If Firaxis changes the combat...

[splangy]

They better make HP OPTIONAL! I know those of you who want easy wars want HP, and thats fine, but some of us like a real challenge! I couldn't care a less if a rifleman lost to a spearman, because A: I haven't seen such things happen and B: I like to have a fight when I invade. I DO hope they release a patch that makes HP optional so there are no longer 75 threads reading "Fix the combat!" or "My tank lost to a pike!" (of course he didn't send reinforcements, 1 tank should be able to roll over anything that can breath)

The problem is that with hp a fortified swordsman (full health) will lose badly to a attacking swordman 4/5 of the time, while in civ3 currently you have a 2/3 chance to win. Why? because hp means the battle has more rounds of combat, thus the person with a slightly higher chance tends to win much more often. Even though it would seem they make no difference, they do, because 1 succesful round of combat takes down 1/3 of there HP, not 1/10 or 1/20 so the person with a higher chance of attack has a much higher chance of victory. Though mathematically it wouldnt seem that way. To prove my point go into civ2 and attack a pike (defence 2) with a tank (attack 10(not sure but lets just say)) and the tank wins with 0-1 hp lost. Do this in civ3 and a tank will win but if it loses only 1 round thats up to 1/3 hp gone. Because of this civ3 forces you to prepare and plan before a war, in civ2 1 tank was more than enough to take out a entire Ancient Empire. Anyone who played civ1 would tell you that the few even wars there were (most were either retarde AI Militia vs human tanks covered by bombers, or they were just a early chariot (way overpowered) rush) were actual fights, in civ2 all you need is 1 of the currently strongest guards and you were set to build a massive/unstopable army and invade everyone.

Im not trying to antagonise people who write posts that complain about civ3's combat, im just saying that if 1 tank dies to a musket or pike, 1 more tank should win. Also, I consider myself a reasonably good player (played civ2 for 2 years straight) and on regent I am neck and neck in tech with 9 out of 10 AI (the other one is the one I rolled over with my swordsman ) so maybe the problem is that you should stop playing warlord/chieftan and move up to regent/monarch...

Basically I to sum up the post, I want to have a choice if a HP patch is released. Anyone else think the same way I do or am I the only one...

[General Ludd]

You can change the HPs in the editor, I suppose you could always make it so all units have 1hp... that'd make veteran and elite units worthless, though.

[GePap]

While I don't understand the idea of making HP optional (do you mean FP?), I am glad people who like the system are deciding that perhaps we gamers should get a little thing called choice.

[splangy]

By HP I meen how it was in civ2 (hp+fp)

[Grim Legacy]

I did get to see it happen.

I attacked a sizeable city (12+) with a veteran tank. The city's defenses were down to the last fortified veteran spearman. It repelled my tank, taking only 1 hit while dealing 3 deadly blows to my unit. Sweet.

Let's calculate a bit: 16attack, 4HP vs 2defense, 4HP + 10% terrain defense bonus, + fortification bonus (WTF is this listed grrrr) 25% (?) + metropolis bonus (ALSO unlisted!) 50%(?) = 7defense total. Oh it's about the same scenario as your attacking swordsmen losing from a warrior on hills (3 vs 1.5). Hm.

[Akka]

[SIZE=1]"I know those of you who want easy wars want HP, and thats fine, but some of us like a real challenge!"
"(of course he didn't send reinforcements, 1 tank should be able to roll over anything that can breath)"
"so maybe the problem is that you should stop playing warlord/chieftan and move up to regent/monarch..."

I was about to flame you about how scornful, full of your own little petty vanity you are, but it would not resolve anything to lessen myself to your level, so I'll answer you trying to keep as much courtesy as I can ("trying" is the important word) :
we want HP/MP because
- it allow more realistic results
- it would allow more modding ability,
- it was in Civ2 we do not understand why it was taken out (talk about a stepback).
It's already perfectly possible to make invincible units, so the "you want only to win easily" is a crappy argument.
I would add that putting HP/FP to 1 would let the game in exactly the state it is, so you would be able to keep the combat system you like, while for us it's not even possible to change it.
And I'll finally add that your childish attempts to make people who want HP/FP look like retarded whiners wanting only an easy game prove only that you are a bragging boy who want to show how better he is compared to us.

"Im not trying to antagonise people who write posts that complain about civ3's combat"

Then reread yourself because it's what you're doing.

metropolis bonus (ALSO unlisted!) 50%(?)

A town is +25%, a city is +50%, a metropolis is +100 %.
If you ever try to look for any kind of stats about the game, the editor is THE place for it, as it hold nearly all the stats of the game.

[Grumbold]

You got my vote, Splangy. They can ad a thousand extra things to the editor with pleasure as long as the initial settings stay as they currently are. Then the mod community can come up with their downloadable LeetPak of all the best tweaks and we can all decide whether to use it or not.

