Darkodinplus

Join Date 03/2006

+20

Military organization and groupings

I know I can create my own units in Elemental but something that I have been wondering about for quite sometime is the choice of groupings. Is everything in Elemental going to be single units or are there squads? I hope you can produce and design squads if you want. While in most games you can get around this by having multiple units work together as an unofficial squad that isn’t really ideal if you ask me.

Having some type of system in place that designates certain units in a queue as part of a specific squad using the unit production screen wouldn’t be too awfully difficult. In this case the smallest selectable entity would be the squad opposed to the individual unit. This would add a lot of variety and depth to the military of Elemental because then even if two armies had similar units they could have made totally different squads causing them to battle in different ways.

The only problems I would see arising with this is when the player puts a fast unit and a slow unit in a squad together which could only be reasonably negotiated with the faster unit limiting its movement to that of the slower unit. The other area of concern would be including ranged units with CQC units which would probably be the biggest problem. The best way to deal with this I think would be to include a toggle button to switch the squad between primary modes of attack. So if you had 5 archers and 5 spearmen in a squad and you set them to ranged the squad would basically ignore the spearmen unless an enemy engaged. If the button was set to melee the squad would basically ignore the archers although you probably wouldn’t want archers in close quarters but that might just be a necessary evil.

While I wouldn’t mind seeing the logical steps beyond a squad that might be asking too much since complexity would really run away if you start letting people make platoons and battalions. The player can always make unofficial versions of those anyway which is easier to manage then say an unofficial squad.

elemental

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

ScottTykoski

Join Date 03/2001

+132

As of now, our current plan has the player making two choices when they train a unit...

1. Unit type: Which unit design do I want to train (Common Footsoldiers, Advanced Bowmen, etc).

2. Grouping Type: How large of a squad do I want? A 'Squad' only requires 10 population units, but a 'Company' of 40 troops will last even longer on the battlefield, with a 'Legion' (300 troops) putting up an even better fight in open war.

Most 'Grouping Types' will require a Logisitical understanding to be met (through Technologies or base racial ability), with some of the larger groups unable to join in dungeon exploration (I would imagine only 'Squads' could realistically traverse most dungeons).

Also, in this system, you couldn't mix-and-match unit designs within the group. That's not to say an Army can't have a variety of bowmen, calvary, and knights, but they would be seperate groups traveling as one body (think Fleets from GC2).

Again, all subject to change, but that's where our our current path takes us.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Thanks for the info; I had anticipated some logistics requirement for the larger groups but would I be mistaken in saying that the actual appearance you describe sounds similar to King’s Bounty the legend where if you have knights in your army regardless of the number they are all represented by one avatar on the map or are you saying that each group I make will be represented by an individual avatar in the army?

Successfully updated karma reason!

ScottTykoski

Join Date 03/2001

+132

A units representation is dependent on a number of factors...

1. Computer Specs: Higher end machines will be able to show more units, lower end boxes condencing said visual representation.

2. Zoom Level: Zoom in to see an army in all it's glory, zoom out and it'll be represented via the Champion unit they're grouped under.

3. Game Mode: You'll be seeing fewer units on the main map then in the tactial battle.

But in general we're really trying to keep away gross under-representation of units....'lots of troops on the screen' is more fun than 'one troop next to a large number'.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Hm, can a unit have more than one weapon? Like in: can my legionair throw his pillum and then use his sword for close combat?

edit: rephrasing

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting GHenrikG,

reply 4

Hm, can a unit have more than one weapon? Like in: can my legionair throw his pillum and then use his sword for close combat?

edit: rephrasing

I would also be interested in having units which do more than just one type of weapon.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Alstein

Join Date 07/2004

+55

Quoting BoogieBac,

reply 1

As of now, our current plan has the player making two choices when they train a unit...

1. Unit type: Which unit design do I want to train (Common Footsoldiers, Advanced Bowmen, etc).

2. Grouping Type: How large of a squad do I want? A 'Squad' only requires 10 population units, but a 'Company' of 40 troops will last even longer on the battlefield, with a 'Legion' (300 troops) putting up an even better fight in open war.

Most 'Grouping Types' will require a Logisitical understanding to be met (through Technologies or base racial ability), with some of the larger groups unable to join in dungeon exploration (I would imagine only 'Squads' could realistically traverse most dungeons).

Also, in this system, you couldn't mix-and-match unit designs within the group. That's not to say an Army can't have a variety of bowmen, calvary, and knights, but they would be seperate groups traveling as one body (think Fleets from GC2).

Again, all subject to change, but that's where our our current path takes us.

Perhaps for the expansion you could evolve that into a Kohan-style system where you can have support with the army- like paladins to improve morale, clerics to heal and speed recovery, etc...

I'd like to see that down the road if it can't be done at launch.

As for fast and slow units- that will lead to a system where people will use nothing but cavalry, unless forced to do otherwise by the system. Speed kills in TBS.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting arstal,

reply 6

[...]
As for fast and slow units- that will lead to a system where people will use nothing but cavalry, unless forced to do otherwise by the system. Speed kills in TBS.

Well, a pike wielding unit would be the hard counter here. Perhaps it even has a special ability: The pikemen form a hedgehog like circle and thus can't be outflanked by cavalery.

I think, it all comes down to balancing (and thus beta testing).

Successfully updated karma reason!

Alstein

Join Date 07/2004

+55

Which will just get whittled down vs ranged mounted units.

