order to attack. In other words, the sub could attack from any square up to two away from the ship being attacked. Only modern cruisers and modern carriers (with modern anti sub aircraft) could detect these subs.

If sea colonies were used, make them almost impossible to find, except with modern ships and special aircraft. Make undersea colonies accessible only through special surface entry ports (either on land or at sea). These ports could be spotted by any unit passing them, but the accesses could lead to the actual colony(ies) by way of undersea tunnels (as in CTP I). Space stuff..I could do without, unless someone could come up with something realistic and balanced. Colonizing other planets would be neat. I've only touched on some ideas for a couple of units (mostly sea). Everyone else has so many great ideas in the other messages I read. Great Stuff! Only bad thing...the games not out yet and none of the ideas have been utilized, yet. But, we can hope

The supply line deal could be taken care of by the computer and/or by having a special supply unit or units that must be attached to the fighting units to help keep them supplied. The possiblilities are limitless, but unfortuantely, computer memory is not and computer systems owned by potential players varies drastically.

The stacking deal needs to be repaired in Civ3 to allow better combat accuracy. War battles are very important in the game. No first in space, or alien life development game win scenarious. Make unit modifications easy as well as map and scenario. The moral and supply ratings for units is good. Allow for more resources to pop up.

Example:


No one cared about Uranium and oil during the B.C. and early A.D. eras. Different gems, gold, silver, platinum, etc should pop up (be discovered) and be needed as the game progresses. Make trade easier. Trade is important, but (personally) I like the way it was done in CTP I better than the 'head ache' you had to do to accomplish a trade route in Civ2.

Allow the development of sea colonies (as an option to be included by the player(s) in each game if they desire it). The same could be done with space (make sure space units are not too powerful and only if player(s) select the option in their game)

Allow us to add or remove resources to our maps (like in CTP I). In Civ2, you can only get resources where the diamond shapes are on the map, therefor, all resources occur only on the lattitude lines.


One thing that is very, very, very important to me. I'll buy a new Civ game to check it out if it has Hot Seat play available. I'm sick of playing against AI or internet (if you can find any non locked games, and its slow and inconsistent). My enire family plays Ciuv2 and CTP-I in Hot Seat mode (together, obviously) We have a great time. I will NOT purchase CTP II until they create a Hot Seat patch (a decent one like CTP I). The same will apply to Civ3.

[Deathwalker]

Some very interesting ideas that would help the game a lot. I like the suplly idea, but it has never crossed my mind before

------------------
I have walked since the dawn of time and were ever I walk, death is sure to follow

[UltraSonix]

Off topic:

quote: Level of Realism in War

I vote for "Saving Private Ryan" level of realism.

(Anyone missing an arm?)

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards... Despite any stupid advertisments you may see to the contrary... (And no, koalas don't usually speak!)

[Dom Pedro II]

Well, I think the computer can handle supply lines. Like I said, the only thing governing supply lines should be line of sight for simplicity's sake. Without line of sight with a friendly city, the unit's fighting ability is cut in half.

It shouldn't be too tough. The game already keeps track of support needed for each city. This would be even easier since it would be on an empire-wide basis. Also, the computer seems to be all-too aware of where the units positions are (stupid Democracy : . So to use a line of sight method should not trouble the computer TOO much.