OMG I just realized something amazing...

[Glassmage]

If units take longer to die, this mean that you can actually bring workers to build Forts and Great Generals' Citadels on captured enemy border city. These improvements make more sense AND are actually useful. Trench warfare so fun! How do you guys think this more hp per unit will affect warfare? Before we just go in, focus fire, then push to capital. Now it requires more work.

 

[GeoModder]

Or even better, a defender builds/creates those on HIS border, so no border city can be captured.

 

[GenjiKhan]

Citadels are useful,even now,if you plan their position to block the advance of enemy's waves or using them to weaken a stronger army than you .

 

[tofofnts]

I'm hoping this will create long lines of units which change slowly, kinda like WWI

 

[Brimstone]

Be careful what you wish for. I predict...quagmire with endless swapping units back and forth alla 1UPT. It appears all units will be difficult to kill, 3 strikes or more with units of equal strength.

Doesn't sound like fun to me and the short comings of 1UPT will become more apparent while trying to capture a city.

I hope I'm wrong.

 

[CYZ]

Great point!

Forts and citadels work perfectly if you can defend longer. I'm sure the new machinegun units will even increase this due to their defensive nature.

 

[Ajuga]

I think that this will make domination victories a lot harder though.
If cities get the same boost, they will also take longer to take.

 

[CYZ]

I think that this will make domination victories a lot harder though.
If cities get the same boost, they will also take longer to take.

Well, that's the question ofcourse. But domination should be harder, it's the easiest victory atm.

 

[AriochIV]

Be careful what you wish for. I predict...quagmire with endless swapping units back and forth alla 1UPT. It appears all units will be difficult to kill, 3 strikes or more with units of equal strength. Doesn't sound like fun to me and the short comings of 1UPT will become more apparent while trying to capture a city.

Seems to me that's much more like real combat -- a damaged unit can retreat from the line instead of being destroyed, but only if there's a healthy unit in reserve to replace it on the line -- so having a larger force will actually mean something. Combat won't be "endless" unless damaged units can heal as fast as they are being damaged, and that doesn't seem very likely, but it may take some combined arms effort to breach the enemy's lines. And when you do, his damaged units will be exposed.

Granted that it's questionable whether the AI will be able to competently manage such a system to greatest effect, but it sounds promising to me.

 

[Stefanskantine]

Seems to me that's much more like real combat -- a damaged unit can retreat from the line instead of being destroyed, but only if there's a healthy unit in reserve to replace it on the line -- so having a larger force will actually mean something. Combat won't be "endless" unless damaged units can heal as fast as they are being damaged, and that doesn't seem very likely, but it may take some combined arms effort to breach the enemy's lines. And when you do, his damaged units will be exposed.

Granted that it's questionable whether the AI will be able to competently manage such a system to greatest effect, but it sounds promising to me.

I agree, it has potential to be interesting if they balance it right. 2 lines of units fighting a long war of attrition, until a breakout or flanking maneuver exposes the wounded in the rear. Sounds like most real wars to me.

 

[CYZ]

Flanking will be a much bigger factor now. And the same for artillery and air strikes, these are the only ways to break the enemy line directly.

I hope the AI can cope. A simple melee first, ranged second, will go a long way with this setup. And that's simple enough right... Did anyone else just think about camikaze catapults

 

[Civsassin]

Flanking will be a much bigger factor now. And the same for artillery and air strikes, these are the only ways to break the enemy line directly.

I hope the AI can cope. A simple melee first, ranged second, will go a long way with this setup. And that's simple enough right... Did anyone else just think about camikaze catapults

War will be much more difficult in the early game with siege and ranged units only effective up to two tiles away. Especially for cities that are surrounded by hills or have mountain or other terrain screens. The Honor tree, and the bonuses it provides, will become much more significant.

 

[CivilizedPlayer]

Am I the only one who thinks the 100 HP system is being overanalyzed and/or overhyped, in terms of the way it will lengthen combat? It's definitely a good thing, and I'm a fan of it. I look forward to longer sieges, and less units being completely wiped out. However, the difference is a matter of units taking 3-4 hits to kill, as opposed to the current 2-3 (assuming no ranged attacks). That doesn't strike me as a major game-changer that will revolutionize the combat and completely force me to rethink how I attack an enemy.

