Bombarding Rail or Road with Bombers or Cruise missiles

[uncivilizedplayer]

is this supported in 2.5? what ruleset?

[cazfi]

is this supported in 2.5? what ruleset?

The closest a ruleset could come is allowing Bombers to pillage anything.

In 2.6 it would still be "Pillaging" (or "Cleaning" like Pollution and Fallout removal) but you would be able to limit Bomber's pillaging ability to specific extras.

[JTN]

is this supported in 2.5? what ruleset?

The closest a ruleset could come is allowing Bombers to pillage anything.

And indeed, in 2.5's civ2civ3 ruleset, aircraft can do this.

[uncivilizedplayer]

Please add this to experimental ruleset, my favourite ruleset ;d

[GriffonSpade]

You can copy the ruleset and make your own changes to it.

Having an 'instant pillage' action enabler for 2.6 sounds interesting though, including the ability to make it consume all movement points (so that it can't do anything else). Or maybe simply destroy the unit afterward. (Which would probably be the best for using a missile to destroy infrastructure)

[sveinung]

Having an 'instant pillage' action enabler for 2.6 sounds interesting though, including the ability to make it consume all movement points (so that it can't do anything else). Or maybe simply destroy the unit afterward. (Which would probably be the best for using a missile to destroy infrastructure)

Its too late for 2.6. 3.0 is still possible.

[GriffonSpade]

Having an 'instant pillage' action enabler for 2.6 sounds interesting though, including the ability to make it consume all movement points (so that it can't do anything else). Or maybe simply destroy the unit afterward. (Which would probably be the best for using a missile to destroy infrastructure)

Its too late for 2.6. 3.0 is still possible.

Ah, I see. That's too bad. Hate to hijack this, but I'm curious, would it be possible to set what happens to the actor or defender depending on success or failure(or possibly even 'tying)? For example, on failure, tie, or success, whether the defender lives or die, whether the actor should live or die, they should engage in normal combat (for a failed bombard check against a bombard-defender, though this might need a bomb_chance rating like what diplomacy actions have), how many movement points or even all movement points should be lost, whether all actions should be blocked, etc.

[sveinung]

Hate to hijack this, but I'm curious, would it be possible to set what happens to the actor or defender depending on success or failure(or possibly even 'tying)? For example, on failure, tie, or success, whether the defender lives or die, whether the actor should live or die, they should engage in normal combat (for a failed bombard check against a bombard-defender, though this might need a bomb_chance rating like what diplomacy actions have), how many movement points or even all movement points should be lost, whether all actions should be blocked, etc.

The plan is to gradually move in that direction.

[GriffonSpade]

The plan is to gradually move in that direction.

Ah, that's awesome. I assume there are several stages to go through before you get there? And to elaborate what I meant by 'tying', I meant 'non-critical fail' (For example, you don't succeed with a suitcase nuke, but at the same time they don't find out you did it). There would need to be some sort of 'tie_chance' associated with the action that would make the top X% of fails non-critical.

[sveinung]

The plan is to gradually move in that direction.

Ah, that's awesome. I assume there are several stages to go through before you get there?

Correct. At the moment most of the focus should be on action requirements (action enablers). Serious work on making the actions them self more ruleset configurable and finally ruleset defined belongs to a later stage.

And to elaborate what I meant by 'tying', I meant 'non-critical fail' (For example, you don't succeed with a suitcase nuke, but at the same time they don't find out you did it).

I suggest that you file "tying" as a feature request in our patch tracker if you want it. It increases the probability that it won't be forgotten.

There would need to be some sort of 'tie_chance' associated with the action that would make the top X% of fails non-critical.

Based on your description it could also be implemented as an extra dice roll. (Not saying anything about what would be the better approach)