1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

[IDEA] UnitStack in cities via special buildings

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by poncratias, Oct 8, 2010.

  1. poncratias

    poncratias Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    336
    Let's cut to the point:
    What if you could stack units in cities, but you need to build special buildings to do so?

    For example: 1 Barrack could host 1 Unit.


    So you could build multiple barracks, raising the capacity +1 for each.
    This is also kind of realistic, as you need a place/building where your troops can stay in real life too.
    The same could work for Airports/Airfields.


    This would also enhance the rest of the Civ V gameplay greatly in return:
    Empires would spread out more, as there is an important reason for building cities etc.

    This also would not lead to defensive Stacks of Doom, as you can only stack as many units as you have buildings/space for them, and this buildings can be expensive and take a while to build.
    So no too big stacks, no overpowering.



    I had this idea when I thought about the 1UPT rule.
    I really like it and it's good, but it just feels wrong when it comes to the cities.
    A big mega city can only host 1 Unit?
    Hmm but with "Unit per Building" things would just make sense, I really think this is something the gameplay really needs.
     
  2. Hurler64

    Hurler64 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    12
    Great idea!
     
  3. Doctor Phibes

    Doctor Phibes Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    London
    That is rather clever, good way round 1upt. But - what would be the building's upkeep? This game is all about gpt, remember...
     
  4. bal_rob

    bal_rob Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    14
    Location:
    Hull, UK
    Surely it make more defensive sense to stop the units getting to your city in the first place? Which actually the current system of "unit litter" actually facilitates.

    Although don't put me down as a fan of the games system. I hate how messy it is. I'd like to see a system that allows you to stack (or put another way, "store") units in a city. Obviously without those units actiing as a garrison.
     
  5. duxup

    duxup Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2001
    Messages:
    385
    Is this supposed to solve some problem defending cities?
     
  6. Zechnophobe

    Zechnophobe Strategy Lich

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,867
    Location:
    Goleta, California
    It's a good idea actually. It will help AI defend cities, it will give you an easier to place to 'dump' military when you aren't at war.
     
  7. Doctor Phibes

    Doctor Phibes Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    London
    What to do with all those reserve units? They not only make things look messy, but they obstruct movement, especially when they get two deep around a square. It's a solution. Think marshalling yards. [Only if you keep 1upt though. Otherwise it's not an issue.]
     
  8. poncratias

    poncratias Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    336
    No, this is supposed to make the game better.

    Don't you think this would greatly enhance the gameplay?

    1UPT is great, but sticking to it blindly where it makes no sense doesn't make sense;)

    We should allow our selfs to think further, behind the "all or nothing"-discussions when it comes to the 1UPT debate.

    1UPT is a new feature, and it just isn't quite worked out yet.
    It is possible to make it better.
     
  9. leafs43

    leafs43 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2010
    Messages:
    16
    The best way to defend cities is having a wall of men between your city and your enemy.

    The hexagonal game board was made so this would be possible.


    I think the best way for this game to take advantage of the hexagonal board is allow to 2 different build queues, one for buildings, one for units.
     
  10. poncratias

    poncratias Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    336

    it's not about defending.


    it's about playing your empire.
     
  11. dexters

    dexters Gods & Emperors Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2003
    Messages:
    4,182
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    Game already has barracks > armory > Mil. Academy path

    So that's +3 units right there. No need to even add a new building or allow people to build multiple barracks.

    Also... let me add another twist

    Unit maitenance is elimited for fortified units. you pay gold when you send your troops out of the city.
     
  12. leafs43

    leafs43 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2010
    Messages:
    16
    There is no point to allow extra garrisons if you weren't defending. The unit maintenance alone would kill you rendering the idea completely moot if no one was attacking you.
     
  13. poncratias

    poncratias Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    336

    This is exactly an other point that makes this idea really have potential.
     
  14. bromidias

    bromidias Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    21
    Location:
    Netherlands
    I dont think its about us as players defending. Its a idea that will make the AI a little better couse we all know they need all the help they can get.
    And i find it a nice idea anyway, how many barraks do you normaly build. Maybe one in a empire (I normaly build non, its not needed and those free xp's I would get from the barraks ill get through slaughtering badly placed AI units)
     
  15. poncratias

    poncratias Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    336
    No Unit maintenance as long as they are fortified in the city.
     
  16. Moss

    Moss CFC Scribe Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    May 1, 2002
    Messages:
    6,584
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas and Suggestions Forum :)
     
  17. leafs43

    leafs43 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2010
    Messages:
    16
    The whole point of unit maintenance is for gold management.

    If you could garrison your troops and eliminate the cost, everyone would have large armies.
     
  18. mmmfloorpie

    mmmfloorpie Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2010
    Messages:
    97
    Good idea. What I always thought would be a good idea is to allow different types of units to stack in cities.

    Why not allow a ranged unit to stack with a defensive unit?

    And let the unit fight independently of the city. Before an enemy caps a city, they should have to defeat the unit garrisoned within.

    This way you can have a spearman as the main defender and an archer (which basically has no defense) be your ranged unit.

    To take this a step further, why not allow this on all tiles? Allow one defense unit to stack with 1 ranged unit?
     
  19. Col Mustard

    Col Mustard Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    45
    This idea is amazing especially with the no maintenance for garrisoned units. However, I agree with an above poster that you shouldn't be able to make multiple copies of the same building. Another option could be to have the barrack allow multiply units to garrison (up to 5?) and the garrisoned units just have a smaller unit maintenance instead of no maintenance. Barracks, etc. may actually be worth building.

    If you want to do short stacks like that, it could be a good idea but you should reduce the ranged units to a one tile but leave siege at two tiles (no more super human archers lol). I also think civilian units should be stackable but only one worker can work a tile at a time.
     
  20. Doctor Phibes

    Doctor Phibes Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    London
    It certainly isn't and it certainly wasn't. (The historical Napoleon once accused a proponent of 'walled' defence of 'trying to stop smuggling'.) The idea here is not necessarily about defence, but more about logistics. However, I must concede that it's conducive to a more dynamic defensive mode. I'd suggest, therefore, that walls should obsolete when this opportunity becomes available.
     

Share This Page