Millitary Design Modules

[DarkCloud]

Just like I mentioned in my Millitary Design Post the game Civ III should be run by modules much like SMAC.

Some early ideas...

Land Unit Models and (Weapons)---
-Warrior (Spear)
-Advanced Warrior (Jagged Spear)
-Biological Warrior (Spear dropped in Smallpox Blood)
-Fire Warrior (Spear with wood set on fire)

----
1.The basic warrior would be 1-1-1
2.The advanced warrior would be 1-1-1 but the opponent would take 10% more damage per hit.
3.The Biological Warrior would be 1-1-1 but if the opponent is hit 5 times then they will contract smallpox and die.
4.The Fire Warrior would be 1-1-1 and if you are in a forest, burn the forest down after x number of hits on opponent.

-Please post your ideas and modules here.

[Shadowstrike]

I don't think early civ would know how to poision with smallpox, maybe a toxin, but not smallpox. Maybe a "poision damage" would do (i.e. unit with poision takes a small amount of damage each turn unless it is treated in a city or hut)

The fire spear seems unrealistic too. Maybe you could have a unit with a stone spearhead that does additional damage.

[Youngsun]

what about this?

quote: Stone axe +3 melee Hunting spear +2 melee +1 support Primitive bow +2 support Bronze spear +4 melee +1 support Bronze sword +5 melee Bronze armour +1 armour -1 mobility Iron spear +5 melee +1 support Iron sword +6 melee Iron armour +2 armour -1 mobility Wooden shield +1 armour Bronze shield +2 armour -1 mobility Iron shield +3 armour -1 mobility Composite bow +3 support Horse armour +1 armour -1 mobility Marius's mule allows a unit to fortify -1 mobility Light Horse +6 mobility(no armour allowed) Medium Horse +5 mobility(armoured men allowed) War Horse +4 mobility(Horse armour allowed) Chariot(arse) +2 mobility Chariot(horse)+3 mobility Elephant +2 mobility -2 enemy melee(only cavalty) Long sword +7 melee Pike +5 melee X2 melee vs mounted(only inf) Lance +5 melee X2 melee vs mounted(only cav) Plate armour +4 armour -2 mobility Mace +5 melee ignores enemy armour 50% -1 mobility Longbow +5 support ignores enemy armour 60%(inf only) Crossbow +3 support ignores enemy armour 80% Stirrup +2 melee(only mounted)auto upgrade if discovered If your culture/social system is primitive, then you can only mobilise primitive men Melee/support/armour/mobility Primitive men 1/0/0/3 Ancient men 1/0/0/4 Renaissance men 1/0/0/3 Modern men 1/0/0/2 Melee:basic fighting power/close combat ability Support:when accompanied with melee units add bonus to the melee units Armour:absorb some of enemy hit including enemy support fire Mobility: this is not map(strategic) mobility this is battlefield mobility. 1~4 Bf mobility equals 1 map mobilit 4~8 Bf mobility equals 2 map mobility 8~12 Bf mobility equals 3 map mobility Battlefield mobility affects actual battle as a combined arms effect and map mobility ,as you know, reflect how many square you can move.

As you may have noticed the heavier the armour gets the more severe mobility penalty it receives thus leaving you with dilema how you going to put the emphasis for your army. mobility or heavy armour?-for Infantry

With extensive usage of heavy horse you may arm your mounted force with heavy armour without necessarily taking the mobility too much away from it thus shock troops now available in your stock.

Only after the invention of longbow & crossbow, heaviliy armoured cavalry will be properly countered.(those arms are capable of penetrating armour)

All the weapons after Stone Age will require metal resources to be produced. I'm not so sure how detailed the production mechanism should be.

1.Complicated mineral/energy resource(copper,Iron,coal,oil etc.)

2.or just simple metal points represented by number? ie. metal:100pts enegy:50pts.
[This message has been edited by Youngsun (edited August 11, 2000).]

[Evil Capitalist]

This looks worryingly like those games where you get a 100 page book of weapons and another of rules, with special parts like:

weapon causes two hits, with 16 damage in melee, but 24 at range if range is less than two with 36 damage if range is more than two unless you are playing with cloud cover rules and add 2 damage if there is an r in the month... ad nauseum.

[Adm.Naismith]

I'm sorry to Youngsun, but I share Evil Capitalist fear.

While I agree that some Unit workshop can add a bit more diversification to units without too much harm (if the workshop will be properly developed, that is), I will forever be a pain in the neck remembering we are modelling a Civ (empire management) game, not a wargame. I love wargames, simply they are another genre and required to be modelled taking into account detailed armours&weapons as you write into your interesting list.

