How quick after release will players be using the Builder Block Strategy

[AbramsGunner]

As everyone who watched today's Livestream saw, builders will block apostles. From this I deduce that missionaries, inquisitors, spies, etc will also be blocked. That being said, I am sure players will be using something along the lines of a 'Builder Wall' along borders and 'Builder ring' around districts and cities to stop these non-combat units from functioning. Hope this quickly gets removed.

 

[Stringer1313]

Agreed this is silly. But taking a step further -- should military units be able to block religious units? I never felt like they should block either. That's what closed/open borders are for.

 

[Ebrim]

Maybe... But, how many people will have builders just hanging around? That was a pretty unique bit of geography for the choke.

 

[redwings1340]

I could only see this working for narrow choke points. You don't want an army of builders, that will cost gold maintenance and production that could be spent on other, more productive endeavors. It's still going to be an annoying tactic, certainly, but probably not at the scale you're imagining.

 

[Sagax]

Maybe... But, how many people will have builders just hanging around? That was a pretty unique bit of geography for the choke.

Aztecs God-tier confirmed.

On a more serious note, this can get really annoying really fast. Because while a player probably can't use this effectively, an AI might cause a lot of frustration simply by moving its units around. Remember how your missionaries and Great Prophets struggled with reaching a tile in a foreign land because the AI keeps moving its units?..

 

[joncnunn]

I'd use military units to block instead:
The builders will be too busy making improvements; so I can much easier spare the military units by stationing on the road hexes; which I'd need anyway to keep the AI missionary units from blocking my builders.

I'd prefer that religious units be forced to respect closed borders during times of peace. And for if at peace moving a military unit onto an opposing civilian unit to peacefully kick the unit out of my territory.

 

[Redaxe]

That is silly units should not be able to block missionaries unless you are at war with that player.
Surely a missionary can walk through a crowd of workers....

The civilian traffic jam was unrealistic in Civ 5. If spies are also going to be civilian units walking around then it makes even more sense to remove the civilian traffic jam.
There is no reason as to why multiple civilian units of different types shouldn't be able to share the same tile.
For instance Civ A should be allowed to have a worker, great person, missionary and spy on the same tile. Civ B should be allowed to move multiple civilian units onto that tile (but only 1 of each type), for example a missionary and/or a spy (I don't see why workers shouldn't either).

Civ 5 actually had a few exceptions where more than 1 unit of the same class could share a tile (if only temporarily).

 

[Redaxe]

Remember how your missionaries and Great Prophets struggled with reaching a tile in a foreign land because the AI keeps moving its units?..

This was particularly frustrating with CityStates in the mid-late game in Civ 5. Often they'd have so many units in their zone of control that it made it very difficult to move religious units to them and workers if you were trying to build roads.

It really felt like an artificial hindrance. In real life missionaries would usually appear as civilians travelers or some maybe even merchants travelling from city to city.

There is no reason why a military unit or civilian unit would block a missionary unless there was a war or some other special circumstance.

 

[Ebrim]

This was particularly frustrating with CityStates in the mid-late game in Civ 5. Often they'd have so many units in their zone of control that it made it very difficult to move religious units to them and workers if you were trying to build roads.

It really felt like an artificial hindrance. In real life missionaries would usually appear as civilians travelers or some maybe even merchants travelling from city to city.

There is no reason why a military unit or civilian unit would block a missionary unless there was a war or some other special circumstance.

I think this is part of the reason why units don't hang around in Civ VI. Generals become obsolete, builders get used up, etc.

 

[Lucius_]

That is silly units should not be able to block missionaries unless you are at war with that player.
Surely a missionary can walk through a crowd of workers....

I'm 99% certain units can walk through each other, there just has to be an available hex, and enough movement points, in order to do so. A wall of builders around your territory wouldn't do squat, unless that wall was at minimum 2 hexes deep, likely impossible due to costs. 6 builders around a city to prevent religious spread would be doable, but then the AI would just target another city, which imo, would just cause a lot of annoyance to try to bounce your builder wall from city to city, the grief to game the system wouldn't be worth the trouble. Of course, I'm sure plenty of people would be upset, though they would never do it themselves because of how annoying it would be for them, but would be upset anyway since it's possible to do.

