Do you like the new embarkation?

[Montov]

I like it, but it could use some improvement, like embarking as civilian as LegionSteve is saying.

Also, instead of extra movement in modern era, maybe a transport ship is an option so you can choose between current embarking or a fast transport.
That ship should have 5 movement, 12/15 strength, and a capacity of 3 land units.

 

[Torvoni]

The new embarkation is my favorite feature of the game.

In civ4 it was a big hassle to arrange galleys, galleons, and transports. Most of the time I completely avoided archipelago maps, and with continents I always tried to find the closest two points between my continent and the other continent. It was so annoying to shuttle troops across the sea.

Now in civ5 we don't need to worry any more. The troops just hit the water and cross.

I do think that land troops should be permitted to share a hex with a real ship. I think that is a bug which will be fixed. For now there is no way to protect the land troops even by escorting them.

After learning astronomy I use excess workers and obsolete units to explore all the water on the map. If they die ... who cares ... because they didn't matter anyway and I would have just disbanded them.

Embarkation is great.

 

[mihaifx]

I do think that land troops should be permitted to share a hex with a real ship. I think that is a bug which will be fixed. For now there is no way to protect the land troops even by escorting them.

I don't think this is a bug but I don't think it's balanced either. The way I would fix it is add a movement penalty around enemy warships, the same as for the land penalty....this would avoid that snatching of the embarked units from behind your warships.

 

[zonk]

Hate it.

Think it's a crime against nature.

Think it turns seas and oceans into nothing but non-city-buildable "blue land".

Think it completely destroys naval games, island maps, and archipelago maps.

The AI doesn't seem competent at it anyway - whereas it WAS quite competent with TPs and escorts naval stacks in IV.

...I recognize that I'm in the super-minority, but no amount of whining over the boredom of loading TPs will EVER convince me that a system where popping a tech means my scout can suddenly swim the entire Pacific the very next turn is a right and proper system.

 

[AljayBoy]

@ Zonk - I'm with you in that minority - it's another example of Civ being oversimplified, and to those who advocated for it to make it 'easier' for the AI to understand, did it? I have yet to be convinced.

 

[killmeplease]

yeah, bring transports back.

 

[McLMan]

While it's taking some getting used to, I like embarkation. I don't think transports would work that well in V with how slow building units is. It takes a different sort of planning in V vs. IV in that you have to get your unit order right taking into consideration how they can move after landing. I like the fact that you can't just plop a stack next to a coastal city.

 

[Sarxis]

Rise of Nations (RTS) used the 'embarkation' style of transport. I like it because it eliminates the micromanaging of transports. And: the transports should be slower in game terms for possible interception by naval warships.

 

[Teodosio]

...I recognize that I'm in the super-minority, but no amount of whining over the boredom of loading TPs will EVER convince me that a system where popping a tech means my scout can suddenly swim the entire Pacific the very next turn is a right and proper system.

mmm since you want transports back I suppose you want supply trains too?
It feels strange that just popping agricolture means your troops can stay supplied miles into enemy territory.

Infantry and all foot units need trucks and trains too. How are they supposed to move on roads and railroads without them? Following this reasoning there should be the need to build 'train' units to load infantry on.

And by the way, how do our troops cross rivers when no bridges are available? We need sappers units too...

I just want to say that a game is a 'model' of reality. If you want to go all the way to realism you must include so many irrelevant details that the fun factor is essentially lost.
At the end of the story the only meaningful consideration is: are trasports fun or are they a micromanagement pain? In my opinion they were a pain and they are better gone; other opinions may vary but 'realism" concerns are not really the point.

Cheers!

 

[gorillagogo]

I don't like it at all. It's completely unrealistic that some unit scouting halfway across the globe from your cities can happen upon a body of water and magically conjure up a boat to cross it. It also creates a micromanagement headache when trying to get an invasion force from one continent to another.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Hey, it's a gorillagogo.

I don't mind it. I don't have to build train units to use railroads or freighters to trade resources either.

Don't your guys have to go back to your own territory to get the "embark" ability?

 

[Sonereal]

I don't like it at all. It's completely unrealistic that some unit scouting halfway across the globe from your cities can happen upon a body of water and magically conjure up a boat to cross it. It also creates a micromanagement headache when trying to get an invasion force from one continent to another.

But having to build actual transports and stack units on said transport were less micromanagement somehow?

You know what else is completly unrealistic? The linear tech tree. The limited choice of units (which, in reality once you factor in every possible combination of weapon, armor, tactic, etc, should add up to being a few....thousand different units). The fact that there's no visible supply lines to cut. Etc.

