Combat system for Civ 4

[wrylachlan]

As an interesting thought experiment, those of you who think the current combat system doesn't work, how would you do it differently? I am not talking about how you would change the current system, but if you had to do it all over again from scratch, how would you do it?

Work all the kinks out of your idea, then post it here, and I'll put together a poll for who likes which ideas.

Some common complaints to address in your new solution:
1.) Spearman vs. Tank problem
2.) Implementation of ranged weaponry
3.) Air battles
4.) Great Leaders
And I'm sure you can think of many more imperfections with the current system.

[Changmai Beagle]

I've probably posted these before, but here goes. They are all taken from other games.

Principles (The five laws of antagonistics)
1. Provide a simple shortcut method and a more tactical method at the player's choice.
2. Reflect the value of technology.
3. Include strategic value of location and tactics.
4. Reflect the value of combined arms.
5. Consider morale.

Steps:
1. Build your army - CTP - You can meld any units into an army with some limit. After that they can move as one unit at the speed of the slowest unit. Units can be simply moved in and out of the army unit without restriction. On sea you create convoys or task forces (War in the Pacific)
2. (Optional) Set up your configuration (Hannibal, Alexander) setting out which individual units will be placed where at the front, back, flanking, scouting, etc. either on a configuration screen or choosing a preset setup. If not chosen, standard setup of infantry (randomly placed) in front, ranged units in back (rp) and flanking units (rp) on both sides.
3. Fortify or move.
4. Enter area with enemy unit (or they enter). Select shortcut battle or tactical screen. (Age of Wonders)
4. Both armies are represented on tactical screen with fortifications (if any). (MOM, AoW, HOMM)
5. Movement. Artillery units attack first or move with rest of units. Ranged (archers, tanks, etc.) units fire next or move with rest of units. Infantry can move or attack once, mobile infantry, cavalry etc. can move several spaces and attack. Player can chose which unit to attack with each of his/her units - within reach.
6. Attacks are resolved at the end of each player's turn. Common attacks are serial (all artillery first, then ranged, infantry and flanking units together with a bonus compared to two infantry units).
7. Defensive damage is possible against infantry and flanking units similar to the way attack/defense between two units now takes place. Infantry and flanking attacks together would divide the defensive damage between all i/f attackers.
8. Probability and damage. The higher the technology the higher probability for hitting the target (artillery, ranged fire) and for causing damage. The higher the technology the higher the number of hitpoints of damage. The higher the technology, and the more armor cost put into the unit the higher the hitpoints required to kill. The higher the amount of damage the lower the probability of hitting the target or causing damage and lower the hitpoints. The rougher the terrain the lower the probability of an attacker hitting the target or causing damage. The rougher the terrain the slower the movement and less hitpoints per hit (from units with multiple hitpoints).
9. Every unit has a morale value that increases with technology, armor and health. Once a certain differential is reached the lower morale unit runs away. A spearman can still be in the game, but will run away from a tank automatically (unless maybe elite, full strength, fortified on a mountain and behind a river). Cavalry may run away from a tank if on plains, or after the first hit, etc. Infantry possibly after a couple of points down against an untouched tank. I prefer this approach to a major number of hitpoints as it may be quicker to resolve.
10. Tactical retreat. Units can run away on the tactical screen, and can leave the edge of the screen, to be found in the square in that direction with whatever damage they accumulated in the tactical screen. When your last unit retreats (or you hit the retreat button) the battle is over. By the way - I'd expect any retreat to take a lot of damage from at least flankers and ranged units.

[alva]

1. No problem
4. option

[ThaddeusAlexander]

I say put a form of firepower back in, driven by age.

Example:

A knight attacks a spearman. Each time the knight hits, he deals 2 damage instead of one. If, however, infantry attack a spearman, they deal 3 damage per hit but only 2 damage to units created in the middle ages such as pikemen and knights and musketmen.

Or maybe an attack/defence bonus equal to the difference in age? Maybe .... but I prefer a new firepower.

I think that could stop spearmen killing tanks pretty fast

Cheers
~Thadalex

[Jon Shafer]

Tsch... I'd have such a different engine, it would take all evening to write out my ideas (I have a 12-page mini design document if you want me to paste it ), but unfortunately I have a Java assignment due in 2 1/2 hours, and I'm just starting.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by ThaddeusAlexander
I say put a form of firepower back in, driven by age.

Example:

A knight attacks a spearman. Each time the knight hits, he deals 2 damage instead of one. If, however, infantry attack a spearman, they deal 3 damage per hit but only 2 damage to units created in the middle ages such as pikemen and knights and musketmen.

Or maybe an attack/defence bonus equal to the difference in age? Maybe .... but I prefer a new firepower.

I think that could stop spearmen killing tanks pretty fast

Cheers
~Thadalex

If you do the same thing with hit points, abonus per age, It will stop the spearman vs. tank thing.

[vondrack]

Originally posted by Trip
Tsch... I'd have such a different engine, it would take all evening to write out my ideas (I have a 12-page mini design document if you want me to paste it ), but unfortunately I have a Java assignment due in 2 1/2 hours, and I'm just starting.

Trip, I would love to see this document. If you do not feel like displaying it here, would you be able to paste a link or send it in an email?

[Jon Shafer]

Currently there's not really much to it, since I haven't had time to work on it much and flesh out the details. I have about a half-dozen or so Design Documents for various projects I'd wanted to start, but never really had the time to. The .ZIP will actually contain a few .DOC files with models for various aspects of the overall design. Civilization+ DD v01.doc is the introduction document. The main staple of my games are their immense complexity, so it may be doubtful that anyone would enjoy working with it much.

Oh, and (C) of myself, of course.
You use my ideas you'd better shell up or I'll hunt you down (I am the almighty CS major after all ).

Also, some of it is applied from the GGS design (check out the forum), in case it looks familiar.

[vondrack]

Thanks, Trip, just reading through the docs. Interesting stuff. A very important thing, I guess, is the hex based map, which is exactly what I have been thinking of for quite some time (but then, I am screwed now... since if I ever use it, it will look like I stole your idea and you will hunt me down... fortunately, I am a CS major, too, although I have no idea how almighty... )

[Der PH]

IMHO the CTP system is very good. it includes a lot of Chagmai Beagle's proposals.
It is quite easy to handle and offers a variety of tactical options.

The problem is that the AI isn't very good at using it compared to a moderately experienced player. I remember huge AI army stacks blocking each others movement and such things.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by vondrack
Thanks, Trip, just reading through the docs. Interesting stuff. A very important thing, I guess, is the hex based map, which is exactly what I have been thinking of for quite some time (but then, I am screwed now... since if I ever use it, it will look like I stole your idea and you will hunt me down... fortunately, I am a CS major, too, although I have no idea how almighty... )

Glad you liked it. Not much hope for it in the future, but it keeps me busy from time to time. As far as the hex map, it really just depends on how you want units to react to each other on the map. Hexes are good to represent more realistic battle situations. In a way, Civ has a hex system (in the way that you can move), though aside from the directions you can move and attack there's not much relevance (in my system depending on which way your flank is in relation to other units a unit's battle effectiveness is modified. Like I said, my system is basically Civ with a lot more detail (especially in the combat area).