Announcement

JT · May 21, 1999, 13:00

I put that. It's under concepts. Look for Transport size.

**willko** · May 21, 1999, 13:02

mea culpa. i'm a moron.
/will.

JT · May 21, 1999, 13:05

No, you're just blind.

**23 Skidoo** · May 21, 1999, 15:29

Nice work! A model distillation. We have to think about what is a practical and usable format for Firaxis; this is probably just what they're looking for.

Good idea to have summary forums without a lot of tangential posts. 'Nuff said.

**willko** · May 22, 1999, 00:58

umm, that transports have some kind of carrying capacity effect like in starcraft:
larger units like tanks take up more space compared to smaller ones like infantry; fixing the paradox of how the same unit that can carry 8 armored divisions only capable of carrying 8 spies.

JT · May 26, 1999, 20:53

More summary:

UNITS

Red Cross: Heals one unit before going back to nearest city to get more medical supplies.

Train Artillery: Before tanks, with large cannons.

CONCEPTS

Partisans: Can move away from a battle if attacked, get double when defending.

Veteran: Have the ability to prolong units' "build time" so they are "built" with a higher morale.

Upgrade: 10% of units upgraded each turn until all upgraded when new advance(such as Gunpowder) is discovered

Longer wooden navy: England built an empire out of frigates and galleons, but by the time we finish one, we already have ironclads. Lenthen the time between frigates and more advanced ships(I personally would like to see frigates come sooner).

Named units: Ability to name your own units.

No shields: If you disband units in city, you shouldn't get any shields unless you are building a unit

Losing exp.: over time, a unit loses experience if not in a battle.

A/D/M Limit: If Units Workshop is included, have a limit as to how many A/D/M points you can put on(not counting FP or HP, those are decided by weapon and armor). There should be certain # of points you are given, and you can put however many you want into a single catagory up to the category limit and the # of points you are given. For example, I could have 12 points, and put 8 in attack, 2 in defend, and 2 in movement. Have the maximum amount of points increase with tech.

Missionary/Propagandist - Could be used by any government type, though more
succesful with some than others. COuld be sent into other cities to make them support
your government type. Not a spy, capturing cities, but inciting public pressure to get
another civ to change thier government type (assuming public pressure, civil wars, etc
is ever implemented). Would be able to select what you want them to work on
(Encourage democracy? Capitalism? etc.. only your own choices are possible). On the
home front, they could act to keep your people in line, agreeing with your policies, and
decreasing fallout from revolution. Would be especially suited to Capitalism,
Fundamentalism, and Communism. Could lead to fun cold war!

Pillaging: Partisians do not lose MP from pillaging

COPIED FROM POSTERS

Been thinking a lot about Upgradable Units for Civ ever since I started playing Civ II
and especially ever since SMAC...
Most historical 'units' are a result of a combination of developments, not all of them
technological. If all was related to tech, then the Hittites would have had Legions when
they developed iron working (forced draft forging) in 1000 BC - didn't happen, 'cause it
took developments in tactics, formations, and even sociology to result in the Legion -
an organization, not a weapon type.
In 4000 BC, you have 2 basic weapons/units available: the spear, either thrust or
thrown, and the simple or self bow. Thus, in Civ terms you get a bowman (leather
brown in hue, carrying bow) or a spearman (leather again, spear underarm, no shield)
Develop Bronze Working:
You can upgrade three ways:
1. (Slashing Swords) can now be forged: turn your spearman into a Swordsman, which
is a minor increase in attack value
2. (Shields) can now be hammered out (literally!) - increases defense of any unit BUT
bowman can't use them and shoot
3. (Bronze Armor) which is more expensive than shields, but can be hung on anyone -
more defensive increase.
NOTE: If we adopt Ranged Weapons (one of the good ideas from CtP) then Shields
increase defense against Ranged Fire, not against hand-to-hand - that isn't entirely
historical, but usable in Game Terms
Now, if you also have a cultural development: Armed Citizenry (as opposed to a
Warrior Class) you can form Phalanxes out of the spearmen. These Require Shields, but
not body armor (the late Greek, early Macedonian phalanx did not, in fact, use it).
Phalanx gets attack and defense bonuses over simple spearman BUT it can't operate in
rough country, gets severely penalized in woods, forests, swamps, etc - anything but
open ground like plains or grasslands.