Pretty sure you could this in CiV too, wall off a city with workers to blog missionary spam, but I've never tried it personally. But hey, there's a use for all those workers sleeping around my empire after all!

 

[Redaxe]

I'm 99% certain units can walk through each other, there just has to be an available hex, and enough movement points, in order to do so. A wall of builders around your territory wouldn't do squat, unless that wall was at minimum 2 hexes deep, likely impossible due to costs. 6 builders around a city to prevent religious spread would be doable, but then the AI would just target another city, which imo, would just cause a lot of annoyance to try to bounce your builder wall from city to city, the grief to game the system wouldn't be worth the trouble. Of course, I'm sure plenty of people would be upset, though they would never do it themselves because of how annoying it would be for them, but would be upset anyway since it's possible to do.

Pretty sure you could this in CiV too, wall off a city with workers to blog missionary spam, but I've never tried it personally. But hey, there's a use for all those workers sleeping around my empire after all!

If I'm not mistaken I thought in Civ 5 you didn't necessarily need a civilian wall 2 hexes deep. If you take into consideration unit Line-of-Sight (you can't see over rough terrain in most cases) then quite often a wall 1 unit deep was enough to block units(i.e your missionary/worker is on grassland and your blocking unit is on a hill (well goodluck in getting around that). Mountains & Cities could also block very well and take into consideration that missionaries only had 1 sight radius.

 

[joncnunn]

While if civilian units can pass thru other players civilian units it would be a major improvement in Civ VI; it doesn't eliminate path finding issues which made it unsafe to give multi-turn orders or even orders into a hex in FOW; (if your military unit had exactly enough MP to end on a road occupied by another civ's unit but not enough to move past it would move off the road when it should instead stay on the road to avoid wasting next turn's movement getting back on the road.)

Your own builder units don't need to stack with each other in light of insta-improvements and charges; but they do need the ability to stack with other players units that are inside your territory in times of peace. (Or alternatively have a movement order that would result in one of your units ending your move on another players unit inside your territory in time of peace kick that players unit off your lawn.)

 

[stealth_nsk]

I vaguely remember quite the same thread before Civ5 release. AFAIK it never became more than theoretical concept. And it looks even less probable in Civ6.

 

[Furycrab]

I'd use military units to block instead:
The builders will be too busy making improvements; so I can much easier spare the military units by stationing on the road hexes; which I'd need anyway to keep the AI missionary units from blocking my builders.

I'd prefer that religious units be forced to respect closed borders during times of peace. And for if at peace moving a military unit onto an opposing civilian unit to peacefully kick the unit out of my territory.

See I kinda think the opposite. I like that you can, means religious play doesn't need be bloody and if you don't want to see my missionaries, you can take the warmonger penalty. Needing open borders would make diplomacy a bit stupid sometimes, like the AI shouldn't say yes for any amount if they know you have missionaries.

I just hope against higher difficulty AI you don't get swamped by faith even when you play a "religious" civ.

 

[Lucius_]

I agree, borders should be open for missionaries etc. I hated that in CiV, but with Civ VI, I think it will be less an issue. Just keep 2-3 apostles around just to kill missionary spam. Of course, if your neighbor shows up with an army of apostles of his own, well, then things might need to get bloody, but fortunately there is a casus belli for that.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Given that there is "religious combat" I'd suggest

4 "layers"

Military (1 military unit)

Religious (1 religious unit)

Trade (any number of trade units from any number of civs)

Other (1 controllable Builder/Settler/Great Person/embarked/support unit)


Each layer could have a different civ...unless the two civs were at war.
If two civs are at war,
Military unit civ A->Any unit civ B= combat
Civilian/Religious unit civ A->Any nontrade unit civ B=blocked*
Trade unit civ A->Military unit civ B=dies
Trade unit civ A->non Military unit civ B=stacks

