ZoC & Defensive bombardment

[jid]

Hi guys,

I've been playing Civ for quite a while now and have migrated to C3C.

However, I'm still confused about some of the aspects of the combat system and would appreciate some help:

1) Zone of Control

This is obviously different to the Civ2 system but how exactly does it work? It looks as though any unit with ZoC has a percentage chance of shooting at an enemy unit when that unit comes near.

What affects the percentage chance? Is it affected by whether the unit is fortified; in a fortification; had movement points left over from the last turn; the quality or attributes of the unit that has entered the ZoC; whether the unit has entered the ZoC, is leaving the ZoC or moving within the ZoC?

2) Defensive bombardment

It looks as though certain units have a quality called defensive bombardment.

When is the defensive bombardment value used as opposed to the units natural defensive value?

What other factors affect defensive bombardment (along the same lines as factors listed for ZoC)?

3) Anti Aircraft units

Do AA units attack any aircraft that flies directly over them or any aircraft that flies within one square of them?

4) Combined Arms

Obviously, combined arms are essential in modern warfare but it looks redundant in C3C. While all the required units are present (marines, paratroopers, TOW Infantry, helicopters, Mobile AA) does anyone use anything beyond Mech Inf., Modern Armour and Radar Artillery?

What is the purpose of TOW Infantry in C3C?

Thanks,

Jid

[Harovan]

Shortly:

1) Where in Civ2 or CtP the movement would be blocked due to ZoC, in Civ3 it is still possible, but the other civ gets a free shot on the passing unit. I think it gets it always, i.e. 100%.

2) The defense bombard is used once in a turn per unit with this feature and only, if the unit isn't the defender itself. If you attack a spearman/archer stack, the archer gets a defensive shot, before the spearman defends. If you attack two archers, one gets a defensive shot, the other defends. If you attack an elite archer and a beaten up a 1-hp spearman and the archer defends, there will be no defensive shot (the archer defends, and the spearman has no range-0 bombardement). If you attack a single archer, it doesn't get the defensive shot either, because it's the defender.

3) Since airpower is used mission based, there's no real route for the plane. I can't answer this question (my Conquests experience is rather slim), but I think there must be some kind of a range for the AA unit.

4) Combined arms is only for the roleplaying aspect in epic single player games and of little use otherwise. Just take the best attacker and a lot of it and go conquer. But combined arms are an absolute necessity, when it comes to multiplayer games.

TOW infantry is just another foot unit which doesn't need a resource. That's good, because otherwise a civ without resources would have to resort to riflemen even through the modern age.

[Willem]

Originally posted by jid


What affects the percentage chance? Is it affected by whether the unit is fortified; in a fortification; had movement points left over from the last turn; the quality or attributes of the unit that has entered the ZoC; whether the unit has entered the ZoC, is leaving the ZoC or moving within the ZoC?

It's pretty much a random thing. I'm not sure what the percentage is but it certainly isn't 100%. I've never tried to keep track but I'd say it's more like 30%. It doesn't happen nearly enough as far as I'm concerned.

And any units that are in a Fortress have a chance at a ZoC attack, regardless of whether they have the ability or not. But it happens even less than with units that already have the ability.

When is the defensive bombardment value used as opposed to the units natural defensive value?

Any unit that has a bombardment value has the ability of getting in a free shot when attacked. So a Catapult will get one but not a Spearman. The strength of the bombard ability determines the chances of them scoring a hit, buteven if they do hit, it only takes off 1 hit point. As of Conquests, Archer/Longbowmen units now get one as well. They are essentially bombard units because of this but they don't have any range so they can't be used the same way as Catapults.

[geniemalin]

Originally posted by jid
1) Zone of Control

This is obviously different to the Civ2 system but how exactly does it work? It looks as though any unit with ZoC has a percentage chance of shooting at an enemy unit when that unit comes near.

Not 'coming near'; it only has a chance at a shot if the enemy unit moves from one square next to it into another square, also next to it.

My understanding (possibly wrong) is that if you meet the above condition, it always 'gets the shot' but the shot is resolved like a normal attack ( ATT/(ATT+DEF) ) so may or may not succeed.

2) Defensive bombardment

It looks as though certain units have a quality called defensive bombardment.

When is the defensive bombardment value used as opposed to the units natural defensive value?

What other factors affect defensive bombardment (along the same lines as factors listed for ZoC)?

Defensive bombardment is simple. When the unit (or the stack it is in if there are multiple units in the square) is attacked, before 'normal' combat is resolved it gets a free shot - which again is resolved like a normal attack.

3) Anti Aircraft units

Do AA units attack any aircraft that flies directly over them or any aircraft that flies within one square of them?

Only directly attacking their square. There are no 'paths' in C3, the planes 'teleport' to their attack location and don't 'fly over' anything.

[mactenchi]

tow infantry is also nice because it has that zero range bombard. i was using mech inf. and tow inf. stacked as defenders in my last game. also, depending on your research, you might get tow inf. earlier.

[MotownDennis]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph

But combined arms are an absolute necessity, when it comes to multiplayer games.

