Embarkment messes this game up

[code9]

We must wait for the fixes... as always.

What fixes? Firaxis fired a bunch of people, even the lead designer left. They released Civ5 to make quick bucks in time for Christmass. Get over it, there won't be any huge patches.

If only there was a way to make naval units stack with embarked, everything would be fixed.

 

[whb]

No, good idea, bad AI.

Which means bad idea -- if the concept is too hard for their team to write a good AI for with their limited resources and time, then it is a bad idea. This is a predominantly single-player game, where you are playing against the AI their team had the capacity and capability to write, not HAL9000.

 

[IONDragonX]

I don t see how they missed that ? That is an obvious one

I remember an interview before the release that said "embarked troops count as civilian units so they can stack with the combat ships". I guess they forgot to finish the design.

 

[ruskyandrei]

I find it funny that so many people complain about embarked units being too easy to destroy now.
It's funny, because before Civ5 was released many people used to complain about embarkation ruining the game because it would be impossible to defend against an invasion

 

[lschnarch]

I find it funny that so many people complain about embarked units being too easy to destroy now.
It's funny, because before Civ5 was released many people used to complain about embarkation ruining the game because it would be impossible to defend against an invasion

The explanation is quite easy:
Before the game was released, most people assumed it would have a decent AI. In addition, people did not assume that embarked units could just be "overrun".

After release, we found that the AI is *not* decent and that embarked units can be overrun.

This means, as soon as the braindead AI decides to go maritime, its units are sentenced to death.
On the other hand, due to the high speed of maritime units (caravels and later ones) and the fact that you have to manouvre your fleets ship by ship by ship by ship, crossing oceans with your invasion fleet becomes tedious even for the human player.

I will admit that these problems may be less significant on smaller maps, but on huge maps they constitute quite a problem.

 

[nokmirt]

What fixes? Firaxis fired a bunch of people, even the lead designer left. They released Civ5 to make quick bucks in time for Christmass. Get over it, there won't be any huge patches.

If only there was a way to make naval units stack with embarked, everything would be fixed.

No there will be there was a write up in another thread a week or two ago.

 

[Biz_]

it's not an AI problem

this is a poorly implemented mechanic for multiplayer as well

 

[Frozensky]

it's not an AI problem

this is a poorly implemented mechanic for multiplayer as well

Again, embarkment isn't the problem. Multiplayer is.

Transports would still be vulnerable to double moving. That's a flaw with multiplayer.

 

[zarakand]

If the AI can't handle it, it doesn't work. So, how can you say that "it's just great and one of the things they got right in CiV"?

I understand where you are coming from but the A.I. always struggles to handle tactics in these types of games. Civ IV is no different, as the combat A.I. is terrible. Yes, the A.I. in CiV is worse...I think we all agree on that.

However, from a design perspective I find embarkation a nice change. I never enjoyed building galleons/transports and then just lay around. I've been a big fan of embarkation since I saw it used in Rise of Nations, and very much enjoy the change in CiV.

 

[Biz_]

Again, embarkment isn't the problem. Multiplayer is.

Transports would still be vulnerable to double moving. That's a flaw with multiplayer.

lack of stacking is the problem

if you cannot put a unit and a boat on the same tile there is nothing you can do to defend it, especially when all the naval units behave like archers

 

[Polycrates]

lack of stacking is the problem

if you cannot put a unit and a boat on the same tile there is nothing you can do to defend it, especially when all the naval units behave like archers

I'm not sure about this. I mean technically they're still military units, with all that it entails. And as someone mentioned, requiring stacking makes things more difficult for the AI - and I'd add that it seems a little inelegant to me as well. One particular problem is if you're using marines to attack a city, but the marine is defended from land bombardment by a stacked ship on top of it, that's a pretty cheap exploit right there.

Really, I think overrunning itself is more the problem. Require ships to bombard embarked units instead of just overrunning, and I think you get quite a nice balance of risk for naval operations. If you actually try bombarding embarked units in the current game, it takes on average 2-3 bombardments to sink an embarked unit, which I think is okay (if a tiny bit much). Attacking an embarked unit would require a ship to use up its attack for the turn as well, so it can't then also trade blows with the enemy navy. A screening naval force/carrier air group can be very useful to tear apart any naval/air forces that come near, but embarked units are still uncovered and potentially exposed to risk.
It also means that the tight, annoying co-ordination of one naval unit per embarked unit having to constantly move together isn't needed (and I could see that getting really old really fast - orders of magnitude more annoying than naval movement currently is) - rather it favours more a screening picket of warships, but with less of the current extreme risk if the picket isn't perfect.

