Zones of Control

[SerapisIV]

Does this screenshot show a horseman's zone of control? Also as technology increases, a tank shouldn't be able to be effected by a horseman's zone of control. Did any of the previews mention ZOC changing with technology, or just based on unit movement?

[SerapisIV]

Hey I'm not sure how to make this pic look smaller in the thread, so if a mod can, please change the size, I won't be back online to do it for a few hours. Thanks, and sorry about the huge window.

[airdrik]

I don't think that is the horseman's zone of control, but rather his visual radius. My hope is NOT that ZOC's are based on movement, but on mobility, because it is not likely that a horseman has the same ZOC as a cavalry, and likewise a warriors the same as a marine.

I would at least hope for another unit stat: mobility, which determines that unit's ZOC. If not that, then have their ZOC based on defence as well as movement (ie. based on def*movement, or (def^2)*movement), that way ZOC's aren't entirely determined by movement.

[tniem]

I would have to believe that airdrik is right, simply that the circle is the horseman's sight lines.

Of course it could have something to do with he is in a city and the city is making the circle.

[Chronus]

Hey,

Maybe the Zones of Control can be as follows:

The slower unit has its movement points deducted from the faster unit. The result is the number of moves the faster unit can move when moving through the Zones. For example, a tank (movement of 3) is moving through the zone(s) of control of several riflemen (movement of 1) and can, therefore, move 2 spaces for that turn. If any ONE of the units next to the tank is a cavalry (movement of 2) then the tank's movement for that turn is reduced to one (again when moving through zones of control only). Of course, the slower unit will be unable to move at all through the zones.

[Nemo]

i saw several posts/previews stating that the ZOC was under construction. That they were working on a solution to have faster moving units have a larger ZOC and to have slow units have low ZOC. I *think* it said that as of now they were playing with the notion of having a phalax have no ZOC, therefore it could not create a blockage as efficiently against a tank, but a tank would have a ZOC. therefore if you put each on a pice of land 3 squares wide you would need 3 phalax or 1 tank to take control of this land. i dont remember where i saw it, but i do remember that it is something they are working hard on balancing.

[TechWins]

I know this has to deal with national borders but I just wanted to say this somewhere and I didn't feel it is important enough for me to start my own thread about it. My favorite thing about SMAC was seeing my borders of my country expanding or getting mad when an enmey shrunk my borders. I would imagine this is in Civ III as well but I'm just making sure. So are national borders going to be in Civ III or have they not stated that yet?

[Sabre2th]

Borders are in, yes. We haven't determined exactly how they'll be implementing borders, but we will have them in some form.

Sabre

------------------
"We don't know a millionth of one percent about anything."
-Thomas A. Edison

[joseph1944]

Nemo. I also hear somewhere some units no ZOC and small zone for other units.

------------------

[Grumbold]

I am very dubious about this variable ZOC system. ZOC have never been about the ability of a unit to seriously challenge the enemy in a stand up fight where both parties are prepared for battle. It is about the capacity of the enemy to lay ambushes, destroy supplies, mine roads and pull night raids. A tank regiment with all its troops asleep in their tents is just as vulnerable as a Roman cohort to a sneak attack. Just knowing the enemy is "nearby" causes a competent commander to slow down, ensure a significant proportion of the troops are combat ready and alert and send out more scouting patrols or set more night time pickets. Lightly armed guerrillas have shown time and again in this century just how effective they can be against even the best equipped modern troops.

[Grumbold]

Hmm, currnently no ZOC for most Ancient or Medaieval units it seems. I guess Sun Tzu was fantasizing about the way military manoeuvers would be conducted in the future when they had invented more mobile units

[Grumbold]

Flushed with the recent suppport in the unique units debate I'm wondering if the lack of responses here means I'm the only one who cares greatly about this ZoC change? I've always seen the ZoC as the cheap man's implementation of supply and communication routes. Without supply rules or ZoC it is going to make warfare really messy in the early game and almost impossible to block enemy explorers from entering territory you claim but have not yet got the borders to prove it. I'd rather see a ZoC increase for mobile units in the later game than a decrease in the early stages. Fighters should have an interception ZoC of at least 4 tiles, for instance.

------------------
Searching for unique Civilisation growth not predetermined racial templates

[SerapisIV]

quote: Originally posted by Grumbold on 05-15-2001 11:05 AM Fighters should have an interception ZoC of at least 4 tiles, for instance.

This would be a great addition to the game, the fighter alert button never really worked well for me in SMAC, hopefully they'll make it a more robust feature

[colossus]

quote: Originally posted by Grumbold on 05-10-2001 12:54 PM I am very dubious about this variable ZOC system. ZOC have never been about the ability of a unit to seriously challenge the enemy in a stand up fight where both parties are prepared for battle. It is about the capacity of the enemy to lay ambushes, destroy supplies, mine roads and pull night raids. A tank regiment with all its troops asleep in their tents is just as vulnerable as a Roman cohort to a sneak attack. Just knowing the enemy is "nearby" causes a competent commander to slow down, ensure a significant proportion of the troops are combat ready and alert and send out more scouting patrols or set more night time pickets. Lightly armed guerrillas have shown time and again in this century just how effective they can be against even the best equipped modern troops.

Very good points!
Realistically, there is never such a thinh as ZOC blocking movement. A unit can always attempt to move through the ZOC of another unit. But so doing risks being harrassed, ambushed, cut off with supplies and communications, and showered by missile weapons. So units don't move into enemy's ZOC, not because they cannot do so, but that they know its little better than suicide.

My recommendation:
Units exerting ZOC do not block movement. Instead they may inflict damage to units passing through ZOC. The amount of damage should be realate to its attack, firepower, terrain, etc.

[Grumbold]

quote: Originally posted by colossus on 05-16-2001 03:41 AMMy recommendation: Units exerting ZOC do not block movement. Instead they may inflict damage to units passing through ZOC. The amount of damage should be realate to its attack, firepower, terrain, etc.

That would certainly help but I think the blocking of movement is more to simulate the fact that a unit that has had to pass that close to an enemy to get through will have its supplies going the same route. The army may march without sustaining any damage but then starve or run out of fuel and munitions afterweard because the lightly protected supply columns are being destroyed behind them. Taking a fixed 10% damage for moving from one ZoC tile directly to another ZoC tile is an interesting idea and certainly better than removing ZoC completely from most units. If should not be calculated on the unit strength because all units are equally vulnerable to loss of supply, morale and cohesion.