DEBUG/DESIGN: Should an army containing cavalry be able to attack Mountain w/o road

MrBaggins · December 30, 2003, 13:08

There is a little design decision needed to solve a CtP2 bug, noted by Maq.

Quote:

Originally posted by Maquiladora
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=105038

So basically,

1. When a 12 Cavalry stack attacks a mountain city and they win, they wait outside and dont capture the city, just kill the enemy units inside.

2. When 6 Cavs and 6 Infanrymen attack a mountain city and win, all the stack moves inside, then the Cavalry die and the Infantryman capture it. (if theres any remaining from the battle).

3. When 12 Cavalry attack 6 Infantrymen on a mountain in the open and the Cavs win the Cavs dont move onto the mountain BUT they keep all their MOVE points but they cant ATTACK again in that turn.

Maybe Cavalry shouldnt even be able to actually attack the mountain city to begin with.

The thread is here.

This is a poll intended to find a consensus as to the solution.

MrBaggins · December 30, 2003, 13:18

Incidentally, I believe a road, railroad, maglev or undersea tunnel, depending on the terrain and tech level, should be left on the tile of the city, if its raised due to attack, provided that at least one tile is roaded/railed/whatever adjacent to the raised city tile.

Pedrunn · December 30, 2003, 14:54

Can't attack tiles they can't move to

Maquiladora · December 30, 2003, 15:31

Seconding Pedrunnia and Senor Baggins.

Martin Gühmann · December 30, 2003, 16:17

It is logical for me that a location to that you can't move you can't attack, of course given you don't have units with bombard ability. But in that you case you bombart that location and don't attack it. At least this is a difference in CTP2. So my vote goes to:

Can't attack tiles they can't move to

-Martin

child of Thor · December 30, 2003, 16:20

opps i mis-read the second option as 'Can't' when it says can - so i would vote for the first one

tyrantpimp · December 30, 2003, 17:14

i think if we assume the city has a road and the units attack from a road then we should assume the road stays after the city is captured. In which case they could attack the city. But to be fair perhaps they should get a penalty and a warning they are getting that penalty?

In conclusion i choose bananas!

Martin Gühmann · January 1, 2004, 13:06

That's a difficuilt question if a road should be left when the city is destroyed, well you could argue that at least some ruins should be left. So what is the current behaviour?

-Martin

Mihai · July 8, 2004, 04:00

Can't attack tiles they can't move to. If there is a road there, then all units can move there, so they can attack.
Even when a city is destroyed, the road are still there. If we consider road damage, we go into too much details.

Solver · July 8, 2004, 09:24

Can't attack where they can't move.

But make cities always count as roads and make a road remain where razed cities were, so that stacks could attack and take cities in mountains.

Flinx · July 8, 2004, 10:29

If there is a road up to the mountain city then Cavalry can ride up the road and attack the city; if they win they move into and take the city as normal; if the city is destroyed, the Cavalry die.

If there is no road then the Cavalry cannot attack; any army containing Cavalry (etc.) should not be allowed to attack (similar to invalid bombard etc.)(and a message could automatically pop-up explaining the situation)

J Bytheway · July 9, 2004, 15:25

If cities leave roads, then this leads to an abuse of building roads by building/disbanding cities. The obvious solution to that is to make city building cost PW (which seems reasonable).

EPW · July 10, 2004, 03:12

Quote:

Originally posted by J Bytheway
If cities leave roads, then this leads to an abuse of building roads by building/disbanding cities. The obvious solution to that is to make city building cost PW (which seems reasonable).

Just make it so it doesn't leave a road when a city is disbanded

How about a city that is destoyed leaves behind ruins that act as a road, but have a 1.0 movement cost? They would disappear in time. I know theres already some good druined city sprites around.

SMIFFGIG · July 14, 2004, 12:57

i think horsemen should be able to move onto mountains but substain health loss. to represent loss of troops (different on terrain) and this should be appllied to other terrains and units differently (desert. marsh etc)

e.g.
Should tanks be able to move over marshland without loss ?
Should cannons be able to cross Jungle without loss?

etc

Flinx · July 16, 2004, 22:46

Quote:

Originally posted by J Bytheway
If cities leave roads, then this leads to an abuse of building roads by building/disbanding cities. The obvious solution to that is to make city building cost PW (which seems reasonable).

IIRC cities do not leave roads(/railroads/maglevs).

Flinx · July 16, 2004, 22:50

Quote:

Originally posted by SMIFFGIG
i think horsemen should be able to move onto mountains but substain health loss. to represent loss of troops (different on terrain) and this should be appllied to other terrains and units differently (desert. marsh etc)

e.g.
Should tanks be able to move over marshland without loss ?
Should cannons be able to cross Jungle without loss?

etc

In theory, but I do not think that works in the current gameplay mode/style.

EPW · July 16, 2004, 22:54

Ruins!

SMIFFGIG · July 17, 2004, 07:23

Quote:

In theory, but I do not think that works in the current gameplay mode/style.

It was a suggestion to what it could be changed to

J Bytheway · July 17, 2004, 08:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Flinx
IIRC cities do not leave roads(/railroads/maglevs).

They don't, but people were suggesting that they should.

If disbanded cities don't leave road, but destroyed cities do, then people will complain when they disband a city on mountains containing cavalry...

Big Dave · July 29, 2004, 18:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Martin Gühmann
That's a difficuilt question if a road should be left when the city is destroyed, well you could argue that at least some ruins should be left. So what is the current behaviour?

-Martin

This is my issue. I had a small stack of cav units and I took a city in the mountains. Well it was a small city and it got destroyed as I took it. Unfortunately my cav all got destroyed then because they were in illegal terrain. I would like to see a road left behind if that happens in the future, but I'm open to other solutions, too.