Having land units insta-turn into ships is still a terrible idea in Civ5.

canadianreefer said:

Could units embark on a transport and set sail in 1 turn in previous games? If so then the 1 turn it cost to embark then set sail could be seen as the unit building it's own raft for those worried about immersion.

Click to expand...

The problem is the fact that the AI can`t use it properly and even for the player it can cost a lost unit because of the way they`ll automatically go by the water route.

People who say it saves on micromanaging are not thinking. It is actually causing micromanaging. It`s a good gameplay mechanic to have separate ships and troops, as well intuitive.

I suppose a solution would be to simply add free transports when a unit reaches a land\sea border. They would still have to made but take only one turn. Once made the unit would have to be ordered to BOARD the transport. this one turn `boarding` would give the Player time to halt or stop the troops going into the sea at the wrong time. Not very realistic, but better than what we have at the moment.

Or have the Unit that`s about to enter water Pause for a turn on land instead of pausing after entering the water as a transport. This would give the Player time to abort if it was a mistake. In fact I like this one.

It still doesn`t help the AI though.

How can some of you posters possibly claim that it saves on micromanagement? Mustering an army into a stack of transports and quickly and easily moving it across the sea in one clean stack is infinitely more convenient than the tedious click-fest of moving each individual unit of a seaborne invasion force, constantly reissuing orders every time the pathing has to be rerouted. Without even factoring in the AI's supreme fecklessness, I'd still argue that it's an inconvenience to the player.

All this problem can be solved by having embarked defense the same as the unit strength on a flat land.

JanghanHong said:

All this problem can be solved by having embarked defense the same as the unit strength on a flat land.

Click to expand...

Why? To trivialize the difference between land and ocean tiles even more? At that point, you might as well make maps with no ocean at all.

Steamwerks said:

How can some of you posters possibly claim that it saves on micromanagement? Mustering an army into a stack of transports and quickly and easily moving it across the sea in one clean stack is infinitely more convenient than the tedious click-fest of moving each individual unit of a seaborne invasion force, constantly reissuing orders every time the pathing has to be rerouted. Without even factoring in the AI's supreme fecklessness, I'd still argue that it's an inconvenience to the player.

Click to expand...

I was going to say that about why have ocean maps at all? Good point.

As far as this post goes... it brings up another major annoyance of Civ V. If you set a unit to move to a spot, and there is something on that spot, you have to set it to move again even if that spot is 50 hexes away. Your unit should keep moving to the designated spot until it cannot move anymore, then you can reroute it. I hate this. Hate it hate it hate it.

i happy with the removal of transports. took a useless unit out the game for convenience.

its just like forcing us to build trains for each unit to ride on railroads. just a hassle

canadianreefer said:

Could units embark on a transport and set sail in 1 turn in previous games? If so then the 1 turn it cost to embark then set sail could be seen as the unit building it's own raft for those worried about immersion.

Click to expand...

You cannot raft across an ocean.....

Ikael said:

I think that it is one of the greatest ideas in order to remove pointless micromanaging since the substitution of pollution for health.

Click to expand...

If building transports is "pointless micromanagement" then why should the player have to build ANY naval vessel? Transports were an important part of the naval strategy of previous games and are a crucial limiting factor...they correctly disincentivized oceanic attacks, because such an attack required a massive transport building programme.

Steamwerks said:

How can some of you posters possibly claim that it saves on micromanagement? Mustering an army into a stack of transports and quickly and easily moving it across the sea in one clean stack is infinitely more convenient than the tedious click-fest of moving each individual unit of a seaborne invasion force, constantly reissuing orders every time the pathing has to be rerouted. Without even factoring in the AI's supreme fecklessness, I'd still argue that it's an inconvenience to the player.

Click to expand...

Hear, hear!

Steamwerks said:

How can some of you posters possibly claim that it saves on micromanagement? Mustering an army into a stack of transports and quickly and easily moving it across the sea in one clean stack is infinitely more convenient than the tedious click-fest of moving each individual unit of a seaborne invasion force, constantly reissuing orders every time the pathing has to be rerouted. Without even factoring in the AI's supreme fecklessness, I'd still argue that it's an inconvenience to the player.

Click to expand...

This, again.

For me, any large scale naval invasion becomes a hassle with 1UPT. Civ is a grand-strategy game after all, surely military logistics is something where micro-managing is entirely appropriate? For me, the no naval transport issue has put me off naval invasions because its too messy & unrealistic (yes, i know a lot of things aren't but seeing as combat is one of the main points of the game it really should be.)

I'm quite surprised at people moaning about 'micro-managing', from Civ 3 to 5 seems to be a drift towards Civ Rev if anything & look at what people have to say about that game!

Im not exactly in favour of 1UPT on a whole, but then the mega-doom stacks weren't exactly ideal either. I think there could be a better way, between the two somehow, but implementing something would be hard to balance I guess.

The embarkation system in Civ V is fantastic. The problem lies with the AI. If you want to fix it, then fix the AI. The DLL should allow you to do that. If you aren't able, then perhaps someone else will make an AI mod in the future.

Transport ships were terrible. Let's never bring those back.

synyster said:

I'm quite surprised at people moaning about 'micro-managing'....

Click to expand...

Much of wording used by some players of games on the internet really means `I`m too lazy.`

Too much micromanaging = I`m too lazy.

