^ This is the method I was trying to explain to you and I think Cruel may have done a better job at getting the point across.
Apparently neither of us managed to get our points across since I explained using this very method in my first post on the matter.
As I keep attacking, I keep reselecting my unused bombards/cannons between the attacks, to see if the original unit that kept them in check has finally been replaced by something else.
This must have gotten changed somewhere along the line and I never noticed (I've played civ for a very long time), or I'm confusing it with bombarding city defences. Either way it doesn't really matter.
Well, I brought it up originally because SR-71 was asking advice on how to deal with large AI stacks, and was advised to just bombard them. I wanted to point out that this doesn't always work, so I guess it matters in that respect at least.
Isn't that how things should work? Wouldn't any army place their generals in the safest locations, so they can keep their chain of command during such an attack?
They way I look at things is that your more experienced units are you commanders in that stack, as a result their promotions/experience are passed on in aid to the rest of your troops through their chain of command. They aren't out their "shielding with their body."
I know why the "protect valuable units" exists, the problem with bombards is a side effect of it. I still think it silly that they are able to protect rest of the stack from harm once they have taken some damage, but not before. You would not put your generals in front of cannon fire in the first place.
And while you could counter-argue even this point and I could reply again, this is distracting us from the issue at hand: Stacks of doom still exist, and two mechanics to keep them in their place have somewhat failed. The first is bombardment. Sometimes you just can't deal with a stack with bombards at all, sometimes you can. It depends on the make-up of the stack, and frankly it's more to do with luck (AI either happens to have experienced/warlord units in the stack or not) and whatever roster of units the AI has access to at the moment, than anything strategic or tactical the player can influence.
The second point is the logistics system, which doesn't punish extra large stacks enough to be sufficiently effective in my opinion. At least not when they're on the defensive. They get -35% but the aid they get from each other and from any defensive terrain cancels/surpasses that. (And let's remember the main tactical advantage a stack provides is that units aren't forced to defend twice if they are severely wounded until everyone is. Anything else is just icing on the cake.) I still suggest that chipping away at terrain defensive bonuses at the high end of the logistics line (penalties V and VI, not I-III) could help resolve the issue somewhat. And I don't think this is punishing tactical play, since tactical play involves (or should, in my opinion) splitting your stacks into smaller ones and manouvering them, instead of just putting everything together and moving them from forest/jungle/hill square to the next.
My biggest concern with this proposal is, frankly, if teaching AI to split stacks properly (proper balance between weak and defensive units) and having it properly deduce when to use the terrains and keep everything together, and when to split up and sent the weaker stack to better terrain, is a task too large to be accomplished with a reasonable effort.
I recognize that there are always some ways to deal with almost anything in this game, such as clearing the jungles (which btw, is either a trivial or gargantuan task depending on the map and era) for a partial solution to the above problem. I'm not asking for a list here, I mean that if I find myself jumping through too many hoops just to deal with something that's supposed to have mechanics for doing so already in place, but which are randomly ineffective, I point it out as a problem.
As for the espionage, I still think that that one mission is ridiculous. It's like an espionage nuke. And frankly I don't think anyone was expecting it the first time. Espionage used to grow from a nuisance to a major problem a bit more gradually. Just because you *should* try keep up with espionage points, doesn't mean that the penalty for failing to do so is randomly crippling (I think that the AI has to get lucky to pull that mission off successfully). And trying to keep up with espionage, unless it's your main concern, which it shouldn't be, is difficult to do consistently since buildings that grant it without specialists are wonder-related until jails come along, espionage slider is... (come on! if you can afford the luxury to use the espionage slider, surely you've mastered the difficulty level you're on, and should go up one
) never mind, and either the AIs divide their own spending somewhat evenly, or the political situation is such that a bunch of them hate specifically you and are spending accordingly, forcing you to choose one or two to keep up with, and neglect the rest. (Is the solution to such a political situation then: be nice with everyone?
)
for having to see the RNG just decided to let the AI war continues. and
are king during the very early stages.
warriors will dwindle the economy more and more.