Then again in medieval history those were the most dangerous units. Hopefully there will be a counter to that.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Testing will indeed be required as one unit type becomes dominant, you have to find a counter for it.

Armoured knights - longbowmen and/or pikemen.

Cavalry bowmen - armoured knights

Dragon - ???

Once you add combat spells and creatures to the mix it will be lots of fun (and time) to test.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Interesting. But about grouping: is more always better ? Is a bigger unit always better than smaller ?

It would be interesting to have some limitations, narrow swamp/mountain passes which have limited bandwidth and only allow smaller units to pass. Or a path on a frozen river or lake, which can't be crossed by a big squad. It shoudln't be too common or it would become an interface/logistics nightmare.

Fantasy General had an interesting concept - it distinguished between light and heavy infantry, and cavalry. It even distinguished between ordinary light infantry and skirmishers ! Some units supposedly had 'loose' formation making them relatively good in tough terrain like woods, swamp or mountains. Light infantry and cavalry actually had an edge over their heavy counterparts in rough terrain ! Aside from combat modifiers, heavier units had movement penalties in such terrain. And siege machines were simply awful anywhere except open fields and roads. Perhaps Elemental could use something similar ? Squad size affecting how well it performs in rough terrain ?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting BoogieBac,

reply 3

A units representation is dependent on a number of factors...

1. Computer Specs: Higher end machines will be able to show more units, lower end boxes condencing said visual representation.

2. Zoom Level: Zoom in to see an army in all it's glory, zoom out and it'll be represented via the Champion unit they're grouped under.

3. Game Mode: You'll be seeing fewer units on the main map then in the tactial battle.

But in general we're really trying to keep away gross under-representation of units....'lots of troops on the screen' is more fun than 'one troop next to a large number'.

So how will you decide "computer specs"? I mean will it be an option in the video options menu? or will it scale itself based on frame rate?

Personally, I think there is a limit on number of troops and fun. There is a point where I can't watch guys be crushed by a dragon on a per-person basis or watching guys fly away from an explosion. But looking at current shots I can't see that being much of a problem.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting b0rsuk,

reply 10

This would be an interesting dynamic I would like to see included in military engagement. I would also like the ability to mix and match unit types in a given squad for the reasons I gave in my original post.

On a side note from one of my other threads I'm still wondering if there is a limit to how much training a soldier can receive and the quality of equipment you can create for a soldier.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Philocthetes

Join Date 10/2003

+153

Quoting Darkodinplus,

reply 12

...I would also like the ability to mix and match unit types in a given squad for the reasons I gave in my original post. ...

I take Scott's reference to GC2 fleets to mean that you *will* be able to mix and match 'unit types' in a larger group/stack, just not types within a unit. A 'unit' seems to be roughly analagous to a ship design in GC2.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I understand that you will be able to include different units in the larger groupings that would be completely insane if you couldn't. All I'm saying is I would like to have the ability to include multiple types of units in a squad I created. So for example I could have a squad of 9 spearmen and one dismounted Hodarian Knight to make a 10 man squad.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I think homogenous unit groups ("fleets with one ship design") are fine so long as you can use unit combinations effectively. For instance:

Having archers stand directly behind spearmen and fire between them (warning: only attempt with well-trained archers).
Having skirmishers retreat through friendly lines (again, a professional army is probably needed here

I guess in general, lots of "cool" mixed-unit tactics would probably have a prerequisite in terms of training, and possibly even Kingdom/Empire.

Boogie - any chance we can get a glimpse into thoughts on tactical options?

Successfully updated karma reason!

I guess (and absolutely hope) that you train individual units which you can form into groups (GalCiv 2s fleets) if you want to and that you can also disassemble squads to individual units again.

Having only a certain number of units moving through f.e. a mountain pass is a good idea and I just know it's gonna be incorporated in the campaign in that there are a squad of superpowerful troops guarding a pass which you can only engage with another squad of superpowerful troops.

But for MP it sounds very exciting. Like Age of Wonder: Shadow Magic where a tile surrounded by mountains (or some other impassable terrain) could only have 2 stacks fighting at the same time. Together with "raise mountain" or "wildfire" it opens up for interesting strategical possibilities.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Denryu

Join Date 07/2006

+93

Quoting Campaigner,

reply 16

I guess (and absolutely hope) that you train individual units which you can form into groups (GalCiv 2s fleets) if you want to and that you can also disassemble squads to individual units again.

Having only a certain number of units moving through f.e. a mountain pass is a good idea and I just know it's gonna be incorporated in the campaign in that there are a squad of superpowerful troops guarding a pass which you can only engage with another squad of superpowerful troops.

But for MP it sounds very exciting. Like Age of Wonder: Shadow Magic where a tile surrounded by mountains (or some other impassable terrain) could only have 2 stacks fighting at the same time. Together with "raise mountain" or "wildfire" it opens up for interesting strategical possibilities.

Sounds like someone watched '300' recently. Spartans at Thermopylae, anyone?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Hmmm, a Kohan type army creation system could work for making squads.

I mean, an army would have several main, support and special slots for different types of troops. When forming the army, you could even leave some slots empty if $/time is in short supply.

So for example, your battalion creation could consist of a front line of footmen, a back line of archers, and a special slot filled with a leader or hero.

*The Battalion would travel at the slowest troop component speed as well.

Successfully updated karma reason!