Advertisement
Civilization Fanatics' Center  

Go Back   Civilization Fanatics' Forums > CIVILIZATION V > Civ5 - General Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old Sep 27, 2010, 09:38 AM   #81
Mītiu Ioan
Deity
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Timisoara, Romania
Posts: 2,008
he he ... this seems to be "Total War" curse somehow ... they managed to design such an interesting combat system in the last versions that the AI which was wrote couldn't raise at a decent skills !!
Mītiu Ioan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 10:23 AM   #82
Lawrie
Prince
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 387
Quote:
Faizan, chess does not purport to be a simulation, thus it is relatively free from such accusations.
since when is Civ 5 a simulation?
Lawrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 10:25 AM   #83
SlothMD
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Snug View Post
My preconception is that a mechanized infantry should be able to defeat 1,000 crossbowman.

I understand the mechanics of the game, that's why I'm criticizing them. I think "plink" is the operative word in your post. The idea that men shooting iron-tipped bolts of wood at an armored vehicle, and somehow winning is absolutely ludicrous. No matter what the numbers.
So...and I mean this in the nicest possible way...your complaint is that the combat system is not as militarily ignorant as you are?
SlothMD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 10:28 AM   #84
SlothMD
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by dannythefool View Post
I'm not saying that the range of these units in game is accurate. I think it's not important at all how wide a tile is (scale is out of whack anyway and has been in every Civ game so far). The point is that there are different roles in a battle, and these *roles* are accurate. Pretty much all modern rifle combat is close range. Longbow never was.
More accurately, the definitions of close and long-range have changed over time.

And a lot of the confusion from the Civ system is that the tactical scale and the strategic scale are different, but presented on the same map.
SlothMD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 11:56 AM   #85
Rince
King
 
Rince's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In your city, poisoning your water!
Posts: 669
I see it much more pragmatic: If it's fun it's OK. After all, it's a game and not a simulation.

Repeatedly loosing a tank to a spearman for example is not much fun. Having the same thing happen once in a lifetime is funny though.

Also, some people really don't seem to get the 1UPT system. If you could stack 2 units per tile, you could simply combine a ranged with a melee unit to protect it and park it on a hill outside your enemy's city. Been there, done that. With 1UPT on the other hand you protect your ranged units by blocking access to that unit by the enemy. Suddenly, unit placement, terrain, chokepoints and the enemy's available (and visible!) units become actually meaningful. How some people cannot see this as an improvement over Civ4 is beyond me.

And I totally like how with 1UPT you can line-up your army on the enemies border, with his units shuffling uneasy on the other side! With Civ4 you would just have my stack vs. his stack.

Last edited by Rince; Sep 27, 2010 at 12:00 PM.
Rince is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 01:10 PM   #86
GhengisFarb
www.GhengisFarb.com
 
GhengisFarb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Operation "Screwed" Eagle
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo30 View Post
And why exactly is that reasonable to you? 1upt seems perfectly reasonable to me.
For a board game. In real life and real military tactics you usually augment one force with another type so the idea of having 2 artillery units with one infantry unit would be historical.
__________________
Click the pretty colors
www.GhengisFarb.com (All ORIGINAL graphics - Home of the Leadermate of the Month) Leaderhead Request Thread
FINISHED LEADERHEADS>"Jessica Rabbit" Helen of Troy
LEADERHEAD PREVIEWS > Genghis Khan Name the Leaderhead
GhengisFarb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 01:35 PM   #87
Mītiu Ioan
Deity
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Timisoara, Romania
Posts: 2,008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rince View Post
With Civ4 you would just have my stack vs. his stack.
Yes - but the AI could be implemented to handle this quite decently ...
Mītiu Ioan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 01:47 PM   #88
MonorailCat
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by GhengisFarb View Post
For a board game. In real life and real military tactics you usually augment one force with another type so the idea of having 2 artillery units with one infantry unit would be historical.
Last I checked Civ V was a game. Not a real life war....
MonorailCat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 02:10 PM   #89
GeneralMatt
Emperor
 
GeneralMatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonorailCat View Post
Last I checked Civ V was a game. Not a real life war....
Unfortunately all the other aspects - civilzations, leaders that were chosen, city names etc - give the impression they were trying to create something with at least a slight resemblance to history.
Now we are to believe that is not the case and that it is merely a coincidence that there is any resemblance to historical events, places, and people?

