Idea for the future: Unit attrition

Optimizer · January 10, 2003, 19:14

I've missed the concept of unit attrition in Civ games*, but one can hope for it to come up in an expansion pack, in a clone or in Civ 4.

It could be integrated very simply into the Civ 3 rules.

Each turn there is a risk - depending on terrain - that a unit outside your borders loses one hit point. Some techs and wonders decreases the risk of attrition.

This would add both realism and strategic depth.

*) The Helicopter in Civ 2 is the only unit that suffers attrition.

WarpStorm · January 10, 2003, 19:17

It would make deep strikes into enemy territory a lot harder. Some units should be immune to the effects, for example scouts and explorers.

alva · January 10, 2003, 22:16

It would resemble logistcs somewhat

, maybe make it so only when enemy borders and at war.

Cyclotron · January 10, 2003, 22:19

Maybe it could be eliminated if you controlled roads/rails into that area (of course, that wouldn't be possible in enemy territory, only in unclaimed land).

Yurt · January 10, 2003, 22:29

Maybe just for older times. I think from industrial times and on, attrition was minimal.

alva · January 11, 2003, 00:21

Quote:

Maybe just for older times. I think from industrial times and on, attrition was minimal.

Not really, hitler couldn't get to moscow due to lack of support lines.
Rommels tanks broke down in the dessert (was it Rommel, or was it the english tanks?)
(I'm not a history buff

)
I'm sure there are many more examples to that extend, and I'm sure other people are more then willing to comply

WarpStorm · January 11, 2003, 09:56

Professionals talk logistics.

justjake73 · January 11, 2003, 11:06

I have been wanting supply lines in Civ since day 1.

When invading, a civ should have to seize a city with a port eventually or start suffering attrition. The Allies had to seize Cherbourg quickly because the Mulberry harbors could only go so far.

This would also make the AI strategy of placing cities anywhere and everywhere unviable.

Zachriel · January 11, 2003, 12:10

Attrition is a very important factor in warfare, especially modern warfare. Merely using a Tank, uses it up (like mileage on a car, only more so). Parts wear out with use, accidents happen, problems in requisition, etc. Tanks are often cannibalized for parts during extended wars; so even if the enemy never destroys a single Tank, at the end of the war, there are usually fewer Tanks than when the war started.

Players already complain when they lose an occasional Tank to a Spearman (which I usually attribute to attrition). Imagine the whines if Tanks were to just lose hitpoints "randomly."

bobbo008 · January 11, 2003, 12:36

you may want to consider the 1 gold maintenance cost per turn then.

i think, mainly, you can't "randomly" lose hitpoints if you only have 4... more hitpoints needed, this would make the battlesystem a little more reliable.

Trifna · January 11, 2003, 13:01

it could be implemented, but it should in fact, rather than die from attrition, feed itself over the country, as it was done through history. You enter a house and say "gimme foooood", simply. Attrition only comes when there's no food nor house... like Napoleon's Russia campaign.

bobbo008 · January 11, 2003, 13:03

so back to supply lines? In civ3, you can basically have the Maginot line in Greenland...

Trifna · January 11, 2003, 16:34

Well it would change a little. And an army troup could sometimes cause food problems to cities/villages where troops are passing. In history, this was really a plague for people ; like during Middle Ages where troops, should they be friendly or not, were always very bad news for farmers.

WarpStorm · January 11, 2003, 17:33

Then there should be unhappiness and food loss any time a unit goes through a city's tiles.

bobbo008 · January 11, 2003, 18:12

hmm... i also like the idea of unhappiness where troops are present. unfortunately, most citizens are either unhappy or not, you cant have "a few" be upset...

It should be implimented though, as I dont like it when the National Guard rolls their tanks down my street... especially when its hot, because then the tanks sometimes leave treadmarks down the street, which means they must tear the whole thing up... because Wisconsin is full of smart people...

chairmanmeow · January 12, 2003, 01:57

Quote:

especially when its hot, because then the tanks sometimes leave treadmarks down the street, which means they must tear the whole thing up... because Wisconsin is full of smart people...

Apparently you really don't like Wisconsin. That's ok, I don't like Maryland, either.