[splangy]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil


I was about to flame you about how scornful, full of your own little petty vanity you are, but it would not resolve anything to lessen myself to your level, so I'll answer you trying to keep as much courtesy as I can ("trying" is the important word) :
we want HP/MP because
- it allow more realistic results
- it would allow more modding ability,
- it was in Civ2 we do not understand why it was taken out (talk about a stepback).
It's already perfectly possible to make invincible units, so the "you want only to win easily" is a crappy argument.
I would add that putting HP/FP to 1 would let the game in exactly the state it is, so you would be able to keep the combat system you like, while for us it's not even possible to change it.
And I'll finally add that your childish attempts to make people who want HP/FP look like retarded whiners wanting only an easy game prove only that you are a bragging boy who want to show how better he is compared to us.

WOW! First of all I must say that its not like I insulted your fammily, I ASKED Firaxis to make HP/FP OPTIONAL. Why cant it be optional? I didn't make any "childish attempts to make people who want HP/FP look like retarded whiners". Are you gonna tell me that you haven't seen threads like the ones that I used as an example? You have some major issues if your taking this COMMENT as seriusly as it looks you are...

Then reread yourself because it's what you're doing.

hmm, again I must state that this is a GAME its not like I just insulted your dieing grandmother...

A town is +25%, a city is +50%, a metropolis is +100 %.
If you ever try to look for any kind of stats about the game, the editor is THE place for it, as it hold nearly all the stats of the game.

not to be picky but your wrong.
towns= zero defense (but can build walls)
city=50% but cant build walls
Metropolis=100%, no walls however.

[splangy]

Akka le Vil, you use the following quotes from my post as an example of how "Childish" I am, so let me explain why I said what I did...

"I know those of you who want easy wars want HP, and thats fine, but some of us like a real challenge!"

I meant alittle harder when I said "a real challenge", not that HP makes it extreemly easy, as long as the AI stays with you in tech.

"(of course he didn't send reinforcements, 1 tank should be able to roll over anything that can breath)"

A insut to brian renolds who made tanks and howitzers near unstopable (In civ2 EVERYONE knew how to rush past the AI in tech and plop 2-3 tanks to take over a anchient opponent.)

"so maybe the problem is that you should stop playing warlord/chieftan and move up to regent/monarch..."

How is that being pompus? Are you saying that someone who finds the lower levels easy should stay there? I dont really see how this is insulting...

[Akka]

splangy, I did not take it as a personnal insult, but I admit that I perhaps overeacted.
But what's getting on my nerves is the assumption that HP/FP is made to allow an "easier" game, which is completely false.
It's becoming a moto for some people to say that adding a new feature (read : FP/HP) would be to please the "whiners that have trouble to win the game" (I'm not quoting you, but giving you an example of what kind of counter-arguments were given by some people). In fact, HP/MP would just allow modder to customize more the units and, IN A PARTICULAR CASE, allow for more realism. The difficulty of the game has nothing to do with it, and I would like people to understant that.

I would like to add again too that FP/HP are by their very essence optional, because you just have to set them to 1/1 to keep the game in the exact same state it is. When people say that they would not like them, they basically just want to deprive everybody of another dimension of modding the game, that's all.

[Grumbold]

Akka you seem to be firing both barrels at an arguement that isn't even being held on this thread. No-one has posted here that FP should not be allowed. Its essentially no different than the ability to increase A/D values if that is what you want instead so whatever floats your boat.

Firepower stat as you have discussed using it will make an easier game for the person with the tech advantage. Nine times out of ten that will be the human player, if anybody, because people play to the level that challenges and entertains them, not that wipes the floor with them. We haven't seen anyone complaining that the enemy had tanks but was so incompetent it couldn't wipe out their cities defended by "only" four riflemen or musketeers.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Grumbold
Akka you seem to be firing both barrels at an arguement that isn't even being held on this thread. No-one has posted here that FP should not be allowed. Its essentially no different than the ability to increase A/D values if that is what you want instead so whatever floats your boat.

Firepower stat as you have discussed using it will make an easier game for the person with the tech advantage. Nine times out of ten that will be the human player, if anybody, because people play to the level that challenges and entertains them, not that wipes the floor with them. We haven't seen anyone complaining that the enemy had tanks but was so incompetent it couldn't wipe out their cities defended by "only" four riflemen or musketeers.

My position is simple :
1) Adding HP/FP will be good for many and bad for none.
2) Someone with a big tech advantage should have a big fight advantage.

I'm aware that the 2) is arguable, but I'm fanatic about only for my own game, and I don't mind if Fireaxis doesn't change the balance, AS LONG AS I CAN HAVE MY MP/FP BACK !

I was answering to this thread only to say "more FP/MP does not mean an easier game", because it apply to both sides. If people think it's too easy to have a tech edge over the AI, well they can play a more difficult level.