ciV combat system rocks!

[AxelRhodd]

After several games and lot of complaining I am fnally into it!
But really the ONLY reason why Im still playing ciV is its 1UPT rules and combat system.

Often I find myslef spending several minutes planing my next troop movement.
Its like a game of chess. The best thing about the combat system is that just because I may be behind AI in terms of technology, I am NOT automatically doomed.

I am able to use SMART placement of units and make use of TERRAIN to defeat superior invading army. Throw in couple of Honor policies and a general and things get really interesting.

So for me it is the combat system that makes me want to play this game.
Which main aspect of the game has caught your imagination?

 

[kaltorak]

I agree. There are several things I don't like about civ5. And I still think it's much more boring than what it should have been. But after playing 1upt I find it hard to go back to SoDs

 

[flyingbunnys]

I fully agree the combat system was the best thing to happen to the game. 1UPT is a great feature and I hope it is not removed. I hated the mindless build a stack and move it around. The limited resources is also sorta cool, although with no alternative energy or resouces available its a bit of a bummer.

Least favorite thing for me is trading post, lack of workshops, windmills, waterwheels, Plant forest, and the uselessness of food resources.

 

[kaltorak]

Least favorite thing for me is trading post, lack of workshops, windmills, waterwheels, Plant forest, and the uselessness of food resources.

You should check out this mod: Economy Mod

It solves much of what you are complaining about, while not changing the core of the game.

 

[J-man]

I agree with you all. I just wish that the AI knew how to handle 1upt. Things have improved with the last patch (I haven't seen the AI send siege to battle without any support anymore) but it's still sad.

 

[Horizons]

Don't forget quantified strategic resources. Things like this and the combat system make going back to Civ4 totally unpalatable for me.

 

[ProximaCentauri]

Yeah, 1 upt is great when compared to Civ4, but it's useless for now cause the AI don't get it at all.
Quantified resources seemed to me a great idea too, but after a while I have to admit that I NEVER lacked any of them, so quantified or not just made no difference.
I came to Civ with Civ5, so it's not about going BACK to Civ4, but just going.

 

[mihaifx]

Often I find myslef spending several minutes planing my next troop movement.
Its like a game of chess. The best thing about the combat system is that just because I may be behind AI in terms of technology, I am NOT automatically doomed.

I was thinking about the AI and the fact that I've played more that 100 hours....most of the time warmongering, pulling off intricated plans and learning how combat works. How can the AI stand up with me when it starts from scratch every game, while I gradually improve. No matter how good they make it, I doubt it will ever outmaneuver me in combat.
Only a playable multiplayer might satisfy my combat hunger

 

[Ex-Cop]

No it doesnt

 

[DaMav]

After about 40 hours I like the new combat system a lot. But I'm having problems with one thing -- figuring out whether I can bombard square A from square B with 100% reliability before I actually have a ranged unit on B.

I understand you need a line of sight to the target, at least with older units like catapults and crossbows. But sometimes it seems like that isn't enough. Sometimes I get ranged attack 2 squares back on level ground and sometimes I don't.

Can anyone give me some info that discusses this in more detail, preferably with examples. It's really frustrating setting up a battle plan and maneuvering your ranged units into place only to find out they can't reach the target. TIA.

 

[Slowpoke]

After about 40 hours I like the new combat system a lot. But I'm having problems with one thing -- figuring out whether I can bombard square A from square B with 100% reliability before I actually have a ranged unit on B.

I understand you need a line of sight to the target, at least with older units like catapults and crossbows. But sometimes it seems like that isn't enough. Sometimes I get ranged attack 2 squares back on level ground and sometimes I don't.

Can anyone give me some info that discusses this in more detail, preferably with examples. It's really frustrating setting up a battle plan and maneuvering your ranged units into place only to find out they can't reach the target. TIA.

Basically, on ground, hills and forests will block you. On a hill, it gets pretty borked and I have no idea how it works :/ generally it seems it's more sight but sometimes not??

 

[lschnarch]

General rule: there shouldn't be any obstacles in the way.

