Combat in details

[stealth_nsk]

So, to gather everything up, let's start from what we had in Civ5. It's combat gave us:

Pros:

- Real tactical combat. Overshadows all cons to me.

Cons:

- AI can't handle tactical combat and without ability to throw masses on player, just loses.
- Hard to move masses of units.
- Long build time for units due to map limited unit capacity.
- Friendly civ units getting on the way (the problem which existed in all Civ games) became much bigger issue.

What we'll have in Civ6:

1. Ability to stack military and civilian units. No gameplay changes, but requires less efforts to move units, which is good.

2. Support units to stack with regular units.. We know the following support units - Ram, Siege Tower, Anti-Tank and Anti-Aircraft. It looks like there will be no more than 1 support unit per regular unit and you'll not need a support unit for each of your units. Let's say it's +30-40% to the total number of units you could build. Not so big deal against 1UPT problems, but still helpful and giving much more tactical variety.

3. Corps and armies, allowing stacking 2 (later 3) units of the same type into some kind of super-units. This measure is purely to reduce the amount of units. With 1UPT it's nearly always worth making corps/armies.

The great thing here is what this option will not be available immediately, so once you research corps (or upgrade units to those which could be stacked - the mechanic is not clear yet), you'll stack your existing units, clearing the field effectively and allowing building much more of them. After gaining access to armies, you'll not clear your field (as it's unlikely you'll be able to join corps into army), but instead you'll be building more units to convert Corps into Army.

Interesting thing here is how experience will fit the system. In Civilization 3 where armies were used before, the experience affected HP only, so joining units was easy. If we'll still have unit levels and traits in Civ 6 it's unclear how they'll be stacked and whether units will be able to get experience separately while in the army. I have a feeling the individual unit traits will be removed in favor of old-fashioned veterancy (too many issues with combining traits and armies) and customization will be done with support units, but we'll have to wait for more details.

Conclusion

We don't know all details, but so far as I see the new system can't fundamentally fix 1UPT problems, but could greatly reduce them, while improving its strong points.

 

[gunnergoz]

It is not clear to me from the info released so far that this scheme will do much to alleviate the basic problem of ranged units being used by the AI as front line fodder while it holds back the infantry, or creates traffic jams where the infantry cannot advance past the ranged units that got to the area first. OTOH if ranged units are allowed to "stack" with infantry, that could create some interesting combat situations, depending of course upon how they allow such a hybrid unit to express its combat power on the battlefield.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

According to info in another thread, Corps and Armies max out at about 140% of the individual unit's strength, so you are really better off breaking out into 2 or 3 individuals than keeping them stacked unless you have a lot of units around or you are really in a tight space.

Edit: Linky:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=14265095&postcount=44

 

[stealth_nsk]

It is not clear to me from the info released so far that this scheme will do much to alleviate the basic problem of ranged units being used by the AI as front line fodder while it holds back the infantry, or creates traffic jams where the infantry cannot advance past the ranged units that got to the area first.

The AI have to use bruteforce to solve the core of tactics, so I wouldn't expect the tactical AI to improve too much. On the other hand, some issues could be polished. Speaking about the traffic jams, it's likely in Civ6 we'll have slightly less units. It will help, but as I said, not generally solve.

OTOH if ranged units are allowed to "stack" with infantry, that could create some interesting combat situations, depending of course upon how they allow such a hybrid unit to express its combat power on the battlefield.

Stacking ranged units with melee will remove most of tactical elements from the game. Dumbing down the game to fit AI capabilities looks like wrong decision,

 

[stealth_nsk]

According to info in another thread, Corps and Armies max out at about 140% of the individual unit's strength, so you are really better off breaking out into 2 or 3 individuals than keeping them stacked unless you have a lot of units around or you are really in a tight space.

Edit: Linky:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=14265095&postcount=44

It's incorrect. They said adding unit to make corps will create a unit of about 140% strength of the original. We don't know what strength the army will have.

And since you normally can't attack with melee units from behind (or ranged units from far away), it's worth making Corps and Armies.

 

[Matthew.]

Also you really cannot underestimate stacking damage/units on tiles in a tile based system. The simple, easy example: If you only have 4 tiles to attack from, 4 armies will perform far better than 12 where 8 units sit on the side lines, even though the 4 armies take the damage cut.

 

[gunnergoz]

We also don't know yet if there will be any combat/command/logistics modifiers for corps/armies beyond this 140% stacking strength factor. Seems to me that this could be a way to reflect more modern battle organizations (think phalanx/legion/division evolution in warfare) allowing for more combat effectiveness as you improve your ability to command concentrated groups of combatants. For example, some cultures could be granted buffs for using such corps/armies since historically they were experts at organizing troops for battle (e.g. Romans/Napoleonic France/Imperial Germany). Also there may be combined arms modifiers we are not aware of yet, like buffs for having mounted units next to foot units, representing envelopment/exploitation forces.
This new system has possibilities, I'll say that for it.

