Is not the unit supply cap a bit low ?

[GodDamnItAlexander]

That greatly depends on how i play. In the game that i was talking about - i had 9 (2 captured) when i had the problem, after that i captured another 4 . If i play tourism - i think 7 is an ideal number, if i play Venice - i usually have 20+

With that number of cities unit supply should never be a problem.

I haven't found the supply cap to be a problem as outlined in this thread; though it does impose a significant constraint for sure.

Wouldn't this problem be solved by playing on lower difficulty (or by playing vanilla)? I imagine raising an army to take over the world as a single city would be a near-impossible task in reality. CBP is working well if this is reflected in-game imo.

I see it as a game first, then a reflection of reality. My version of fun is taking over the world with one city. Current VP doesn't allow that IMO. I'm happy to be proven wrong. Japan OCC immortal quick doughnut (center is ocean) tiny are my current settings, aiming for domination victory.

 

[Tekamthi]

With that number of cities unit supply should never be a problem.


I see it as a game first, then a reflection of reality. My version of fun is taking over the world with one city. Current VP doesn't allow that IMO. I'm happy to be proven wrong. Japan OCC immortal quick doughnut (center is ocean) tiny are my current settings, aiming for domination victory.

I don't necessarily agree with your design vision but I understand. I don't get, however, why tearing apart the whole ruleset is the better option to you, when you could just drop down from immortal to prince or something. If anything I'd like to see the game get more challenging than it is at these top difficulties, not easier.

 

[GodDamnItAlexander]

I don't necessarily agree with your design vision but I understand. I don't get, however, why tearing apart the whole ruleset is the better option to you, when you could just drop down from immortal to prince or something. If anything I'd like to see the game get more challenging than it is at these top difficulties, not easier.

Then it will be too easy. My only problem is supply cap.
I see my game plan as rushing to medieval era, mass producing units, and then promoting them throughout time so I can catch up on production.
I can roleplay as Julius Caesar, basically be a great general that goes around conquering everyone with his legions while governing Rome (and just Rome, sending roman governors to other cities {puppets}).

 

[Emufarmers]

I can roleplay as Julius Caesar, basically be a great general that goes around conquering everyone with his legions while governing Rome (and just Rome).

Rome serves as a good cautionary tale of what happens when one city tries to rule the world.

I think Blue Ghost gave you what you need to adjust the game to work with the particular scenario you're trying to play.

 

[Owlbebach]

With that number of cities unit supply should never be a problem.

Well in my opinion 20-25 cities on Large map is quite a lot. Of course if you have 40-50 cities - you will never have enough army to defend them, but in my opinion you are not supposed to. Thats how the game works, you should not have 50 cities ever, if you do - up your difficulty.

 

[Blue Ghost]

I think having unit supply be a real constraint significantly improves the game. It cuts down on micromanaging while increasing strategic depth. When you can't field an unlimited army, decisions as to what to do with the troops you have become all the more important. Sending your troops off to invade other lands is a real risk, since you'll be leaving your own lands I defended. I've run up against the supply limit plenty of times, and each time I've found the challenge of how to deal with it really enjoyable. So you can change the supply settings if you want, but I think the game is vastly improved with the supply rules as they stand.

 

[GodDamnItAlexander]

I think having unit supply be a real constraint significantly improves the game. It cuts down on micromanaging while increasing strategic depth. When you can't field an unlimited army, decisions as to what to do with the troops you have become all the more important. Sending your troops off to invade other lands is a real risk, since you'll be leaving your own lands I defended. I've run up against the supply limit plenty of times, and each time I've found the challenge of how to deal with it really enjoyable. So you can change the supply settings if you want, but I think the game is vastly improved with the supply rules as they stand.

How do you go on conquering spree on OCC?

 

[Blue Ghost]

How do you go on conquering spree on OCC?

I don't play OCC. The game isn't really designed to support it.

 

[GodDamnItAlexander]

The game isn't really designed to support it.

