Expand IsInfra Functionality
-
@CrazyG So this eliminates the one unit suicide strike destroying the stockpile?
-
@prastle
Correct. -
One of the current effects of IsInfra that I really don't like is the swing. If you add cannons as an isInfra unit, you do end up with extremely swingy situations. If I get this hit kill the last infantry, I the kill 5 or 6 units for free. Now, swings have a role, but if they are too common, its bad.
So I'm going to put out something I'd like to see. I want a unit with the current isInfra status, where it cannot be chosen as a casualty. But I don't want it to be captured, ever. Not when attacking, not when defending.
So what happens if all the normal combat units (the units with hitpoints) die? You should put the newer hits on those isInfra cannons.
Situation 1 (1 round of combat)
I roll 4 hits. My opponent has 3 infantry, 3 cannons.
I should kill the 3 inf, then 1 cannon.Situation 2 (2 rounds of combat)
Round 1
I roll 3 hits. My opponent has 3 infantry, 3 cannons.
His 3 infantry die.
Round 2
I roll 2 hits. I kill 2 cannons.Situation 3
Round 1
I roll 4 units. My opponent has 3 infantry, 1 light cannon, 1 medium cannon, 1 heavy cannon.
First, my opponent's infantry are dieing. Those leftover hits, the defender would decide which of his cannons die. -
@CrazyG What is the point of making them Infrastructure in the first place if you are going to make them be taken as casualties during battle? What am I missing from this?
-
@Hepps
Well to start, infrastructure is a confusing term.There are a lot of reasons a person might want a unit to not be able to be taken as a casualty. TWW's air transports is one example. We want that unit to not be selectable as a casualty, but that doesn't mean its captured.
Here is a theoretical situation. I attack a territory with 2 air transports, 2 paratroopers. You defend with 3 infantry. Let's look at two situations.
Situation A
You get lucky, you score 3 hits. What should I lose? 2 paratroopers is obvious, but what about that 3rd hit? I think I should lose an air transport too.Situation B
You score 2 hits. I lose 2 paratroopers. What should happen to the air transports? Are they captured by the enemy, or destroyed?Another case would be if I attack a territory but cannot capture it. Let's say I have 100 fighters, I attack a space with 1 infantry, and 1 cannon (the cannon without hitpoints from before).
I actually can't kill your artillery if its infrasture. If we change this situation so that you have 10 artillery, I would have to sacrifice a ton of planes just to get that one infantry.
-
@CrazyG I think what you are getting at is 'enforced' or 'required' casualty selection ordering. Essentially having some way to say these unit types must die first or last or somewhere in between. You could even take this to the extremes and have a set casualty selection order so that the defender never has any input into their casualty selection (and even attacker for that matter). An example would be for say revised that the 'enforced' OOL is inf, art, tank, fighter, bomber. This would eliminate the funkiness around players trying to decide whether to take say their bombers as early casualties in a large, close battle. There is also the concept of just full/partial random casualty selection where the player would have no casualty selection input at all the casualties are determined randomly (this is already an available property for targeted attacks).
That concept has been discussed before and is something that could be potentially added. Though its somewhat tangential to how IsInfra works. IsInfra currently essentially indicates a unit has 0 HP and can be either captured/destroyed.
-
@redrum said in Expand IsInfra Functionality:
That concept has been discussed before and is something that could be potentially added. Though its somewhat tangential to how IsInfra works. IsInfra currently essentially indicates a unit has 0 HP and can be either captured/destroyed.
I see that.
But just to consider for isInfra and ideas like air units that have it. Fighters will be able to attack anything they want for free if the capturing behavior is changed.
So the answer is yes to question #3
-
@CrazyG Good point. Which is why I generally lean towards even air infra units being captured/destroyed if they are the only ones left. I believe that avoids being able to say have 1 fighter that has HP and 100 bombers that are IsInfra then flying that stack around to essentially strafe large unit stacks while only losing 1 fighter. Ends up being a very similar problem to having lots of multi-HP units that heal every turn which can just strafe with their extra HP.
And yeah, I don't really see any downside of allowing targeted attacks to target IsInfra units.
-
-
I've done some brainstorming, and I'm confident that allowing isInfra units to be targeted by targeted attacks is the most useful feature suggested so far. This ought to be the priority for this thread. I could immediately use it for something, the idea of a map that uses only targeted attacks would really benefit from this feature.
On attacking isInfra units being captured/destroyed or retreating, there are cases for both making sense (tribes wants them to be captured, HoH wants them to retreat). So would it be possible to make a global property that determines this?
-
I've also noticed that if a unit is isInfrastructure, it cannot have an targeted attack. You won't get an error, the targeted attack just won't fire.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login