Look, also SMAC manual show as a more complex armour model (dividing from armour that can defend against energy weapons, bullet weapons or both) has been discarded into the released game.
I don't know if Firaxis did it because of balancing problem, AI unable to cope with, beta testers feedback or anything else, still it should be an alert to us .

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant

[Evil Capitalist]

I just think that the modules idea is based on 20th century thinking. Think about land war from 1492-1914:

Initially pikes, arquebuses, light cavalry, heavy cavalry and culverin style artillery.
Wheelock Musket replaces arquebus, cavalry get pistols, line tactics evolve, firelock replaces wheelock, and is replaced by flintlock, cannon get better barrels.
Bayonet replaces pike, premeasured cartridge introduced. Cannon gets more mobile.

Do you notice something there? You never go back to older weaponry. Napoleon's marshalls never thought of using a regiment of matchlocks, it would be stupid.
The best system I've seen is that of Imperialism II- designated catagories which can be upgraded and have similar abilities. You get the variety, but don't have the absurdity of unrealistic combinations. The only uses I can see for a workshop are the following:
1)Special abilities: e.g. police training. These only come in later, so make it not so important. You could just train it in to an existing unit.
2)Level of weaponry: the number of guns on warships is important to its strength, but only is a real issue c.1648-1865.

[DarkCloud]

Evil Capitalist

You see, these weapons would only be additions such as modules in SMAC. Each unit could only have up to 2 modules in any one age and no, you would not go back to older units, this would only give you greater variety in units.

Shadowstrike

About the fire warrior, I guess it is a little unrealistic, so I stand corrected.

However, ancient people did know how to use germ warfare. There is evidence of seiges of cities in the BC eras when the attackers threw dead animal carcasses over the walls to infect the enemy.

Smallpox was primarily used by the American settlers in America to infect the Native Americans by giving them rugs infected with the virus. (I know, I can't believe they did it but they did.)

Youngsun

Thanks for your ideas!

Naismith

The system would not be more complicated than Alpha Centauri's as you can probably see and Alpha C was NOT a complicated game.

It could be a Wargame/Strategy Hybird, it is already in some respects.
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited August 11, 2000).]

[DarkCloud]

Okay Here are the models so far.
{With thanks to Youngsun for some of the Phalanx ideas! Keep them coming!}

Land Unit Models and (Weapons)---
------------------------
WARRIOR
-Warrior [Basic] (Spear)
-Advanced Warrior (Jagged Spear)
-Biological Warrior (Spear dropped in Smallpox Blood)

1.The basic warrior would be 1-1-1
2.The advanced warrior would be 1-1-1 but the opponent would take 10% more damage per hit.
3.The Biological Warrior would be 1-1-1 but if the opponent is hit 5 times then they will contract smallpox and die.

PHALANX
Phalanx (Bronze Spear and Bronze Shields): 1-2-1

Wooden Phalanx: 1-1-2 (Wooden Shields, Travels fast like a real Roman Legionaire would, 30-40 miles a day. Hey they did it!)

Archer Phalanx: 1-1-1 r1 (Uses shields to defend heads while each row fires barrages. Ranged attack of 1 square if they are on higher ground than the defender)

Engineer Phalanx: 2-2-1 (Engineers make elaborate traps for the enemy to fall in and dig better trenches than most units. Attack Advantage)

Germ-Warfare Phalanx: 1-2-1 regular +25% attack on city walls (Heave carcasses over city walls during seiges.)
[This message has been edited by DarkCloud (edited August 11, 2000).]

[Youngsun]

Evil Capitalist

Sure it looks like but not the same as others which you might think of.

When you disband your units in CivII, you throw away men and weapons altogether. My suggestion corrects this and you can arm your men with better weapons.

Civ is not wargame and it's like a combination of running an empire,managing economy and raging a war things so we need to incorporate the military aspect of the game with others. Heavy conscription should create social and economical burden to your civ but you can still prepare total war without significantly damaging your economy by producing and stockpiling weapons.

Those weapons I showed are not that civ specific(no gladius or sarissa there)and its rather highly generalised and categorised with Ages(Stone->Bronze->Iron->etc) so makes it applicable to all civs in the world.

Furthermore CivI and CivII are already stat based as far as military units are concerned.
Att/Def/Fp/Hit

With present military stat, archers can roam around without heavy inf escort(Archer 3/2/1/1) because CivII does not differenciate melee & support concept. My suggestion encourage combined arms effect and balanced unit stack(Heavies,Skirmishers,Support and Shock troops). This also can be extended to modern warfare(Inf,Recon,Artillery and Armour) and this 4 major military branches need arms for themselves and that was what I listed above.

Right resource allocation of war production is the key for victory and we all know Hitler ruined it so lost the war and you shoud examine your social and economical situation of your empire first for where to concentrate your war effort.