Point is, all these units (spearmen, bowmen, swordsmen, phalanx) can be represented
by 3 icons (spearmen, bowman, swordsman) with appropriate color changes (leather
brown to bronze, add shields) to indicate the Upgrades.
For Ground Troops, mobile Chassis would consist of Horses, Elephants, or Chariots
until the internal combustion engine allowed you to Motorize (haul in trucks) or
Mechanize (haul in armored vehicles and build tanks) Horsemen are not Upgraded by
putting a phalanx on a horse - riding horses is a Special Skill usually connected with a
Special Class of People (equestrian Order in Rome, Knights in Indo-European cultures -
the term is found in ancient Rome and Greece as a Social Class) So the basic
leather-cloth-clad horseman gets bronze armor, changes his spear for a sword, adds
iron (mail?) armor, adds a Lance (not the same as a spear) and eventually Upgrades all
the way to a Steel Plate Armor + Lance = Knight.
Then someone builds Musketeers and Gunpowder weapons have the Special Attribute
of ignoring all armor effects on non-mechanized chassis! Goodbye knight, hello
unarmored cavalry again...
The entire gamut of current military ground CivII/CtP units up to the modern period can
be represented by less than 25 icons with variations like color changes added to them.
This is doable, or should be by any competent modern game design group...

Give certain units better abilities against certain others in a "flexible", tabular format:
For example assign an "motorized vehicule" flag to units A, B, C and D, then assign a
"double attack against motorized vehicule" flag to unit E (Call it an anti-tank
weapon)(This idea stems from my experience with a lot of scenario work where the
inflexibility of the CivII "rules" becomes noticeable)

Same idea for air defense, air attack, cavalry defense etc...

**Ekmek** · May 27, 1999, 00:26

I copied this from my radical ideas comment but have a supply truck go the units its supplying instead of automatic, maybe make it an advanced option at the beginning of the game, and at the unit editor change the quantities of food, gold, production (since production shield represents parts, fuel, etc.) you should be able to automate the supply truck to trans to units, so you don't micromanange. logistics would make it challenging and more realistic (so you can't have a legion exploring around the globe or the arctic etc).

**Isle** · June 2, 1999, 06:45

This dont seem like a very good idea! How are people supposed to find the summery, if it disappears the second page of the forum?
Next time, put it in front of the thread, this is more consistent with the other threads and easier to find.

JT · June 5, 1999, 21:18

Actually, it won't be consistent with the other threads much longer. The other Thread Masters are saying that they won't post theirs at the beginning of the threads, either, because it takes up too much space.

NEW ADDITIONS:

UNITS

-Chemical and Biological weapons: Like Nukes, but only effect population. Can also put pollution in a square.

NOMAD: Like a walking
city it gathers food&shield&trade from the field it moves to (nothing if fortified in
emergency) while trying to explore the neighbourhood.
It needs no support and splits into two nomads when the foodbox reaches 20(?).
It can only build warriors & (after discovering riding) horsemen (it can't build other
units, roads, irrigation, mines, city improvements or wonders).
Through the collection of trade points it can gain the early advances fire making,
horseback riding, farming, crafting...
Once the farming advance is aquired, nomads may build villages or cities.

-H-Bombs: Can wipe a city off the face of the earth.

CONCEPTS

-Be able to choose whether or not you have enhancements on units when you build them.

-Get the Unit Workshop with an advance in the future.

-Before you can build a unit, you must discover the tactics AND weapon/armor for it.