I think that if attrition were to be put into Civ 3, then the units would need more hit points, since there are only 4 for a veteran, attrition would have significant effect.

bobbo008 · January 12, 2003, 02:02

when the Packers lose a playoff game, it affects everyone, not just football fans.

Trifna · January 12, 2003, 13:42

Quote:

Originally posted by chairmanmeow

Apparently you really don't like Wisconsin. That's ok, I don't like Maryland, either.

I think that if attrition were to be put into Civ 3, then the units would need more hit points, since there are only 4 for a veteran, attrition would have significant effect.

Or maybe there could be three "troop qualificatives":
- Number of troops
- Permanent quality of troops (elite, veteran...)
- Temporary effects on troops (moral, attrition...)

THIS would make some sense when we're talking about troops! Alot more than horses that lose 4/5 of their men and then resurrects out of no where at cost = 0.

(Boy, I like what I've just written

)

bobbo008 · January 12, 2003, 13:55

they're should be a healing cost.

Trifna · January 12, 2003, 14:04

Well there would not be these points, so healing cost would simply be the cost to build an army, as in other games where you buy bunch of units in an army. In some way, it would be like buying units by bunch of 4 divisions of a hundred let's say (stacked by 100 units or so...). You lose then, they don't revive but you can send some refresh. As in reality...

VladTepes · January 12, 2003, 14:36

Attrition from lack of supply should be fractions of strength. Have a "experience" bar (vet, elite etc) and also a "supply" bar. Both of these would factor in when in combat. Also, diffrent technologies would affect supply in different ways - ancient armies are more damaging to terrain due to their foraging, modern armies have ration kits, so they don't damage farms but require a supply line.

The advance of Logistics would increase strength, but you must have a Supply Depot within a certain number of squares of the unit or begin losing Strength due to the troops being poorly supplied.

Trifna · January 12, 2003, 17:23

It's exactly like I said. I would propose, instead of just repeating again and again as threads do, to to build something coherent. Maybe by starting from the little post I wrote (I think it would work with these "troop qualificatives"):

Quote:

Or maybe there could be three "troop qualificatives":
- Number of troops
- Permanent quality of troops (elite, veteran...)
- Temporary effects on troops (moral, attrition...)

THIS would make some sense when we're talking about troops! Alot more than horses that lose 4/5 of their men and then resurrects out of no where at cost = 0.

Also, don't be shy to say a word on the thread I've started (For a coherent colony system), it's another thing I really see as incoherent and that should be better in Civ.

Also, VladTepes, I looooooove your signature

justjake73 · January 12, 2003, 18:32

It's been floating around the Internet for a while. The complete "version":

"Three OS's from corporate-kings in their towers of glass,
Seven from valley-lords where orchards used to grow,
Nine from dotcoms doomed to die,
One from the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Redmond where the Shadows lie.
One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them,
One OS to bring them all and in the darkness bind them,
In the Land of Redmond where the Shadows lie."

First time I read it, I thought it was absolutely brilliant.

Kingof the Apes · January 12, 2003, 21:31

Optimizer · January 18, 2003, 12:12

Back to topic:
Unit attrition could be decreased by technology advances like Navigation and Medicine, or by Home Ground Training.

Moderators, could you please move this thread to the Civ General/Future forum?

Willem · January 18, 2003, 12:21

Quote:

Originally posted by WarpStorm
Then there should be unhappiness and food loss any time a unit goes through a city's tiles.

Unless the city has a Barracks. It provides the unit with the supplies it needs.

Trifna · January 18, 2003, 15:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Optimizer
Back to topic:
Unit attrition could be decreased by technology advances like Navigation and Medicine, or by Home Ground Training.

Moderators, could you please move this thread to the Civ General/Future forum?

I agree it could be moved to the Future forum. Didn't knew its existence when I started this...

Optimizer · January 18, 2003, 16:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Trifna
Didn't knew its existence when I started this...

That's simply because the forum started a few days ago.

Trifna · January 18, 2003, 22:35

Years?... Damn, there must be 99% marijuana in the air to give me such a distorted sense of time...

Optimizer · January 19, 2003, 06:34

Thanks for the point. I changed "years" to "days".