[will be continued.... now I have to go somewhere]

[Youngsun]

[I'm back and little bit drunk too ]

quote: Initially pikes, arquebuses, light cavalry, heavy cavalry and culverin style artillery. Wheelock Musket replaces arquebus, cavalry get pistols, line tactics evolve, firelock replaces wheelock, and is replaced by flintlock, cannon get better barrels. Bayonet replaces pike, premeasured cartridge introduced. Cannon gets more mobile.

Doesn't have to be that specific

Musket(arquebus with rest)
Musket(Napoleonic one with bayonet)
Rifle(Napoleonic one/pre WWI)
Rifle(WWI)
Rifle(WWII)
Rifle(post WWII)
Rifle(Modern)

would be enough I reckon.

quote: You never go back to older weaponry

That's the point Evil capitalist so we can sell those inferior arms to less developed civs as today's USA does.

quote: You get the variety, but don't have the absurdity of unrealistic combinations.

Anything bizzare you see from my suggestion? triple convexed composite bow or flaming sword?(just kidding) Anything combined from the suggestion above will end up as one of the 4 major branches(heavies,skirmishers,support and shock troops).

When I say unit workshop please don't imagine SMAC style one because I don't like SMAC style workshop too.(Admiral knows ) Actually if there is any way to make an unit with consripts and stockpiled weapons I don't think we need a unit workshop.(Colonisation style perhaps?) Also you can restrict the number of designed models like MOO/MOOII so you don't have to hassle with too many similar unit models.

DarkCloud

I surely share your enthusiasm but things like archer phalanx are too weird to me and it is historically incorrect. Archers are archers nothing more/nothing less and the same goes to Phalanx too. Also using germs for siege warfare thing shouldn't be part of unit characteristics but kind of auto upgrade for every unit when you discover proper tech thus we don't have design a unit for that.

Anyway General suggestion section needs energetic person like you. Keep the heat pal as long as you can.

[Evil Capitalist]

As a point of information on the firearms this is how I'd do it. This would define the era (as in era 1, era 2, era 3, etc. If you've played Imperialism you know what I mean).

Arquebus- generic middle ages firearm c.1300-c.1550
Musket- Wheelocks, firelocks, early flintlock c.1550- 1715 (if I remember right)
Later musket- Flintlocks, bayonets with paper cartridges 1715- 1860
Early rifle- Flintlocks and percussion caps c1750- 1860
Breech loader rifles- bolt action, percussion cap with bullets not musket balls. 1860- 1890
Magazine rifle- Bolt action with magazine 1890- 1940
Semi Automatic rifle- Semi auto, like an M16 or AK47 1940- 2000
Advanced rifle- The stuff the US has just said it's going to buy with attatched grenade launcher-like weapon.

[DarkCloud]

Gord

Well thanks for the support Gord.
How do you do that quote thing, I saw it once but forgot.

Youngsun

Well, after reading your most recent model, I have to agree with Evil Capitalist, it is just too many weapons, I don't propose exactly SMAC's design workshop, I only propose we use some of its options like the Body- Warrior, Phalanx and the Modules- 2 per character.

Youngsun

Who knows what the ancients may have done, archer phalanx and all. And who here wouldn't like the advantages of an archer phalanx?

Could you please explain unit upgrades for germ warfare? The way I see it is most units would think that it was beneath themselves to heave carcasses over walls and would only commit a small contingent to do such and thus not fully receive a bonus. With a specialized unit this could be easily accomplished because they would not be so posh as to think it beneath themselves.

(MORE UNIT DESIGNS TO COME!)

[Gord McLeod]

quote: Originally posted by Shadowstrike on 08-10-2000 08:43 PM I don't think early civ would know how to poision with smallpox, maybe a toxin, but not smallpox. Maybe a "poision damage" would do (i.e. unit with poision takes a small amount of damage each turn unless it is treated in a city or hut)

Actually it's quite simple; you bombard them with diseased corpses and other refuse. This was very commonly done in times of war.

quote: The fire spear seems unrealistic too. Maybe you could have a unit with a stone spearhead that does additional damage.

Flame was also a very common weapon of war; the early greeks had flame weapons we still, to this day, do not know how to reproduce. Greek Fire is a mystery to modern people but was a devastating weapon centuries ago.

[Youngsun]

Evil capitalist

Would you mind put the lists for hitorical development of cannons(primitive bombard~)or armours(MkI~)? and thank you for the firearms list.

DarkCloud

I'm sorry if I offended you(certainly didn't mean it).

quote: Who knows what the ancients may have done, archer phalanx and all. And who here wouldn't like the advantages of an archer phalanx?