Obstacles in this context mean forests and elevations. Exception from this are cities which can shoot even over moutains.

Furthermore, it has to be taken into consideration that due to clever positioning you can shoot alongside of an obstacle. And of course the target has to be in the line of sight of the ranged weapon or any other unit of yours (becoming important with artillery).

 

[DavidPBacon]

The best thing about the combat system is that just because I may be behind AI in terms of technology, I am NOT automatically doomed.

I am able to use SMART placement of units and make use of TERRAIN to defeat superior invading army. Throw in couple of Honor policies and a general and things get really interesting.

So for me it is the combat system that makes me want to play this game.
Which main aspect of the game has caught your imagination?

This one of the things that breaks the game for me. If i'm behind in tech, I should loose, at least that's how I feel it. To me, if I win in this case, it should be because of my intelligent use of the empire resources, of diplomacy options, of my espionage resources etc, not because I can move my units more efficiently then the AI. I will always be able to that. I agree SOD was a bad solution to the matter, but 1Upt is not an improvement, specially with the ccurrent AI.

 

[Aristos]

...rocks, paper, scissors?

 

[Biz_]

it's actually really terrible once you start playing at high levels or on maps that don't work well for 1upt

 

[flyingbunnys]

I've played on every difficulty and I have not had any problems with 1upt. I'll amitt that I have not tried truning on high ocean level, but even if lots of mountains made lots of narrow difficult passes, seems like its just part of the challenge and not a problem.

 

[qrterlber]

This one of the things that breaks the game for me. If i'm behind in tech, I should loose, at least that's how I feel it. To me, if I win in this case, it should be because of my intelligent use of the empire resources, of diplomacy options, of my espionage resources etc, not because I can move my units more efficiently then the AI. I will always be able to that. I agree SOD was a bad solution to the matter, but 1Upt is not an improvement, specially with the ccurrent AI.

You don't have to be "smarter" than the other civs in order to win. There are many civilizations that conquered others, not because they had better technology, but because they had better generals.

 

[Bandobras Took]

This one of the things that breaks the game for me. If i'm behind in tech, I should loose, at least that's how I feel it. To me, if I win in this case, it should be because of my intelligent use of the empire resources, of diplomacy options, of my espionage resources etc, not because I can move my units more efficiently then the AI. I will always be able to that. I agree SOD was a bad solution to the matter, but 1Upt is not an improvement, specially with the ccurrent AI.

Actually, I feel that's been a problem in all Civ games, not just 5. Humans have always been better at combat than the AI.

It's not so much that thing that I like in Civ 5, but that for the first time, I feel like defensive warfare is viable -- you're not signing a death warrant in this game by not aggressively expanding and wiping out their military first.

 

[Doubleplusgood3]

I like the whole system I can finally not focus on getting a massive tech lead and instead pouring resources into a massive swordsman and knight army. Somehow I always wind up conquering the most with these two units.

 

[migkillertwo]

After several games and lot of complaining I am fnally into it!
But really the ONLY reason why Im still playing ciV is its 1UPT rules and combat system.

Often I find myslef spending several minutes planing my next troop movement.
Its like a game of chess. The best thing about the combat system is that just because I may be behind AI in terms of technology, I am NOT automatically doomed.

I am able to use SMART placement of units and make use of TERRAIN to defeat superior invading army. Throw in couple of Honor policies and a general and things get really interesting.

So for me it is the combat system that makes me want to play this game.
Which main aspect of the game has caught your imagination?

agree 100%. Honestly the one thing Civ V has going for it is the combat system. But sometimes it can be too easy to outsmart an AI opponent. just build a few forts in a few key locations (ideally on a hill across a river) and the AI will just throw its units into the slaughter.

But I swear, it seems like the AI really does learn. Just the other day I was fighting a two-front war. On both fronts, I built some forts and garrisoned riflemen in them. both enemies kept sending waves of riflemen for a few turns. Then they stopped, and tried to slowly wittle down my forces with cannon fire.

Further, the Northern enemies, the romans, had twice attempted small amphibious flanking forces. Then they just stopped.