Easy way to make Civ 7 good in 7 easy steps (Doctors hate it)

[Marla_Singer]

The main reason, I keep repeating, for 1UPT is it is easy to gauge how big an army is and also just understand the composition of an army at first glance than it is for Stacks.
It's therefore better for accessibility and for new players.

That's just facts.

Alright, you seem to make of the concept of multiple units on the same tile something a lot more complicated than what it actually is. To make the discussion move forward, here is how it worked with Civ4. You had little dots over unit flags telling you how many units were on the tile. And a list below the screen showing all units on the active tile.

As you can see below, it is very easy to evaluate the situation at first sight.

I'm almost 100% certain you all are just nostalgic for the old mechanic when the new one works perfectly fine... Civ 6 has it such that you can combine them to save space... You really don't need any more than that?

If we continue to speak about it as an issue 12 years after Civ5 was released, then that means there's something unsolved about it. Otherwise we wouldn't.

Civilian units fit on military units because they are definitively two different types of units. Different symbols that can overlay on the same tile.
Military units on top of military units would be confusing.

Why? See the picture above: is it really hard for you to understand there's both an Archer and a Missionary in Chicago? If your brain is able to manage a worker and a knight on the same tile, I'm sure it can also handle a knight and a crossbowman on the same tile.

Just how would the combat work??

In sending your attacking unit on the defender?

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

It is also a completely arbitrary rule that two military units are not allowed to share the same hex at the same time..

If it's arbitrary that they can't share the same hex at the same time, shouldn't enemy armies be able to walk into each other's hexes and end their turns there too?

 

[SupremacyKing2]

If it's arbitrary that they can't share the same hex at the same time, shouldn't enemy armies be able to walk into each other's hexes and end their turns there too?

Not sure what you mean. If we go with stacks, then the AI would be able to do stacks too.

 

[MistroPain]

Err, just saying if you need to click on a unit then it is not easy to evaluate 'at first sight'...

Its doable though. If you made each of the smaller units that compose a unit a representation of a different unit (I realize this is worded poorly) then you could sort of see the stack at first glace, and just convert that dot into just a number, maybe different numbers to represent different unit types (Green = melee infantry, Blue = ranged infantry, red = cavalry, white = civilian).

What I mean about the 'unit in a unit in a unit' comment is take the current graphics where unit health is represented by multiple units, and swap that instead to different unit types. IE rather than seeing 3 warriors standing on a tile representing how healthy that unit is, seeing a tile occupied by 3 warriors would simply represent 3 warriors, and then you could give them graphics like a limp and cuts to indicate health. Although using this would prefer capped stacks as far is what is reasonable to put into a single tile.

I'll admit I prefer 1UPT to stacks, and I definitely think it is easier to read. I do think the solution isn't to revert back to stacks but to increase movement ranges of units. Old World units have much greater movement ranges than Civ and I do feel like the combat in that game is amazing, only thing I dislike is the lack of drawbacks from force marches, especially in how the AI manages to utilise it... its freaking tough...

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

Not sure what you mean. If we go with stacks, then the AI would be able to do stacks too.

Armies. Walk into. Their enemy's hexes. Since excluding tile presence is unjustifiably arbitrary.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

Armies. Walk into. Their enemy's hexes. Since excluding tile presence is unjustifiably arbitrary.

When units try to enter the same hex as enemy units, that's called combat.

 

[SirNovelty]

Alright, you seem to make of the concept of multiple units on the same tile something a lot more complicated than what it actually is. To make the discussion move forward, here is how it worked with Civ4. You had little dots over unit flags telling you how many units were on the tile. And a list below the screen showing all units on the active tile.

As you can see below, it is very easy to evaluate the situation at first sight.
View attachment 630289

Dude, I get you're pretty familiar with Civ IV, but as somebody who's only got about a dozen hours in it after two attempts to learn the game, that's not easy to read at first sight at all. Firstly, like was said above, you have to click on the unit. Also, this could just be resolution getting eaten (I think I recall it being clearer), but I don't see two dots there. But the fact is I wouldn't care about the dots in most cases anyway, because I still need to click the unit to know what that dot represents. From that I have to extrapolate the movement and combat options are of the individual units within the stack to make any sort of intelligent combat-layer decision. Add in the immediate win-loss nature of most combats and slight RNG variance, determining the range of possibilities for a conflict is pretty complicated for an inexperienced player.

If we continue to speak about it as an issue 12 years after Civ5 was released, then that means there's something unsolved about it. Otherwise we wouldn't. [\QUOTE]

Well that's just not true, people love to complain about things on the internet, regardless of if they're issues or not. More seriously though, I have a slightly hot take: 1UPT wasn't a problem in Civ V at all. It slowed the game down sure, but in many cases it fulfilled its objective of creating interesting large scale conflicts in which terrain mattered. Occasionally a war might be simply too tedious to prosecute, but that's probably a good indication that you shouldn't or made a fundamental error. The only times it was unavoidable was the occasional Iroquois or Shoshone on the other side of the map who would win a SV if not trudged through, and that's more a consequence of the AI bonuses all but removing the only real constraint on expansion in a game where the player was forced to play tall than any issue with the combat. In Vox Populi in particular 1UPT creates quite compelling scenarios thanks to the introduction of unit caps and heavier expansion focus. The problems in Civ VI are only so prominent because of low movement (which was already low in Civ V, but for some reason they made it round down) and a map generator that loves massive mountain ranges, complex river systems, and tons of jungle and forest. Granted, that's probably intentional support for districts, but the point remains that there's a lot more working against 1UPT in this game then the system itself, and Firaxis themselves have shown they can get it a lot better.