So are you suggesting we make an unit based on assumption and guess rather than using data collected and compiled by archeologists and historians?

Advantage? How can you think giving a bow and arrows would be an advantage to a phalangist?
To aim and shoot freely they need more space within the troop which is highly contradictory to the doctrine of Phalanx not to mention the extra weight they have to carry. I know some of later pikemen used bows along with long pike but they carried much less weight compared to that of Phalangist.

Also you know very well it's usually specialisation which brings out the full potential of each armed force not generalisation and all-round usage. Romans and Greeks knew this very well and always followed this principle.(no archer legionnaire or hoplite)

quote: Could you please explain unit upgrades for germ warfare? The way I see it is most units would think that it was beneath themselves to heave carcasses over walls and would only commit a small contingent to do such and thus not fully receive a bonus. themselves.

and that's the way it should be and this may be simulated as providing bonus to besieging army who possess the knowledge of using germ.

If you can bring a reference to historical existance of specialised germ phalanx I will happily accept your proposal.

quote: just too many weapons,

Most of them I suggested above are related to the units of CivII in some ways with few exceptions such as chariot(arse & horse)and how general can they be more than that? Do you really want damn simple list like Stone Axe->Bronze sword->Iron sword->musket-rifle?
If the weapon list gets civ specific it can be enlarged up to several hundreds of items and I reduced them to the maxium simplicity with reasonable degree of historic representaion. Please suggest any viable alternative to my list then we can make compromise.

[Evil Capitalist]

I'm not too sure on the cannons, but tanks:

Basic tanks- 1917-1940: From MkI to Matilda. Mk I male version has guns and machine guns, female just machine guns. between world wars swivel turret appears, and side turrets disappear. Early engines go up to about 4 mph, by WW2 they can do c.20 (I think).
Heavy Tanks- 1920s-1950s: Conquorors, JS3s, etc. Heavy gun, slow movement, thick armour. Lose popularity when good, all round tanks appear.
'Blitzkrieg' tanks- 1935-1970s: Wider tracks, heavier guns than early tanks, but move considerably faster. Later ones include sloped armour, etc. examples: Tiger tanks, Shermans, T34s. Phased out in most armies by the 70s, but still in use in some areas.
MBTs (Main Battle Tanks)- 1945- : Tanks like the centurion, T55, M48 etc. faster, better armoured and better armed than WW2 tanks. Important step up in armourment for western tanks with the introduction of the L7 105mm gun. Many still in service today, forming the backbone of the majority of poorer nations' armoured divisions.
Modern tanks- 1970s- : The next generation of tanks, including M1s, Challengers, Leopard IIs. Make use of bigger guns (usually 120mm), better engines (usually capable of about 50mph), better ammunition (eg APFSDS- armour piercing fin stablisized discarding sabot) and advanced armour,, notably chobham (layers metals, ceramics and plastics designed to defeat APDS rounds).

I'd go into light tanks and APCs but I'm not too sure about them. There's a good site for various modern tanks at http://battletanks.com
[This message has been edited by Evil Capitalist (edited August 13, 2000).]

[SWPIGWANG The Second]

DarkCloud

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

YOU'VE GOT IT ALL WRONG.

1st of all...You the concept of anyone trying to put all the weapon (most of it anyway) is a unit design work shop is INSANE due to the fact that it is going to do nothing more then giving players headacres.

Besides, thats THE most unrealistic and ahistorical idea ever. Allow me to explan.

The whole problem here is that you are thinking that weapons, armour and other short of this stuff can be used to emulate real life units. DEAD WRONG. The orginalization of a army is no less, if not more, then the lenght of a sword or the size of a anti-tank gun. Besides, almost ALL armies, modern or long vanished, is a result of combined arms. Of course people didn't specialize before the concept of combined arms, but instead each men carried more then one weapon. As a result, no army in the world have only used ONE kind of weapon as the system would allow.

The archer at the battle of Agincourt for example, brought double pointed wooden stakes to build a fence-like structure to stop Cavalry, a Long Bow with 25 shots and a melee weapon of one's choice. Now do you build a unit with 3 weapons? And the fact that the reason the british archers uses the longbow and their french counter part don't is caused more by culture then technology.

Lets not get into modern day armour divisions or infantry battlions each with its own AA-Guns and Artillery support and so on. Even wellindon's squares at waterloo used some pikemen to stop a cavalry charge.

With your system a Roman legion would be exactly the same as a man at arms. Of course the way they fight is different but the equipment is about the same. How about a samerie and a crusader, both ware chain armor and uses a long sword. Yet sll of then are VERY different.

Besides, your system is no fun for me. When I want a phalanx I don't want bronze ancient spear man.

I'd support a system witch specially ability can be added to predesigned units....EARYLY ON IN THE GAME

[S. Kroeze]

What is a phalanx?

