WARNING: Lots of ugly placeholder/temporary graphics ahead!
Large-scale strategy games have always had an uneasy relationship with nitty-gritty tactical combat. If the combat's too lengthy, it can bog down the larger strategic gameplay or else make players want to just Auto-Resolve it away (this is a problem for some
Total War players). If it's simple, shallow, or overly automated, a potentially valuable and interesting aspect of gameplay is neglected (
Civilization, Europa Universalis, and Crusader Kings are all amazing games that fall into this category).
With V&V, I wanted to solve this design challenge. How could I make a game with large-scale, epic strategy that also had meaningful tactical combat? Tactical combat that was deep and interesting, but somehow didn't slow down the strategic gameplay layer too much? This development log (and many more on the same topic, I expect) will document my attempts to "square the circle".
My basic approach to V&V's combat was the following:
1. Create logical, transparent, and easy-to-grasp mechanics. Interesting and challenging tactical decisions should result from simple mechanics interacting in complex ways. Hearthstone does a great job with this, as do many modern board games. Any depth the game has isn't meaningful if players can't process it or perceive it; well-designed game mechanics avoid this problem.
2. Every battle should require careful planning, clever improvisation, and deep understanding of the enemy's army as well as your own. There shouldn't be any meaningless "trash" battles, and even important battles should usually resolve quickly. The player shouldn't be spending lots of time in lopsided battles with little or no tactical thought involved. Every battle should be either important, interesting, or not in the game. No two fights should be the same, or allow repeating the same tactics over and over. Rather than many small, insignificant decisions in each battle, the player should make a few key decisions with large impact.
3. If a battlefield tactic worked in actual history, it should be usable and viable in V&V. From Mongol-style hit-and-run horse archery, to disciplined shield wall soldiers like the Spartans, to medieval European cavalry charges, V&V's combat should model many historical strategies.
All of these are easier said than done--but not impossible, I think. Some design decisions can fulfill two or three of these simultaneously. Let's go through two of the many ways V&V attempts to address these combat goals:
V&V allows a massive degree of army customization. You have five basic troop types: light infantry, heavy infantry, ranged, cavalry, and "special". Within this structure, you can modify your troops' equipment and special training to simulate virtually any army from history. Want to make a Mongol warrior? Modify your cavalry to use fast horses with lots of endurance, equip your troops with composite longbows and light armour, and use your unit training slots to give your unit abilities like Parting Shot, Feigned Retreat, and Live Off The Land. Want to make a Spartan-style phalanx? Change your heavy infantry to use a large Hoplite shield and long spears, then use your training slots for the Shield Wall, Hold The Line, and Band of Brothers abilities. You can mix-and-match equipment and abilities to create entirely new soldiers as well.
Enemy armies constantly make interesting combinations of characteristics for their troops, yielding a large number of unique and interesting combat scenarios. You'll have to adapt your own tactics constantly.
Equipment is not just a set of stats with different attack numbers; each weapon has special characteristics that can fundamentally change your tactics. Some examples: spears have reach and can strike first in melee; maces are particularly good at bypassing armor; large two-handed swords can disrupt enemy formations; curved scimitars can slash lightly-armored foes; longbows can outrange the enemy and deliver massive penetrative power; crossbows require little training and can be used effectively by green peasant troops; lances can inflict bonus damage when used from the back of a charging warhorse.
V&V simulates the psychology of warfare. Morale is a critical part of combat. Like in history, battles are usually won by destroying the enemy's will to fight rather than killing every troop on the field (although this can certainly happen as well). How does it work in V&V, specifically? Simple: each unit has a Morale value. It can go down in many ways, but mostly by being attacked, flanked, surrounded, or if allied units in the army start running (panic is infectious). You can also use a unit's turn to Rally, which can restore some Morale. The lower a unit's Morale, the higher the chance that they'll break and try to run.
That's it. The mechanics are simple, but can lead to fascinating tactical situations. For example: if you're outmatched by an enemy, but they have a faltering unit with low Morale, maybe you can target that unit, make it flee, and spread panic among the enemy ranks. Remember, each unit that flees can cause other units to flee, and trigger a chain reaction that will win you the battle. Or maybe you're facing a strong, defensive formation of elite enemy troops who have high Morale. Rather than attacking head-on, you can use your weak units to flank and then surround that unit, causing it to gradually lose heart without making your own weak units fight.
I have a lot more to say about the design of V&V's combat (I've barely touched on special abilities received from training, or the effects of terrain and weather, and attrition, and much more), but I'll leave things there for now!