Actually, combined arms are used EVEN LESS in Multiplayer games. This is primarily due to the fact that most MP games are played on a timer and one doesn't usually have enough time to maneuver all the different types of units before the timer runs out.

[alexman]

Sir Ralph was obviously talking about PBEM, or turn-based with no timer. Civ3 MP any other way is not really Civ, if you ask me.

[MotownDennis]

::sigh::

I respect the great work you do here, Alexman, and you're obviously free to have your own personal tastes, but....

Simultaneous MP is not really Civ???

I've played Civ fanatically since '91 and I know Civ. Simultaneous MP IS Civ. Different, yes. Inferior, no.

Sorry for going off-topic. This just kinda fires me up though.

::back to our regularly scheduled thread::

[patcon]

more questions on anti-air defense
1. Sometimes when I bomb a city with multiple bombers, the AI sends fighters against them as they are sent (until they run out of fighters, and I send enough bombers that they always do), but sometimes they ignore some bombers and intercept later ones. Has anyone else seen this?

2. Do Flak and Mobile SAMs only defend against aircraft which directly attack their tile? Or can I create a defensive wall of SAMs in the flight path of any potential aerial attack? Perhaps ringing an opponent's city which has bombers with SAMs to shoot at the bombers if they try to launch an air assault while I bring up enough other units to capture the city? While that (a complete ring) might seem extreme, a partial wall might cause a flight-path diversion far enough to put some of your units and cities out of operational range.

[Harovan]

Yes, of course I meant PBEM. Simultaneous turn MP moves Civ dangerously close to RTS clickfests like AoE and RoN . Civ is a turn based game. And more so, a turn based game, where it's only one side's turn at one time.

[alexman]

Originally posted by patcon
1. Sometimes when I bomb a city with multiple bombers, the AI sends fighters against them as they are sent [...], but sometimes they ignore some bombers and intercept later ones. Has anyone else seen this?

A fighter on air superiority has a 50% chance to intercept a bomber (5% if the bomber is stealth). If it fails to intercept, it can try to intercept the next incoming bomber. If it succeeds, it's done intercepting for that turn.

2. Do Flak and Mobile SAMs only defend against aircraft which directly attack their tile?

Yes.

PS. The reason I don't care for simultaneous MP Civ is exactly the fact that you have to rely on fast clicking instead of deeper strategy like combined arms, mentioned above. The game becomes even more one-dimensional than SP, when the addition of human players should have the opposite effect.

[Brundlefly]

Is barricade supposed to provide ZOC?

[Zero]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Yes, of course I meant PBEM. Simultaneous turn MP moves Civ dangerously close to RTS clickfests like AoE and RoN . Civ is a turn based game. And more so, a turn based game, where it's only one side's turn at one time.

whoa... saying simul MPs are not civ is one thing (which I agree to btw), saying RTS is a clickfest is another.

[Willem]

Originally posted by bfg9000
Is barricade supposed to provide ZOC?

In a way, but not in the usual sense. Barricades prevent any further movement but only for that turn, enemy units have to stop and can't continue further. This gives your units a chance to attack before they move again.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Willem


In a way, but not in the usual sense. Barricades prevent any further movement but only for that turn, enemy units have to stop and can't continue further. This gives your units a chance to attack before they move again.

Except that the enemy unit get the fortification bonus. They are useless.

[Jaybe]

I have never cared for the "barricade" effect of Barricades. It should stop a unit when it comes adjacent to be appropriate. OTOH, the defense bonus of Barricades is fine.

BTW, the only time you have a fort left vacant is when a fort comes with its own garrison!

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Zero
..., saying RTS is a clickfest is another.

RTS games are clickfests per definition, this is a property and not a flaw. One likes it (you), the other doesn't (me). One likes to think 5 minutes if he should irrigate a tile or better mine it (me), the other likes to build five farms in two seconds (you). That doesn't make one player better and the other worse. It just makes them different.

No need to get offended, by the way.

[vmxa1]

I like both, but prefer TBS or RPG.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph


RTS games are clickfests per definition, this is a property and not a flaw. One likes it (you), the other doesn't (me). One likes to think 5 minutes if he should irrigate a tile or better mine it (me), the other likes to build five farms in two seconds (you). That doesn't make one player better and the other worse. It just makes them different.

No need to get offended, by the way.

No it is not a clickfest by definition. What idiotic RTS players click buttons like crazy?

How the hell am I supposed to take "clickfest" any other than "there is no skill in RTS cause time is a factor and all you have to do is build things faster"? I doubt you meant it any other way. Yeah, Civ is ****ing Clickfest too if you think about it. Think about all the mouse click you need to do to move units queue builds etc

Maybe you didnt mean to insinuate that RTS is some brainless game, maybe not. But the way ur still trying to defend yourself by insisting your original statement is somehow justified DOES make me mad for real now.

[SporkPimp]

Uh... maybe he's just saying that RTS games rely on having very high dexterity, hand-eye coordination, and memorization to succeed?

The primary factor in most RTS games is how fast you play, not how smart you play. The guy who can micromanage his units while simultaneously out-producing casual players 5-to-1 (laughable, actually... it's generally more like 10-to-1) wins. The fact that great skill is required to come up with winning strategies doesn't take away the fact that actually implementing them is a game of speed.

