1 Unit per Tile Rule

Do you like the possibility of a 1 unit per tile rule in Civ5?


  • Total voters
    481
I would like to see more space between cities. Right now battles/wars too often are fought with cities providing bombard support to one or both sides, I would like to see city attacks deemphasized extremely, maybe having the range of only the tiles directly surrounding the city hex. With this, city strength could be increased, to provide for a longer duration siege, giving the defender an opportunity of raising a new army to relieve the siege of their city.
 
Come on people, if you gonna make a comment on the necro, do it with class:


On topic, you really should have made a new thread. However, it's not as if 1up is a new system, there's only a limited amount of warfare systems in strategic games after all: turn-based one unit per tile, turn-based many units, RTS-units, Armies (a la Total War), etc. ...

I however highly doubt we will see 1up in the next civ game. It has a distinctive disadvantage: it scales horribly with the rest of the map which is supposed to depict a whole Earth/planet. See all the discussions of the archers shooting over the English Channel.
 
On topic, you really should have made a new thread. However, it's not as if 1up is a new system, there's only a limited amount of warfare systems in strategic games after all: turn-based one unit per tile, turn-based many units, RTS-units, Armies (a la Total War), etc. ...

I however highly doubt we will see 1up in the next civ game. It has a distinctive disadvantage: it scales horribly with the rest of the map which is supposed to depict a whole Earth/planet. See all the discussions of the archers shooting over the English Channel.

If it's relevant to the original topic and you are adding something worthwhile, I don't see a problem with necroing.

The scale is the greatest problem I see with it. Spreading out forces over large fronts is a relatively modern concept in warfare. Even up to the Napoleonic Wars, most armies would be called stacks of death. The 19th century sees independent corps, so maybe a two-five tile front with flanking, and only in the 20th do we see long fronts.

Civ can solve this problem, I have no doubt. There are plenty of games that have, with frontage rules, stacking penalties that change with technology, introduction of new organizations like corps midway through the game, etc.
 
I never played civilization 5 but from what I've seen on the internet that's what I can say about it:
Moderator Action: What I can say: You dug out a 2 years old thread to begin a post with such a sentence? Next time: Please don't do that.

Since when one unit takes as much space as city which has 1 million people and many buildings?

I think it would be a good idea if tiles would be much smaller, and city would take up about 10 tiles, but still there would be 1 unit per tile. That way it would be much more realistic and attacking cities could be more interesting.
 
I never played civilization 5 but from what I've seen on the internet that's what I can say about it:

Since when one unit takes as much space as city which has 1 million people and many buildings?

I think it would be a good idea if tiles would be much smaller, and city would take up about 10 tiles, but still there would be 1 unit per tile. That way it would be much more realistic and attacking cities could be more interesting.

You know this thread is ancient, right? Someone should really lock this up, seeing how this thread started in early 2010.....
 
I voted yes - i hate stacks of doom. Now, the ONE flaw in 1upT is that it can be a burden to manage 20 units, especially when they are constricted by each others presence. Especially around bottleneck or sensitive areas.

However, this is much better than SoD because each game involves "less units" meaning "more space" and less unit-spam lag.

That said, i would make ONE change: I would allow ONE unit of EACH TYPE on a tile.

Thus a melee - ranged - recon and civilian could all share a square but ONLY from the same civ.

I do like the option of seeing those forested hill choke points and putting a scout on it to block the AI.
 
I just wish there was a group feature for soldiers and workers/great people/settlers, so you could send them over a distance without having to worry about them taking different routes and being attacked.
 
i would like the traditional "RTS" option of click a tile, "drag" to select multiple units then move them all. Instead of targeting them all to a hex, it would keep the entire formation together and try to move their "zone" to the new area.

I would also like to be able to set a creation waypoint so units auto-move to spot X once created.
 
I never played civilization 5



Moderator Action: Please don't troll around.

Since when one unit takes as much space as city which has 1 million people and many buildings? I think it would be a good idea if tiles would be much smaller, and city would take up about 10 tiles, but still there would be 1 unit per tile. That way it would be much more realistic and attacking cities could be more interesting.

Since when have military units conformed to hexes on an artificial map? There are quite a few things with this statement but I'm busy so I'll make this quick.

1.) You don't know how many soldiers are in a unit.

2.) The combat system is broken enough when cities take up only one tile.

3.) Good luck balancing a city that takes up ten hexes.

4.) Good luck rebalancing the game to allow a city to take up ten hexes.

5.) Arguing about realism in a game where technology flows linearly and often independent of reality on the ground, where happiness is global, where there is no immigration, and a host of other things is pretty invalid. Especially when the "realistic" suggestion is invalid.



You brought as much to this discussion as the person who bumped the thread in the first place.
Moderator Action: Please don't troll around.
 
Top Bottom