1 unit/tile overkill

I think workers should act like great people and be able to stack under normal units so you can build improvements and roads with no issues. Other than that I love teh no stacking now it makes it much more tactical
Again, they're putting tactics into a strategic scaled map where each hex is tens of km, and half way trhough the tech tree they suddenly switch back to strategic. Thus, you have tactically scaled units vs strategically scaled units on a strategically scaled map.

It's like you want to compare the CN tower to he Empire state building interns of size and use a toy model of the CN tower to compare with the actual Empire state buildig. ;)
 
Tactically, i like the move to both hexes and to 1upt.

Immersion wise, I absolutely hate it, and I think its one of the reasons I found myself playing Medieval 2: Total War all day today rather than Civ V.

It's awesome that I can have my infantry up front in line, my archers and catapults in the back, shooting away, and my cavalry sweeping around the flanks to engulf the enemy. It really sounds awesome on paper.

But it destroys almost all the immersion when it takes, geographically speaking, 90% of a continent to perform the maneuvers mentioned above.

Now scale in the Civ series has always been out of wack, and I can understand that, but I really think they go to far with it in Civ 5. I'm not saying that they should remove 1upt. I think it is probably the best new aspect of this game. I just think there should be double, maybe triple the number of hexagons for each of the map sizes.

It makes all these tactical maneuvers irrelevant when you can only perform them in the heart of Africa or Asia.
 
Blitz66, I think it's not the geography that's broken, but the AI's expansion.

Think about it; if the AI expanded properly, we could have huge battles over large landmasses.
 
I don't see how that makes it bad. Yeah you have to produce to make your army, that's not a bad thing. You make it multiple so you can customize your army, move units out, have some damaged, move in elite ones etc etc. i don't know, to me, choices like that are what make a game fun. Do I make an army of 5 infantry because I already have a unit of tanks mowing down their machine gunners or should I give it some support units too just in case it gets ambushed?

a 1uph system simply works better than having to build 5 units per hexe to have a complete unit. Also I hardly consider that choice making, you're simply playing rock paper scissors while smashing stacks into each other like toy cars.

the new system actually requires you to think about placement, formations, choke points, flanking, etc things that have decided the fates of battles since the dawn of warfare.
 
a 1uph system simply works better than having to build 5 units per hexe to have a complete unit. Also I hardly consider that choice making, you're simply playing rock paper scissors while smashing stacks into each other like toy cars.

the new system actually requires you to think about placement, formations, choke points, flanking, etc things that have decided the fates of battles since the dawn of warfare.

Read my post on this. Tactical battles for half the game on a strategic map and then the battles switching to strategic is like comparing a toy model of the CN tower to Empire state building.

The tactics you mentioned were on the scale of less than 1 hex. In Civ 5 tactical battles are fought across continents.
 
I think workers should act like great people and be able to stack under normal units so you can build improvements and roads with no issues. Other than that I love teh no stacking now it makes it much more tactical

lol have you played the game? What you described is exactly how it works...

Every tile can have 1 Civilian unit and 1 Military unit on it.
Workers and Great People are Civilian units.
Spearmen and Infantry are Military units.

Therefore you can build Roads and Forts underneath military units.

And as for further up, it seems some people don't know that you can actually swap units with one another.

Seems a lot of people haven't actually played the game... They are crying and screaming for features that actually are in the game.
Why don't you guys try out a few things and get a good idea of how the game works before you bash it... 1UPT may be a little clunky, but I find it works pretty well. With a little practice, I found that I was able to move my troops around with relative freedom. It just takes some practice and understanding of some subtleties.

And as for your Mech Inf being killed by Crossbowmen...
What kind of position are you assaulting? You should be able to kill one and run away the next turn no problem... you have 4 movement. He also probably had amazing promotions (hint... they build up nicely on ranged units). You probably attacked through his Zone of Control, into an area where you were generally surrounded with overwhelming numbers (AKA a trap). It is completely understandable that you could have lost a single Mech Inf that walked right into his trap.
 
