Discussion in 'CivBE - General Discussions' started by Dale, Apr 13, 2014.
Well according to their AI war simulations in BE, the new AI is better, from the PC gamer interview.
I really hope Firaxis (or at least some intrepid modder) backports these improvements. I won't hold my breath, but it would be nice (especially seeing how both are a similar engine).
Same for the Mantle API implementation, really. I don't expect a full engine upgrade, but it would be nice for us to get some Civ5 improvements, since the brunt of the work is already done for Civ:BE.
1upt could definitely be improved in say, Civ VI, but I don't understand why people would be surprised that this game has 1upt just like Civ V. If you feel like that, I doubt you will feel excited about a Civ game for a loooong time.
I personally think the system is much better and more interesting than SoD's.
Yes it would be nice, I believe Paradox did similar between their games, but alas, Firaxis is not Paradox and they might not have further long-term plans for Civ 5.
Also, another reason I think 1UPT will work better here is besides better AI and the different setting they also have a more consistent scale, though whose to say how much theatres of war may expand in the future. Even if they do expand, BE isn't so far an interplanetary wargame.
Having terrain limit movement makes it more strategic, not less. It allows you to use the terrain to prevent flanking in order to keep things focused where you need it to be. It allows you to create chokepoints to effectively defend against attacks. In other words, it makes terrain part of the equation in a way stacks never could.
I look at a location in Civ5 where the city is on a hill with one hill and two mountains on one side and coast on the other (angled in a way to sea attacks difficult) and I can instantly say "that's a difficult city to attack." Civ4 never had anything close to that.
Only if the limit is the exception.
On a planetwide scale the limit is the general rule.
I disagree based on my experience in Civ5, but we may have to agree to disagree.
This new BE isn't that exciting actually when it comes down to it. All this time we were thinking that BE was going to make a change in our lives forever but didn't since the similar space program/scenario that appeared in civilization 4 bts as final frontier. 3 social policies also appear in civ 5 bnw which is also another thing that was brought back and doesn't excite as much.
What? It hasn't come out yet! SMAC technically is just heavily modded Civ 2, wasn't that exciting for most people and didn't sell that well back then either. Still an amazing game. What's nice is that the Civ series has a lot more players now so a lot more people to potentially transfer over to it. Final Frontier was a half-hearted effort, I heard, and this isn't just a scenario (I didn't play much Civ 4).
Have you tried SMAC? It's completely different, it takes place on one planet, and as far as I know BE is going to as well (might add more planets in an expansion I hope).
Yes! You have summed up my thoughts nicely! Neither option is the best option - both have serious flaws IMHO.
There should be a way to cluster or group units so that you don't have to move each one individually. Moving a large (more than five units) army in Civ5 is a nightmare, unless you really love to hear your mouse click many times per turn. Don't get me wrong. I like the strategy required to use terrain to your advantage, or flank an enemy position, but jeez - getting your units there? Yuck.
To me, an acceptable compromise would be to stack up to five units, but only be able to attack with one of them per turn, unless you break the stack apart. Only one unit can attack per turn while stacked. You'd get the convenience of easier troop movement, but you'd have an incentive not to use your units in a stack.
This is something that I'd like to see in Civ BE.
You may now descend upon me like a pack of rabid dogs for spouting such anti-1UPT heresy.
What if you had land transport units, APCs? Can store five units or something, you can deploy them around them. Would make sense for a sci-fi game.
Dropships and other transports could be implemented to have a similar carrier for vehicles, using the orbital layer.
Maybe a subterranean layer would be interesting as well for an expansion. I'm thinking of Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun in all this I suppose.
APCs, no way. We've already gotten rid of embarking on transport ships. Adding an extra layer of complexity is not their current design goal. And low numbers of units/tile calls for troops with generalised functions, instead of Civ4 where high numbers of units/tile call for lots of highly specialised troops.
How about it's a grouping mechanic, you don't have to build the APCs, you select multiple units and order them to move into one tile, and they become one grouped unit at the cost of combat effectiveness.
If we're trying to be realistic in any way, shape or form:
1. A land transport (APC) of non-gargantuan size could reasonably carry 1 or 2 infantry squads. If each unit of infantry is supposed to be a company, or perhaps a regiment - which I think is the game's design intent - then 1 transport should be able to carry 1 unit. For purposes of game functionality, perhaps 2 or 3 at the most... any less and nobody would both constructing them.
2. Dropships should be used to carry about the same as an APC - perhaps 1 more unit at most. The reason to use them is clear - speed and invulnerability vs. anything but ground to air (AA) weapons.
3. Orbital Layer... sky is the limit. Orbital unit deployment, which I see as something like mass-landers capable of bringing tank companies to from low orbit to ground rapidly, should be something you research into. Perhaps it starts off in the early- to mid-game as capable of bringing down small number of units. Later, it should be capable of moving entire armies... assuming you research into it and spend the necessary hammers on constructing the necessary orbital facilities and vehicles.
Well, units in Civ were never really one unit, one APC unit would be a formation of APCs, though technically that means the infantry groupings are much smaller. The dropships would have to be reasonably limited to balance out their advantages, and as you said require the right techs.
Oh yeah and the grouping suggestion makes more sense than buildable units, to streamline the game. I suppose first it would be infantry only and then later small vehicles and eventually orbital drop.
Even if this isn't in the game, it would be cool for an expansion.
Fair point on the APCs... might be great to make "mechanized" a unit trait rather than making Mechanized Infantry a separate unit type. Something like, the infantry units enjoy a bonus of some sort for 1 or 2 rounds after dismounting, then take a small penalty of some sort thereafter for some number of rounds.
Things like that would make the military aspect of the game feel interesting, without making it the whole point of playing.
Would it be possible to allow unit stacking on the strategic map, but when combat is to be initiated, the game would switch to tactical map. The tactical map would be a larger, more detailed version of the terrain from the strategic map.
Of course, that would require taking the time to deploy your troops for tactical combat. But isn't that the general idea of 1upt?
I got to try the SMAC demo and got into it for awhile. I stopped using the SMAC demo for some reason since it was only a trial version but it was interesting for a bit.
But the idea of having to load a tactical map for each stack battle is painful, and doesn't really sound fun.
Separate names with a comma.