COPIED FROM POSTERS

-Terrain Effects and Types have to be better defined, and it dovetails with Unit
Capabilities: There are a host of unit types, whether they are game-defined or player
-designed, that have special pluses and minuses in movement and combat vis-a-vis
terrain.
To use modern examples for a change, Armor (tracked) is notoriously ineffective in
"close" terrain" mountains, cities, swamps, forests, etc. This relates to both its
movement, which is much slower and much more heavily penalized than that of foot
infantry in those terrains, and its combat factors.
I always thought of 'Alpine' as representing all the types of modern Light Infantry - and
representing them poorly, at that. Lightly equipped infantry forces, like the Ranger
battalions, German Jaeger Divisions, everybody's Mountain units in WWII and modern
Light Divisions in the US Army, are designed to be easily moved strategically (by air or
sea) and to operate effectively in all types of 'bad' terrain - like the list of
armor-unfriendly stuff earlier in this post.
What's left out is that they are also relatively lightly armed, and unless equipped with
light motorized vehicles (which the US Army experimented with right down the road
from me at Fort Lewis) they are slower than regular troops on roads, plains, grasslands,
etc. Their combat factors are pretty good relative to everything else in the bad terrain,
but they get ground up in the open: don't have the heavy firepower of armor or mech.
infantry. The reason they do well in the bad terrain is that everyone else's combat
factors go DOWN dramatically there, because they can't bring their firepower and
mobility to bear in swamps, mountains, cities, etc.

-The six thousand years of human civilization has involved more significant advances
than merely snapping bits and pieces together. The evolution of Legions into
formations of Pikemen was more than just adding wooden sticks to their arsenal. It was
a tactical evolution. Groups of pikemen gathered into square formations, able to point
their pikes in all cardinal directions to withstand any enemy charge.

Battleships, destroyers, cruisers, carriers, frigates, transports, ironclads... they have
different and distinct names for a reason. They're different, inside and out, through and
through, in terms of the hull, the armaments, and the crew. You could strip all the
weapons off a battleship and use it as a troop transport, but it wouldn't be as effective
as a troop transport. You could mount dozens of huge gatling guns on a cruiser, but it
still wouldn't be as effective a combat vessel as a battleship.

And what if the workshop does give you the ability to construct fantastical
wonder-ships, say, AEGIS Battle-Carrier Transports? Well, it creates a schism between
the real world, in which such units are fanciful and impractical, and the game world, in
which such units are highly desirable for naval superiority. Got a problem? Just take
three ABCT's, fill them with nuclear weapons and mechanized marines and watch the
enemy fall. And while you're at it, construct a few Stealth Heli-Bomber Tanks, and
guard your coastal cities with Submersible Infantry, and conduct your city sieges by
parachuting AEGIS Howitzer Para-Tanks into the enemy's territory... bleah!

-
The trasport plane would add another layer of micromanagemnt without improving a
players flexibility. I think all air and ground units should be 'deployed'.
When a unit is built (i prefer regions and units built by a region) it is placed in a list of
units to be deployed. Other units can be added if they have not moved yet. At the end
of your turn, you deploy these units. The AI suggests a location for each unit, and you
can change it or keep it as is.
Deployed units are not combat effeective until your NEXT turn, preventing instant
defenses. They are destroyed if attacked. Deployment can only be made to cities,
bases, and some naval vessels. cities under siege, bases and ships have a limit to the
number of units that can be deployed per turn. You can deploy to allied cities and
bases as well.

For a historical civ game i think the unit editor is cumbersome. it is too dificult to trim
unwanted units, too many variations are available, and they don't have much impact on
the game, especially if all it is doing is giving your armour +1 attack (pazers), for an extra
row of resources.

Units should aoutomatically upgrade. any obsolete unit has a 5% (random number)
chance of upgrading each turn.