It seems to me some posters here use the word in a rather unconventional way.

quote: 'Phalanx' is a Greek word, meaning 'battle array', nothing more! Phalanx: 'in military science, tactical formation consisting of a block of heavily armed infantry standing shoulder to shoulder in files several ranks deep. Fully developed by the ancient Greeks, it survived in modified form into the gunpowder era and is viewed today as the beginning of European military development. The ancient Sumerian army fielded a standard six-man-deep phalanx; the first line went into battle carrying large, rectangular shields, and the troops bore heavy pikes and battle axes. During the 7th century BC the Greek city-states adopted a phalanx eight men deep. The Greek hoplite, the heavy-armed infantryman who manned the phalanx, was equipped with a round shield, a heavy corselet of leather and metal, greaves (shin armour), an 8-foot pike for thrusting, and a 2-foot double-edged sword. Since the phalanx held in solid ranks and was divided only into the centre and wings, there was generally little need for an officer corps; the whole line advanced in step to the sound of the flute. Such a formation encouraged cohesion among advancing troops and presented a frightening spectacle to the enemy, but it was difficult to maneuver and, if penetrated by enemy formations, became little more than a mob. For a millennium after the fall of Rome, massed infantry was swept from the field by heavy cavalry, but in the 15th century, Swiss burghers and peasants, fighting for their freedom in Alpine valleys where cavalry had little room to maneuver, brought about a return of the phalanx. This consisted of one-fifth missile weapons (chiefly the crossbow), one-fifth spears, and three-fifths halberds (eight-foot shafts with the blade of an ax, the point of a spear, and a hook for pulling a rider out of the saddle). Discarding all armour except for the helmet and cuirass, the Swiss were able to march 30 miles a day and attack with a celerity and discipline that were disconcerting to their adversaries.' (source: Britannica.com, article 'phalanx')

'Between 675 and 650BC, however, a new type of fighting appeared. Massed heavy infantry, known as hoplites and armed primarily with spears, overturned the cavalry, which without stirrups could not hope to generate the power to attack even small formations of food soldiers so long as they stuck together.

It is generally assumed that hoplite armament (shield, or hoplon; torso armor, at first a "bell" cuirass and later a metal-reinforced corslet; helmet; greaves; short iron sword; and a six-foot thrusting spear) and phalanx tactics are logically inseparable. This is not the case. They were discrete phenomena- simultaneous, perhaps, but seperate.

For one thing, the heavy panoply of the hoplite was not necessary for spear-based, close-formation tactics. The consistent success of both the later version of the Macedonin grand phalanx and the Swiss pike formations, neither of which used much body armor, proved this. Moreover, there is a tendency to label hoplite equipment as something new and revolutionary when in fact it was a close approximation of the accoutrements of the Iliad.'
(source: R.L. O'Connell:'Of Arms and Men',1989)

So my conclusion is that the phalanx is first of all a tactical formation, and its use closely related to the social and political conditions in a given society. In fact the Greek phalanx was nothing new at all! Another argument for some sort of recruitment system related to domestic politics.

So a group consisting exclusevely of archers and yet fighting in close-formation using shock power doesn't make sense!
I know CivII by linking the Phalanx to Bronze Working is partly to blame for this confusion.

[Evil Capitalist]

quote: Originally posted by SWPIGWANG The Second on 08-13-2000 09:29 AM Even wellindon's squares at waterloo used some pikemen to stop a cavalry charge.

No.

The cavalry was stopped by close packed bayonets. The pike went permanently out of fasion after Cullodan, when the British, with bayonets, routed the jacobites. Pikes did not make it into 19th century European warfare.

[DarkCloud]

Okay, Okay, how about we eliminate the modules.

Thus we would merely have units such as the aforementioned

-Warrior [Basic] (Spear)
-Advanced Warrior (Jagged Spear)
-Biological Warrior (Spear dropped in Smallpox Blood)

Phalanx (Bronze Spear and Bronze Shields): 1-2-1

Wooden Phalanx: 1-1-2 (Wooden Shields, Travels fast like a real Roman Legionaire would, 30-40 miles a day. Hey they did it!)

Engineer Phalanx: 2-2-1 (Engineers make elaborate traps for the enemy to fall in and dig better trenches than most units. Attack Advantage)

There would 'hopefully' be three variations of each unit, should you so choose to use them.

And, to cut down on clutter in your city's build screen how about this:
You click on a design, say 'Phalanx', the design then opens up a box such as the ones which appear when you highlight over the 'profile' button at the top of this post.

From there you can choose your type of Phalanx.

Youngsun- Any objections or comments they would be welcome?

[SWPIGWANG The Second]

I think I'd like a system where there is a basic unit and players get to pick minor differences of type. For example for a Tank unit a player would get to pick wether the tank would be Trench/Infantry Tank, Light Tank(?), Medium (Bliz) or Heavy Tank. Then the player would get to pick speical abilities, like Amphibious assult (attack off ships)

Damn...I rememeber seeing pikes in a printing for waterloo.....

[Evil Capitalist]

As in 16 foot long things? You're probably thinking of bayonets or perhaps the 'colours' (flags)

[Youngsun]

Updated...

*Prehistoric*
Stone axe +3 melee
Hunting spear +2 melee +1 support
Primitive bow +2 support

*Ancient*
Bronze spear +4 melee +1 support
Bronze sword +5 melee
Bronze armour +1 armour -1 mobility
Iron spear +5 melee +1 support
Iron sword +6 melee
Iron armour +2 armour -1 mobility
Wooden shield +1 armour
Bronze shield +2 armour -1 mobility
Iron shield +3 armour -1 mobility
Composite bow +3 support
Horse armour +1 armour -1 mobility
Marius's mule allows a unit to fortify -1 mobility

Transport(Anceint to early Modern)
Light Horse +6 mobility(no armour allowed)
Medium Horse +5 mobility(armoured men allowed)
War Horse +4 mobility(Horse armour allowed)
Chariot(arse) +2 mobility
Chariot(horse)+3 mobility
Elephant +2 mobility -2 enemy melee(only cavalry)

*Midieval & Early Rennaissance*
Long sword +7 melee
Pike +5 melee X2 melee vs mounted(only inf)
Lance +5 melee X2 melee vs mounted(only cav)
Plate armour +4 armour -2 mobility
Mace +5 melee ignores enemy armour 50% -1 mobility
Longbow +5 support ignores enemy armour 60%(inf only)
Crossbow +3 support ignores enemy armour 80%
Stirrup +2 melee(only mounted)auto upgrade if discovered


*Renaissance to Modern*
After the discovery of gunpowder new stat(firepower) will be added to all units which use firearms(many thanks to Evil capitalist)


Infantry primary
Arquebus +1 firepower
Musket +2 firepower
Later musket(Napoleonic) +3 firepower +4 melee
Early rifle(Napoleonic) +5 firepower +4 melee
Breech loader rifles(Colonial) +6 firepower +4 melee
Magazine rifle(WWI) +7 firepower +4 melee
Semi Automatic rifle(WWII) +10 firepower +4 melee
Advanced rifle(Modern) +15 firepower +3 melee

Armour
Basic tank(or Inf-tank) +8 armour +6 firepower +1 mobility(1.ignores trench effect 2.Ancient enemy melee/support negated ->applied to all armour)
Heavy Tank +10 armour +6 firepower(X2 vs hard target) +2 mobility
'Blitzkrieg' tank(WWII) +12 armour +7 firepower(X2 vs hard target) +5 mobility can "blitz"->applied to all armours after this
MBT(post WWII) +16 armour +12 firepower(X2 vs hard target) +7 mobility
MBT(next generation) +30 armour +16 firepower(X2 vs hard target)
+8 mobility(finally it equals 3 map mobility)

Note: All armours developed during and after WWII can blitz which means your unit can get through enemy unit without necessarily destroying it. Blitzed and enveloped enemy unit will suffer from penalty of reduced firepower,etc.

Siege support
Captapult/trebuchet +1 siege support can break city wall
Medieval bombard +2 siege support can break city wall
Mortar/Howitzer(Napoleonic) +3 siege support ignore city wall(applied to all artillery after these)
Mortar/Siege gun/Railgun(World war) +4 siege support

Field firepower support
Cannon(Napoleonic) +1 Firepower support
Breechloading cannon +2 FP support
Field Howitzer(world war) +3 FP support
SPA/Mobile rocket launcher(WWII) +3 FP support +5 mobility
SPA/MLRS(Modern) +4 FP support +6 mobility

Misc. support
Flak gun +4 firepower X3 vs Air target X2 hard target
SAM +16 firepower air target only
AT gun +2 firepower X4 hard target
ATGM +16 firepower hard target only

Transport(Modern)
Truck(motorised) +6 mobility
Half tracked(mechanised) +7 mobility +2 armour +1 FP support
Tracked(APC) +6 mobility +4 armour +1 FP support
Tracked(IFV) +7 mobility +8 armour +2 FP support

Note:Field guns can be horse-drawn by combining horses and guns. Other type of transport can be used for that function such as trucks.

Ground Reconnaissance
Motor cycle +2 recon bonus +7 mobility
Armoured vehicle(WWII) +2 recon +8 mobility +2 armour
Combat recon(modern) +4 recon +12 mobility +4 armour

[This message has been edited by Youngsun (edited August 15, 2000).]

[Youngsun]

I reduced Inf tank's firepower because it's primary roles are "breakthrough mission" or "absorbing enemy hits" to protect following infantry not necessarily wiping out enemy troops. By same token Infantry of that age get higher firepower thus encouraging inf-armour combination. We all know early failures of proper armour use due to lack of inf escort.

When Infantry and Armours move at similar pace(1~4 mobility=1 map mobility)there is no need for APC but as armour speed get faster and faster Infantry need APC to catch up with the advancing armours.

Anyone can provide a list for Artillery,APC,Navy,Airforce and missiles?(deeply appreciated)
[This message has been edited by Youngsun (edited August 14, 2000).]

[Shadowstrike]

The missiles should be a simple matter, just pay more for extra range i.e.:

100 m. = 10 shields
1000 m. = 100 shields
...

or whatever. But the range must be developed through research (put into rocket tech of course)

[DarkCloud]

SWIPIANG-

So you mean you would like to see variations. Such as

Phalanx- Choose:

Phalanx (Bronze Spear and Bronze Shields): 1-2-1

Wooden Phalanx: 1-1-2 (Wooden Shields, Travels fast like a real Roman Legionaire would, 30-40 miles a day. Hey they did it!)

Engineer Phalanx: 2-2-1 (Engineers make elaborate traps for the enemy to fall in and dig better trenches than most units. Attack Advantage)

Yes?

[Youngsun]

Artillery(firepower support)

Captapult/trebuchet +1 siege support can break city wall
Medieval bombard +1 FP support can break city wall
Breechloading/leather cannon & Mortar/Howitzer(Napoleonic) +2 FP support +2 mobility ignore city wall(applied to all artillery after these)
Mortar/Field Howitzer(Modern) +3 FP support +3 mobility
SPA/mobile Rocket launcher +4 FP suppport +5 mobility


Misc. support weaponry(AT & AA)

Flak gun/AA gun/Vulcan/SAM +2 FP support X3 vs Air target
AT rifle/AT gun/ATGM +2 FP support X3 vs hard target

Note: Maxim/Gatling gun,Rail gun, SPAA,Mobile SAM,RPG,AGL,Mobile ATGM were excluded.

Perhaps I generalised Misc. weaponry too much anyone think that way please let me know.
[This message has been edited by Youngsun (edited August 15, 2000).]

[Evil Capitalist]

The just a few points: There is a lot of differecnce between field and seige artillery. From c.17th entury you'd need a horse drawn artillery unit. Also there should be napoleonic style cannon and breach loader seperatly- the breach loader was a vital improvement. Seige guns could also be upgraded at c.1900 to steel barrleded guns (those WW1 monsters).

[Youngsun]

OK Evil Capitalist

Siege support

Captapult/trebuchet +1 siege support can break city wall
Medieval bombard +2 siege support can break city wall
Mortar/Howitzer(Napoleonic) +3 siege support ignore city wall(applied to all artillery after these)
Mortar/Siege gun/Railgun(World war) +4 siege support

Field firepower support

Cannon(Napoleonic) +1 Firepower support
Breechloading cannon +2 FP support
Field Howitzer(world war) +3 FP support
SPA/Mobile rocket launcher(WWII) +3 FP support +5 mobility
SPA/MLRS(Modern) +4 FP support +6 mobility

Misc. support

Flak gun +4 firepower X3 vs Air target X2 hard target
SAM +16 firepower air target only
AT gun +2 firepower X4 hard target
ATGM +16 firepower hard target only

Note:Field guns can be horse-drawn by combining horses and guns. Other type of transport can be used for that function such as trucks.

Evil capitalist could you provide a list for Navy,Airforce and missiles?
[This message has been edited by Youngsun (edited August 15, 2000).]

[Evil Capitalist]

I'll deal with the Navy for now
I'd like to point out that I think the naval side of the game would benifit from an overhaul. Two ships cannot blockade the English Channel, and naval batteries can have a major effect. This is also the one theatre where I think the workshop is needed.

I will use the terms rough seas and calm seas- rough seas are the north seas etc. of the world, calm seas are like the mediteranean or tropical islands. A calm seas unit may only operate safely in calm water, otherwise it runs a risk of damage, which is very high if it leaves the coast. A rough seas unit doesn't worry about that.
I may also use some jargon, so here it is
AA- anti aircraft
ASW- Anti submarine warfare

Early vessels:

Outrigger: Used by the polynesians to colonise loads of islands. Calm seas, must stay by coast, always a risk of loss.

Early merchant vessel: The boats you get sailing the mediteranean before the first proper navies develop. Calm seas.