I've tried this myself (accidentally actually, by just not even knowing that overrunning was an option ), and it works really nicely, I think. A simpler solution, too.

 

[builer680]

Attacking an embarked unit would require a ship to use up its attack for the turn as well, so it can't then also trade blows with the enemy navy.

You can't "run over" and "trade blows" in the same turn with the same ship right now anyway.

 

[Hesha]

Since this is slightly related: It is SOOOO annoying that Triremes are ranged units. First of all that's historically complete nonsense and second it makes the barbarian Triremes so very annoying - I think it would be a win-win for the game if they took their ranged attacks away and made them melee ships and insted put some form of early medieval siege ship in to fill the gap between Trireme and Caravel.

 

[JimT]

Do I hate that I can't possible protect my transports - Yes
.

Why not, the plan is quite simple:
Gain Naval Superiority
Embark (Warships scout the route)
Invade
Warships bombard.

The problem is what do you do with your navy when the enemy only has inland cities.

The AI is not very good but it can get through sometimes and it can be an effective way of getting past chokepoints. Its a shame it doesn't count the local warships and work out how many units get through.

Also am I the only one who finds their warships can only take out one embarked unit a turn, its a slow game of frogger and means units can slip through the net.

 

[Ankh]

Why not, the plan is quite simple:
Gain Naval Superiority
Embark (Warships scout the route)
Invade
Warships bombard.

The problem is what do you do with your navy when the enemy only has inland cities.

The AI is not very good but it can get through sometimes and it can be an effective way of getting past chokepoints. Its a shame it doesn't count the local warships and work out how many units get through.

Also am I the only one who finds their warships can only take out one embarked unit a turn, its a slow game of frogger and means units can slip through the net.

Maybe I missed my point with that short statement. Your plan above works, and invading an AI player is not a problem. Getting your fleets across the ocean is not an issue. Its annoying for example: when I send a settler to an island/small continent with a caravel to support it only to get it instagibbed by an barbarian caravel appearing from nowhere.

The point is it doesn't matter what I do, the caravel can kill my settler if it wants. I would need 6 ships to keep it safe (one on each hex around it). Some form of zone of control would stop random ship from sinking them out of the blue.

I also find it kinda strange that while my fleet is sailing side by side it's just waiting while an enemy ship approaches, boards my transport and scuttle it. Some form of interception is needed here.

Yes you can only "overrun" one embarked unit per turn.

 

[SpearMan153]

I think embarkation is a net gain and don't think transports would work with civ5 because of:
- slower build times
- unloading the units stacked in the transport back into the 1upt world could be tricky
plus you're not stuck on your continent if you happen to have no port cities.

I do occasionally find myself pining for a few transports (with better movement) on the wider ocean crossings but most of the time

A case could be made for no insta kill - maybe double damage on bombard instead (enough to kill/criple a unit in 1 shot asumming tech parity)

Naval zones of control may also be good (subs should ignore though)

 

[Hesha]

Well, couldn't the whole issue be solved if it was just ruled, that embarked units within one hex to a naval unit cannot be run over and have to be bombarded? Dunno if that's programmable though...

 

[Truthy]

I don't like the massive amphibious carpets of doom I have to use to attack an over-seas opponent. They should have transport ships or allow you to stack embarked units.

 

[nokmirt]

I don't like the massive amphibious carpets of doom I have to use to attack an over-seas opponent. They should have transport ships or allow you to stack embarked units.

Convoys in real life are spread out over many nautical miles. I think the approach is more realistic. I just wish the AI was better at using naval forces.

I think as time goes on they will make the AI better. It already has shown improvemnt over the first patch. Strategically it comes to fight, but it is easy for a human player to break up those attacks tactically or locally. The AI has to do a better job of protecting it's artillery. I was able to seperate two of it's cannons and destroy them in detail. Then I massacred their musketmen, with a medieval army mind you. This would not have happened had the AI used the terrain and made the proper moves. If it was programmed properly it could have defeated me without too much trouble.

 

[Howard Mahler]

Precisely wrong!
Given how many hexes it takes to go around the earth and the size of the earth, a hex is very approximately 200 miles across.
The D-day invasion, the largest amphibious assault in history, easily fits within one sea hex.

Convoys in real life are spread out over many nautical miles. I think the approach is more realistic.