If two civs are at peace
Military Unit civ A->Military Unit civ B=can't stack but moves through
Religious Unit civ A->Religious Unit civ B=can't stack but moves through*
Civilian Unit civ A->Civilian Unit civ B=can't stack but moves through
Trade Unit civ A->any Unit civ B=stacks
Military Unit civ A->non Military Unit civ B=stacks
Religious Unit civ A->non Religious Unit civ B=stacks
Civilian Unit civ A->non Civilian Unit civ B=stacks

If two civs declare war whle their units are stacked
... Military unit attacks kill all enemy civilian units stacked with it
... Enemy Religious/Civilian units with no military unit present are removed to the closest tile of their home territory

*unless civ A unit is Apostle of a different religion than civ B, then Theological combat

 

[Stringer1313]

Given that there is "religious combat" I'd suggest

4 "layers"

Military (1 military unit)

Religious (1 religious unit)

Trade (any number of trade units from any number of civs)

Other (1 controllable Builder/Settler/Great Person/embarked/support unit)


Each layer could have a different civ...unless the two civs were at war.
If two civs are at war,
Military unit civ A->Any unit civ B= combat
Civilian/Religious unit civ A->Any nontrade unit civ B=blocked*
Trade unit civ A->Military unit civ B=dies
Trade unit civ A->non Military unit civ B=stacks

If two civs are at peace
Military Unit civ A->Military Unit civ B=can't stack but moves through
Religious Unit civ A->Religious Unit civ B=can't stack but moves through*
Civilian Unit civ A->Civilian Unit civ B=can't stack but moves through
Trade Unit civ A->any Unit civ B=stacks
Military Unit civ A->non Military Unit civ B=stacks
Religious Unit civ A->non Religious Unit civ B=stacks
Civilian Unit civ A->non Civilian Unit civ B=stacks

If two civs declare war whle their units are stacked
... Military unit attacks kill all enemy civilian units stacked with it
... Enemy Religious/Civilian units with no military unit present are removed to the closest tile of their home territory

*unless civ A unit is Apostle of a different religion than civ B, then Theological combat

Yes x1000. Is it that hard to do this?

I also don't know, for that matter, why even military units from two civs at peace can't stack. It's frustrating not being able to move through allied territory just b/c they have a ton of military units. I get that we want to preserve 1upt but in the instance where two civs are at war against the same civ, I don't think allowing two units from two civs to occupy the same tile is that horrible. That could be a limited exception to 1upt, like armies/corps. If you're good enough to coordinate movements like that you should be rewarded.

 

[DemonMaster]

The blockade tactics was perhaps needed in Civ 5 because you could only counter the damage enemy missionaries did (inquisitors and also prophets), not the missionaries themselves. It is not needed in Civ 6. Why?
We now have something that we didn't have in Civ 5, we have a proper counter to enemy missionaries, or in fact we have two. We have apostles (who doesn't burn their charges when they attack enemy religious units) and also if you decides to burn him (whatever that means) you can build inquisitors, who (my guess) act as super apostles when it comes to religious conflicts and also probably have charges to remove other religions from cities.

The situation in the stream was also quite extreme. Rare configuration of land choke points to a city.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

The blockade tactics was perhaps needed in Civ 5 because you could only counter the damage enemy missionaries did (inquisitors and also prophets), not the missionaries themselves. It is not needed in Civ 6. Why?
We now have something that we didn't have in Civ 5, we have a proper counter to enemy missionaries, or in fact we have two. We have apostles (who doesn't burn their charges when they attack enemy religious units) and also if you decides to burn him (whatever that means) you can build inquisitors, who (my guess) act as super apostles when it comes to religious conflicts and also probably have charges to remove other religions from cities.

The situation in the stream was also quite extreme. Rare configuration of land choke points to a city.

Inquisitors are actually weak in religious combat (str 70) but they can remove (at least a portion) of other religions from cities... which they could do in civ 5 (great prophets also could in civ 5)

However the Religious combat with apostles v. missionaries is good, because you can build some Apostles, and instead of constantly having to replace them for faith, you can kill off enemy missionaries and heal the apostles (who will rack up promotions?)

 

[CaiusDrewart]

Whether the blockade turns out to be an efficient tactic or not, the fact that it's possible is both silly and unnecessary. Relaxing 1UPT for civilian units is simple and will completely eliminate these headaches. This is an easy call.