Anyone out there interested in drafting a set of units and their values?

[F_Smith]

P.S. -- the fun of a 'war' game, to me, is in the real combat tradeoffs: armor v. speed, expensive trained professionals v. citizen rabble, etc.

I would love the choice of (at least) light, medium and heavy units of all mobility choices (horse, foot, mech, air, sea, etc).

Please?

[Dominique]

Okay, let me put this straight so you can see the benefits better:

1) We do not have to worry anymore about the grapical representation ON THE MAP - a standard icon (army / fleet / air) which may change over the epochs and - maybe as per culture is absolutely satisfying if one sees a detailed (and even customizable) image on the right (or whereever).

2) Doing these "doll graphics" is much easier (and can thus be looking very professional, since there is more time to care for those tiny details) than doing totally different unit graphics for each type. Essentially, you do the proper figure once, and give it several types of equipment.

3) As for the gameplay aspect, there will be literally an unlimited number of unit types. What can the player want more?

Mark:

I fully agree that there should be standard, "pre-built" units so customizing is optional.

Hrafnkell:

This ceratinly should NOT result in s "fashion war". There's no need to change anything if the player doesn't want it. But let me tell you one thing: I do not know whether you ever saw a game of "Warhammer" - it's a tabletop war game you play using fantasy tin miniatures. Believe me, at least half of the fun of this lies in the sight of one's own colorful army, lovingly painted, with elaborated coat-of-arms... let's assume Clash will become not only a good, but a GREAT game - an addictive one, played again and again. Wouldn't you like to have not some generic civ with standard equipment / uniforms, but instead lead YOUR army into battle? Imagine this in multiplayer - people could, if they want, exchange their personally edited graphics files, and you had YOUR very unique army marching on the road.

Always keep in mind that these are OPTIONAL ideas - no need to change anything if you don't want it, a default set will always be available. But for those mod freaks out there (and they are quite numerous amongst the civers), this, together with a good scenario editing tool, would be HEAVEN.



------------------
If somebody asks you "Art thou a god?", you tell him "YES!"

[Dominique]

"F",

the thing about the "light, medium, heavy" variants could be done very easily for moust unit types.

Let's say when getting certain advances you can develop certain "standard units", i.e.

- infantry
- cavalry
- artillery etc., you know them

When developing a certain advance, you may e.g. get the design model for "ancient cavalry", being essentially cavalry without any add-ons, let's say they wear leather armor and a short sword by default.

Lateron, you discover "chain mail", and from now on can design a cavalry wearing that - here's your "heavy scout". Of course, one must be careful to balance equipment values (e.g. armor could make the unit slower?).

Same goes for weapons - you develop the war lance and can give that to the cavalry, may naming it "light knight", being able to upgrade these to "regular knights" when having discovered pate mail lateron and finally maybe "heavy lancers" after the introduction of full plate.

I'd strongly advise to NOT replace older techs by newer techs. Advanced as the new equipment may be, it often should have it's drawbacks (like weight, cost...), so often one would want to still build some "old-fashioned" units (not as in CIV, where you simply CAN'T build a phalanx in the modern ages).

As for the graphical aspects, it's IMHO absolutely necessary to reflect the individual equipment visually (and it looks nice, too... ).


------------------
If somebody asks you "Art thou a god?", you tell him "YES!"

[Blade Runner]

I love the idea of the unit color changes. I see with my virtual eyes the blue army fight against the yellow one.

I cann't agree with idea of custom units. I played SMAC. I don't play now because this custom unit system.
1. You need to spend a lot of time to produce different units.
2. Because they are similar many times you just don't know which is which.

So I think the system will be better with traditional ready made units.

[Dominique]

Blade Runner:

You are absolutely right that no one would like to designe similar units again and again.

What I'm talking of is having fixed "standard" unit types which will appear in the "units to create" roster as soon as you have the necessary advencements. But you CAN design custom units. For what? See, players's style of play varies - with me, I'm a very defensive player. I'd just love to give my spearman that one point more defense by letting them wear full plate even if this makes them less maneuverable.

Now you could say: "Fine, why not include a premade heavy spearman by default?". Because then you'd have up to hundreds of "default units" which vary only slightly and make it very hard to know what is what.

Giving the player the opportunity to design custom units makes sure there will be - besides the "standard versions" only the unit types he's really interested in in the roster.

I don't think it would be any problem to even save a list of unit designs for use in later games (at least, if the later games are based on the same setting / scenario), so each second of "work" spent on tinkering with your units won't be lost when the game is finished.

So, regarding your two (in themselves absolutely correct) points:

1. You CAN spend a lot of time but it will pay and you only have to do it once (if at all, since there ARE default designs).

2. You WILL be able to differentiate not only because you decide on their value, but because you will be able to design them visually to a certain extent, as well.

Still opposed?


------------------
If somebody asks you "Art thou a god?", you tell him "YES!"

[F_Smith]

1) Like Dom said, there will be standard units also.

2) the prob with most games is that their custom units are not based on real, common sense things. We're talking about "Heavier armor, slower guy". "Newer firearm, more expensive" common sense things.

[Blade Runner]

Dominique,

Sounds good to me. I feel the possibilities in the SMAC system, but IMO they can not reach the goal. Your idea is much better.

Blade Runner

[Druid2]

I know I'm coming to this conversation late, but as I was reading the thread, a light bulb went on.

Why show individual "units" at all? Select a "commander" for a task force, and build or assign individual unit types to that task force. That task force is, by definition, a "stack" of individual unit capabilities. It fights as a whole, takes damage proportionally to various elements, and has a movement factor that depends on its makeup.

Minimum TF size = 1 unit + commander. [Now you have an additional 'factor' to play with :: commander capabilities, if you want to do so. You also have a new thing that civ's can become expert in :: being good commanders.] Maximum TF size = ??

You'd need to have the capabilities, of course to split the TF or reassign it's elements w/ other TF's etc.

[Mark_Everson]

Your suggestion is kinda where I think we wound up. At what level we model commanders is still open.

However we are seriously considering:

1. Dominique's build units from the ground up notion (at least I think it was D who first brought it up). This would also make unit graphics more varied as a bonus. Finally it'd add some order to the unit power system which would help in designing individual units.

2. Optional Tactical combat system to fight battles out. Not necc. for the first pass at Clash, but keep it in mind as an add-on.

3. I had a third thing, but I can't remember it now... It'll come to me eventually.