After playing the game for some times, it's obvious that the 1 unit per hex system is better than the stack of doom system. However, the fact that unit groups can completely block map bottlenecks create logistical challenges for the AI (units arrive in the wrong order, it's difficult to rearrange units after a breach, etc.
Therefore, a new, AI-friendly system could improve the situation:
- Combat would remain as it is.
- Movement through hexes with friendly units would be allowed, even stacking units on one hex to a limit (say, three?), but only ONE unit in a hex would be in DEPLOYED state. That means only one unit is combat-ready, controlling the hex area - the others are IN TRANSIT. If the hex with multiple unit is attacked, only the deployed unit may defend. If it is destroyed or must retreat, all the in-transit units on the hex are immediately destroyed (similar to workers and settlers).
- changing the deployed unit would be possible, but would finish the unit's turn.
Careful unit placement would be still necessary, but the logistical issues with reinforcement that hurt AI war campaign so much would be, IMO, reduced. I also believe that wars in narrow bottlenecks and peninsulas would make more sense.
Therefore, a new, AI-friendly system could improve the situation:
- Combat would remain as it is.
- Movement through hexes with friendly units would be allowed, even stacking units on one hex to a limit (say, three?), but only ONE unit in a hex would be in DEPLOYED state. That means only one unit is combat-ready, controlling the hex area - the others are IN TRANSIT. If the hex with multiple unit is attacked, only the deployed unit may defend. If it is destroyed or must retreat, all the in-transit units on the hex are immediately destroyed (similar to workers and settlers).
- changing the deployed unit would be possible, but would finish the unit's turn.
Careful unit placement would be still necessary, but the logistical issues with reinforcement that hurt AI war campaign so much would be, IMO, reduced. I also believe that wars in narrow bottlenecks and peninsulas would make more sense.
