DESIGN: New Unit Abilities request thread

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by Caranorn
1) Create more unit sizes for transport, not everyone will have a use for this, but for more or less modern scenarios this could be handy. I'd sugest 8 or 9 sizes.

If you just want to increase the cargo capacity of a unit just open the unit.txt and look for something like CargoData there you should find the cargo data, but beware of a bug that you can't unload more units then you have on the tile with the transporter.

-Martin

[Caranorn]

I decided I'd better look into the existing game files (not the source code as I haven't downloaded that yet, I probably couldn't use it anyhow) and comment my original post for clarity (and to a degree to correct my errors)..

1) Currently CTP2 uses 3 sizes, small, medium and large. I'd propose if it can be done to change this to 9 or 10 sizes defined numerically 0-9. Certain types of units just can't carry certain others which is best determined by size (for example, a Yorktown class aircraft carrier cannot carry the F14 fighter while the Nimitz class can, over the course of a game, more then 3 size classes could and should be defined (only 40 or so years lie between the design dates of those two ship classes, CTP2 spans 6 and more millenia).

2) Currently CTP2 just determines what unit type (land, sea etc.) can be carried, what size (small, medium and large) can be carried and how many units can be carried. It does not check the number of units by type which would allow for more specialised designs.

3) Lets discard this for now, even I am wondering what exactly I meant by this. It was probably a degree of realism not needed in CTP anyhow.

4) This point is obvious so I expect I don't need to clarify it. (Only note, I of course meant Thessaly Cavalry, not Theban, not that many here would care or know the difference (or need to know for that matter)).

5) This feature of different army sizes depending on technology and leadership could be a very important feature (the idea of guerilla tacticsmentionned by someone else would undermine it somewhat in the modern age and provide for interesting changes in strategy). Concentration of firepower (or forces in general) was a major determining factor in warfare throughout history. As doctrine and technology changed higher concentrations were made possible (and in some cases rendered obsolete by guerilla like tactics).

6) Good leadership could historically raise the concentration of troops beyond the normal technological limits of the time (or rather extend it to its maximum). So that's what this reflects. Quality modifier should be obvious to anyone. Lastly, one important factor I had not considered last night is how multiple leaders should effect army size and quality. I expect it would be best if only one leader was used per army (otehrs might be present but would only use their regular combat capacities), but many other ideas could be considered. But all would depend on how this can be programmed into the existing engine (if it's easy a rank system, possibly based on leader quality could even be used, so that the most experienced leader was used).

Marc aka Caran...

[The Big Mc]

I always wanted to make a sea unit in a landlocked city then use the rail launcher to send it to space and then allow it to space down in the ocean and star firing

[Ekmek]

bump

[Ekmek]

updated 3-15-04

[Immortal Wombat]

Originally posted by MrBaggins
Personally, I think that one very large thing we have to consider, is should the CtP2 interface be improved? (thats a yes, btw *chuckles*) and are there any interface features from Civ3 that would improve the playability of CtP2.

The trade screen.

[Gen.Dragolen]

Immortal Wombat,

Is this thread still active ?

The reason I ask is there is a solution to the only unit ability that seemed to not be resolved. Precision Bombing.

The way I see it is that it is units can attack improvements only. Just make it so that units can only attack a building or improvement on a tile. The precision attack should be left to units like Special Forces, guerillas, Spies and aircraft like stealth bombers and cruise missles.


D.

[Ekmek]

updated 11-04-04

new ideas are posted at the top of the first post.

[Didymus]

Logistics: What about RoN's supply wagons? They reduced/eliminated ATTRITION in enemy territory. Oh, wait, we don't have attrition yet...

Of course, we don't have RANGE either... our humble warrior unit can roam for 2000 years a world away and report back instantly... guess they live off the land, right? So why are we paying support on them?

As far as increasing army size, (i) can the combat code handle that gracefully? I mean, w/ regard to the combat screen. I like to watch combat so I can see how my units do & so I can retreat when I screw up. Also, (ii) the army size limit helps force you to acquire modern units. Eight warriors and four archers will kill two infantry and cost less maintainence! So at some point, it really makes sense to limit armies because it gives leverage to modern forces.

[Ekmek]

Originally posted by Didymus
Logistics: What about RoN's supply wagons? They reduced/eliminated ATTRITION in enemy territory. Oh, wait, we don't have attrition yet...

Of course, we don't have RANGE either... our humble warrior unit can roam for 2000 years a world away and report back instantly... guess they live off the land, right? So why are we paying support on them?

The logistics abstract thread suggests that movement costs more and increases exponentially the farther a unit gets. So it becomes extremely expensive to move a unit so far away.

[Ekmek]

other possibilities:

* Attack city but cannot capture it (for siege units)

* tile enhancement Like the cow was supposed to: a unit that increases the food (animals) or wealth (merchant) or production (miner) on tiles. Basically moveable tile improvements (but half the bonus) and cost population
(I know it sounds like civ3 workers but it could cost more than improvements and are easily enslaved or captured, making it serve as a bonus for hard to work areas or help allies)

* Emplacement : a unit that moves but pnce it emplaces it is permanently there. Basically fortifies but then cannot unfortify to serve as minefield units etc. (by the way can we make minefield tiles, tiles that cause damage but not destroy?)

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by E
* tile enhancement Like the cow was supposed to: a unit that increases the food (animals) or wealth (merchant) or production (miner) on tiles. Basically moveable tile improvements (but half the bonus) and cost population
(I know it sounds like civ3 workers but it could cost more than improvements and are easily enslaved or captured, making it serve as a bonus for hard to work areas or help allies)

It does not only sound like moving a lot of unit, but also it means a lot of units to move around, as I cannot rest to fill every tile around my cities with tile improvements, I cannot rest to fill every tile around my cities with bonus units. So it means additional micromanagement.

-Martin

[The Big Mc]

Originally posted by E
other possibilities:
(by the way can we make minefield tiles, tiles that cause damage but not destroy?)

sory so far only with slic

[Kuciwalker]

This may have more to do with the combat model than unit abilities, but here goes...

In combination with the idea that stack size expands with time, I'd like each unit to be worth a number of "points", and you can only have so many points worth of units in a stack (this number can change with tech) (OT: typing this I just realized this system would be quite amusing in a Warhammer mod ). In addition, the points can be divided into different types - sea/land/air, maybe arty too. Also, allow multiple stacks per tile (though if this turns out to be an exploit for defenders, make it so that the other stacks retreat int an adjacent tile if one of the stacks loses a battle).

[Ekmek]

Increasing unit experience like Civ4 might have? maybe higher points increase attack, defense, move, armor, firepower (if those concepts are implemented)