Tweet
Armies and Stacked Combat-can it work?
Hi Guys,
I normally wouldn't start a new thread, but I would like to know some people's opinions onconcerning the suggestions I sent to Firaxis about
Stacked Combat (armies).
Firstly, I should say that I had hoped that combat would be resolved on a seperate Tactical Screen (Like Birth of the Federation).
Where you could move your units around, set tactics for each unit and select targets for your units attacks. With that in mind, I
believe that stacked combat CAN WORK, if it's done PROPERLY!! Here were some of my suggestions:
First of all I suggested that building stacks should be tied to an earlier advance than Nationalism-I suggested Warrior Code/Iron Working or even a new advance like "Mass Combat Tactics". Of course this suggestion depends on when Nationalism will be available (is it 18th-19th centurty nationalism, or the first appearence of the "Nation-State" to which they refer?)
My second, and most important suggestion, was that units in an army stack should fight individually and simulataneously (not just the strongest unit fighting, with additional units giving a bonus to attack strength-as in a Civ II fortress). I felt this would give a greater advantage to a numerically superior army than the fortress model! The way this could work is that, when you engage an enemy with a stack, both sides' stacks split up on the screen into seperate units (arranged in a face off similar to that on a chess board). From here you click on each unit, choose a target for their attack, and select a basic order (see below). After you've finished selecting targets for all your units you press an attack button, and combat commences and continues until one force is destroyed, routed or retreats!
My third suggestion was to that range should be a factor in Civ III combat. This would give modern and early ranged units (like archers) an advantage over melee and shorter ranged units, as they'll be able to get several shots off without fear of retaliation! Basically, when you engage an oponent, you will face off at a default "Range" based on terrain, unit(s) maximum weapon ranges and how far units can see. If a unit is out of range it moves closer each combat "Round" within range of its opponent, or it is defeated/destroyed. This would mean that each unit would have to have a "Tactical" movement rate to represent its movement during combat.
I also suggested that you should be able to give your units basic "Orders" before a combat starts. This would be as simple as: Assault, Defend, Harass, Supression Fire, encircle, Entrench, bombard etc. Basically, once combat begins you can't change a units orders(unless you have a leader) except to order a retreat. I also felt that units (armies) should be able to violate orders and retreat if they are badly damaged or up against a superior force (ie. units should have morale, based on combat strength and experience!)Connected to this is my belief that it should be possible to rout units-when a unit reaches the "Red" hit point level, they automatically retreat, but can be attacked by enemies with ranged weapons as they flee (routed units cannot defend, as they are too busy getting away, wheras Retreating units leave the scene of combat in a more orderly fashion!)
I also felt that turns should be broken up into a seperate Move and Attack step: ie. everyone moves their units, then everyone conducts attacks. This would allow a player to bring an army back to a key location, if an enemy appears near that location that he didn't see earlier (assuming he has enough Movement!)
It also means that, if you launch a Nuclear Weapon(s), your opponent can launch any nuclear weapons he has before you resolve the attack (anyone for MAD?!)
Last of all, I believed that most land and some sea units should have a maximum "Range". This is the range they can go, unsupported, into enemy territory. In order to go further they must either capture an enemy city, or construct "Supply Depots" (which could be attacked or Raided by the Enemy!) I felt that this would stop an enemy from simply moving in and taking your Capital.
Anyway, sorry for the length of the post. I hope to hear some suggestions (positive and Negative) sometime in the near future.
The Aussie Lurker
I normally wouldn't start a new thread, but I would like to know some people's opinions onconcerning the suggestions I sent to Firaxis about
Stacked Combat (armies).
Firstly, I should say that I had hoped that combat would be resolved on a seperate Tactical Screen (Like Birth of the Federation).
Where you could move your units around, set tactics for each unit and select targets for your units attacks. With that in mind, I
believe that stacked combat CAN WORK, if it's done PROPERLY!! Here were some of my suggestions:
First of all I suggested that building stacks should be tied to an earlier advance than Nationalism-I suggested Warrior Code/Iron Working or even a new advance like "Mass Combat Tactics". Of course this suggestion depends on when Nationalism will be available (is it 18th-19th centurty nationalism, or the first appearence of the "Nation-State" to which they refer?)
My second, and most important suggestion, was that units in an army stack should fight individually and simulataneously (not just the strongest unit fighting, with additional units giving a bonus to attack strength-as in a Civ II fortress). I felt this would give a greater advantage to a numerically superior army than the fortress model! The way this could work is that, when you engage an enemy with a stack, both sides' stacks split up on the screen into seperate units (arranged in a face off similar to that on a chess board). From here you click on each unit, choose a target for their attack, and select a basic order (see below). After you've finished selecting targets for all your units you press an attack button, and combat commences and continues until one force is destroyed, routed or retreats!
My third suggestion was to that range should be a factor in Civ III combat. This would give modern and early ranged units (like archers) an advantage over melee and shorter ranged units, as they'll be able to get several shots off without fear of retaliation! Basically, when you engage an oponent, you will face off at a default "Range" based on terrain, unit(s) maximum weapon ranges and how far units can see. If a unit is out of range it moves closer each combat "Round" within range of its opponent, or it is defeated/destroyed. This would mean that each unit would have to have a "Tactical" movement rate to represent its movement during combat.
I also suggested that you should be able to give your units basic "Orders" before a combat starts. This would be as simple as: Assault, Defend, Harass, Supression Fire, encircle, Entrench, bombard etc. Basically, once combat begins you can't change a units orders(unless you have a leader) except to order a retreat. I also felt that units (armies) should be able to violate orders and retreat if they are badly damaged or up against a superior force (ie. units should have morale, based on combat strength and experience!)Connected to this is my belief that it should be possible to rout units-when a unit reaches the "Red" hit point level, they automatically retreat, but can be attacked by enemies with ranged weapons as they flee (routed units cannot defend, as they are too busy getting away, wheras Retreating units leave the scene of combat in a more orderly fashion!)
I also felt that turns should be broken up into a seperate Move and Attack step: ie. everyone moves their units, then everyone conducts attacks. This would allow a player to bring an army back to a key location, if an enemy appears near that location that he didn't see earlier (assuming he has enough Movement!)
It also means that, if you launch a Nuclear Weapon(s), your opponent can launch any nuclear weapons he has before you resolve the attack (anyone for MAD?!)
Last of all, I believed that most land and some sea units should have a maximum "Range". This is the range they can go, unsupported, into enemy territory. In order to go further they must either capture an enemy city, or construct "Supply Depots" (which could be attacked or Raided by the Enemy!) I felt that this would stop an enemy from simply moving in and taking your Capital.
Anyway, sorry for the length of the post. I hope to hear some suggestions (positive and Negative) sometime in the near future.
The Aussie Lurker
Comment