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

[Metecury]

Builder cost increases with every builder right? Why on earth would you waste your production just to exploit a game mechanic? How is this even a problem? It simply does not sound fun, if someone wants to exploit something in single player it's his problem, if we are talking about multiplayer well, if your friends exploit this sort of thing just for the sake of winning at all cost and such perhaps you should not play with them.

 

[Lucius_]

Builder cost increases with every builder right? Why on earth would you waste your production just to exploit a game mechanic? How is this even a problem? It simply does not sound fun, if someone wants to exploit something in single player it's his problem, if we are talking about multiplayer well, if your friends exploit this sort of thing just for the sake of winning at all cost and such perhaps you should not play with them.

It's not. I suspect this is just an example of "I hate 1UPT" people dealing with the fact it didn't go away by chipping away at it in anyway they can find with justification, regardless of how weak the justification is. It's a mountain out of a molehill. Another thread people were saying civilians not stacking was a "major" problem with CiV.

 

[Stringer1313]

It's not. I suspect this is just an example of "I hate 1UPT" people dealing with the fact it didn't go away by chipping away at it in anyway they can find with justification, regardless of how weak the justification is. It's a mountain out of a molehill. Another thread people were saying civilians not stacking was a "major" problem with CiV.

I am a huge fan of 1upt and I still think this should be fixed, esp since it seems like it can be fixed easily.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

It's not. I suspect this is just an example of "I hate 1UPT" people dealing with the fact it didn't go away by chipping away at it in anyway they can find with justification, regardless of how weak the justification is. It's a mountain out of a molehill. Another thread people were saying civilians not stacking was a "major" problem with CiV.

This has nothing to do with whether 1UPT is on the whole a good thing or not. It's just flat-out irritating to have your civilian units be blocked by the civilian units of another player, whether in your own territory or another's. This comes up pretty much every game at some point. There's an incredibly easy fix--allow 2 civilian units (and also 1 civilian and 1 military unit) of different powers to stack. It's that easy. It's just asinine that they never bothered to put something so simple in.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Builders are expensive. Why not use scouts?

This isn't a 1upt issue, it's a civilian units can't go through foreign units issue.

 

[Lucius_]

Builders are expensive. Why not use scouts?

This isn't a 1upt issue, it's a civilian units can't go through foreign units issue.

Scouts are, and have always been in Civ, afaik, military units.

 

[joncnunn]

Scouts would indeed be much more cost effective tile blockers to keep AI units off your lawn than builders in Civ VI.
(Scouts are dirt cheap to build no matter how many you've already built; and there won't be much point in using them for anything else after you've explored your landmass.)

Yes; the main problem is that AI units ending their movement on roads on your territory interfere with you moving your own civilian units.

 

[Penry]

I'm not sure if it has been said in this thread, or the Livestream thread, but isn't the fact that the Apostle was blocked was because Hattusa had closed borders with Philip and not that the builder was blocking it?

 

[Magil]

I'm not sure if it has been said in this thread, or the Livestream thread, but isn't the fact that the Apostle was blocked was because Hattusa had closed borders with Philip and not that the builder was blocking it?

City-states don't have closed borders like players do, unless you know something I don't. And don't religious units have the ability to enter even closed borders? It seems more like the builder + river was blocking the apostle.

 

[Metecury]

City-states don't have closed borders like players do, unless you know something I don't. And don't religious units have the ability to enter even closed borders? It seems more like the builder + river was blocking the apostle.

City states have the same border rules unless you are the suzerain. All civs and city states get to enforce their borders once they research the early empire civic.

 

[Magil]

City states have the same border rules unless you are the suzerain. All civs and city states get to enforce their borders once they research the early empire civic.

That would sort of make sense, but to religious units?

 

[isau]

I am not sure about this strategy, but I agree civilian units should stack. They do in fact stack in the Civ V Vox Populi mod, with no issues. It really makes a big difference in the game. And certainly no Worker unit should be able to block Missionaries and stop another player from winning.

 

[AbramsGunner]

I'm not sure if it has been said in this thread, or the Livestream thread, but isn't the fact that the Apostle was blocked was because Hattusa had closed borders with Philip and not that the builder was blocking it?

I just watched it and is was definitely blocked by the builder and a mountain chokepoint. Ed says "Right now, we have this builder in the way".

My original post was probably in the extreme as far as use of builders as an active strategy, but I can foresee the annoyance being prevented from using non-combat units effectively because a builder (or other unit) is blocking your units from spreading your religion or spying.

Seeing how non-combat units are an important aspect of gameplay this will become frustrating very quickly. Still hope it gets changed very soon.

 

[Penry]

Yeah, on watching further, what I thought was a solid closed border is, by the looks of things, a border that activates when a religious units is selected. Before and after he interacts with the Apostle, when he has military units selected, the Hattusa border is dashed and open.

Interesting that the borders with Hattusa are shown as open when Philip and Hattusa do not have a Suzerain relationship and it clearly states open borders as one of the bonuses of having said relationship!

 

[Penry]

Yeah, on watching further, what I thought was a solid closed border is, by the looks of things, a border that activates when a religious units is selected. Before and after he interacts with the Apostle, when he has military units selected, the Hattusa border is dashed and open.

Interesting that the borders with Hattusa are shown as open when Philip and Hattusa do not have a Suzerain relationship and it clearly states open borders as one of the bonuses of having said relationship!

I watched the actions of our blocked Apostle again and the border with Hattusa are in fact definitely closed. Whether or not closed borders deny religious units is an uncertain point to me though.

Must get some fresh air and stop analysing Dev Let's Plays.....

 

[Siptah]

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?)

They said Inquisitors are very strong, but only inside your own territory. We haven't seen one of them fighting in home territory yet IIRC. Maybe the get a really massive bonus there and can fight back incoming apostles and missionaries.

 

[zocki]

Realy sucks, not so much for the ability to block religous units with workers but for all the issues with civilian traffic jams. They should have realy allowed two civilian units per tile.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Scouts are, and have always been in Civ, afaik, military units.

But it isn't the fact that it's a civilian unit that's the problem, it's the fact that it's a foreign unit. If it were a city-state scout, you still couldn't go through it or share a tile with it.

 

[dturtle1]

No on the tactic and meh on the foreign unit blocking.
Builders have much shorter lifespan than workers and Religious units you can just kill. The only civilian left is Great People(unless you keep all your military engineers just for roads(assuming they don't use charges to build roads). If worse comes to worse its just 1 turn. I get that not having that improvement can be annoying but really how much will it affect your game?

The situation in the livestream was absurd and hardly indicative common gameplay. On top of this Ed never went back to the Apostle the next turn. it highly likely the builder would have moved to last open tile, considering that City State had only 3 workable tiles.(LoL) It wouldnt be surprising if he could move the apostle next turn anyways and he lost...pretty much nothing.

 

[isau]

I think if it's going to stay that way that Religious units should be able to kill Builders in combat. The current situation doesn't make sense. You can protect your religious units from religious combat with a stronger unit by using a Builder to block the path. IMO that should definitely nto be possible, especially if Religion is now it's own specific victory condition.