DESIGN/DEBUG: The "Design decision" thread

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by Maquiladora
Another one is the retreat option in SP. Do we think it should be removed altogether? I think it should.

Do you think it should be removed, because the AI doesn't use it or because you don't see any sense in it to have it at all?

-Martin

[MrBaggins]

Originally posted by Maquiladora
Obviously not a bug but im wondering why does disband city option exist if the AI doesnt use it? Does the AI use it in fact, i havent seen it. Its bad when they find a city in a ruin on swampland and they dont disband and move it.

True, but thats more due to the code not having it as a consideration, rather than it being impossible to code: its based on a relatively limited scope. We should reexamine the issue while we work on the AI.

I would like to make disband city ONLY at size 1. A MP i played tonight with Toni, he took 9 of my cities but there was a real possibility of me retaking some of those cities, but all he had to do was starve them down to size 3 and disband. I agree starving and disbanding is fine, but not at size 3.

I think that we should have the disband size be a constant, which SP'ers and MP'ers could change to their preference.

Another one is the retreat option in SP. Do we think it should be removed altogether? I think it should.

Again... its not considered by the AI, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be. If anything, its easier for the AI to come to terms with that the disbanding option.

[Maquiladora]

Do you think it should be removed, because the AI doesn't use it or because you don't see any sense in it to have it at all?

I see that it works and it makes sense to retreat, but its not good for gameplay, even if the AI can use it well. I think its a very cheesy tactic to just attack with outdated units and know whats inside the city.

I think that we should have the disband size be a constant, which SP'ers and MP'ers could change to their preference.

An option in the MP setup screen would be fine by me.

[MrBaggins]

Originally posted by Maquiladora
I see that it works and it makes sense to retreat, but its not good for gameplay, even if the AI can use it well. I think its a very cheesy tactic to just attack with outdated units and know whats inside the city.

Thats true... but if we remove that tactic, then SP'ers will just attack and reload.

So... make the game ironman? Or introduce an easier "automatic" abstract method to peek into enemy cities? That'd be my preference.

I don't think you can stop all cheese in SP. I think that providing a method for both humans and AI's to check each other out (with counterespionage to defend,) would be generally welcomed, and assist in this.

Removing retreat certainly won't help a lot... it just means that a single ancient unit becomes a sacrificial attack.

[EPW]

I could never build the televangelist unit in any of the games I played. I don't know if I was doing something wrong or if it was accidentally or intended to be left out of the game.

[Maquiladora]

I could never build the televangelist unit in any of the games I played. I don't know if I was doing something wrong or if it was accidentally or intended to be left out of the game.

Were you in Theocracy gov? I think its kind of backwards to be in Theocracy the time at which you research Televangelists (mass media).

Removing retreat certainly won't help a lot... it just means that a single ancient unit becomes a sacrificial attack.

Thats true you can still peak into a city with little attacks. But if your big attack is going wrong you shouldnt get the chance to regroup. They didnt disable it in MP for no reason. Why not just make it an option? Its gonna take an hour to start a game with all these options to look at...

Id also like to bring up another one, killing pop chances.

BOMBARD_KILL_POP_CHANCE 0.1
ASSAULT_KILL_POP_CHANCE 0.4
CAPTURE_KILL_POP_CHANCE 1.0

Assault is way too high. I think this another one of those realistic features but it wasnt tested for cheese. I played a SAP game and i landed 12 Arch+Hop on the coast of an AI i could see they had ALOT of Pikemen waiting so i attacked their Capital one-by-one instead. It was a pop 12 city, i knocked it down to pop 7. Okay the attack didnt go well compared to the investment in those 12 troops and coracles! but i still got something out of it when i shouldnt have.

[EPW]

I didn't know you had to be in theocracy Does it say that in the Great library or manual? Its probably not a very useful unit anyways.

[Gilgamensch]

It is saying in the GL as well in the manual

But I must admit, as Theocracy is not a good government (unlike in CTP1, where it was to strong), I never used it again (same for their special units)

[quote]
BOMBARD_KILL_POP_CHANCE 0.1
ASSAULT_KILL_POP_CHANCE 0.4
CAPTURE_KILL_POP_CHANCE 1.0

Assault is way too high. I think this another one of those realistic features but it wasnt tested for cheese. I played a SAP game and i landed 12 Arch+Hop on the coast of an AI i could see they had ALOT of Pikemen waiting so i attacked their Capital one-by-one instead. It was a pop 12 city, i knocked it down to pop 7. Okay the attack didnt go well compared to the investment in those 12 troops and coracles! but i still got something out of it when i shouldnt have.
[quote]

Actually I would like to see the bombard raised to a higher level. I mean think of, when you bombard a city you are also trying to control all roads leading to it, therefore blocking/controlling the food floating into the city.

[Maquiladora]

Not necessarily. Even in CtP2 you can last many turns before total starvation.

12 units sitting next to a city, 6 of them bombard (not together), perhaps killing as much as 3 pop a turn at a 0.5 chance? Thats unbalanced.

[Gilgamensch]

You never seen the good old catapult in use, I guess. When they were throwing fire/deseases over the walls, the population was decreased fairly quickly. Quicker than you could slaughter them.

Don't forget that one turn is covering a few years.............

[Maquiladora]

Thats fine if we ignore all possible cheese tactics and go only for realism....

Don't forget that one turn is covering a few years.............

Then why does my Battleship not go all around the world in one turn?

[Gilgamensch]

Not what I was saying, but I just would like to see it more balanced.

For the battleship:

If we can't build proper ships, what do you expect? We can't even manage, to rewrite the code in a few hours (even as we have the internet-wonder ) !!

[epeterson]

I have real issues with the CIs that bolster a cities defense. For example:

If you have battlements, why can't you counter-bombard naval units?

Same with Flak Towers and aircraft.

Once again for Ballista Towers and land units.

All of these things I mentioned above should be active-defense!

Are city walls effective against both naval and air units? I hope not!

Please explain how these improvements relate to a defending unit's movement, as there was some mention of it earlier. If a city is attacked with tanks than a flak tower would not be used. But if tanks AND planes attack then it would be. Right? But how??

[tyrantpimp]

well to be fair a flak tower can be used to attack ground units but it probably wouldnt damage heavily armored vehicles too much and it probably wouldnt last long on the battlefield since it could be out maneuvered and blown up then again real life just complicates things

[MrBaggins]

Originally posted by Maquiladora
Not necessarily. Even in CtP2 you can last many turns before total starvation.

12 units sitting next to a city, 6 of them bombard (not together), perhaps killing as much as 3 pop a turn at a 0.5 chance? Thats unbalanced.

I agree. It needs to stay relatively low.