Not wanting even the slightest bit of realism even though the game is based on reality = I`m too lazy.

It`s all laziness and the lack of wanting to understand how it works and what it was like for the real guys when using strategy.

Oh and then there`s the twisting of what I mean (which is their favourite ruse), such as, " Oh yea, men in real life lived for thousands of years governing civilizations!" Knowing that they`re missing the point entirely.


Strategy games has to have some micromanaging, especially games like Civ 5. there`s a very good practical as well as realistic reason to have separate transports for troops to go onto:

1. It`s very obvious: You must have troops go onto something to set sail. these things don`t just happen.

2. Ingame it`s practical because we don`t accidentally shove soldiers into the sea by mistake, especially in mid warfare.

3. It`s all a part of strategy.

4. It actually saves on dumb mistakes by both the Human and makes it easier for the AI. In many ways it saves on unnescessary management that comes from this silly insta-ship turn units.


I read a lot of stuff on warfare and loading men onto ships to transport them somewhere is like basic 101 of strategy. Even toddlers should be taught this stuff. Heck, when I was a child I loaded my toy soldiers on to ships when attacking the enemy!

I know some of you will carry on the same silliness and say that you think it`s great, when it isn`t, but any sensible person knows this insta-ship thing is a mistake by whoever thought it and one day people will laugh about this most ludicrous mechanic of the game. Moderator Action: No trolling please.

And you will too.

Socratatus said:

Much of wording used by some players of games on the internet really means `I`m too lazy.`

Click to expand...

You have a penchant for making disagreement personal, and stating your subjective opinion as if it were objective fact.

A preference for the current system, or the previous system of transport ships, is purely a matter of taste. People are not lazy, or refusing to accept the truth, when they prefer white chocolate over dark chocolate or vice versa. And the same is true in this case.

Strict realism is not a crucial part of any escapist entertainment, since the definition of escapism is precisely to enjoy an alternative to reality. When you make these strident appeals to realism, keep in mind that you're simply devising an authoritative proof for what in reality is nothing but your personal opinion.

It's impolite, and detracts from a fun conversation by being insulting.

Having to build transports and move units on/off means more immersion??!! Good grief. The way Civ5 does it was another one of the brilliant changes - for the human player. Nice graphics change too. However, I do wish the AI does better at not randomly put units to sea.

Buccaneer said:

Having to build transports and move units on/off means more immersion??!! Good grief. The way Civ5 does it was another one of the brilliant changes - for the human player. Nice graphics change too. However, I do wish the AI does better at not randomly put units to sea.

Click to expand...

Nobody's complaining about immersion, it's about the excess micro caused by 1 UPT and the AI terribly handling naval warfare still.

Personally I'd rather have transports than what we have now (if my scout gets stuck on the other side of someone's borders before he can embark he's stuck forever, but with transport I can get him back), but I don't mind the auto-embark feature. However I could go without the excess micro of naval invasions.

I take it you have never played a traditional wargame (board or computer)? The greatest "immersion" for me is the 1upt and having to solve the puzzle of effectively moving pieces on a board given then rules and modifiers of terrain, placement, range, zones of control and command influence. Or we could just stack them all together and throw most of those rules out the window.

But like in all computer-based wargames, there never have been a challenging AI opponent and the same is true for Civ5 (which was why we all played those games PBEM). And that is why I want them to work harder on that for next update or version, to get rid of idiotic moves esp. on the seas. They have come a long ways and I believe that what we have now is a great foundation to work from.

It's an unfortunate AI problem, but I don't think the idea itself is a bad one. I don't know anything about AI programming, but hoping it wouldn't be an insurmountable challenge to make it a bit smarter about sitting its embarked land units in range of cities/ranged units.

It doesn't sound like it would be hard to make it simply consider water tiles off-limits to land units if those tiles are currently at risk for being hit by known units/cities next turn, and that alone would go a long way toward addressing the problem.

Maybe that is more difficult than it sounds, though. It's easy for me to sit here and say that, not knowing anything about programming AI.

Buccaneer said:

Having to build transports and move units on/off means more immersion??!! Good grief.

Click to expand...

You think having armies of transformers (transports in disguise) is more "immersive"?

im honestly stuck between two modes of sea travel.I love transports in civ 4 because it allowed me to put a huge army on a stack of transports and not have to take up half the ocean to reach the other side of the world.But then again i guess large navies could take up half an ocean so the civ 5 system might be in the direction of realism.I think its a hassle to move civ 5 water borne units through the ocean because there so weak and they waste hex space which you could use to maneuver through the ocean.But i just cant wait till air transports come back to civ 5 !! and trading world maps ...

I happen to like the new embarkation system. That said, I don't see why transports couldn't exist under the 1UPT system. Even in Civ 5, a worker can share a with a military unit. Surely the code could be adapted to allow two units to share one tile at sea.

I'm a naval war buff; I've logged many hundreds of hours playing "War in the Pacific/Admiral's Edition" in solo play and PBEM. I enjoy fussing with transports in that game. Heck, in that game we transport oil, fuel, resources and supply around in cargo ships of all size. But when playing a grand-strategy game like Civ, I'm happy to abstract much of that stuff. It's too bad that the AI hasn't improved, but I recall that it really struggled with transports too.