Which combat system would you prefer for the next Civ?

Which combat system would you prefer for the next Civ?


  • Total voters
    19

Supamarioana

Chieftain
Joined
Nov 3, 2010
Messages
17
Location
Octoberfest Capital-City
Hello guys. :)

I already opened this poll in the forums of other Civ incarnations. Please don't vote two times.

There has been a lot of discussion about the 1UPT system of Civ5. To be honest: I just played the demo. And although I think that Civ4:BTS is near-perfect, its combat system could be better. So I'll just explain to you some battle systems by example of the turn-based-strategy games they are used in and ask: Which one would you like to see in the next Civ?

Please read before voting:

1. Birth of the federation:
People are less likely to know this game so I'll explain it in more detail. It's a star trek sci-fi game but that doesn't matter. What counts here is its combat system:
You attack and defend with stacks. In battle, the game changes to a turn-based tactical combat screen. For each turn, you can tell each unit (or a whole group) in your stack, what it should do: Evade, attack, withdraw, bombard,... and of course which unit it should attack, if any. This sounds complicated at first, but it's really very easy to do and opens up many tactical possibilities.
After pressing "end turn", every predefined action is carried out for attacking and defending units alike in "real-time" until the next combat turn begins or one side is eliminated (or has escaped).
Optionally with auto-resolve for players that are not interested in combat of that detail.

2. Call to Power:
It's also stack vs. stack in a special turn-based combat mode. But in comparison to botf the player has no influence once the battle started. The outcome is computed depending, amongst other things, on the characteristics of the units (bombardment, melee, flanking,...)

3. Civ5:
1 unit per tile. Therefore it's always one-on-one during combat.

4. Civ3/4:
Stacks are allowed, but combat is still one-on-one at a time. The defending stack chooses it's best unit.
This poll shall not be about details like how siege units should work exactly. That's why I merged both systems.

5. Total War:
I never played it, but some people seem to like this one. It combines turn-based strategy and resource management with real-time tactical control of battles.

6. other:
Feel free to tell us about any other system that you would prefer. Please bear in mind that the discussion should not focus on details like stack cap or AI-limitations or graphics and so on. It's about which system you'd like in general. So when you favor the CTP-option with a stack limit of 4, you should still vote for the CTP-option.

Personally, I prefer the botf system:
It's more detailed as you can choose actions for each unit depending on its abilities and it's more fun to have entire armys or fleets fighting each other, which is also more realistic. People might think that this special combat screen might lead to a game which even more concentrates on warfare, but the opposite is the case: A clash of 2 big stacks is decided very fast in one short but dense big battle instead of 20 little ones. In Civ4, a battle of two stacks consisting of 10 units each takes much longer. In Civ5 even more so. Additionally, armies spanning whole continents are rather unrealistic in my opinion.

Thank you very much for reading. :)
 
don't worry, we can't vote in this one since you didn't include a poll.
Well I did include a poll. But this forum has the interesting ability to just let you make the poll after it has already created the thread. ;)
I created a new poll on purpose so that we can get the separate opinions of people who like different versions of Civ.
 
Well I did include a poll. But this forum has the interesting ability to just let you make the poll after it has already created the thread. ;)
I created a new poll on purpose so that we can get the separate opinions of people who like different versions of Civ.

ok, sorry, I'll delete the link.
 
4. Civ3/4:
Stacks are allowed, but combat is still one-on-one at a time. The defending stack chooses it's best unit.
This poll shall not be about details like how siege units should work exactly. That's why I merged both systems.

5. Total War:
I never played it, but some people seem to like this one. It combines turn-based strategy and resource management with real-time tactical control of battles.

6. other:
Feel free to tell us about any other system that you would prefer. Please bear in mind that the discussion should not focus on details like stack cap or AI-limitations or graphics and so on. It's about which system you'd like in general. So when you favor the CTP-option with a stack limit of 4, you should still vote for the CTP-option.

Well, having played Rome: Total War I feel I should explain a bit about it, just in case. The battles are Real-Time Tactical, and you have (in Rome, anyway) a limit of 20 units you can control at a given time - this applies both on the Strategic Map (20-unit stacks) and for the player in the Battlefield. The AI can control more than 20 units at a time (including allied Reinforcements, if you decide to let the AI command your reinforcements). The biggest problem is the same one that's present in Civ, though - the AI is bad. It has almost no tactical skill and tends to charge its Generals (Family Members who provide Morale benefits for the rest of the army, in addition to being a powerful Cavalry unit) right onto your defending spears, usually before the infantry get there. Not having played Empire, I don't know how well it handles ranged-centric combat, such as you'd get in gunpowder-era and modern battles.