Of course, there are other changes to combat that will change a lot. For one, I heard Ed Beach mention that siege weapons will now be crucial to capturing cities, while regular ranged units will be less effective. I look forward to that, for sure. And I look forward to the fact that the 100 HP system means that minimum damage dealt is a lot less, making a spearman much less effective against a tank. However, that change will actually speed up combat, since it will be easier for a more advanced army to steamroll an outdated one.

 

[PhilBowles]

If units take longer to die, this mean that you can actually bring workers to build Forts and Great Generals' Citadels on captured enemy border city. These improvements make more sense AND are actually useful. Trench warfare so fun! How do you guys think this more hp per unit will affect warfare? Before we just go in, focus fire, then push to capital. Now it requires more work.

I already build Citadels at the border of captured cities if I'm going to have trouble holding them otherwise. Normally if I've been able to capture a city in the first place, there aren't enough enemy units immediately available to prevent it. I've never tried building forts or found that I need to.

 

[CTH]

I predict that the biggest change will not be in going from 2 hits to 4 hits but rather that plenty of weaker units will survive an attack from a stronger one, the 1 hit going to 2 hits is much more significant as you can retreat that unit or retaliate (with for example a ranged unit vs a melee unit).

 

[Haig]

Artillery units wont be as effective against land units
anymore, more important as siege tools and softening
enemy before land attack.
Hello bayonet charge!

 

[RealHuhn]

It's a good thing that advanced units will have an easier time to destroy outdated units.

But 3-4 hits to kill could be a bad idea because
a) wrong decisions don't get punished as much as before
b) keeping units alive will be much easier which leads to a critical mass of highly promoted units and
c) I doubt that the AI knows how to focus fire properly.

It's possible that combat will be much easier. I hope I'm wrong.:/

 

[Montov]

I think an advantage in numbers at the frontline will be more important with tougher units. AI at higher levels do generally have more units than the human (because of the bonuses), but when you can kill the incoming units the turn they arrived in range, it isnt a big problem. 1UPT limits the amount you can bring directly to the frontline, but with tougher units you (or the AI) can overwhelm the opponent with numbers.

That's a good change.

 

[Deggial]

c) I doubt that the AI knows how to focus fire properly.

At least this is something, I got the impression the AI can do already! I lost many units due to concentrated attacks so far. The AI loves to use cavalry (retreating after attack) an fighters for this.

Of course, there has to be a *supremacy in numbers* for it - and this will be even more crucial in G&K, with more fights needed to kill a unit!
As the player usually fights short-handed in higher difficulty levels, I expect them to become harder with the expansion.

 

[AriochIV]

At least this is something, I got the impression the AI can do already! I lost many units due to concentrated attacks so far. The AI loves to use cavalry (retreating after attack) an fighters for this.

The AI is halfway decent at this, but what it lacks is appropriate target selection; it will focus fire on your cavalry (which is no threat to city you're attacking) and leave the cannon and infantry which are about to assault the city untouched. I would guess this is because the tactical AI simply tries to focus on killing the most vulernable unit, which is often a damaged unit or one that doesn't receive defensive bonuses. This limits the usefulness of cavalry and armor against ranged units to decoys, as they will almost always draw an undue amount of attention from AI guns.

Of course, there has to be a *supremacy in numbers* for it - and this will be even more crucial in G&K, with more fights needed to kill a unit!
As the player usually fights short-handed in higher difficulty levels, I expect them to become harder with the expansion.

More health will definitely improve the weight of numbers, but in order to make full use of this, the AI will need to be taught to value the survival of its own units, which it currently does not seem to value (often leaving a damaged unit under ranged fire in place indefinitely until it is killed, and often sacrifing a more expensive unit to finish off a damaged, cheaper unit). In particular, it will need to learn how to shuffle units around in tight 1UPT space, without having them run off in the wrong direction or blunder directly into killing zones. That, I suspect, will be quite a challenge if they don't ease the 1UPT rules somehow.