To simulate the economic burden of waging war, units should be supported by gold.
Repairs also cost gold. The support cost is unaffected by unit status (1 gold / 20
shileds?) Repairs cost 1 gold per shield worth of repairs. Units repaired in the filed pay
full price. At a city they pay 2/3 price and if the city has a barracks/airport/port it costs
1/3 price.

-The reason for having a "unit workshop" - which in ancient/historical times could be
called the Armory or Field of Mars - a place where units are put together, is both that
there are 100s of variations of historical units and that those variations existed because
different civilizations had different requirements for units based on their historical and
grographical situation.
In other words, as long as you have Random Maps, someone is going to get stuck in a
set of terrain that does not favor his historical unit-type, and the player and his civ are
therefore automatically Screwed, Blued, and Tattooed.
Within the limits established by the technology available, a civ should be able to
modify/adopt units to adapt to the situation it faces: if I am playing Mongols in a
forested, mountainous area, I am not gong to want Unarmored Horse Archers, I want
Legions. And if my sociology/politics doesn't allow Legions, then I want the best
infantry outfit I can build for that terrain, and not be limited to Phalanx, which (should
be) seriously penalized in rough terrain.
SMACs graphic problems do not have to be universal. Let me give some examples of
how Workshop and historical units go together:
The starting weapons/units for almost everyone in 4000BC are Archer (the bow was a
neolithic invention, if not earlier) and Warrior (armed with thrown or thrust spears or
club). They have no armor (leather and fur doesn't give any bonuses!). Graphic icons
would be a spearman or bowman in brown fur/leather.
Discover Bronze Working.
Possible Upgrades: Bronze Scale armor, Bronze Shields, Bronze Swords, long
bronze-pointed spears.
Changes to Units:
Archer: Can now be armored in bronze: same icon only now he's got a gold/bronze
colored torso. You CANNOT give shields to archers, and giving him both a bow and
another weapon would be either disallowed or would penalize BOTH weapons.
Warrior: Give him bronze armor, and the torso becomes bronze-colored. He can get a
shield, which is an icon change (shield in left hand, round and bronze-colored). The
point of his spear can change to bronze.
If he has armor, shield, and long spears, he can be formed into a Phalanx, which adds a
Banner behind him (showing a specialized Formation as well as weaponry). Phalanxes
have increased defense against mounted units, but decreased factors in terrain like
woods, mountains, or hills.
You can build a brand new type of unit: the Swordsman. The icon would be a
barbarian-looking type waving a bronze sword over his shoulder, dressed in leather/fur.
Add armor and shield, and he turns bronze and adds the shield icon as above.
Armored swordsmen might be limited in that you can only form them if you have a
Military Aristocracy in your social forms, but that discussion belongs in another
thread.
Discover Iron Working
Possible Upgrades: Iron Mail Armor, Iron Stabbing swords, Iron-pointed Pikes (two
handed spears)
Changes to Units:
Archer: Change his torso to iron-gray, with texture, and he's now armored in mail.
Spearman: Change in armor as above.
Phalanx: Upgrade to Pike Phalanx: new icon with figure holding two-handed pike: basic
figure shieldless and clothed in leather/fur, but upgrades would include Shield icon,
and bronze or iron armor color-texture changes. (NOTE: This represents Alexander's
Macedonian Phalanx, it was NOT a Medieval invention)
Swordsman: Iron armor, iron sword (color change).
If your social/political system allows, either Phalanx or Swordsman with iron weapons
can Upgrade to Legion - this icon would have a rectangular shield, iron armor and
sword, vexillium banner flying overhead.

Now, most of the weapon and armor changes wuld be handled the same way for
Mounted Units, but to save space here I'll merely note that by changing color to denote
armor/weapons changes, virtually all the ancient infantry units can be accomodated
with 5 basic icons plus 2 shield variations.
Using color change to show the differences between, say, Steel Armor, Face-hardened
armor, and composite (Chobham) armor, 2 - 3 basic icons could show all the variations
of modern tanks and APCs and their Upgrades.
This does not appear excessive to me, either for the player or the programmers...