Anyway, question: Where does Civ2 fall in your categories? Because it's honestly the best combat system for the Civ games I've played (1-3), and it seems to be better than 4 (from what I've read), although without the customizability.
 
Where does Civ2 fall in your categories?
I played Civ2 just a short time and this has been a long time ago. But as far as I remember, it is the same category as Civ 3 and 4: Stacks but with units fighting one-on-one. They only differ in details.

This poll shall not be about every detail of how these systems are realised in those games. The games are just examples, that's why I wrote them in quotation marks.

You should rather ask yourself:
"What system would I prefer if it could be implemented in the best way that I can imagine?"

Take the AI for example: In Total War, you say it is bad. But would you prefer the system if the AI in every suggested system was perfect?
 
For Civilization games, the way it's handled in 1-4 is the way I feel is the best, with particular regards to Civ2. Port Civ2's combat system completely, except keep Civ3's Bombardment, and you'd have a perfect Civ combat system.
 
Meteor Wing > Thundaga.
 
I voted the Federation choice, from the description, I've never played the game. Back in the 90's, there was a series of WW2 games that used a similar set-up and it worked quite well at simulating battles at a large scale.

I would add that the player should be able to select the order in which the units run their attacks, otherwise, the idea loses a lot of its appeal.
 
I actually have enjoyed the 1 uph system installed in Civ5. Sure the AI stinks at strategy, but the AI has always done that. The idea of promotions also seems less dull to me as I don't have to search through a 25+ unit stack to find 1 unit with just the right promotion to take down the top unit on another stack.
 
The best battlesystem for turnbased epic strategy games in my eyes is that of Age of Wonders II SM. When a battle occurs, the game switches to an interesting battlescreen with hills, trees and terrain of the location of the mainscreen. Here tactical combat is really possible. The maximum number a tile can contain are 8 units. In battle several groups, each containing up to 8 units can meat. I wish, Firaxis would have done something similar. :)
 
The best battlesystem for turnbased epic strategy games in my eyes is that of Age of Wonders II SM. When a battle occurs, the game switches to an interesting battlescreen with hills, trees and terrain of the location of the mainscreen. Here tactical combat is really possible. The maximum number a tile can contain are 8 units. In battle several groups, each containing up to 8 units can meat. I wish, Firaxis would have done something similar. :)


Ya but its not like Firaxis will copy that feature into Civ , or will they. :dunno:

Especially if zooming on that type of terrian.

I've always wanted to zoom in a battle for the desert. :ar15:
 
The best battlesystem for turnbased epic strategy games in my eyes is that of Age of Wonders II SM. When a battle occurs, the game switches to an interesting battlescreen with hills, trees and terrain of the location of the mainscreen. Here tactical combat is really possible. The maximum number a tile can contain are 8 units. In battle several groups, each containing up to 8 units can meat. I wish, Firaxis would have done something similar. :)

Sounds something like Master of Orion's battle system, which I found quite interesting.
 
I voted Civ3/4 system. I highly dislike the trend to turn Civ into a wargame. That's how we end up with Civ5. ;)

I like keeping war/combat abstracted like it is in III and IV. If I want to play a tactical wargame, there is a wide selection of true wargames available.
 
Civ3/4 system, best of both worlds. Civ5 reminds me of Stratego plus eye-candy overload. Although, Civ5's menu system is crisp and clean.
 
Hey, Stratego was awesome as a boardgame. The computer version was a bit odd, I'll admit.
 
Hey, Stratego was awesome as a boardgame. The computer version was a bit odd, I'll admit.

I played it with my 2nd cousin once (who was a civ fan, BTW). Had I moved a bottom row unit instead of a top row unit, I would've won! :lol: (thought it might've been another bomb unit).
 
I rather liked the system from the new colonization, I never played 4 enough to learn it's system, but I think it is probably the same.
 
Curious why Civ2 is getting votes, what with one battle deciding the fate of an entire stack outside cities. I like Civ3 where having more than one defender isn't completely useless.
 
Back
Top Bottom