It's like an FPS, for that matter... it doesn't matter how goddamned clever you are if you can't make decisions faster than the other guy. Knowing where to shoot falls second to actually shooting, etc. etc...

...you know, this is a ridiculously off-topic argument.

Yes, RTS games are clickfests. No, they aren't mindless. Let's all get over ourselves.

-SporkPimp

[Zero]

Originally posted by SporkPimp
Uh... maybe he's just saying that RTS games rely on having very high dexterity, hand-eye coordination, and memorization to succeed?

Is that the first thing you picture when someone says "this game is a clickfest"? I dunno if Im crazy or something, but first thing that comes to my mind isnt anything but what you said above when I hear "clickfest".

EDIT:

The primary factor in most RTS games is how fast you play, not how smart you play.

WRONG. And your example shows just how much you understanding you have of RTS. Maybe if your opponent is incredibly craptastic, you could produce 5:1, 10:1 ratio. Primary factor ISNT how fast you play. Yes playing fast is extremly important... obviously cause its in real time, but at high level gaming there are things called build orders and just about every good players have roughly same fast play not to be outproduced when starting positions are the same. The way you win RTS isnt building **** fast, its using strategy to gain upper hand that allows you to be able to outproduce.

In warcraft III, even most scrub players can build about same amount of units as the speed of good players build. Its not that hard.

First game of warcraft I remember is building mass huntress. And when I attacked my opponent who had 2/3 less unit I got my ass handed down because he wasnt sending all his units to attack like I was scrubily doing at the time.

[Zero]

Alright, normally I wouldnt get into an argument and wouldnt care less what anyone says about anything...

RTS is not a clickfest. The word clickfest itself is an insult and a wrong terminology. Its just as wrong as calling fighting games masher games. No, just mashing buttons and doing combos dont win you games.

As both fighter and RTS gamer I hear these two misconceptions over and over again. And frankly its really irratating when someone who doesnt even know how to play those games think they can claim to understand it.

Im sorry I even bothered getting mad. If you seriously still believe RTS to be a clickfest its fine by me. I shouldnt really care what others think anyway and will have to live just to disagree... Its not my job to go around preaching what is correct all the time anyway. I guess I just got annoyed hearing the same thing over and over. Its wasnt your fault for not knowing in the first place anyway....

[vmxa1]

Zero people have used the term clickfest for RTS for some time and if you play Starcraft as the Zergs you can see what they mean.
Yes you click as much or more in some TBS games, but they are actually refering to the mode you getting into during combat in RTS.

It can be difficult to manage large numbers of units in a real time combat as yo usee in games like C&C, Warcraft, Age of Empires and on up the line.

All great games BTW.

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by Zero
Is that the first thing you picture when someone says "this game is a clickfest"?

I picture an ideal world where such a duscussion wasn't taking up space in the regular civ forums.

OnT: I was sketchy on this in vanilla/PtW and have no idea about conquests- Do AA units/ city improvements have 0 range defensive ability against air attacks? Do they do anything against attacks on adjacent tiles? Also, what does the SAM battery do? The Civopedia doesn't give any numbers or other details.

[Zero]

Originally posted by vmxa1
Zero people have used the term clickfest for RTS for some time and if you play Starcraft as the Zergs you can see what they mean.

I do play as the zerg in BW. There is alot of moving ur units back and forth (advance and retreat) and moving small to individual unit to get them to desired strategic location (unit trap etc). I know.

Only people that use the term clickfest are people that diss RTS. Try googling for the word and see if you can find one positive use out of it. You're better off defending the word "Nigger" isnt actually an insult to black people. Try convincing them that Nigger is a word soley used to "describe black people".

All great games BTW

I agree

I picture an ideal world where such a duscussion wasn't taking up space in the regular civ forums.

Yeah and I picture an ideal world where i didnt have to respond to these ignorant posts in the first place

[Jaybe]

All AA units/improvements only affect their own tile. Only aircraft on air superiority have more than same-tile range.

[Zero]

can u increase their range in the civ3 editor?

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by Zero
can u increase their range in the civ3 editor?

No, you cannot increase the range of ground-unit/improvement AA units.

AA is just for local defense. Use your interceptors for area defense, building forward airbases as necessary. Interceptors are SO much more effective.

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by Zero
Only people that use the term clickfest are people that diss RTS. Try googling for the word and see if you can find one positive use out of it.

The only games I've played in some time besides TBS are Starcraft and RoN clickfests. I've never tried them MP, so I guess I'm just ignorant, but I find SP they're a nice change of pace. They don't seem to make for great conversation, though...

So when an AA unit or SAM battery are attacked, do they defend with with their air defense value, or take a single potshot in support?

[Inverse Icarus]

there is a lot of skill in RTS games, but the point sir ralph was making was that in the civ-genre, you should be able to sit back and think about things for a while.

in an RTS, you don't have that luxury (usually). if you sit back for 5 minutes, the enemy has 5 minutes more production than you.

with the use of queues and waypoints, the "clickfest" effect is getting dampened, but it's still a lot more "rapidfire" than civ.