Seriously, the only war that I can think of where 1 Upt would work on a strategic scale would be the Great War, on the Western Front, but even then it was cramped and concentrated in a small enough area, that this may not even be appropriate.
I would like to hear of another instance where there was anything similar. Last I checked, the Romans and Carthaginians used "Stacks of Doom" (86,000 and 56,000 at Cannae), Marlborough used Stacks of Doom (52,000 at Blenheim), Napoleon used Stacks of Doom (72,000 at Austerlitz), Wellington used Stacks of Doom (68,000 plus 50,000 Prussians at Waterloo), and the Prussians and Austrians used Stacks of Doom (221,000 Prussians and 206,000 Austrians at Koniggratz).

At any rate, I do think some limitation is justified, but I would base it on some simple logistical calculation, such as, for example, 1 unit per tile on tiles with no roads, two with roads, four with railways, and so forth. It could be expanded even further by taking into account the type of terrain, whose borders they are in, if its farmland/town, and other things. Specific numbers could be toyed around with, but the general principle is worthwhile I think.
__________________
We have not journeyed all this way across the centuries, across the oceans, across the mountains, across the prairies, because we are made of sugar candy. - Sir Winston Churchill

World Empires: 1900 Nation/Political Role Play Project

I very rarely check in to CFC anymore, so if anyone needs to contact me about a file being down, or something similar, you can contact me at generalmatthew_shk@yahoo.ca. - Matthew

Last edited by GeneralMatt; Sep 27, 2010 at 02:41 PM.
GeneralMatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 02:24 PM   #90
Drawmeus
Emperor
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,210
A "peacetime footing" for a military where you can put additional units (say, up to 1 per adjacent land tile) into your cities with the caveat that if you go to war they'll all be ejected would be wonderful.
Drawmeus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 02:54 PM   #91
noid
Warlord
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Poland
Posts: 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeneralMatt View Post
At any rate, I do think some limitation is justified, but I would base it on some simple logistical calculation, such as, for example, 1 unit per tile on tiles with no roads, two with roads, four with railways, and so forth. It could be expanded even further by taking into account the type of terrain, whose borders they are in, if its farmland/town, and other things. Specific numbers could be toyed around with, but the general principle is worthwhile I think.
I like the idea, somewhere on the forums a read an idea to introduce mass to the stacks value. Different terain could home a certain amount of massed units (and different units would have different mass).

For instance, you could stack a knight unit(2 mass) and 2 x pikemen(2x1mass) on a flat grassland tile you own(it would have 3 mass limit + 1 mass with road on it), but if you wanted to move those units over your border to a forest tile w/o a road(e.g. 2 mass limit) you would have to split the stack up. Following this logic civilian units wouldnt have any mass (workers, setllers etc) and they would be able to move freely.

It would make wars even more tactical, and would remove most of the annoyences of the 1upt system, w/o introducing the dreadfull SODs back to the game.
noid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 02:59 PM   #92
DragonKnight
Warlord
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Portland
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drawmeus View Post
A "peacetime footing" for a military where you can put additional units (say, up to 1 per adjacent land tile) into your cities with the caveat that if you go to war they'll all be ejected would be wonderful.
The forced ejection could get tricky though, I never liked units getting the magic bump to far off tiles... But I favor let them be stacked to 2, but when stacked the unit with the highest strength becomes the primary unit, the others get no bonuses and a 50% penalty. If the primary loses a battle the secondary dies too. That way it is only to facilitate better movement, and doesn't effect the strategy of an attach formation.

But I also agree with others, the maps feel like they have too few hexs. And if you turn the map size up, you can't support large empires due to the happiness issues.

DK
DragonKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 03:08 PM   #93
hemeyou
Chieftain
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10
I have to agree, I hate 1 unit 1 tile. I think in principal is good as the Civ IV AI liked to make HUGGEEE unit stacks, but the map sizes just don't suit 1 unit 1 tile. I think that maybe only stacking of same unit types up to 3 or 4 would be a much better system.