-I know that it has been said before, but I'd like to stress here that it would be great if
certain units were more effective against a distinctive type of unit. It would be nice if
artilery would be very effective against infantry units, but almost useless against tanks;
alternatively, it would be great if an anti-tank artilery piece could hold it's own against a
tank.

We've seen that a little in CIV II and SMAC where an infantry unit is more effective
against cities. Now it's time to take it a step further.

It would also be nice to expand the active defence principle and the ranged defence.
Tactically, it would be great if one could place an infantry unity on the front line, an
artilery piece behind it, and an anti-air defence unity behind the artilery piece. The
artilery and the AA gun would have a defensive cover of one square all around it,
meaning that if a unit beside it is attacked, it will fire upon the unit attacking. I believe
that an improved combat system to the game would vasty improve the overall appeal of
Civilization.

-Firstly, a new build option would apprear in your city menu if you had units in the city.
You could upgrade these units for a minimum cost of 2 rows of shields, plus the
absolute value difference of each units cost. (Say upgrade a cruiser to a carrier, 2 rows
of shields plus the 8 row difference = 10 cost). Cheaper than building a whole new unit,
but not exactly easy. You could do a que build for this, as in "change all my Phalanx in
City/My Empire to Marines", in all your cities, the build que would fill with the new
upgrades after the current project. Capitalization would be automatically deleted from
the build que of course.

-Firstly, a new build option would apprear in your city menu if you had units in the city.
You could upgrade these units for a minimum cost of 2 rows of shields, plus the
absolute value difference of each units cost. (Say upgrade a cruiser to a carrier, 2 rows
of shields plus the 8 row difference = 10 cost). Cheaper than building a whole new unit,
but not exactly easy. You could do a que build for this, as in "change all my Phalanx in
City/My Empire to Marines", in all your cities, the build que would fill with the new
upgrades after the current project. Capitalization would be automatically deleted from
the build que of course.

-
"Stealth" exists in several forms in both naval and air units already.
WWII naval ships depended on armor for defense. Modern ships depend on Radar
jamming, decoys, and basically being hard to target rather than trying to survive a
direct hit. That's why even the smallest warships these days have their own helicopter
or drone aircraft: they're used to put up false imagry, jamming chaff, infrared sources to
decoy missile trackers, etc. - all forms of Naval Stealth. That's your real current defense
against the Cruise Missile for non-AEGIS ships.
Similar with aircraft: Stealth is relative, and the real defense is the combination of
satellite, AWACS, and other surveillance and counter-surveillance systems that work
together: for every strike aircraft there are a dozen other aircraft covering him physically
or electronically: the 'Stealth' craft just need less separate cover.
Not as technically sophisticated, but in the US Army even 20 years ago we already had
infrared-absorbing paint on tanks, the Soviets were 'cooling' tank exhausts to foil
infrared detection, camouflage nets were made with 'anti-radar' pigments and materials:
in any kind of half-covered terrain, it is still very, very difficult to target a ground force
that knows how to hide.
Stealth technology should be related to earlier Advances like Camouflage (a WWI
French advance) and Maskirovka (the Soviet set of techniques for faking and hiding
military capabilities). The three could make a Heirarchy of defensive capabilities,
something like this:
Camouflage: Each stack appears as a single unit to the enemy
Maskirovka: Units and Stacks only appear to the enemy if his ground or air unit is or
passes next to them.
Stealth: Allows you to build air, sea, and ground units with X % greater Defense Factor
against any air attack (playtest to determine what's appropriate: my gut feeling is
something between 10% and 33

-My twist on something I've seen suggested before--the Colonist.