And as for further up, it seems some people don't know that you can actually swap units with one another.

Seems a lot of people haven't actually played the game... They are crying and screaming for features that actually are in the game.

Or for those of us that have played the game, it's an example of poor UI design that it's not obvious that you can have units swap places. I still haven't managed it often enough that I can remember that it's possible.
 
Um, can you explain how 4 units of crossbowmen could "trap" a mech infantry units?

Let's say that 1 Crossbow unit is 100 men, for argument's sake.

Let's also say the Mech Infantry is also 100 men.

Mech Infantry are simply infantry with trucks. The ability to move around faster.

The Civilization series abstracts enough (I mean the shortest time for 1 turn is 1 year right?), that I think it's safe to say the Crossbow unit in this situation caught them eating or sleeping while on campaign.

Can 400 men with Crossbows + the element of surprise, beat 100 men with rifles?

I don't know, you tell me.
 
Or for those of us that have played the game, it's an example of poor UI design that it's not obvious that you can have units swap places. I still haven't managed it often enough that I can remember that it's possible.

So many people are screaming and crying that the interface is for noobs and makes the game too easy and explains everything. And why does the game need to explain that you can do it when all you need to do is try?

And how IRL could a group of Xbowmen trap a group of Mech Inf?
Hill pass, guerrilla attacks, cutting off a supply line, night time raids, cutting gas lines, etc etc.

How in game could a group of Xbowmen trap a Mech Inf?
Zones of Control
 
Let's say that 1 Crossbow unit is 100 men, for argument's sake.

Let's also say the Mech Infantry is also 100 men.

Mech Infantry are simply infantry with trucks. The ability to move around faster.

The Civilization series abstracts enough (I mean the shortest time for 1 turn is 1 year right?), that I think it's safe to say the Crossbow unit in this situation caught them eating or sleeping while on campaign.

Can 400 men with Crossbows + the element of surprise, beat 100 men with rifles?

I don't know, you tell me.

if they somehow win, it would not be by outranging and firing from a distance at mech infantry like the game portrays. 100 mech infantry would stomp over 400 crossbowmen in a fight.
 
So many people are screaming and crying that the interface is for noobs and makes the game too easy and explains everything. And why does the game need to explain that you can do it when all you need to do is try?

And how IRL could a group of Xbowmen trap a group of Mech Inf?
Hill pass, guerrilla attacks, cutting off a supply line, night time raids, cutting gas lines, etc etc.

How in game could a group of Xbowmen trap a Mech Inf?
Zones of Control
sorry for the double post, but none of your examples involve having 2 vs 1 range superiority which the crossbowmen ridiculously have in game vs mech infantry. All of your ideas the mech infantry could also do far easier, yet they can't fire ranged in this game like the crossbowmen can.
 
lol have you played the game? What you described is exactly how it works...

Every tile can have 1 Civilian unit and 1 Military unit on it.
Workers and Great People are Civilian units.
Spearmen and Infantry are Military units.

Therefore you can build Roads and Forts underneath military units.

And as for further up, it seems some people don't know that you can actually swap units with one another.

Seems a lot of people haven't actually played the game... They are crying and screaming for features that actually are in the game.
Why don't you guys try out a few things and get a good idea of how the game works before you bash it... 1UPT may be a little clunky, but I find it works pretty well. With a little practice, I found that I was able to move my troops around with relative freedom. It just takes some practice and understanding of some subtleties.

And as for your Mech Inf being killed by Crossbowmen...
What kind of position are you assaulting? You should be able to kill one and run away the next turn no problem... you have 4 movement. He also probably had amazing promotions (hint... they build up nicely on ranged units). You probably attacked through his Zone of Control, into an area where you were generally surrounded with overwhelming numbers (AKA a trap). It is completely understandable that you could have lost a single Mech Inf that walked right into his trap.

oh lol. Yeh Ive played guess it was never an issue for me I just recall having two workers in a tile and it telling me to move them so I assumed that was how it worked for all units.

