"Flanking bonus"

[migkillertwo]

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy...ferent+in+Civ+V.&rgroup=e32010_story&cvr=Zoo1

In this screenshot, we can clearly see that units have some kind of "flanking bonus". What do you guys think this means?

I suspect that there's a bonus for attacking a single unit from more than one direction in a single turn, so now unit placement will become vastly more important in Civ V than Civ IV

I hope I'm right, because this will make combat way more enjoyable and, to a degree, much more realistic.

 

[Ahriman]

There seem to be two types of positioning bonuses; a +15% bonus for having a unit adjacent to the attacker (also applies to the defender), and a +15% flanking bonus for having a unit in the 3 "rear" tiles opposite the unit you are attacking.

Flanking seems to stack, we don't yet know (I think?) if adjacent unit stacks, and we don't yet know if you get a flanking bonus as a defender (if the attacker is flanked).

All of these will encourage battle lines, encirclement and massing/concentrating your force.

They will also mean that the AI will have to play very carefully in ordering how its units move if it is to play anything close to optimally.

Ranged bombardment (killing units without damage with concentrated firepower) and these positioning bonuses make me very nervous about weak AI. They are both powerful slippery slope mechanics, where the larger army gets a big extra bonus.

 

[migkillertwo]

Well I guess all we as non-developers can do is cross our fingers and hope like hell.

If there are flanking bonuses, I imagine battles might play out like this

Step #1: Defenders get a big ****ing line of infantry and maybe artillery to defend their border
Step #2: Attacker finds weak spots in this big f***ing line
Step #3: Attacker directs ungodly amounts of artillery fire and aerial bombardment at these weakspots
Step #4: Attacker breaks through these weak spots with Tanks and/or mechanized infantry
Step #5: Attacker sends in "swarms" of infantry through these new holes in the enemy line
Step #6: Attacker attacks the line-troops from all directions with infantry and artillery, thus destroying them said line-troops
Step #7: Attacker rushes for cities and wins the war

This might be fun, but I suspect that it will get old eventually.

 

[2K Greg]

Well I guess all we as non-developers can do is cross our fingers and hope like hell.

If there are flanking bonuses, I imagine battles might play out like this

Step #1: Defenders get a big ****ing line of infantry and maybe artillery to defend their border
Step #2: Attacker finds weak spots in this big f***ing line
Step #3: Attacker directs ungodly amounts of artillery fire and aerial bombardment at these weakspots
Step #4: Attacker breaks through these weak spots with Tanks and/or mechanized infantry
Step #5: Attacker sends in "swarms" of infantry through these new holes in the enemy line
Step #6: Attacker attacks the line-troops from all directions with infantry and artillery, thus destroying them said line-troops
Step #7: Attacker rushes for cities and wins the war

This might be fun, but I suspect that it will get old eventually.

Zone of Control

 

[Riot_Starter]

Zone of Control

I love simple answers to peoples cries of "IMBALANCE" or other such nonsense. Oh people, when will you start thinking rationally.

 

[migkillertwo]

no blitzkrieg then?

 

[Ahriman]

I don't see that ZoC would necessarily stop this kind of thing. Presumably the ZoC of a unit disappears when you kill it.

What could stop it is the number of combats needed to kill an enemy unit (even with flanking/positioning bonuses), and the low movement rate of units.

You can punch a hole and then over multiple turns push more units through, but if they have similar size forces then units you push into a hole will just suffer devastating counterattacks; a unit pushed into the enemy line will suffer massive flanking penalties as the enemy counterattacks your breacher.

 

[migkillertwo]

I don't see that ZoC would necessarily stop this kind of thing. Presumably the ZoC of a unit disappears when you kill it.

What could stop it is the number of combats needed to kill an enemy unit (even with flanking/positioning bonuses), and the low movement rate of units.

You can punch a hole and then over multiple turns push more units through, but if they have similar size forces then units you push into a hole will just suffer devastating counterattacks; a unit pushed into the enemy line will suffer massive flanking penalties as the enemy counterattacks your breacher.

hence why the nazis would attack a weak spot with ungodly amounts of firepower

 

[Nicolas10]

So far, though, it appears as if ranged attack will favor the defender, at least with siege weapons. If you can't move and fire catapaults and cannon, then you have to move them into position before using them.

Meanwhile, A defender, if properly defending, and put some siege on hills and absolutely obliterate the frontal units of an attacker.

In other words, there appear to be pluses and minuses when it comes to attacking and defending. And we also haven't discussed amphibious landings, where one side keeps a line in the hills to defend an oncoming army but sends a few naval units around back to land and force a mass retreat by the attackers.

And, yes, we certainly hope the AI is up the challenge in using all these mechanisms.

 

[migkillertwo]

I suspect that the AI will be stuck in world war 1. They're able to recognize when you amass troops on their borders, perhaps then they will be able to form lines of troops in their side of the border in the times leading up to war.

 

[Sleepehead]

Well I guess all we as non-developers can do is cross our fingers and hope like hell.

If there are flanking bonuses, I imagine battles might play out like this

Step #1: Defenders get a big ****ing line of infantry and maybe artillery to defend their border
Step #2: Attacker finds weak spots in this big f***ing line
Step #3: Attacker directs ungodly amounts of artillery fire and aerial bombardment at these weakspots
Step #4: Attacker breaks through these weak spots with Tanks and/or mechanized infantry
Step #5: Attacker sends in "swarms" of infantry through these new holes in the enemy line
Step #6: Attacker attacks the line-troops from all directions with infantry and artillery, thus destroying them said line-troops
Step #7: Attacker rushes for cities and wins the war

This might be fun, but I suspect that it will get old eventually.