 

[Hajee]

Hmm, perhaps Great Generals are used to create the Armies

 

[TheMeInTeam]

According to info in another thread, Corps and Armies max out at about 140% of the individual unit's strength, so you are really better off breaking out into 2 or 3 individuals than keeping them stacked unless you have a lot of units around or you are really in a tight space.

Edit: Linky:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=14265095&postcount=44

Doubtful, that's only a serious consideration if you can't afford extra units to drop a 40% strength boost on all of your army. Two 100% units will beat one 140%, but that stops being true at numbers like 6 vs 12, or 12 vs 24. Marginal utility rapidly favors higher strength per tile as soon as your additional unit can't consistently attack, and this effect is not going to be limited to hard chokes.

High level AI will probably have the bonus-granted chops to spam corps outright too, so players will have to plan around that in addition.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Pretty sure I read that the overall strength of 3 individual units will be stronger than an army of 3 units. But I might be wrong.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Hmm, perhaps Great Generals are used to create the Armies

Nope, it looks like they are just standard way to combine units late game.

Pretty sure I read that the overall strength of 3 individual units will be stronger than an army of 3 units. But I might be wrong.

Nope, they said the combined units are weaker than the sum, but the actual numbers were for corps only. The strength of corps and armies is being in 1 tile and higher strength for each individual fight.

 

[Talim [own]]

Honestly all i want from this game is a good AI

please can we have a good AI just once

 

[Haig]

An idea for a German unique unit fitting the new system:

88mm Gun - Replaces Anti-tank support unit, stronger and also can be used as an AA gun.

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

With the wrong damage formula, having a corps won't be as useful as employing a carpet.

Probably won't happen, but math is hard.

 

[Aristos]

Doubtful, that's only a serious consideration if you can't afford extra units to drop a 40% strength boost on all of your army. Two 100% units will beat one 140%, but that stops being true at numbers like 6 vs 12, or 12 vs 24.

Unless HPs also get boosted when combining units into corps and armies, which if I were designing is exactly what I would do (or else NOT combining them becomes a no brainer, which they say want to reduce drastically in 6).

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I wonder how damage is shared among the 2-3 joined units.

 

[manu-fan]

I wonder how damage is shared among the 2-3 joined units.

Well, as we have seen nothing at all about un-combining, I think were pretty sure it's just a new unit, not 2-3 units any more.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

At first I was hopeful that Civ VI was going to significantly modify 1UPT, but it doesn't look like it. Corps and Armies are all well and good, but a) you can only combine units of the same type and b) this is only possible in the late game. Attaching battering rams to an infantry unit seems like a pretty minor change. And the easier stacking of civilian and military units is purely cosmetic.

Seems like 1UPT has--unfortunately, in my view--survived more or less intact. Hopefully the designers at least make the map MUCH bigger (and yet somehow still manageable) and with far fewer chokepoints, so combat won't continue to be an absurd traffic jam.

 

[manu-fan]

At first I was hopeful that Civ VI was going to significantly modify 1UPT, but it doesn't look like it. Corps and Armies are all well and good, but a) you can only combine units of the same type and b) this is only possible in the late game. Attaching battering rams to an infantry unit seems like a pretty minor change. And the easier stacking of civilian and military units is purely cosmetic.

Seems like 1UPT has--unfortunately, in my view--survived more or less intact. Hopefully the designers at least make the map MUCH bigger (and yet somehow still manageable) and with far fewer chokepoints, so combat won't continue to be an absurd traffic jam.

Sort of correct. Still 1UPT, but with marked improvements over Civ 5. Every unit combined is a tile saved. So having Support Units combined with Melee saves a tile. Combining 3 into an army saves 2 tiles.

It will still be basically 1UPT though.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

Sort of correct. Still 1UPT, but with marked improvements over Civ 5. Every unit combined is a tile saved. So having Support Units combined with Melee saves a tile. Combining 3 into an army saves 2 tiles.

It will still be basically 1UPT though.

Yeah. I think it's a shame though. These tweaks are a step in the right direction but I'm highly skeptical they will solve the two big issues of 1UPT--that the AI couldn't handle it, and that there was simply not enough space on the map for units to execute interesting tactical maneuvers.

I was hoping they would do something like allow any two units (melee and ranged, if you wanted!) to combine into one army, and then perhaps there could be a tech in the Renaissance era allowing for any three units, and then in the modern era a limit of four. That would have allowed for some interesting army compositions and seriously alleviated the congestion. I doubt these tiny changes will do that.

And then, of course, there's the elephant in the room--will the AI be any better this time around? It can't be worse. But then, I have never seen an AI perform decently at tactical combat in any strategy game as open-ended and complex as civ, ever. So I think the series might have been better served by de-emphasizing tactical combat. Tactics aren't at all fun or rewarding unless you have a worthy opponent, after all.