DESIGN: CtP2 Source Code released - our actions [brainstorm & discussion]

[Immortal Wombat]

Retreat is screwed in that the AI can't use it, so it just gives the human a totally unfair recon advantage. Even if the AI could use it, there's still an argument that it allows tactics that really shouldn't work.

[Peter Triggs]

And it allows you to keep capturing slaves, too. I guess MrBaggins is right.

[SMIFFGIG]

a VERY badly implemented feature

a Civ3 style retreat could be good where they auto retreat depending on the surrounding land, what unit they are and a % value

or even the current way but when u retreat u still recieve heavy losses
u just dont lose all ur men (usually)

[Maquiladora]

I think we have to be very careful about biting off more than we can chew; in fact we should go for a 'conservative expansion' of CTP2 ( @ Locutus).

Id agree with that and as the thread title says we're just doing a little brainstorming, the only reason i mentioning increasing the 12 unit limit is because someone mentioned it in one of those "if only" threads a long time ago, the last thing youd want is a continually ongoing project with no end.

Working PBEM and no rushbuy bug is all id like to see.

[SMIFFGIG]

Working PBEM and no rushbuy bug is all id like to see

for now...........right ?

[Solver]

More than 12 units, though, would be changing one of key gameplay elements... do we really need to do that?

[SMIFFGIG]

well even if u could only group 12 but allow many more on the same square just to move through

its stupid when u have armies of 12 and cant move something like a spy past them without de-grouping the army

[Maquiladora]

More than 12 units, though, would be changing one of key gameplay elements... do we really need to do that?

Ive seen a few people complain about that (particularly civ2 players) that they couldnt move more units along a road when they wanted to path units. This doesnt necessaily mean increasing the army capacity (this would be extremely difficult i imagine and needless really), just the number that can exist on one tile for movement.

[Solver]

Yep, I agree giving that for moving... but imagine this: your 12-stack stands, and you want to move a 3-stack of Pikes through. Ending your turn, you have 15 units then... and AI attacks that tile. Who defends? Only the 12-stack (fair) or all the units (realistic)?

[SMIFFGIG]

allow units to move THROUGH the 12 stack but not end there last move in with the 12 stack (or end any turn in the 12 stack for this matter, to make it easier

[Solver]

Yeah, but that creates a problem with 1-move units. Sometimes I have had a chokepoint, and a 12 stack standing there. And, I can't get anyone through it... with that variant, I still won't be able to get my 1-move stacks through.

[Maquiladora]

Your coming up with plenty of problems but not much Solving


On another subject, what about building barracks in cities that then produce veteran units as in Civ, as long as the veteran effect is fixed. I think this is conservative enough and adds a nice touch.

[Solver]

Give me the code, and I shall Solve .

Barracks for veterans... hmm, they've now implemented getting veteran status via fights... I'd rather have Barracks allow unit upgrades or somesuch.

I assume fixing veteran effect is going to be easy - must be a simple bug.

[Maquiladora]

It does make sense that veterans gain it through experience rather than trained.

Im wondering how hard it would be to make the AI use the barracks to upgrade its units though. Probably another one for a mod rather than a enhancing patch.

[Solver]

It's all mods... we won't hardcode barracks to do something. We'll ehance SLIC to make that stuff possible .