CIV VII: 1UPT, Stack of Doom or Carpet of Doom. What's your prefs?

[Leucarum]

Given that the army commanders don't show any indication of being able to fight when stacked - I'd describe it as they've gone for addressing the micro issues of 1UPT but sticking with 1UPT overall? No idea if corps etc will still be a thing.

Curious what happens when a stack gets attacked before redeploying... My guess is they'll be quite vulnerable if they want to avoid stacks of doom...

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Given that the army commanders don't show any indication of being able to fight when stacked - I'd describe it as they've gone for addressing the micro issues of 1UPT but sticking with 1UPT overall? No idea if corps etc will still be a thing.

Curious what happens when a stack gets attacked before redeploying... My guess is they'll be quite vulnerable if they want to avoid stacks of doom...

The largest 'Armies" I remember from the videos were a Greek force (well, Hoplites, which is probably a Clue) with about 6 units plus a mounted general, and a Nubian/Egyptian force with 5 units plus a sedan-chaired general. That might be a distinct clue as to the maximum size of early (1st Age?) Armies, especially since one of the screenshots mentions 2 and 4-unit 'Armies' being available for free or cheaper with Policies. Half an army for free sounds not too OP, whereas getting an Entire Army for free would be a bit much.

 

[Leucarum]

The largest 'Armies" I remember from the videos were a Greek force (well, Hoplites, which is probably a Clue) with about 6 units plus a mounted general, and a Nubian/Egyptian force with 5 units plus a sedan-chaired general. That might be a distinct clue as to the maximum size of early (1st Age?) Armies, especially since one of the screenshots mentions 2 and 4-unit 'Armies' being available for free or cheaper with Policies. Half an army for free sounds not too OP, whereas getting an Entire Army for free would be a bit much.

Did you quote the wrong person?

 

[GeneralZift]

It's like 1upt combat with stacked movement. Unironically good solution, has both tactical benefits and strategic

 

[civac]

What happens if there is not enough space to unstack?

Also showing these small armies in the promo material doesn't tell us much. For one thing, smaller unit counts are better for the presentation. But even then I don't think Firaxis are very good at their own games and fully appreciate the number of units you can pump out if you really drill down into the mechanics (in Civ4-6).

 

[SupremacyKing2]

What happens if there is not enough space to unstack?

Maybe the units will unstack outside the commander's radius? Or maybe you only get to unstack the units that can fit inside the commander's radius?

Also showing these small armies in the promo material doesn't tell us much. For one thing, smaller unit counts are better for the presentation. But even then I don't think Firaxis are very good at their own games and fully appreciate the number of units you can pump out if you really drill down into the mechanics (in Civ4-6).

Yeah, let's hope Firaxis has implemented a good limit on number of armies. Otherwise, I could see a mess with a carpet of doom situation if a player has spammed army commanders with 6 units each that clutter the map.

 

[user330977]

I've personally yet to hear a convincing argument against stacks, so I wouldn't mind seeing them return. I do enjoy the approach taken in the Age of Wonders series where armies are made up of a small collection of units. I think this could work well in a Civ setting, with modifications.

 

[Krajzen]

It's like 1upt combat with stacked movement. Unironically good solution, has both tactical benefits and strategic

I also like how it... keeps things simple.
At one point of our discussions I have realized I actually don't want separate tactical battlefields in civ, or minigames. Just let me send units to battle in the convenient ergonomic way, make them fight on the very same strategic map in the fun way, that's it.

 

[GeneralZift]

The new combat system is going to lead to Commander assassinations and the lot, as Spiff and Potato were saying, which is something I'm actually excited for... Interesting to see how war goes in this new game. On a side note, not totally happy with the war support thing if it's the same exact as HK

 

[Lazy sweeper]

The new combat system is going to lead to Commander assassinations and the lot, as Spiff and Potato were saying, which is something I'm actually excited for... Interesting to see how war goes in this new game. On a side note, not totally happy with the war support thing if it's the same exact as HK

That's my biggest concern, I downright despise that mechanic, and what's worse, no mods can change that bc it's a core characteristics and would break the game. I was thinking maybe a mod that would give infinite amt of support points to everyone in equal manner could somehow nullify those effects of then having civs (AI or also human in multiplayer) not declaring war on you... As I see it it's a very bad situation right now, it could get worse than civ VI AI not declaring war problem, if it's even possible...

 

[Stapel]

Well, I was visiting my favourite forum of old, to try and find info on the major differences between CIV6 & CIV7.

My 2 cents: I think it hardly matters, whatever the military system is. That is, compared to how it is handled by the AI. I'm still disappointed by the AI in both 5 & 6.

 

[Professor Phobo]

My preference is 1UPT but with significantly consolidated and merged "Armies" that you have strict limits on, so there's no carpet. Like an army limit in the early game of like, 2, and each army is customized in some way.

