forum.freeciv.org

When a unit is damaged, its movement is hindered, more or less proportionally. Also, it's combat readiness is decreased simply because, with less HP, it will die sooner and inflict less damage on the opponent. But what about Bombard Rate if the unit has a "Bombarder" flag? Is it in any way affected by this?

Since I can see, bombard rate can't be changed by any means; but the attack strength of the bombarder can depend on its state as well as at normal combat

Lets conclude: bombard unit should have rather low bombard rate and relatively high attack rate. Completely opposite than LT42 catapult, which stats with 1 A 9 BR are immune on damage

FYI, Civ3 common land bombarders stats (all can't fight normal combat or kill by bombardment),
strength/range/rate:
Catapult: 4/1/1
Trebouchet: 6/1/1
Cannon: 8/1/1
Artillery: 12/2/2
Radar artillery: 16/2/3

Just for comparison, common defending units' defense strength:
Warrior: 1
Spearman: 2
Pikemen: 3
Musketman: 4
Rifleman: 6
Infantry: 10

Attacking units that tend to arrive in swarms have defense: Horsemen, Archer, Longbowmen 1, Knight and Cavalry 3, Tank 8 (Modern Armor 16 but I have rarely played so late game)

Wahazar wrote:Lets conclude: bombard unit should have rather low bombard rate and relatively high attack rate.

Just what a unit you design: a unit that damages likely but just little or a unit that damages few possible targets but sometimes much. For Civ3 where non-Army units have full HP from 2 to 5 there is no "minor" damage, so to keep things balanced they just had to limit early bombarders' rate. The former is more predictable, the latter is more funny and realistic.

Low bombardment rate, even single one, if attack strength is comparable to defender (not few times low), is very powerful. You would gain 0..1 HP loss, but from every unit in stack, while your unit is intact.
Thus you can have many bombarding units, cover them by infantry, drain HP from defenders, conquer city and continue to next one (while classical direct attacking units are usually lost or very wounded).
Above statements are from Single Player sessions. Multiplayer test are just about to make

With the current bombard mechanics, low A and high BR makes for bigger differences between low and high defence values. With, say, A: 6 and BR: 3 , average damage to an unfortified unit in open field would be only twice as much than to a unit in a city on the hill behind walls.

However, with the numbers I set in LT42, average damage is 3 and 0.7 respectively.

Corbeau wrote:average damage to an unfortified unit in open field would be only twice as much than to a unit in a city on the hill behind walls.

Right, but if we assume that attacker didn't conquer town in one turn (because bombarding units are slow), it is not favorable for defender to use bombarding units against besiege units - their ability would not drop drastically (still same bombard rate, slightly smaller attack).
I'm afraid, that without patch decreasing bombard rate of wounded units, your idea won't work correctly.

Wahazar wrote:

Corbeau wrote:average damage to an unfortified unit in open field would be only twice as much than to a unit in a city on the hill behind walls.

Right, but if we assume that attacker didn't conquer town in one turn (because bombarding units are slow), it is not favorable for defender to use bombarding units against besiege units - their ability would not drop drastically (still same bombard rate, slightly smaller attack).
I'm afraid, that without patch decreasing bombard rate of wounded units, your idea won't work correctly.

I'm not sure what you actually said here.

Corbeau wrote: I'm not sure what you actually said here.

OK, forget about. HP is drained, not attack, my fault.

Re-assuming: there is patch needed to take HP into Bombardment Rate account (similar to affecting movement points by HP)