 |
| |
|
|
Pingu:
|
 |
Exeter, England
Jan 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
Zone Of Control (ZOC) Poll
Hello!
Quite a few people, myself included, have said on these forums that the Civ3 ZOCs are a little weak, and need improving. So here's a poll to get at what people really think about this.
I'll explain the options that I've put:
1) Like Civ2:, this means that ALL units have a ZOC around them and once enters a ZOC it cannot move within the ZOC, only out of the ZOC or attack.
2) Fast units & fortresses => impassable: select this option if you think that ZOCs should only be given to units with a speed advantage or in a fortress (as currently the case). BUT the ZOC should be made impassable, like they were in Civ2.
3) Fast units & fortresses, do crippling damage: select this option if you broadly like the Civ3 ZOCs but want them beefed up. The idea here is that a unit passing a ZOC is reduced to 1 HP.
Perhaps, if a unit has a speed advantage over the unit in the fortress, then it takes only 1 HP of damage, so Cavalry can do a flanking attack if the fortress just contains an infantry unit (but not mech inf, or Tanks).
4) Keep them as they are: should be self explanatory.
5) Get rid of them altogether.
Pingu:
Last edited by Pingu: on 07-12-2001 at 16:37
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hurry
|
|
I agree. But I´d like cities to have ZOCs, too. And maybe units behind rivers. Now rivers are totally useless, since it´s so easy to just cross it and attack from the flank.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dravin
|
|
North Pole, Alaska
Nov 2001
time: 22:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wrong_shui
improvements in enemy territory dont work for your units |
Which really doesn't make much sense concerning roads. Rails I can understand, but roads? As somebody else once said on this board, "What? Do the roads just refuse to let you walk on them?"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shirgall
|
|
Portland, OR, USA
Nov 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
How about this friendly amendment: fortified units in cities and fortresses should have impassable zones of control, fortified units in open ground should damage units passing through their zones of control.
Even cavalry running past infantry should get shot at.
Even ships running past the shore should get shot at by arty on the ground.
Planes flying over mech. infantry should get shot at too. (SAM batteries move in real life)
--jrp
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asharak
|
|
Ottawa, ON, Canada
Nov 2001
time: 00:16
|
|
Personally, I've got no qualms with the zones of control -- or lack thereof -- as they function now. I don't think it's realistic to HAVE to fight the unit in front of you to advance. What I WOULD like to see, however, is a little more tactical sense from the AI, sometimes... it's just not smart to head deep into enemy territory while completely ignoring every city and unit behind you... certainly, tactics of any sort are nice to see from an AI, but perhaps not ones that violate quite so many rules of warfare and common sense.
About the opportunity fire... a good idea, but not implemented well enough. I'd like to see slower units allowed to take pot shots (after all, its not like they're moving far enough to need the speed bonus), and I'd like to see the unit that is doing the passing be allowed to shoot back (a normal regiment can, after all, fire one way while moving another -- or detach a division or two to hold off the attackers). Sort of a skirmish kind of battle -- not a fight to the death. Say, 2 rounds of combat (and the passing unit gains its ground, regardless). That way only a wounded or conscript unit (on either side) could be destroyed in the action.
And I agree that opportunity fire should be expanded to include some air and naval units as well. Just makes sense, really...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mfauzi
|
|
Singapore
Nov 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
I prefer them like in Civ 2, but just for fortresses (and maybe cities too) and not for fast units
But an interesting idea would be disallowing units from travelling in ZOC if only garrison units are in the fortress it but cause damage if only artillery-type units are in it. If both are in it, garrison units will take priority over artillery-type units on ZOC.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
 |
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:16
|
|
IIRC, didn't the French attempt a "civ2-like" ZOC during WWII?
I agree that the new system (very non-standard for the genre) is a bit tough to get used to when you're accustomed to being able to fortify/staff your borders to impassability, but I think this way lends itself to a more fluid, and IMO realistic experience, given the large amount of land area each tile likely represents--even if each unit was Divisional in it's size, if it's fortified and dug in, units in adjacent tiles would simply have the option of going around, as they do now (at the risk--for certain tiles/units) of suffering a passing shot.
Personally, I like the fluid nature it brings to the game....my only complaint is that for the upkeep you spend, Coastal Fortresses are not strong enough. I'd say either make 'em free (0 upkeep) and leave the strength alone, or bump the strength to make them viable in the late game (but I suppose that's veering a bit from the "core" ZOC discussion.
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
I have some strong feelings about fortresses and ZOC.
Here it is.
A fortress should have a base defense strentgh unmanned...lets say begining with one and going up to eight over the ages.
1,2,4,8. Each fortress should have hit points just like units, make them regular and let them gain experience. After all a fortress should represent a minimum garrison.
Now, you can fiddle with building costs and the techs that are needed to get the upgraded fortress.
Occupied fortresses should use the base combat value of the unit plus a fortress bonus.
A fortress should have a ZOC in which they always fire at units that move into. Roughly, for each age the fire should be equivalent to the artillery in the game...catapult, cannon, artillery, and radar.
When captured a fortress must be destroyed. The situation we have now is silly, fortressess are more dangerous to its builder!
Given these parameters fortresses would be meaningful in gameplay and would offer and excellant way for Soren to help the AI out on its defensive woes. As well as add a lot of spice to multiplayer.
Basically fortresses were historically the very focus of war until the motarized age and in Civ they are essentially worthless. Must beef up.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Venger
|
|
Keeper of the Can-O'Whoopass
Jan 1970
time: 23:16
|
|
I would make gunpowder and 2 move units have an enforceable zone of control - any unit coming into contact must break contact to continue moving, or defeat the controlling unit.
That said, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater here, opportunity fire should stay - if a unit enters a hex adjoining mine, I think opportunity fire should occur for all post gunpowder units.
A combination of the Civ2 and Civ3 method would yield really good gameplay.
Venger
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
07-12-2001 16:32
|
|