DESIGN: Armor and HP's

[drulius]

The game has an abstract battle system, with a very specific battle order. Front-line units do damage according to A vs D, vs the opposing front line, and Ranged-line units do damage R vs D vs the opposing front line, and aren't directly attacked. Thus the game is stating that ranged units don't approach the opposing front line... thats the job of the Front line attackers. Their only capability to damage the opposing troops is via their ranged weaponry at this range. An archer would not damage a tank in battle... even lots of archers.

The game plays such that it's cheaper and still effective to hold on to ancient ranged units and use them as cheap backups in a half stack of tanks than to actually build modern ranged backups for your whole army and pay the modern maintenance. Since the ai can't stack units effectively, it becomes a human exploit. That's why I voted for armor. The ai doesn't have to think to take advantage of armor, it becomes built into the system. It becomes possible for a very small very modern force to completely dominate a much larger older force, to finish a game off when you know you've won (or to make you quit and start a new game when you know you've lost). It also becomes more of a balancing act building enough but not too many units before each upgrade you research.

I think we should carry the concept out so that modern units fighting diamond age units represents the same kind of absurdity as arrows damaging tanks, so that cannon and artillery shells would be bouncing off the armor of fusion tanks.

[Gilgamensch]

Units within one age range shall be able to inflict damage. This isn't completly out of the way. So modern units damaging diamond age units: YES. But not archers against tanks and similar.

The only thing I could agree: archers attacking Artillery: Yes, if you are stupid enough to leave them alone

[MrBaggins]

I agree with the last few posts, except... we need a definitive formula... something that can be coded. Just "reduce the damage" doesn't work...

I don't believe that we should have armor in the future age, that is proof against modern age weaponry, however intreuging and "realistic" that might be, in a particular game concept.

The problem is that it produces a late game imbalance, that makes scientific development the most important game concept of all... you just reach the future age, first, upgrade and all of these future units would just overrun anything else in the game...

It takes away choices... don't bother building up production (except for Commerce TI's) or population in late game, just go for science.

[Gilgamensch]

Formula:

If age difference > 1, no damage
If age difference = 1, damage = ((Attack-Defence)/2)-ArmorPoints (if negative = 0 ) (provided I understood the basic principle of CTP2 damage
If age difference = 0 normal damage.

This would mean that ancient units in a stack still will change the outcome, but they would be just a different way of armor/distraction to the other side, not longer being an active part.

The only thing I would like to see taken out of this formula would be ranged units like catapult/canon/and so on, as they still could inflict damage.

Before people are complaining about how a catapult could do damage: Like greek fire and similar, they were not only throwing stones

Another formula I am still working on, would involve good old Einstein Might be overall easier, just depending on either the age difference or the overall cost to research.

[MrBaggins]

Originally posted by Gilgamensch
Formula:

If age difference > 1, no damage
If age difference = 1, damage = ((Attack-Defence)/2)-ArmorPoints (if negative = 0 ) (provided I understood the basic principle of CTP2 damage
If age difference = 0 normal damage.

This would mean that ancient units in a stack still will change the outcome, but they would be just a different way of armor/distraction to the other side, not longer being an active part.

The only thing I would like to see taken out of this formula would be ranged units like catapult/canon/and so on, as they still could inflict damage.

Before people are complaining about how a catapult could do damage: Like greek fire and similar, they were not only throwing stones

Another formula I am still working on, would involve good old Einstein Might be overall easier, just depending on either the age difference or the overall cost to research.

If the age difference is 1-4 (and your view of how many ages we should be dealing with probably different from mine- "STONE AGE","METAL AGE", "CLASSICAL", "IMPERIAL","MEDIEVAL"(maybe 2 early and late),"RENAISSANCE","INDUSTRIAL","MODERN","GENETIC","FUTURE")... then the existing system of doing reduced damage (by later units having more hits and firepower) already works fine, in my view.

Also... I think that "Ages" are the wrong way to go about this... a modern infantry unit can be hurt in ways a tank unit can't.

[Gilgamensch]

That's the reason, why I am just 'playing' with Eisteins relativity theory. Trying to tweak it to our needs. It would be, me thinks, the perfect formula

Further apart and less damage or even no damage.

I don't know if you know, but how is it about tech-advances? They are not counting on top of each other, or?

Meaning each tech (for research) is seperated from each other?

If so, are they linked together, so that CTP2 could calculate the complete 'cost' needed for this research?

