Dumb combat system

S

Snarfy

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 27, 2005
Messages
24
Was cutting edge and worked fine for Civ 1.

But seriously, no changes and we're at Civ 4??

The concept of units attacking one by one and having no cumulative effect is just stupid. I'm sorry, but if I attack with 10 units vs 1, those 10 units should attack together and massacre that one unit. Instead, that one unit gets multiple attempts to take out my 10 units one by one.

Just dumb.

I love this game, but I shake my head at the inability of Sid to update his combat system. One unit vs one unit is so 1980s.
 
If the size of your stack influenced the outcome of a battle SODs would be even more powerful, almost overpowering. I don't see another option really..
 
KabeDerlin said:
If the size of your stack influenced the outcome of a battle SODs would be even more powerful, almost overpowering. I don't see another option really..
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I've never seen a game able to do stacking in such a way that doesn't lead to gigantic overstacked units running around like Godzilla on crack. If anyone's ever played Hearts of Iron - they tried lots things to prevent this (command limit penalties, leader characteristics, etc). Nothing worked all that well, always ended up with killer stacks tromping around the map.

I wish armies weren't eliminated, though - the idea of a limited stack-type unit, I think, was worth salvaging.
 
Snarfy said:
Was cutting edge and worked fine for Civ 1.

But seriously, no changes and we're at Civ 4??

The concept of units attacking one by one and having no cumulative effect is just stupid. I'm sorry, but if I attack with 10 units vs 1, those 10 units should attack together and massacre that one unit. Instead, that one unit gets multiple attempts to take out my 10 units one by one.

Just dumb.
Click to expand...

LOL according to you it would suffice to outnumber an enemy to beat it. You're just not into reading history books isnt ?

:mischief:
 
Quantity is the most common element associated with victory in all of recorded history pertaining to warfare.

Numbers DO matter. The combat model in civ really needs to be redone.
 
Snarfy said:
Was cutting edge and worked fine for Civ 1.
Click to expand...

I hated how an undefended catapult could attack any city they wanted during their period, kind of a spoiler. The Civ battle concept has always evolved around the terrain bonuses, and it's a good system I think.

Also in Civ 1, it was really dumb how that one unit could eliminate an entire stack of units by the defeat of one per stack. No stacking bonus, remember?

Was veeeeery STUPID.
 
Quantity stopped being the common element 500 years ago when the first musketmen were on the battle front. 1 cannon and 300 troops took over central America who had atleast 10 to 1 odds of winning.
 
meneedshelp said:
Quantity is the most common element associated with victory in all of recorded history pertaining to warfare.
Click to expand...

Tell that to the Romans defeated at Cannae by a numerically inferior army under the command of Hannibal

Tell that to the Persians defeated three times by a numerically inferior army under the command of Alexander the Great

Tell that to the British defeated by the Colonials in the American Revolution

While I agree numbers play a role in battle, it is deffinately not the most important thing when determinign the victor, nor is it even an overwhelmingly important factor. THe true factors of victory are commonly training, knowledge of the enemy and the terrain, and a smart commander able to manipulate the battle.
 
MeNeedsHelp said:
Quantity is the most common element associated with victory in all of recorded history pertaining to warfare.

Numbers DO matter. The combat model in civ really needs to be redone.
Click to expand...

Why?

If you have one army against an SoD, on his turn he may be able to beat one of your regiments, but on your turn you will squash him like the bug he is. Likewise other units that can run like Cavalry represent skirmisher's which did just this tactic in the recorded history pertaining to warfare.

Not to mention combat in Civ 4, is not only more tactical then any previous incantation, but is only an abstraction of a pitched battle. If a more accurate battle is what you are looking for try Medeival TW, however, all the CA games are really lacking in the empire building sense, which is what the civ games really are.
 
what's an SoD?
 
Stack of Doom. Basically, you send all your units clustered together. In Civ III it was the military strategy. They've tried to get away from that with collateral damage, but I don't think that actually helps much.
 
ah.. thanks!

Purely relying on numbers obviously won't work as has been noted above.. but now that there is already a concept of special abilities against certain units, that should really help nullify the SoD phenomenon.. For example, if I were to send a huge stack of War Elephants against a small garrison of pikemen, who (I think) have lesser strength but get a bonus against mounted units, the pikemen should do reasonably well.. I played a lot of Rome TW when it came out and that game uses this concept really well.
 
<< LOL according to you it would suffice to outnumber an enemy to beat it ? >>

Uhhh, no, I never recommended anything so stupid.

What's needed is a system that takes into account strength AND numbers.

If you have 10 tanks vs 2 tanks, the 10 tanks ought to be more than 5 times as strong as the 2 tanks. Given equal strength units, a bonus should be applied to numbers.
 
my favourite type of combat resolution for these types of games is
the sort favoured by master of magic and later, the age of
wonders series.

but i really don't mind the type of 'one unit on one unit' type of
combat present in this game at all.

i mean... hey, it's civ for the new era! i think it is freaking awesome,
and there are plenty of changes to satisfy me enough!

man, this game is so great, it makes me pee myself when i try to
explain it!
 
there should be a limit on stacks like ten and then you should be able to attack all at once
 
When all is said and done 10 tanks will always beat 2, unless you jimmy the RNG. Is that to say that 2 tanks can't flank a group of 10 tanks, taking some out before those 2 get taken out?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
The perfect army
Replies
5
Views
2K
Fins
F
T
AI League 2.0
Replies
14
Views
676
Fippy
Fippy
F
Space samurai
Replies
0
Views
640
Fins
F
P
[Extension] Naval Capital Units for VP
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
Relatyve Mind
R
P
[Extension] Torpedo Boat for VP
2 3
Replies
42
Views
4K
Padre XIX
P
Back
Top Bottom