Say you're designing a Civ game. How do you make the combat system?

[SevenSpirits]

I'm currently working on designing a Civ-like game, to be implemented as a mod. (Doesn't really matter much whether it's based on IV or V, but I'm going with V. Hexes, and - I predict - more modding activity. Even though its rules will be more similar to IV.) Naturally the implementation is indefinitely delayed until Civ V modding tools (the codebase) are fully available, but until then I am planning it, and the main puzzle remaining is combat.

I'm sure some people have thought about this quite a bit. What is important for a good Civ combat system? Would you just flat-out-copy IV? Can we do better? Unit stats are not in the picture at this point, I'm just considering the actual rules.

I consider 1UPT to be trivially out of the question due to simple control issues; it's a giant pain to order all your units individually. However I do consider V's goal of having combat not just be about attacking and defending city tiles to be laudable, as well as particularly relevant to this mod, which emphasizes tiles and improvement variety a lot.

Thanks for your help!

[Krill]

Who will play the mod? If it is SP, you are going to have to be a good AI modder, or find one who wants to work with you. If it is MP, not a problem, but if it is to be played MP and not PBEM/PB, then I'd ditch 1upt because of the clickfest issues.

Personally I think that C4s' combat system doesn't require you to focus on the city tiles to the detriment of everything. The problem is that the player base that claims that to be true just don't understand why it isn't. I think that would be the best place to start from.

Also, right now the only reason you've given for going with V that holds true is hexes, so until you know for sure there will be more modding activity (and why is that a good thing?) in V, why commit to using one platform? Especially as you have to wait until they release the tools.

[Jowy]

make it tactical combat like Fire Emblem lol

[Mist]

What is important for a good Civ combat system?

Variety and options. Be it stacks with all the composition, unit-terrain relationships or rock-paper-scissor unit counters.

Would you just flat-out-copy IV?

Hell no. It was a good attempt, but still pretty flawed.

Can we do better?

Most definitely.

Less, but more meaningful promotions. Sphere of Influence, Leadership, Weapon Range. Have a look at Battle for Wesnoth system and how they sorted out those, it should work really well with stacks allowed. Having a way of countering SoD other than siege ( which really, really doesn't make much sense anyhow ) would be nice. Make infrastructure matter, if loosing improvements caused war weariness ( or just flat out unrest for the city the tile belonged to ) turtling inside cities would be less of an option.

[luddite]

I'd say it depends on what kind of game overall you want to make. The combat system in civ IV worked well for what the game was- a city management game with some occasional warfare. Civ V is frustrating for me because you have to spend so long microing units for warfare. If you use all the complicated war game rules, then pretty soon you end up with just a pure war game.

Personally, I've often wondered what Civ IV would be like if seige units damaged every single unit in a tile, with no upper limit. Something like 1 or 2% damage to every single unit in the tile.

[Square Leg]

Why doesn't collateral scale with the number of units on the tile? After all, catapult rocks are more likely to hit a densely packed troops than sparsely spread ones...

[luddite]

Why doesn't collateral scale with the number of units on the tile? After all, catapult rocks are more likely to hit a densely packed troops than sparsely spread ones...

Well it sort of does, but in Civ IV there's a limit on it. Catapults only damage up to 5 units, so you can effectively counter the collateral damage by piling more units in the stack.

[SevenSpirits]

Who will play the mod? If it is SP, you are going to have to be a good AI modder, or find one who wants to work with you. If it is MP, not a problem, but if it is to be played MP and not PBEM/PB, then I'd ditch 1upt because of the clickfest issues.

MP and SP. I should be able to do fine on the AI in principle, though I'm not sure how good I'll be able to get it with just one person. My primary goal is for it to work well as turn-based MP. Secondary goal is to make the AI decent at it.

Personally I think that C4s' combat system doesn't require you to focus on the city tiles to the detriment of everything. The problem is that the player base that claims that to be true just don't understand why it isn't. I think that would be the best place to start from.

Tell me how this isn't true. Past the very early game it seems to me that the main uses of other tiles are to improve or impede logistics when attacking cities or attacking stacks that are attacking cities.

I will have several fort-like improvements. I'm concerned that with the Civ IV combat system they would not be very relevant.

Also, right now the only reason you've given for going with V that holds true is hexes, so until you know for sure there will be more modding activity (and why is that a good thing?) in V, why commit to using one platform? Especially as you have to wait until they release the tools.

Well, I'm not committed yet. But basically I think that at this point the Civ IV mod audience is too small. (Additionally, people who are looking in the Civ IV forums rather than the Civ V ones will tend to be people who don't want change.) It's also relevant that it will probably be easier to find assistance if I base it off V.

[SevenSpirits]

I'd say it depends on what kind of game overall you want to make. The combat system in civ IV worked well for what the game was- a city management game with some occasional warfare. Civ V is frustrating for me because you have to spend so long microing units for warfare. If you use all the complicated war game rules, then pretty soon you end up with just a pure war game.

Personally, I've often wondered what Civ IV would be like if seige units damaged every single unit in a tile, with no upper limit. Something like 1 or 2% damage to every single unit in the tile.

I remember reading you posting that suggestion before. It's definitely something I'll consider.

[SevenSpirits]

Less, but more meaningful promotions. Sphere of Influence, Leadership, Weapon Range. Have a look at Battle for Wesnoth system and how they sorted out those, it should work really well with stacks allowed. Having a way of countering SoD other than siege ( which really, really doesn't make much sense anyhow ) would be nice. Make infrastructure matter, if loosing improvements caused war weariness ( or just flat out unrest for the city the tile belonged to ) turtling inside cities would be less of an option.

Thanks, I'll take a look at Wesnoth. Also I definitely wouldn't mind siege not being the counter to armies; that has seemed bizarre to me as well.