1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Photobucket has changed its policy concerning hotlinking images and now requires an account with a $399.00 annual fee to allow hotlink. More information is available at: this link.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Dismiss Notice
  7. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

1 unit/tile overkill

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by The Snug, Sep 26, 2010.

  1. Monkeyfinger

    Monkeyfinger Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Messages:
    2,002
    He's asking for range to disappear entirely at all eras, because tiles represent several of miles of space and you can't fire anything that far or something.

    Not that I'm defending him or anything here, because that argument is also pretty ******ed. The real answer is to let guys with guns have ranged attacks too.
     
  2. dannythefool

    dannythefool Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    657
    A 16th century longbow is accurate up to around 200 metres, an 18th century musket at most about 50 metres. Because of that they were normally used at fairly close range. Even if bows historically never shot as far as the miles a tile is wide, they were used distinctly differently.

    Rifles or even modern assault rifles are better than muskets, but even those are typically not used at range. That's what artillery is for.

    Also, not directed at you, lol at the noobs who want instant win due to tech lead. Try a higher difficulty level and tell me if you still want it when it is the AI that is usually in the lead.
     
  3. hewhoknowsall

    hewhoknowsall Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    Messages:
    294
    Wow a lot of you use strawmans.

    @the guy claimin. I want range to be removed: when did I say that

    @the other guy:

    1. Since when are the crossbowmen more experienced than the mech infantry? You call my argumen dumb and yet you make stuff up out of thin air?

    2. Your second part makes no sense. When did I want range to disappear at gunpowder. i was avocating for the OPPOSITE.

    So no, stop calling other people's arguments done and insulting them when you can't comprehend their arguments because they're too complex for you.
     
  4. Scramble

    Scramble Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Messages:
    283
    Location:
    Canada
    1. Uhh, being higher tech and better equipment does NOT mean more experienced in the art of Combat... The soldiers themselves could know the land, know the best times to attack, abuse weaknesses in the vehicles and equipment. The Mech Infantry could be a bunch of drunken frat boys with guns who just got hastily conscripted in a war running out of volenteers.

    2. So you want every unit in the Modern Era to be ranged. Well that would make for an interesting game. Mod it in. I certainly won't play it, but you may enjoy it.
     
  5. hewhoknowsall

    hewhoknowsall Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    Messages:
    294
    1. I didn't say that mech infantry are more experienced. You said that crossbowmen are more experienced. Prove it. Sure the meh infantry could be drunk, but prove that it's any more likely than the crossbowmen.

    2. Strawman and backtracking, again.
     
  6. tinstaafl

    tinstaafl Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    119
    Location:
    Germany
    Scramble, experience is actually IN the game. That, to me, means there is not much room to imagine a green crossbowmen unit having experience, because i for one would imagine if it had imagined "experience", it would have ingame-experience.
     
  7. Hukuma

    Hukuma Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Messages:
    29
    Location:
    Seattle, WA, USA
    The argument about how the tactics involved take up too much space may have a good point, but the rest of this sounds like just being upset that you did something stupid and got punished for it. I don't really care how realistic or unrealistic it is for 4 crossbowmen and a city to take out a mechanized infantry, but in terms of gameplay it doesn't sound like a problem. If you have the huge tech lead and want the game to be over, don't finish it, or win one of the peaceful victories. If you want to play on a higher difficulty, go do it! You don't have to finish the game. And if you do "have to" finish the game, just know that it's going to take more than mechanized infantry to faceroll now. Going from old Civs where old units would just destroy bigger units to this one where its taking a huge number advantage and incompetence on the side of the better unit seems a huge leap forwards.
     
  8. Gaizokubanou

    Gaizokubanou Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    253
    I'm on board with the notion that tech lead != instant win, but really there is nothing related to reality that lets longbow in Civ5 to shoot across 3 hexes... same range as MLRS. I would avoid bringing up any actual distance into the discussion because pre artillery range units in this game just scales so unintuitively.

    I think blitz66 put it very nicely. Game mechanics wise 1upt is great (so many of us, including me, like it), but I can also see why many people would be dumbfounded because how abstract it deals with space.
     
  9. Scramble

    Scramble Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Messages:
    283
    Location:
    Canada
    It is pretty clear that the Crossbowmen had promotions and lots of XP, and your Mech likely had none, or was caught on terrain it was not promoted for. Need to remember that low tech ranged units do virtually no damage to high tech units unless they have very strong upgrades and terrain advantages.
     
  10. DNK

    DNK Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    3,562
    Location:
    Saigon
    Love the logic regarding mech infantry and crossbowmen, as though all modern combat occured at the maximum range of the infantry's weapon...

    And as though mechanized infantry didn't disembark upon starting combat. You do realize the point of mechanized infantry isn't for infantrymen to sit in a guarded (yet very poorly armored by modern standards, although lately that's changing) vehicle while the main gun slowly "plinks" away at the enemy, right? The point is to allow for greater mobility between engagements? APCs are "armored personnel carriers", not "armored punishment craft that 7 or 10 men sit in for no apparent reason"...

    Given these two points, it's realistic that enough people with bows could take out a mech inf platoon or whatever the size of unit is that you're envisioning.

    I don't think anyone would have such a reaction to a "pistol brigade" taking out a mech infantry with enough units for the former, and the ranges for pistols and crossbows is probably the same, with the latter doing far more damage.

