Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Detailed game, simplified combat?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedDetailed game, simplified combat?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
GM ThunderCat View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 11 Dec 2009
Location: Everywhere
Status: Offline
Points: 2157 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2011 at 23:28
It is assumed your commanders use the best military formations and strategies that are available to them and their skill sets and it is assumed that your military tactics are combined arms rather than segregated arms, unless you have specialised your army this way. Cavalry vs archers etc is already factored into a single battle.

As to the terrain effects, whether you are attacking or defending also has a factor to terrain, for example: archers defending in buiildings have a much higher bonus than archer attacking buildings as they can set up kill zones. So its important where you have your combat.

However scouting your target before attacking is also important, and then adjusting the composition and layout of your army before you send it out to match and counter your opposition, and matching your troops with the commanders that give them the best divisional bonuses for the situation - obviously this adds extra time and planning to the procedure so isn't always possible.

Presetting battle formations themselves, rather than determining the best situation "in the field", runs the risk of turning to rock, paper scissors - which verges towards luck rather than strategy - an official thought about it is here:

However, war strategies (multiple battles) are more involved and complex. Do you have a swift response army purely of cavalry for rapid response; knowing that that imbalance will suffer heavy losses by an army of pikemen and archers, depending on the terrain e.g. Charge of the Light Brigade - however on plains this army is likely to cut down any defence.

Do you send in one unified army or waves of different armies to wear down the advantages of what you are attacking; before mopping up with a more balanced army? etc.

Honored Mule's wiki has some interesting strategies on Siege and Defending a City from Siege which a worth reading and give an insight into one type of combat.

I hope this helps


Edited by GM ThunderCat - 27 Aug 2011 at 23:45
Back to Top
uritel View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 27 Aug 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2011 at 22:37
Hm.. I suppose.  Perhaps it's my inexperience with other games such as Evony, etc that has made it so that I have not experienced such exploits.  I guess I was seeking more of a complex blend in your armies that both you and your enemies (PC or NPC) would also have.  Ranged hits first (depending on range), cavalry second (due to speed), infantry last.. or what have you.

I suppose I'll just try not to be as picky for now until I experience more combat first hand.  I've noticed myself very picky today.. like wondering why Dwarves have a penalty to iron when they are typically viewed as miners in most games, and wondering why you can't view current quantities of diplomats/military on the same screen as your production one when wanting to queue troops, etc.  I'll just tack it up to that.
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2011 at 22:18
One advantage to this combat method is that it reduces the exploits found in some other games.  Such as innumerable dummy armies in Caesary or Evony.  Sure, it was sort of exciting to see if you got the dummies in the right order compared to the order of the other side in PvP battles ... for about 2 and a half minutes of heart-racing fun.

Complex battle systems lend themselves toward exploits, which yes can be interesting but also can be really frustrating.

Just my thought.
Back to Top
Kilotov of DokGthung View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster


Joined: 07 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 723 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2011 at 21:20
math of combat is a secret the devs are keeping since the weary start.
no math geek influence here Tongue
you don't now the numbers or the factors that determinate combat.
Back to Top
uritel View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 27 Aug 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2011 at 21:13
Originally posted by surferdude surferdude wrote:

Originally posted by uritel uritel wrote:

Now, even with this type of detail.. combat is apparently absolutely bland.  Sure, you have a few changes based on geographical conditions and some luck (apparently), but there isn't much else.  There are no combat stages.  You send swords and ranged into battle in the same army, why is it not staged?  Why does ranged not hit first, then swords second?  Why is this lump summed instead of being as wholly detailed as the rest of the game?  I see a lot of intricacies on the simcity side, but lackluster on the combat side.  This would open up a whole realm to a better experience in the game by having to plan out your attacks and creating the best army depending on the situation, beyond if you're in trees or plains.

Each unit has different attack/defense values against different unit types; racial units have different values to each other, the terrain the combat is on type affects different units differemtly, commander skills affect the different unit type depending on what's trained, what troops are in their division - armies are then composed of multiple divsions etc.

Is still a lot going on without micro managing the battle...

I understand the combat factors.. I'm just wondering why they stopped there.  I'm not asking for micromanaging when it comes to the actual battle (i.e. having to command the battle yourself in real time), but I think being able to impact what happens first (speed, range, etc) is vital instead of a lumped format of (a +b) = c, c * x = y, (y - d) = z, etc.
Back to Top
uritel View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 27 Aug 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2011 at 21:08
@Kilotov - 

I've already considered that, but geographical overview is really not considered (in my opinion) to be an intricate factor.  Especially considering when everything else (for the most part) is HIGHLY detailed and micromanaged.

Picking out the unit based on whether what you are attacking is on a mountain, in the trees, or on plains is just a mathematical percentage increase/deduction.  And all current games have offensive and defensive stats.  Older games have those, too.  Bonuses depending on what you're attacking or defending against is also lumped into the same/similar type of formula of mountain/tree/plains, too.

I consider those to be bland WHEN WEIGHED (and perhaps that's the problem that I have) against the other detailed parts of the game.  If I just clicked "build axmen" to make an axmen without any other prep than building up my barracks, then okay.. I'd be happy, or at least expecting, a lump sum response.  But Illyriad, you've set my expectations too high to be so bland when it comes to other aspects of the game.


Edited by uritel - 27 Aug 2011 at 21:09
Back to Top
surferdude View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 02 Aug 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 103 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2011 at 21:03
Originally posted by uritel uritel wrote:

Now, even with this type of detail.. combat is apparently absolutely bland.  Sure, you have a few changes based on geographical conditions and some luck (apparently), but there isn't much else.  There are no combat stages.  You send swords and ranged into battle in the same army, why is it not staged?  Why does ranged not hit first, then swords second?  Why is this lump summed instead of being as wholly detailed as the rest of the game?  I see a lot of intricacies on the simcity side, but lackluster on the combat side.  This would open up a whole realm to a better experience in the game by having to plan out your attacks and creating the best army depending on the situation, beyond if you're in trees or plains.

Each unit has different attack/defense values against different unit types; racial units have different values to each other, the terrain the combat is on type affects different units differemtly, commander skills affect the different unit type depending on what's trained, what troops are in their division - armies are then composed of multiple divsions etc.

Is still a lot going on without micro managing the battle...
Back to Top
Kilotov of DokGthung View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster


Joined: 07 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 723 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2011 at 21:00
by the way, you have defensive combat and offensive combat.
each unit has a different propose and each has different reactions based on terrain. not bland terrain factors, HUGE terrain factors.

now for example, bow units are good defenders, the higher the ground the better ... cavalry is offensive and is top notch on plain... but sucks on mountain... i mean SUCKS BIG TIME ...
you see? its not as bland as you may think on a first look
Back to Top
uritel View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 27 Aug 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2011 at 20:49
Well, I feel that there is a difference between war and combat/battles.  Of course, frequent battles may lead to war, but skirmishing is bound to happen.  Whereas it's against other players, or roaming NPC's, or the pending factions implementation..

But maybe I am coming from left field on this.  I do find that due to the community (or perhaps due to the game, which influences the community), there is not much focus on the combat side of the game.  By no means am I a warmonger, or trying to become one, but I do look for balance in a game and this one just seems to lean heavily on civil communications between players and building/trading.
Back to Top
Ander View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1269 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2011 at 20:45
combat is not staged. I hope that changes some day. 
but war isn't that frequent that you'd miss the feature very much! :)
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.