I already figured out you could swap units just didnt feel like stating it.. On teh crossbowman thing remember there and also multiple bonuses for units fighting in there own territory so that might have been a factor as well
 
if they somehow win, it would not be by outranging and firing from a distance at mech infantry like the game portrays. 100 mech infantry would stomp over 400 crossbowmen in a fight.

The game is an abstract representation... Use your imagination to figure out why your tactical blunder resulted in the death of an expensive unit.

sorry for the double post, but none of your examples involve having 2 vs 1 range superiority which the crossbowmen ridiculously have in game vs mech infantry. All of your ideas the mech infantry could also do far easier, yet they can't fire ranged in this game like the crossbowmen can.

Again, imagination. Imaging that these crossbowmen are guerrilla troops that have stolen equipment or that they sneak in and run away, since they know the terrain so well... or they slash your mechs tires or destroy the ammunition supply truck or something.
It isn't out of the realm of real life possibility.
 
What is this about crossbow beating mech inf? I consistently roll over barbarian crossbows with my mech with 0 casualties.
 
if they somehow win, it would not be by outranging and firing from a distance at mech infantry like the game portrays. 100 mech infantry would stomp over 400 crossbowmen in a fight.

What I'm saying in that a game as abstracted as Civilization is, you have to assume that if they won, the attack came when they had an element of surprise (sleeping, eating, etc.). This is where your imagination should be kicking in when you play.

1 turn is at least 1 year right? Lots of stuff can happen in one year.

Edit: I see what you mean now, and I agree. It is ridiculous that the crossbowmen get the extra attack on the mech infantry.
 
The game is an abstract representation... Use your imagination to figure out why your tactical blunder resulted in the death of an expensive unit.



Again, imagination. Imaging that these crossbowmen are guerrilla troops that have stolen equipment or that they sneak in and run away, since they know the terrain so well... or they slash your mechs tires or destroy the ammunition supply truck or something.
It isn't out of the realm of real life possibility.

then why have the crossbowmen outrange mech infantry? Is the outranging symbolizing stuff lime the element of surprise? But meh infantry would actually be better at that, so why give that advantage to the crossbowmen?

The only plausible way for crossbowmen to take out mech infantry is sheer luck, which shouldn't be represented by a one sided advantage that the mech infanty should have.
 
sorry for the double post, but none of your examples involve having 2 vs 1 range superiority which the crossbowmen ridiculously have in game vs mech infantry. All of your ideas the mech infantry could also do far easier, yet they can't fire ranged in this game like the crossbowmen can.

I gotta side with you on this point though, and this has killed my immersion in this game.

Why can an archer shoot over a lake, but my musket men can't?

I'm going to reiterate one my points above.

1upt is awesome. But you need many many times more hexes for it to work. The current system in Civ V does not work for me.

Once some tactical maps and mods get created I may come back, but for now, I've shelved Civ V for mainly this reason.
 
yeh later mos units should be able to attack at range but that would make gameplay weird
 
then why have the crossbowmen outrange mech infantry? Is the outranging symbolizing stuff lime the element of surprise? But meh infantry would actually be better at that, so why give that advantage to the crossbowmen?

The only plausible way for crossbowmen to take out mech infantry is sheer luck, which shouldn't be represented by a one sided advantage that the mech infanty should have.

Far superior and specialized guerrilla training against a bunch of green mech infantry.

Doesn't sound like luck to me...
And why are you so hung up on range? They need to have range because in their era they need the range... sounds like you are asking for all range to dissapear as soon as one player discovers Gunpowder...
Is that what you are asking? Cuz that is just... dumb. Just try to imagine it... Try REALLY hard...
 
Top Bottom