In my opinion that's the problem. Others believe in the sake of realism.
I personally think only a small adjustment to unit supply is needed to allow for more play styles.
Wide favors flat currencies, tall percentage based ones. IMO the problem is that the base unit supply is too low. That way conquering cities still gives you a much needed bonus to unit supply for the later portions of the game, while at the same time allows a tall empire to launch a surprise attack and get the snowball going in the early game.

 

[tu_79]

In my opinion that's the problem. Others believe in the sake of realism.
I personally think only a small adjustment to unit supply is needed to allow for more play styles.
Wide favors flat currencies, tall percentage based ones. IMO the problem is that the base unit supply is too low. That way conquering cities still gives you a much needed bonus to unit supply for the later portions of the game, while at the same time allows a tall empire to launch a surprise attack and get the snowball going in the early game.

I think the only way you could play OCC is lowering difficulty, as it is harder to do this in VP.

 

[GodDamnItAlexander]

I think the only way you could play OCC is lowering difficulty, as it is harder to do this in VP.

Or I could try and convince everyone that some minor changes to the game could allow for more play styles (and more fun!) while still maintaining the whole "muh realism!".

 

[SLGray]

See the issue is everyone has their own opinion about this? You can not please everyone.

I really do not see an issue with this. I do not play the game for fighting/wars.

 

[Blue Ghost]

I agree with the general sentiment that fun trumps realism (at least to an extent), but I disagree that increasing the default unit supply cap will make the game more fun. It would lead to more micromanagement and less strategic decision. It's not possible to support every possible playstyle with the base settings, and it doesn't make sense to cater to niche self-imposed challenges at the expense of the wider game. The game provides ways to mitigate supply issues, and one of the major ways to do that is expanding. That's by design. If you refuse to expand, you will have supply issues, and that's the way it should be. You can always adjust the settings yourself if you don't like that.

 

[Gothic_Empire]

Try OCC domination quick. Basically like Venice while not actually playing Venice.

Well, yes, playing with deliberate handicaps tends to, uhh, handicap you. But when I'm not trying to break the game, I find that supply cap is only low if I'm in an eternal war, which seems to be as intended.

 

[GodDamnItAlexander]

It's not possible to support every possible playstyle with the base settings

I think it's doable in a way that can make everyone happy. Give tradition a flat bonus to unit supply at tree end. Rework how buildings give unit supply that still mostly favors wide, but can also let tall empires do some conquering. There a bunch of possible solutions and I'm sure smarter people than me can come up with better ones.

The only problem is the "realists" start complaining that things aren't historically accurate. And are they really not (Sparta anyone)? (obviously tall empires shouldn't be able to field an army as big as wide)

 

[Blue Ghost]

Tall civs can already field enough units to take some cities from a neighbor. After that, you're not tall anymore. I don't see the problem.

 

[GodDamnItAlexander]

Tall civs can already field enough units to take some cities from a neighbor. After that, you're not tall anymore. I don't see the problem.

As I've done in my extreme example of tall in my OCC game (I took one city right next to me with no walls). The problem was that after my surprise attack my army was too small to do anything else. Everyone else's unit supply was growing while mine was still hovering at around 12.

 

[Blue Ghost]

Then find ways to increase your supply. Like not going one city.

It's a matter of opinion. You're entitled to yours, but I'm firmly in the camp that the game would be less fun, not more, if the base supply cap were to be significantly changed.

 

[Moi Magnus]

One solution would be to make the OCC option (in advanced settup) increase the player supply cap.

 

[GodDamnItAlexander]

Then find ways to increase your supply. Like not going one city.

It's a matter of opinion. You're entitled to yours, but I'm firmly in the camp that the game would be less fun, not more, if the base supply cap were to be significantly changed.

You're right. That's probably an awful solution as it completely messes with the current unit supply balance. How about giving tradition a flat bonus? Say +6 or 8?
Maybe laborers each increase unit supply by 2? The game already has all the components for OCC conquest (Imperialism), it's just the early unit supply doesn't allow the snowball to get going IMO.