He costs 40 shields, and costs like a settler (in food and shields). He goes anywhere
outside the city radius, but within X squares (15 on med. world?). Once he's at the
colony site, you order him to exploit, and whatever that square produces, goes to the
city. Then he improves the land--builds a road, irrigates or mines, etc. The enhanced
yield (arrows and food or shields) is transferred to the city. He ends by building a
fortress, and then performs his final function--he Converts, into the appropriate military
unit--phalanx, or pikeman, or musketeer. Or maybe you just convert it into a Garrison,
with 2d, 2a, costing one shield and one food (never two, or else he's not to useful in
republic). The unit becomes obsolete at industrialization or communism. Or, maybe at
this time, it becomes a minor tribe. It CANNOT found a city. It cannot exploit a square
in a city radius, even if that square isn't being used at the time.

This adds to the strategic options. When you have those cities that are all food, or all
shields, you have the option to exploit fully what it is, or build a Colonist to make it a
more well rounded city. You probably shouldn't allow more than one Colonist for a city
until it reaches size 9.

Another adaptation of someone else's genius;-)--the Scout. It's a modern unit, available
with combined arms. It can paradrop. It sees two squares. It moves like a partisan. It can
pillage. It instantly heals, every time it survives combat (which won't be often, it should
be weak, maybe 2a, 4d). It does not cause unhappiness in a democracy, no more than a
spy does. It would go together with enhancements to bombers (either cheaper, or able
to attack and return) very well.

Mo · June 6, 1999, 21:47

Great job!
Could you add this to the summary or represent it somewhere:

I would rather have a bit toned down version of the unit workshop. You get all the normal units preset. For each unit you have a few modifications you can make. Most of the you wouldn't have to research.
Example:
You discover Steel which allows you to build crusiers. You can add antiair guns to your cruiser and make it agis cruiser. You can also sacrafice some armor to make the ship faster. Or you can a helicopter landing pad which will allow it to refuel helicopters. These modifications will either have a downside trading armor for movement, or they will increase the cost. Some modifications will have to be researched(ex. anti air guns for crusisers, longbows ...)

**Ecce Homo** · June 10, 1999, 20:54

JT, could you please add this summary (or a brief version of it) in the UNITS thread, so that we know what has already been suggested?

And do not forget Airships!

**Picker** · June 22, 1999, 08:48

*bump*

**Alexander's Horse** · June 22, 1999, 19:42

Ditch caravans/freight (they're a pain in the arse). I would like to have a leader/emperor unit that:

. Started the game for you (but still have settlers)

. had a defense factor higher than zero (reflects bodyguard)

. Could establish cities (like but not replacing settlers - reflecting the court/nobles and retinue)

. Carried the "crown jewels" (which could be built up over time and captured by other nations - replaces the palace/throne room interface).

. Acted as the capital (like Louis XIV, where the leader is, that is the capital - "palaces" become regional government centres unless the leader is there).

. can directly control some units (i.e. when accompanying them or within capital city radius - so even if your last city is destroyed, all is not lost!)

. Give a combat modifier to controlled units, i.e. when travelling with them or within the city radius of the capital (improve factors).

. had to be killed/captured to destroy a civilisation (but can be reborn/built after a period of civil war/anarchy if killed while your empire still has cities).

. If travelling, can buy cities of other civs like diplomats.

. Has other diplomat/spy qualities (incentive to sometimes put the emperor in the frontline, leading his/her troops).

. Moves at a rate of three across all terrain (easier to flee enemy units).

Why do I want this? Because I think would be fun to flee on the last ship from your last city as it was being destroyed and set up shop elsewhere. Equally make it much easier to establish elsewhere if the computer put you on a poor part of the map at the start of the game. Also would like to hunt down the leaders of other civs and capture their treasures. Assasination of a moving leader also becomes a real possibility. Emporer flees and use treasures to buy some cities from another civ is another. Civil war would generate two leaders and one would have to kill the other to win etc. etc.

Also would like to have generals which modify combat/command armies/navies (but they should be expensive and limited). With regionalisation, every province could have a governor and a general for example.

Announcement

UNITS summary

UNITS summary

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment