Skip to Content
 

Simple but interesting combat mechanic

4 replies [Last post]
Sun, 06/05/2016 - 13:24
Tbone
Tbone's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2013

I've been working on Pillars of Civilization for a while now and in order to be confident in creating a prototype I need to develop the combat/conquest mechanics a little more.

Currently what I have so far is only the pre-combat initiation. Players have 5 territory cards numbered from 1 to 5 placed horizontally in a line with the numbers increasing from right to left in front of them. Each have an attack and defense position modifier - the first territory has a DPM (defense position modifier) of 5 and an APM (attack position modifier) of 1. As the you move from territory to territory away from the first territory your DPM decreases while your APM increases; you are getting closer to the enemy making it harder to defend but easier to attack (I will explain why). This is to create artificial distance between players. When you wish to attack/conquer an enemy territory you will pick one of your territories with at least one attacking unit and then pick an enemy territory with a building or unit and compare position modifiers. You will subtract the APM of your territory from the DPM of your opponents territory to find out how difficult it will be to attack or defend. If the number is positive you must discard power from your hand (each card you have has a certain power number) equal to the difference for each unit you use. If the number is negative the defender must discard power from his/her hand equal to the difference for each unit he defends with. So, the further you are from your first territory (home) it is easier for you to attack the enemy (higher APM) because you are getting "closer", but because of this it is also easier for the enemy to attack you (lower DPM).

Example:

I decide to conquer.
I choose territory 3 of mine to initiated the conquest with.
I choose territory 2 of the opponent and attempt to conquer.
The DPM of territory 2 of my opponent is 4 because it is one step away from the first territory. The DPM of territories decreases by one as they get farther from the first territory.
The APM of my territory 3 is 3 because it is three steps from the first territory. APM increases by one for every step from the first territory.
4 DPM - 3 APM = 1 power discarded per attacking unit used.

Here is where I need help...

Background Info:

There will be no dice here. Units will have an attack and defense value - varying from 0 to 4. Most will have special abilities but in order to create better units you must train basic units. Basic army units have 1 attack and 1 defense. There are also basic worker units that can be used as defense but will not retaliate (deal damage to attacking units). They have 0 attack and 1 defense. Army units are created by discarding two worker units. During play there will normally be about 2 to 6 units per player in a battle.

My Ideas:

After you spend power to defend or attack with units I thought it would be cool for you to pick a place within the territory for battle called a concentration point. This would be a building (they typically give players abilities and advantages) or a unit.

I also had the idea of making a little bit of tension with a rock-paper-scissors type positioning mechanic. The positions would be guard, attack, and flank. Attack would beat guard, guard would beat flank, and flank would beat attack. Each position would give the unit in the position a +1 attack against any unit it's position beats. So if you choose to use the attack position against a unit that is in the guard position you would have +1 attack vs. that unit. I don't know how to implement this though and how to make it a surprise to both players.

Your Help:

I would love to hear some ideas. I know this is a lot of text but if you have any non-dice battle mechanics that would work with 2 to 6 units from each player in battle with attack and defense values varying from 0 to 4 and maybe some sort of hidden information to make things interesting I would really appreciate it!

Top
Sun, 06/05/2016 - 13:54
#1
gxnpt
Offline
Joined: 12/22/2015
concepts need to be integrated

The combat resolution must integrate with the factors already mentioned. So the combat tactic could combine with attack and defense bonuses and the combined totals compared with the enemies combined totals for resolutions.

Top
Mon, 06/06/2016 - 05:23
#2
Johnny Black
Johnny Black's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/01/2016
For me I like any combat

For me I like any combat system that includes some kind of mindgame, where u really have to think about the decisions you make. I like the combat system where the defender plays a card first. They ask you can u beat this? If u can and want to, u play a card that says u can beat it and maybe the defender cant play a certain card to defeat it. This process continues until someone finally says IM OUT I cant beat that. The mindgame comes when everything you put forward you lose. So you have to consider how valuable victory is, and what is worth putting forward now or maybe save for when ur opponent spends some of their better card. I just like this combat system

Top
Mon, 06/06/2016 - 12:57
#3
ruy343
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2013
Where's the risk?

OK, so I understand that you're trying to divorce your combat system from randomness, but I worry that your proposition will make the game fatalistic - the outcome of a combat is decided even before the combat is initiated.

I suggest a combat system similar to the Game of Thrones board game, where you have a hand of cards that give a combat bonus in addition to the units present on the field, with combat bonuses ranging from +0-+4. That amount lines up pretty well with the intended 2-6 units per side per combat. Once you use a given card, you can't use it again until you use up the rest of the cards in your hand, so use your big bonuses carefully! Other games use this idea too, like Sun Tzu and Battle Line.

That said, I do like the idea of distance from the city playing a role in combat efficacy, but maybe you could print that bonus on the city tile itself, so that the bonuses are clearly indicated up to two squares/hexes away from the city itself to make ti simpler.

Top
Mon, 06/06/2016 - 12:57
#4
ruy343
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2013
Where's the risk?

OK, so I understand that you're trying to divorce your combat system from randomness, but I worry that your proposition will make the game fatalistic - the outcome of a combat is decided even before the combat is initiated.

I suggest a combat system similar to the Game of Thrones board game, where you have a hand of cards that give a combat bonus in addition to the units present on the field, with combat bonuses ranging from +0-+4. That amount lines up pretty well with the intended 2-6 units per side per combat. Once you use a given card, you can't use it again until you use up the rest of the cards in your hand, so use your big bonuses carefully! Other games use this idea too, like Sun Tzu and Battle Line.

That said, I do like the idea of distance from the city playing a role in combat efficacy, but maybe you could print that bonus on the city tile itself, so that the bonuses are clearly indicated up to two squares/hexes away from the city itself to make ti simpler.

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut