Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv: November 2000:
[Freeciv] Re: Combat rules

[Freeciv] Re: Combat rules

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: <freeciv@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv] Re: Combat rules
From: <moz2@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 08:55:36 +1100 (EST)

Gert Van den Eynde wrote:
> Is it possible to have "a lot - on -
> one" or "a lot - on - a lot" style
> of combat ? 

Bobby Bryant
> I can't help wonder whether it was
> omitted from Civ I/II because it
> would introduce a problem with
> players quickly building a super- > army 

I suspect it's also because of the tricky switch from turn-based to melee 
combat. Many games "solve" this by having a succession of 1:1 combats that 
aproximate melee (MoM, HoMM etc)
but the "real" melee solutions I've seen basically failed. 

Civ also lacks the notion of grouping altogether as far as I know. So we'd 
possibly have to introduce that (which I'd like anyway). 

What might work is a modifier based on other units in the same square. 
Especially for distance-based attacks. Having multiple units attack and defend 
with the best value in the stack each round might do it.

so a city with a tank and two motorised inf would defend at 6, but when they 
got their damage round it would be at 10 not 6. The attacker would presumably 
use a howitzer plus mech inf for the same reason. Then next round the attack 
would probably hit the second mech inf if the first was damaged.

Could lead to a use for those outdated defensive units - cannon fodder in 
But I wonder if that might bias even more towards defense than the game is now?

Moz & his Pocketmail g33kt0y

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]
  • [Freeciv] Re: Combat rules, moz2 <=