    Spearmen v tanks is, of course, wrong on so many levels, although modding melee to have a -100 v armor would make up for that.
     
  11. dannythefool

    dannythefool Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    657
    The longbowman is a special case, it's a unique unit, and unique stuff seems to be more powerful in general compared to previous games.

    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.
     
  12. azaris

    azaris Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    690
    Location:
    Finland
    Ah, the game where a single imam standing in a mountain pass blocks an entire crusading army from moving through. Or where every single AI will eventually declare war on you, no matter what you do. Or where eventually the map is teeming with superstacks or hyperupgraded knight units when most of the actual fighting in medieval battles was between smelly peasants. Or where merchants have to be hand-guided to the other side of the world to be of any use, where they promptly die of old age a few years after finishing their decade long quest of actually getting there.

    Civilization is so detached from reality that to argue over realism or immersion is pretty much a lost cause. All that matters is, does 1upt make for a compelling mechanic to challenge the player? At the moment it doesn't, because the AI is so bad, but it's still pretty fun trying to find the space to position your troops to try and take that city on a hill with the cannon and great general inside.

    I really hope the dumbing down of the AI was something done at the request of QA before launch to improve performance, and they will patch it in the future.
     
  13. Gaizokubanou

    Gaizokubanou Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    253
    LMAO. Why would anyone in the IFV bother disembarking when you can win against horde of crossbow users by simply running them over with the IFV? :crazyeye: Or screw the squad, just get a APC with a driver and you will get your roadkill.

    And modern combined arms doctrine actually shaped mechanized infantry into the direction where your lightly armed APCs are abandoned in favor of IFV where the transport vehicle is very heavily armed (sometimes more than the crew themselves) and is crucial element of the squad/platoon's firepower.

    If anything, even IFVs are under scrutiny and many armies are looking for something with even more firepower/armor.

    The problem is really simple; there is no abstract way to qualify evolution of combat from 4000BC to 2050AD, scales go whacko, and silly things happen. People should just accept that silly things happen for the ultimate playability of a game that presents 6050 years of history into few hours, instead of trying to justify medieval army getting funny kills over modern mechanized one.
     
  14. RockyBalooba

    RockyBalooba Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    4
    I read most of the posts within this thread and I just have agree with The Snug.

    The very essence of the question one-unit-per-tile or multiple is:
    1. One unit per tile gives a more tactical scent to the game.
    2. Multiple units per tile (=stacked, army or not) gives a more overall strategic game.

    Personally I prefer the latter one.
     
  15. Saarud

    Saarud Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2004
    Messages:
    113
    I really like the new combat system when compared against Civ 4s. It makes the game many heaps more fun than its predecessor. But I agree it's not perfect and could be improved.

    They should instead do as many space games and as HOI3 from Paradox does. In these games you can design ships/divisions/fleets and armies. I'd like to see a similiar function in Civilization. When you start the game you can only have a single unit in a hex but as you research techs you'll be able to make larger armies... let's say maximum 5 units per hex in modern time. Ranged units could for example have a free attack when the army is attacked.

    Civilization series are notorious for their suboptimal solutions for combat.
     
  16. Maxor127

    Maxor127 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    228
    The combat and one unit per tile is one of the few things I think the game did right. It's much better than stacks. Moving them can be annoying. I don't know why they don't show paths when you click them and set them on a path like in Civ4.
     
  17. gunter

    gunter Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2002
    Messages:
    787
    This way force you to use a strategy based on brain instead of piling dooms in a single tile with no strategy but only quantity like an arcade game

    This is not Final Fantasy this is a strategic game

    sorry
     
  18. faizan

    faizan Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Messages:
    36
    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.
     
  19. Hukuma

    Hukuma Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Messages:
    29
    Location:
    Seattle, WA, USA
    Faizan, chess does not purport to be a simulation, thus it is relatively free from such accusations. That is not to suggest that it is free from all criticism (look up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_960 for example).

    The problem that a game like Civ runs into is that it tries to seem familiar and realistic on the one hand, which makes it easier for it to jolt us out of our game when it abuses our sense of belief.

    This is an aspect every Civ game has had, and until they start turning the combat portion into a serious war simulation, they will continue to suffer this criticism. "Man, the supply line simulation in Civ 2012 is so bad! This should never happen!"
     
  20. DragonKnight

    DragonKnight Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Messages:
    286
    Location:
    Portland
    I'm not asking for the interface to explain everything. But the manual doesn't say anything about swapping units. And when I tired, I got a big red dot and circle. I took it on faith that red means no. Which it actually did. Seems sometimes it will let you and other it won't (Even when I have the movements to do it). Of course I was also able to parka tank in a city with an infantry unit for a turn. I wouldn't let either of them attack out of it, but it let them be there.

    The issue is that the interface is buggy, so playing the deduction game means you have to try the same action that failed last time you tried it, just in case it was a bug that it didn't work last time. So they either need to make it work consistently, or explain what you can do in the interface. They clearly chose to explain, but forgot to explain you can swap.

    And WTH is with an non-enemy (other civ with open borders) military unit blocking my workers. My fav though was another civ proposing an open borders trade, and when I said yes, he changed his mind and said that wasn't good enough... bait and switch man...

    oh and @scramble, yeah I played, and I read the manual, but way to degrade that part of the thread into "name calling".
    @ that guys who nicely pointed out that I can in fact swap units. Thanks for attempting to keep that part of the thread helpful.

    DK
     

Share This Page