Tririeme: A coverall term I'll use to cover all the multiple oar ships (they go to quinrieme). Developed by the greeks and Tyre to beat the small vessels (like the merchant ships) that threatened them. Powered by slaves or criminals, and good in most weathers. They relied apon ramming and boarding for their damage, and carried marines for the purpose. Calm seas.
Special ability: Greek fire. Increases Greek fire was a napalm like substance that was sprayed onto ships. This was vital in Byzantium's naval defense. The secret of its composition was jealously guarded and now lost. Increases firepower.

Longboat: The shallow bottomed vessels that carried raiders to foreign shores. I can't think of any engagement involving these, but they need to be included. Equipped with sails and oars the Viking longboat is a purpose built landing craft. These sailed to Newfoundland, the Black sea and the Levant. They could travel up rivers, and few places near the coast were safe from them. Rough seas.

Galley: This was the vessel that appeared from the dark ages. Like a tririeme, but with more emphasis on the oars. Galleys formed the centre of the power of Venice and Genoa. Galleys saw battle as late as the Napoleonic war, and were only got rid of when steam allowed vessels to sail without wind. Although crewed by free men in Venice, they later became floating prisons with appauling conditions. Calm seas.

Cog: While merchant vessels in the mediteranean were light and fast, trade in the North sea required strong ships with wide beams and deep drafts. The cog provided that and because of their large cargo space soon replaced their mediteranean equivalents. They also required piers, leading to harbours being built. Rough seas, coastal.

Junk: The chinese merchant vessel was well designed and better than most western ships for centuries The sails were well configured for maneuvrability. Rough seas. Coastal

Dhow: The arab trade vessel. The sils were efficient, but the ship could not be turned without taking down the sail, requiring large crews or a straight course. Calm seas.

Battleship: This term is used for all large ships in the middle ages, but I don't know any other name so I'll use this. The very biggest vessels in medieval navies were called battleships, and were a symbol of a king's power. They usually had 'castles' at the front and back- forecastles and aftercastles. These would be packed with archers or occasionally a cannon. These ships would carry troops to a foreign shore, but would also provide an escort for smaller ships. Rough seas. Coastal.

Age of Discovery vessels. (all assumed to be rough seas and, unless stated otherwise, capable of sailing away from the coast)

Caravel: A trading vessel with improved sails over the longboat. This ship can sail in difficult situations. Caravels were used to explore by Henry the Navigator, Christopher Columbus, Vasco de Gama and Ferdinand Magellan.

Carrack: A development of the caravel with three or four masts. Used square sails like the caravel and usually had a high fore- and aftercastles where artillery was mounted. Carracks were most famously used by the English to defeat the Spanish armada, being faster and more maneuverable. The carrack later developed into the frigate.

Galleon. Developed in 1570 by Sir John Hawkins by removing the forecastle from a carrack to improve handling. The name galleon was given to it by the Spanish, and it was used in the armada. The Galleon developed into the ship of the line.

Fluyte: Developed by the Dutch with a rounder hull to accommadate more cargo. This ship formed the backbone of trading fleets until the indiaman came along. The fluyte halped the dutch to secure the spice trade and become one of the greatest trading powers in world history.

Sloop: A small ship with about 20 guns. Sloops would be good pirateand anti pirate vessels if they are to be included in the game.

Frigate: Ships which had less guns than a ship of the line, but were more maneuvrable. Frigates were used for patrols and exploration, and were the fast ships in any squadron. Also like any other warship the frigate would be used in landings, and British frigates did well when they raided the French coast towards the end of the Napoleonic war.

Ship of the line: Varying from between around 70 guns to around 130 these were the backbone of fleets from their development (gradual but around 1680s if I had to commit myself to a date) to the 1860s. With the guns on three or more decks the ship of the line was usually employed in squadrons, although sometimes they operated on their own. To give an idea of the numbers in service the royal navy could boast over 150 dat the time of Nelson's death (the USN has only 110 submarines today, their most numerous vessel). The ship had several masts and vast sails (don't ask me for the names). Later they were equipped with steam engines and paddles, but retained the sails. It was only with the realisation of the strength of the ironclad that the SOL fell out of favour.
Special abilities: Heated cannon shot: Invented in the 1840s by a Frenchman the heated shot could cause a wooden ship to catch fire rapidly. Increased damage to wooden ships. Steam engine: Increased speed

Indiaman: This merchantman replaced the fluyte and became the dominant trader during the commercial revoltion. The size varied, but the ship serviced the east india companes well. Many a fortune was made when the indiaman someone had invested in arrived in port (hence "when my ship comes in")

I'll do ironclads and onwards later.

[Youngsun]

You are the man! Evil capitalist Thank you very much.