 

[Krikkit1]

I'd prefer a non tactical system where everything is similar to air combat

Units have a base location
Units have a range (in movement, so not a perfect circle)
Units merge into a stack which acts as 1 Unit.

They can conduct missions (including relocating the base) within a certain range
One of the missions is Defense/Interception (can be at wider ranger for less of a defense bonus)

Terrain would give a bonus,... but it would be terrain along the path between the two stacks of units.

The stack would act as one unit, with bonuses to its strength based on the strength of the types of units in the other stack... ie I get a str bonus of 25% of the smaller of My Cavlary or Their Ranged

 

[stealth_nsk]

1. I'd say it gets down to the biggest question - whether you want tactical game or not. If not, unlimited SoD and similar systems are the best. If you need tactics, some form of 1UpT is needed, that's it.
2. Speaking about Carpet of Doom - it's not game mechanics by itself, it's just a problem with 1UpT implementation in Civ5. Once the problem was identified, it didn't appear in later civ games.
3. Army system in Civ6, commanders in Civ7 and cutting the number of units on age transition in Civ7, all work against CoD (although it's not their only goal).

So, yep, since I like tactical aspects of war (despite being a peaceful player), I'm for 1UpT. And I clearly want 1UpT without logistical problems, which, I assume commanders should solve quite effectively.

 

[Maiq]

I miss the stack. It was the last time I ever felt threatened in a civ game.

 

[Core Imposter]

I was playing a game of Civ IV not long ago and actually witnessed an AI attack another AI with a fully tricked out fleet including battleships, destroyers, transports and three carriers with full loads of planes and I thought, here finally is a proper invasion fleet, finally I am going to see something great. But instead of using the ships to reduce city defenses and then have the planes reduce city garrisons with a follow up amphibious attack directly into the cities the AI used its planes to reduce city defenses and landed the troops adjacent to the cities with the fleet then advancing to another city up the coastline. So of course, the invading troops were annihilated and the invasion failed. The moral being no matter how well the system is set up if the AI is unable to handle combat it's just an illusion. Doesn't really matter if its squares or hexes or stacks or 1upt.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I was playing a game of Civ IV not long ago and actually witnessed an AI attack another AI with a fully tricked out fleet including battleships, destroyers, transports and three carriers with full loads of planes and I thought, here finally is a proper invasion fleet, finally I am going to see something great. But instead of using the ships to reduce city defenses and then have the planes reduce city garrisons with a follow up amphibious attack directly into the cities the AI used its planes to reduce city defenses and landed the troops adjacent to the cities with the fleet then advancing to another city up the coastline. So of course, the invading troops were annihilated and the invasion failed. The moral being no matter how well the system is set up if the AI is unable to handle combat it's just an illusion. Doesn't really matter if its squares or hexes or stacks or 1upt.

I remember in Civ3 you were able to completely paralyze enemy invasion by moving units in and out of city. When AI sees undefended city (and it doesn't have fog of war), it moves all units there. Once they are nearby, you put your garrison unit back in and remove garrison from city on the other side of your empire. AI immediately starts moving to the new target and you could do it back and forth for a long time.

 

[Vitruvian Guar]

I think I like the basic idea from Millenia where you can have a couple units per tile in the beguining of the game, and then the max size of stack increases as you go through the tech tree.

And then I'd like to have some options for army formation. Which units are in the front and which are in the rear. Whether all the units in the stack immediately try to engage the enemy, or some stay in the reserve, prepared to defend from an attack from the flank or from the rear, which should be quite devastating if not being prepared for. This would add an extra strategic depth to combat as well as some realism.

 

[Jesper87]

Best system was in call to power 2. You could stack up to 12 units which all attacked at the same time. The range ones where on the back, calavaly and tanks on the side and melee units in front. AInwas stupid but it was in 1998.

All this things with commanders and generals feels so over complicated. And promotion trees and all kinds of blah blah.

Sorry it is off topic but there seemed to be such an over emphazise on all these options. For me its just a lot of clicking.

 

[Stapel]

I was playing a game of Civ IV not long ago and actually witnessed an AI attack another AI with a fully tricked out fleet including battleships, destroyers, transports and three carriers with full loads of planes and I thought, here finally is a proper invasion fleet, finally I am going to see something great. But instead of using the ships to reduce city defenses and then have the planes reduce city garrisons with a follow up amphibious attack directly into the cities the AI used its planes to reduce city defenses and landed the troops adjacent to the cities with the fleet then advancing to another city up the coastline. So of course, the invading troops were annihilated and the invasion failed. The moral being no matter how well the system is set up if the AI is unable to handle combat it's just an illusion. Doesn't really matter if its squares or hexes or stacks or 1upt.

Well said.
Do we have any news on the AI in CIV7?