I've started w/ the Mini-Military model below.

Simplified Military model for version Alpha 1

....Units.....
Foot Soldier : Move 1 : Combat Factor 1 : Ground only
Tank : Move 3 : Combat Factor 3 : Ground only
Ship : Move 4 : Combat Factor 3 : Sea only
Plane : Move 10 : Combat Factor 5 : Air only ... must land every other turn

....Task Force Rules....
Each TF is named ... by user or by random number assignment
TF Commander feature is not used
TF may contain 1 or 2 units.

....Combat rules....
any unit may attack any "adjacent" unit, regardless of terrain
Each turn is divided into 3 segments (max of 3 attacks for attacker & defender each)
combatants take turns, attacker goes first.
Chance of hitting = [attacker CF] / [Total of attacker CF + defender CF]
Each successful hit = 25% damage. After 100% damage, the TF is destroyed.

Display status after each combat segment. Unit may disengage at each segment on player option. AI units will disengage if damage >=50%.

.... Construction of units .....
Turns to construct = Combat Factor
Cost of construction = Combat Factor * 10

.... Supply of units ....
Feature not used.

Thanks for putting up the model. It looks good. I guess we need to discuss it a bit, but my intention had been to stick with an ancient-world-only alpha-1 just to keep things simple. A lot of the economic and military stuff will be much more complicated as we get into the modern world. I was hoping to avoid that aspect for now. What do you think?

To that end, I think it is also more productive in terms of testing out the land system to have a couple of kinds of units. In civ terms, there might be warriors, legions, and horsemen. The only real problem I have with the model you present is the "attack adjacent" bit. I'm not sure how that works in a simultaneous-move system. I think I would prefer to simply use that if two opposing armies end up in the same square and one or both have attack orders, then they would have combat. One more thought, I think we could allow more than 2 units per army even at this early stage. Otherwise there will be an awful lot of little counters on the board that wouldn't need to be there if they could be formed into an army of more than two units.

What about orders? There need to be at least two, attack, and don't attack. Additionally, we will soon need a discriminate or between attack a square, and attack and enemy unit.

All of our coders except me are not going to be available at least for the next few weeks. So my preference would be just to implement what we have in terms of the simple models into my old version of Clash and document the heck out of them. That way we will have something that works after a fashion fairly soon even though I may be the only one actually coding. This would also have the advantage of letting the dukes play with their primitive models very early looking for fundamental problems.

Thanks for all the good work

Your sugestions sound fine. Doesnt matter much if you call it 'SpearMan' & 'Horseman' ... or 'Infantry' & 'Tank'... at least not at this stage.

I *would* suggest, tho that you include at least 1 unit that operates in each of the 3 environments... just so we can have it working. We especially need to include (if not in alpha1, then certainly in alpha2) the airplane-not-at-base issue: it can stay "out there" for 1 turn, but then must land, etc.

As for number of units / task force: of course, if we can do it with 2, we can do it with "n" .. I just picked a small number for simplicity. As far as I'm concerned, it does not matter how many little things clutter the map.. Nobody's gonna play this version... It's just a "live demonstration" and a place to start the real work... So, go with whatever floats your boat.

RE: combat... In order to allow cross-environment combat, we'd need to allow an order like: "attack into tile X"

So, we come down to 3 orders for alpah1 level military: "attack into tile X", "move to tile Y", "do nothing".

Getting Closer Every Day!

Warning, I'm doing this using my dictation and software. Since I'm not going to prove read this really carefully, there may survive in the document some really weird typos.

>
Your sugestions sound fine. Doesnt matter much if you call it 'SpearMan' & 'Horseman' ... or 'Infantry' & 'Tank'... at least not at this stage.
>

Agreed. We could call one of them Dearth Maul at this point and it wouldn't make too much difference...

>
I *would* suggest, tho that you include at least 1 unit that operates in each of the 3 environments... just so we can have it working. We especially need to include (if not in alpha1, then certainly in alpha2) the airplane-not-at-base issue: it can stay "out there" for 1 turn, but then must land, etc.
>

I guess we should have at least naval units in addition to the Army ones in alpha-one. I would prefer to leave air units until alpha-2. But while we are on the subject...
I had been hoping to avoid the civ idea of having bombers hanging the air for a year. It strikes me as innately silly. My thoughts on the subject were that we should simply have the bombers proceed to any target, bombing, and go, on the same turn, to whichever base they are supposed to end up at. Fighters would have an area of coverage, and would automatically attack bombers that entered their area. This idea will obviously need to be refined somewhat before it's really practical. We will need orders for fighters that let them know the priorities of different defense points etc.. However, simply having the fighters attack any bombers and their escorts that come into the area is a reasonable approximation of what happens in real-life. Sound reasonable?

>
As for number of units / task force: of course, if we can do it with 2, we can do it with "n" .. I just picked a small number for simplicity. As far as I'm concerned, it does not matter how many little things clutter the map.. Nobody's gonna play this version... It's just a "live demonstration" and a place to start the real work... So, go with whatever floats your boat.
>

Personally, I will play it. The other dukes will need to also, to crudely assess how their models are going. That will be especially relevant for things like the government model which should be something approaching halfway to completion in even in alpha-1. No reason it will be so far along is that there is no convenient part-of-the-way implementation that seems feasible. And since we are going to have to play it, I'm going to try to make it as little annoying as possible.

>
RE: combat... In order to allow cross-environment combat, we'd need to allow an order like: "attack into tile X"
>
Yes, you got me there.

>
So, we come down to 3 orders for alpah1 level military: "attack into tile X", "move to tile Y", "do nothing".
>

And perhaps "pursue unit Z"

>
In addition, I think alpha1 should enforce the no stacking rule, for simplicity. One can add to one's own task force, of course, but may not stack w/ other nations'.
>

Sounds reasonable.

See Ya'

............................
Eye halve a spelling chequer
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.
Eye strike a key and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.
As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite
Its rare lea ever wrong.
Eye have run this poem threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfect awl the weigh
My chequer tolled me sew.

1. Get task forces up and running. They can be formed out of arbitrary units at the desire of the player. The task force can be broken down into its component units at any time.

2. Defined domains such as air, land, and sea, for the units and task forces. Currently units and task forces can only attack into the domain they exist in.

3. Provided a simple way for friendly task forces to support others that are in combat. Not a final implementation, just a start. But even what I have makes defenses more robust, simulating the massing of armies in response to an attack threat.

4. Allowed task forces to have different responses depending upon the combat odds. They don't just mindlessly attack or defend anymore no matter what the odds. Currently the player can define the attack odds that must be equaled or exceeded for an attack to take place. Otherwise the task force will break off the attack automatically. Similarly, defenders will retreat if presented with a sufficiently powerful threat.
I had a lot of fun implementing this, and seeing how it affected the dynamics of the strategic and tactical combats. It also improves the cobbled-together AI that I have in the demo right now somewhat.

5. Broken down a combat round into n phases. N currently equals 3 in my limited play testing. After each phase the forces may break off (attackers), or attempt to retreat (defenders) due to changing combat odds.