But it doesn't matter because the 'base' Civ games have sucked for a long time, its all about the mods that the fans come up it that improve the game.
hemeyou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 04:10 PM   #94
revengeofmakno
Eclectic Enigma
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 307
Quote:
Originally Posted by hewhoknowsall View Post
... 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.
The problem has several levels but that quote above zeroes in on what might be the worst of it. The map is strategic, the game is strategic with turns that are year length and more. The logical thing for that would be a combat system that is also essentially strategic or at least very high level operational but no, somehow a viciously stripped down attempt at battlefield level combat is superimposed on that. It is fundamentally absurd and contradictory and the ridiculous things that happen are a logical consequence.

Now I get that some people don't care much about any of that and will have fun anyway whatever the abstractions might be. That is fine, knock yourselves out, but its a kool-aid that some others cannot swallow. I don't think the two camps can ever agree.

But what is crazy and really baffling is that there are a number of people actually trying to argue that this system and what it allows to happen is somehow realistic or reasonable.
revengeofmakno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 04:18 PM   #95
Sofar Sogood
Chieftain
 
Sofar Sogood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scramble View Post
Far superior and specialized guerrilla training against a bunch of green mech infantry.
Just how green would these mech infantry need to be to be totally caught off-guard by a bunch of Crossbowmen, and then subsequently be defeated?

While the scenario is technically posssible, the game would seem to suggest it's a lot more likely than it'd actually be.

Also, what happens if their fairly green Crossbowmen take out my fairly veteran Mech Infantry?

Quote:
sounds like you are asking for all range to dissapear as soon as one player discovers Gunpowder...
Artillery.

Anyhow, it just seems pretty silly having archers fire at a longer range than guns that can totally shoot farther. Not to mention having Crossbowmen WIN because of this ugly "fact."

The easiest solution, as I see it (as in, not messing with the ranges), is to reduce the amount of damage, say, Riflemen onward, take from Crossbows and other archery stuffs.

There'd just seem to be something off about having Crossbows just pick units off from range that those units would realistically be able to fire over.
Sofar Sogood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 04:18 PM   #96
Gaizokubanou
Warlord
 
Gaizokubanou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by faizan View Post
In chess Horses move in L shapes...does that happen in reality? no! so I don't see people ing about chess!

Why can't you people just accept the rules of the game and play them accordingly. Or do your tactics end when you find something that makes you have to think more than you would like to?

Fair enough, 3 tiles = billions of miles, who gives a damn, its a game and to keep things fair and working they made longbowman or crossbowman shoot that far, live with it. Just be AWARE of it and use the BRAIN God gave you to work around the problem.

If you still find it a pain, then thankfully a game like CiV allows for MODS, and you can adjust all of these things to suit your specific needs. I am perfectly fine with longbowmans and them killing my early infantry because of distance...doesn't upset me. I will just learn to work around the problem instead of complaining.
Why would you quote me to rant about people not liking 1upt when I actually like it?
Gaizokubanou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 07:40 PM   #97
faizan
Chieftain
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 36
what would be pretty epic is to have CIV with Total War type battle...I wonder if we could mod something like that.
faizan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 07:40 PM   #98
Scarlet_King
Deity
 
Scarlet_King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,524
Quote:
Originally Posted by faizan View Post
what would be pretty epic is to have CIV with Total War type battle...I wonder if we could mod something like that.
They can't.
Scarlet_King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 07:50 PM   #99
Thoughtful Thug
Deity
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: ohi-yo
Posts: 2,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Snug View Post
Why not allow 2 or 3? Why go from infinite to 1; there was no suitable number between those two extremes?

Why not permit army groups ala civ3? An army group that could permit 1 mounted unit, 1 ranged unit and 2 infantry units. That would seem reasonable to me.
There is a guy quite famous in the modding community that may like what you think about having army groups in the game.


Here is Kael modification. Not what you are asking for, but it is close to what you like.


http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=380955

Ask him to do it.

I prefer the 1upt. The only best change in the series.
Thoughtful Thug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2010, 07:52 PM   #100
Scarlet_King
Deity
 
Scarlet_King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoughtful Thug View Post
I prefer the 1upt. The only best change in the series.
If only they had made a new AI instead of using the combat AI from the Civ4 Beta.
Scarlet_King is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Go Back Civilization Fanatics' Forums > CIVILIZATION V > Civ5 - General Discussions > 1 unit/tile overkill

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Advertisement

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This site is copyright © Civilization Fanatics' Center.
Support CFC: Amazon.com | Amazon UK | Amazon DE | Amazon CA | Amazon FR