 

[Wardancing]

But having to build actual transports and stack units on said transport were less micromanagement somehow?

Placing a few transports on the coast, and setting all my cities producing queued units to goto that spot when created is pretty easy. I set all those que's and goto commands in one turn. When the transports in that tile are full, the newly created unit needs orders, as the tile isnt an availible goto spot. Also, you could set a coastal city to create a que of transports, and also have them auto goto that spot.

 

[Sonereal]

Placing a few transports on the coast, and setting all my cities producing queued units to goto that spot when created is pretty easy. I set all those que's and goto commands in one turn. When the transports in that tile are full, the newly created unit needs orders, as the tile isnt an availible goto spot. Also, you could set a coastal city to create a que of transports, and also have them auto goto that spot.

Except that A.) Units don't stack in Civ5 and B.) Units don't stack in Civ5, this isn't really feasible. You'll quickly run into the problem of a dozen of so useless transport units when in peace time clogging up your waterways.

 

[gorillagogo]

Hey, it's a gorillagogo.

I don't mind it. I don't have to build train units to use railroads or freighters to trade resources either.

Don't your guys have to go back to your own territory to get the "embark" ability?

Hey sammy

I don't remember offhand if units have to return home to get the embark ability. I've been playing mostly pangea maps lately, mainly because I don't enjoy the way they implemented navies.

 

[Wardancing]

Except that A.) Units don't stack in Civ5 and B.) Units don't stack in Civ5, this isn't really feasible. You'll quickly run into the problem of a dozen of so useless transport units when in peace time clogging up your waterways.

Sorry, didnt mean to come across saying that i think it should be the way the last game was. I was just trying to say, that in my case, with the old version of the game, i didnt find transports to be a lot of micromanagement, or a hassle.

 

[Jaffa Tamarin]

I wish they had made embarked units civilian units, so they could share a tile with a naval unit. Other than that I really like it

QFE. Embarcation is great, but I should be able to defend by sticking a battleship on top of my embarked unit, not needing to have multiple battleships trying to block all the approaches

 

[Sonereal]

QFE. Embarcation is great, but I should be able to defend by sticking a battleship on top of my embarked unit, not needing to have multiple battleships trying to block all the approaches

You don't even need to do that though. You should probably be screening with destroyers (to detect submarines) and use battleships and destroyers in combination in a convoy system. At some point, you should probably have smashed the enemy navy before hand and blockaded major ports.

 

[notger]

I love it.
Minimizes tedious micro-management and apart from that, adds immersion.

Most invasion fleets consisted of confiscated civil ships anyway, AFAIK.

 

[Drakarska]

mmm since you want transports back I suppose you want supply trains too?
It feels strange that just popping agricolture means your troops can stay supplied miles into enemy territory.

Infantry and all foot units need trucks and trains too. How are they supposed to move on roads and railroads without them? Following this reasoning there should be the need to build 'train' units to load infantry on.

And by the way, how do our troops cross rivers when no bridges are available? We need sappers units too...

I just want to say that a game is a 'model' of reality. If you want to go all the way to realism you must include so many irrelevant details that the fun factor is essentially lost.
At the end of the story the only meaningful consideration is: are trasports fun or are they a micromanagement pain? In my opinion they were a pain and they are better gone; other opinions may vary but 'realism" concerns are not really the point.

Cheers!

Ok. Not trying to start an arguement here, just want to point out a few things.

1) Supply trains were used all throughout history, but if you cut the supply lines, your hosed. Simple mechanic of requireing a road to keep your troops supplied would be feasable. Expensive? yes. But wars were meant to be costly. Realistic? Definitely.

2) Ancient army's "aquired" a lot of their supplies from their enemies lands, so yes, your army could stay supplied miles into enemy territory.

3) Train unit? How about "transport unit" I believe civ II-IV had some type of land xport unit. Not sure about 1 though, been a long time since i've played it.

4) "Model" of reality? I appreciate your position Sir, I really do. But if we're ( allow me to correct myself).. If I am wanting a "model" of reality, then I would like that model to mimic reality as close as possible.

5) Sappers were used to destroy fortifications, engineers were used to create fortifications .

Personally, I dislike the embark. It's unrealistic, lacks any immersion factor for me, and offers no real tactical benefit to use any AmphibOps. I'm ex-Navy ( lol, which admittingly may be my prob w/the naval aspect of the game), I actually like a variety of maps with varying coasts and land masses. There are definite advantages when your in a war to having the ability to conduct sea based landings against your enimies, and having the appropriate vehicle to do it with. IMO, the embark just doesn't even come close to that.