Why? See the picture above: is it really hard for you to understand there's both an Archer and a Missionary in Chicago? If your brain is able to manage a worker and a knight on the same tile, I'm sure it can also handle a knight and a crossbowman on the same tile.

While I have your post here, I just wanted to point out this is a silly example, you can already stack religious and military units in V and VI, and it's communicated more prominently.

 

[bene_legionary]

I reckon this mod does the job pretty well. When you're attacking, you attack the unit with the highest combat strength. Units are clearly visible with their flags and icons showing their type and promotion tree. When a unit's actions are over the flag's opacity changes. Clear and simple.

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

When units try to enter the same hex as enemy units, that's called combat.

What are we even talking about at this point.
If you won't defend the distinction on which you argued for Xupt over 1upt, then give it up.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

What are we even talking about at this point.
If you won't defend the distinction on which you argued for Xupt over 1upt, then give it up.

What are you talking about? Yes, I am defending Xupt. I am saying 1upt is arbitrary. Units should be able to enter the same hex as another unit.

 

[Naokaukodem]

If it's arbitrary that they can't share the same hex at the same time, shouldn't enemy armies be able to walk into each other's hexes and end their turns there too?

Well it has been done by the past and units couldn't enter enemies tiles without fighting. And yes, it's totally arbitrary but also a lot, lot more clear. So at this point clarity overcomes arbitrariness wich becomes obviousness basically. [EDIT : except in times of peace maybe]

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

What are you talking about? Yes, I am defending Xupt. I am saying 1upt is arbitrary. Units should be able to enter the same hex as another unit.

I can quote this as the counterargument to it. I will not be invested in clearing it up past this point.

 

[Uncle Paul]

Having Stalin lead Russia is like having Hitler lead Germany.

 

[Uncle Paul]

Keep in mind this series has featured Queen Isabella at least 3 times. Plenty of blood on her ruthless hands. And Genghis Khan was not exactly an angel of mercy. neither was George Washington. So ruthlessness is not shied away from in the series.
So if you-know-who is featured. I could counter with the likes of Castro or Khrushchev. They don't all have to be saints.

Maybe we could have Belgium, led by King Leopold.

 

[bbbt]

Lol, every general-themed "Improve Civ" thread really just does turn into 1UPT and Hitler, doesn't it.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Steal as many mechanics from Realism Invictus as possible is my new answer

 

[GeneralZIft]

Dude, I get you're pretty familiar with Civ IV, but as somebody who's only got about a dozen hours in it after two attempts to learn the game, that's not easy to read at first sight at all. Firstly, like was said above, you have to click on the unit. Also, this could just be resolution getting eaten (I think I recall it being clearer), but I don't see two dots there. But the fact is I wouldn't care about the dots in most cases anyway, because I still need to click the unit to know what that dot represents. From that I have to extrapolate the movement and combat options are of the individual units within the stack to make any sort of intelligent combat-layer decision. Add in the immediate win-loss nature of most combats and slight RNG variance, determining the range of possibilities for a conflict is pretty complicated for an inexperienced player.

Late, but this is basically my thoughts about stacks. In retrospect, my thoughts are the same but I will expand it like this:
I don't think there is a visual and gameplay design solution that will make it easy to understand and visible (AT FIRST GLANCE) the amount, strength AND variety of units on the board.

1UPT works because it's inherently as simple as it can get, the units move like a Chess Board.

When units can stack, it will only get more and more complicated as the Eras move on, new players will get confused, experienced players will spend 20 years moving units, explaining how Combat works with Stacks will get confusing (eg. which unit attacks which unit? Do all units take damage together? Do some units protect other units while in a stack? etc. Are not immediately obvious)

There is a reason they made this switch, even if it's unpopular for Civ 4 veterans, it got many people into the series for Civ5 and Civ6.

 

[DeckerdJames]

in 1upt it would be an improvement if you could bump a neutral unit or units out of a tile unless they are fortified, in a fort or defense improvement, or have denounced you. It costs all movement points to bump. So, if a city state or AI civ blocks you in, you can bump them. Maybe +5 grievance or something.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Late, but this is basically my thoughts about stacks. In retrospect, my thoughts are the same but I will expand it like this:
I don't think there is a visual and gameplay design solution that will make it easy to understand and visible (AT FIRST GLANCE) the amount, strength AND variety of units on the board.

1UPT works because it's inherently as simple as it can get, the units move like a Chess Board.

When units can stack, it will only get more and more complicated as the Eras move on, new players will get confused, experienced players will spend 20 years moving units, explaining how Combat works with Stacks will get confusing (eg. which unit attacks which unit? Do all units take damage together? Do some units protect other units while in a stack? etc. Are not immediately obvious)

There is a reason they made this switch, even if it's unpopular for Civ 4 veterans, it got many people into the series for Civ5 and Civ6.

How fracking dumb and lazy do you have to be not to be able to figure out stacks?

1UPT means having to solve a sliding tile puzzle whenever you move. It completely breaks ranged units. It also makes it almost impossible to have a decent AI

 

[GeneralZIft]

How fracking dumb and lazy do you have to be not to be able to figure out stacks?

1UPT means having to solve a sliding tile puzzle whenever you move. It completely breaks ranged units. It also makes it almost impossible to have a decent AI

Civ IV fans huffing pure copium
It's not about being dumb and lazy, it's because the Devs want the game to be intuitive for new players... It's not that deep. How hard is it for you to just move one unit onto one tile, you know, the same way most turn based tile based strategies play...