If your playing against a real person and they can't adjust their defense they should lose. Huge lines would be ridiculous and are probably one of the worst defensive stances a person could do and would also require huge amounts of resources so I doubt the player or AI can keep the up-keep for long.

 

[CoolLizy]

I don't see that ZoC would necessarily stop this kind of thing. Presumably the ZoC of a unit disappears when you kill it.

If units are lined up side-by-side (like we see in many of the screenshots), you'd have to kill at least three units adjacent to each other in a line to break through, otherwise the ZoC of the remaining units would block you. Not to mention the ranged units in the back you'd have to cut through as well...

 

[Auncien]

As to concerns about the AI's quality of play... I suspect that by making the war game more like chess and less about massing we'll see better and more challenging AI performance. If you can't win an entire war by baiting the AI's stack into favorable circumstances every time and then reducing it to nothing then you're going to have to think more. The AI is just playing something akin to a mix between chess and 'Go.' Computers passed humans in their ability to win at chess many years ago.

 

[Esckey]

Does ZoC stack? I mean its suppose to reduce your movement by 1(or to 1?) but would the ZoC of two near by units reduce your movement by 2?

 

[Thyrwyn]

The statement was something akin to "enemy units in ZOC will only be able to move 1 hex."

 

[Nicolas10]

By the way, another thing absent in all these shots are any units in the rear... given the ZOC mechanism, that would appear to be a very effective way of dealing with a large attack or defense.

Basically, if your cavalry can't move very fast when it's part of the line, or move quickly around units to attack weak rear units like seige, then it stands to reason that you'd ideally like to be able to raid with cavalry from an extreme flank or rear attack... in other words let the enemy come into your territory, set up shop with a small line over some hills and with siege support, wait until the enemy deploys to either attack or move around your line, and then when he draws up siege or archers to soften your front line up, have a horse unit 3 hexes away to obliterate the siege. Then your siege, already in place, can soften up what units look most dangerous, and you can close the vice.

ZOC would seem to encourage either the outright splitting of forces, or at least the extreme flanking positioning of the mobile units so they can maximize their speed.

 

[Ahriman]

So far, though, it appears as if ranged attack will favor the defender, at least with siege weapons. If you can't move and fire catapaults and cannon, then you have to move them into position before using them.

Meanwhile, A defender, if properly defending, and put some siege on hills and absolutely obliterate the frontal units of an attacker.

Yes, I like this a lot.

perhaps then they will be able to form lines of troops in their side of the border in the times leading up to war.

Probably. I'm not so worried about the strategic level AI, more the tactical level AI.

Computers passed humans in their ability to win at chess many years ago.

Somewhat irrelevant; those AIs had massive development teams working on them with large amounts of money.
Civ5 is better than previous games because... it has one entire person devoted to the AI (at all its levels).

Does ZoC stack?

ZOC will likely work like this; if you move a unit A that is adjacent to an enemy unit to another tile adjacent to an enemy unit, that unit will not be able to move (can still attack, use abilities, etc.) any more tiles that turn unless the unit it is now adjacent to is destroyed.

ZOC would seem to encourage either the outright splitting of forces

Splitting forces seems very dangerous; if their massed army meets half your force, you're in danger of ignomious defeat, and the flanking and adjacent unit bonuses seem very strong.
Leaving cavalry some distance away on flanks (picketing) seems entirely reasonable.

 

[Brighteye]

Civ5 is better than previous games because... it has one entire person devoted to the AI (at all its levels).

Wait. What? Isn't this one of the most important parts of the game? Are there only 3 people involved?

ZOC and hexes work well enough in many other strategy games. I'm just a little sad because it seems unrealistic to me that a unit can shoot over tens or hundreds of miles, depending on how much terrain a hex represents. That might start to occur when everyone's technologically advanced, but not with archers and cannon.

 

[Nicolas10]

Splitting forces seems very dangerous; if their massed army meets half your force, you're in danger of ignomious defeat, and the flanking and adjacent unit bonuses seem very strong.

Leaving cavalry some distance away on flanks (picketing) seems entirely reasonable.

Oh, it will certainly be dangerous, but I think the opportunity for a pincer-vice will be quite strong. We've only been looking at smallish map sizes, but a large map will give some terrain to manouver. Moreover, suppose you have a nice road network linking 5 cities, you'd likely have units positioned in groups at opposite ends of your map... that way you can see if something's coming at you from either side.

But if you can link up two armies, either as defense or on attack, then you can force the other side to scramble and open himself up to something. If one army stands in the hills waiting to to receive an advancing enemy, and some units come moving quickly along a road from East or West, that army could slam into a flank and threaten to roll up the line/destroy all ranged units in the rear.

But it will certainly be dangerous, as you don't want to be left with one army getting isolated and destroyed.

 

[Ahriman]

Wait. What? Isn't this one of the most important parts of the game?

I am pretty sure that in one of the earlier video previews, they said something like "We think AI in Civ is really important, so for the first time we are going to have a dedicated AI programmer who dose nothing but AI".
Which I guess isn't quite the same as saying that no-one else does any AI work.