[MrBaggins]

The argument for using ages or techs doesn't hold water. Paratroopers might be equivalent in age or tech development to Tanks, but Tanks have far higher damage resilience to ancient weaponry.

You have to have separate numbers for this stuff.

[Gilgamensch]

That would depend (how I am thinking about) on the Armour value. High Armour value would mean (in case of age difference) lower possible damage.

Even archers would have a hard time damaging para-troopers, I agree they could damage a platoon, but hardly ever wipe it off (generaly speaking). I know, you could give the archers poisened arrows and in a Jungle they could wipe them off.

So it would be to the moders (depending then on the AP) how they see it.

Let's say for example (not yet with formula) tank would have 100 AP, para's 10, Archers 2. Attack would be Archers 2, para's 40, tank again 100:

As para's would be close enough in age they could damage/kill the tank, but the archer wouldn't stand really up to.

[MrBaggins]

There is already lower possible damage... that would be the relative number of hit points to the firepower of the unit in question. Given the differences in age, these will be significant, anyway.

[Gilgamensch]

Not really.

The hitpoint for me is the health of the unit(s) and/or # of units in a platoon (or however you want to call them). the firepower is the firepower of the unit.

Armor for me is how well they can protect against the firepower.

[MrBaggins]

Originally posted by Gilgamensch
*SNIP*
If age difference = 1, damage = ((Attack-Defence)/2)-ArmorPoints (if negative = 0 ) (provided I understood the basic principle of CTP2 damage
*SNIP*

Actually, no...

Attack and defence give the chance to hit, they are unrelated to damage...

Firepower is the single damage component right now

Essentially...

Damage= FP/Armor (not rounded)
That is then subtracted from the units HP.

BUT... HP's are always 10.

What this basically means is that FP is damage done to (Armor*HP) hitpoints.

===

Here's my current thought on an ideal system.

Originally posted by MrBaggins
*SNIP*
Each turn, each unit started with a fresh value of X Armor (based on the value in units.txt,) and when it takes damage, damage which would ordinarily be caused to it, is first removed from the armor, before removing hitpoints.

I.E.

On this turn, Tank has, say, 30 HP's and 6 Armor.

Its bombarded, for 1 damage. It now has 5 armor, but still has 30HP's.

It attacks another unit. The other unit manages to score 4 attacks, each doing 2 damage (2 firepower) on our Tank, prior to it being destroyed.

This would remove all of the 5 remaining armor, and 3HP, leaving the tank with 27HP's.

The next turn (its next owner player's turn, not every turn) it would start with 27HP's and 6 Armor.
===
There are a couple of ways that you could slightly extend the system... by only having armor protect against attacks where the current armor was 2x or more than the firepower of the attack...

I.E.

A Rifleman (Firepower of 2) hits a Tank with Armor 5. 2 damage is done to the armor... none to the HP's.

Another Tank (Firepower of 3) hits a Tank with Armor 5. No damage is done to the armor (armor wasn't 2x or more than the firepower,) and 3 damage done to the Tank's HP's.

In addition to this I'd

• Have armor protect totally (no damage done to either armor or hit points) where the armor is 4x(I think... maybe more?) than the effective firepower.
• To deal with the fact that some attacks penetrate armor better than others, we could just include an ArmorPenetration modifier (like +2, +1, +0, -1... just a positive or negative int) that effects the firepower, just for the purposes of determining whether it does damage to the armor, HPs or not at all (effective Firepower). Bombard units might have +1 or +2 for their AP rating.

[epeterson]

Don't you guys think that the significant difference in Attack/Defense/Armor between ancient/modern/genetic age units was Activision's attempt to do what you are suggesting? Perhaps you can just tweak those a little more to your liking instead of trying to reinvent the wheel?

[Peter Triggs]

Hit Points are always 10 only in the vanilla game (and SAP, I think). In both Cradle and CTC we changed them to increase with tech.

[MrBaggins]

Its a start, yes... but it falls apart when an archer has a chance of doing 1/30th total damage to a tank. Given the fact that this unit could have lots of chances in an equal front line battle, it creates an unbalance which is unreasonable.

Basically any unit can ALWAYS damage another... its just a question of how much right now. The majority of those polled thing that there should be some cut-off point, where an obsolete unit can no longer damage a unit at all, in certain situations.

[MrBaggins]

Originally posted by Peter Triggs
Hit Points are always 10 only in the vanilla game (and SAP, I think). In both Cradle and CTC we changed them to increase with tech.

Its still always FP doing damage to Armor*HPs, because fractional damage is done.