Opinions about the new movement system

[DocRock]

Hey guys,

I was wondering what you think about the new movement system. Especially the part that you cannot move up a hill / forest etc with only 1 movement left.

For me, this is the worst feature of the whole game. To be fair, it's more realistic than what we got in Civ 5. But there are so many downsides to it.

1. In combination with the 1UPT, the new system leads to massive traffic jams. Throw in some religious units from another civ or units from a city state and it will end in chaos. Due to the restrictions, you basically move at 1/2 the speed of Civ 5 and jams were an issue there already. Try and sending a unit without babysitting. It will take a zick - zack path around the whole continent.

2. The whole game becomes slower. Much slower. Unbearably slower.

3. The Scout issue. With the massive barbarian Scout spamming, this gets even more annoying because you cannot catch them. You can just follow them. If my unit is on the field next to the Scout in a forest, I should be able to attack it, when I have 1 movement left.

4. The melee units issue. Seriously, who is using melee units anyways? They are way too slow and even worse than in civ 5. Because of the stupid movement system!

I'm really looking forward for your opinions. I hope there will be a patch or at least a mod that changes this.

Cheers!

 

[TomKQT]

This was already discussed. Part of my reaction will be a copy-paste of what I said earlier on this forum.

To be fair, it's more realistic than what we got in Civ 5. But there are so many downsides to it.

I also first thought that the new movement system is more realistic. But it's not.
Sure, in CivV it was quite weird that a unit with just 1 movement point left could with no problems climb a hill requiring 2 movement points. While some other unit with 2 movement points left would be able to do exactly the same thing and nothing more.
But in CivVI there are other problems. A unit with 2 movement points moves towards a hill and has 1 point left ... and cannot do anything at all. He still has movement points, but cannot move at all, not even half the hill.
So, a unit with 1 movement point can do exactly the same thing (= nothing at all) as a unit with 0 movement points. In fact there's not big difference from the CivV system in this concern, it's just "inverse".

What I don't like the most is that the game now doesn't properly end moves of a unit. It's very common that you still have 1 movement point left, but cannot move any further. In this case you have to manually press "skip turn", because the game won't automatically go to the next available unit (in fact it cannot, because it cannot know whether you don't want to use the remaining movement point on something else). This slows the game a lot. A lot. A lot.
In CivV you almost always ended your move with 0 movement points left because you always was able to use them all if you wanted.

 

[Gorbles]

I like the new system. It makes you think more. To say that religious units conflict with it is not a criticism of the movement system; it's more a criticism that religious units share the same map level as non-religious combat units (I think they should have their own layer; it would diversify religious vs. non-religious strategies, too, allowing for a better utilisation of mixed-composition strategies).

To criticise it because you can't catch Scouts . . . have you not considered that this maybe is intentional, so that Scouts are able to actually scout? Ranged units still decimate Scouts, and this further incentivises veterency perks that allow easier movement through terrain. Or unique units that get easier movement through certain terrain.

This was already discussed. Part of my reaction will be a copy-paste of what I said earlier on this forum.

I also first thought that the new movement system is more realistic. But it's not.
Sure, in CivV it was quite weird that a unit with just 1 movement point left could with no problems climb a hill requiring 2 movement points. While some other unit with 2 movement points left would be able to do exactly the same thing and nothing more.
But in CivVI there are other problems. A unit with 2 movement points moves towards a hill and has 1 point left ... and cannot do anything at all. He still has movement points, but cannot move at all, not even half the hill.
So, a unit with 1 movement point can do exactly the same thing (= nothing at all) as a unit with 0 movement points. In fact there's not big difference from the CivV system in this concern, it's just "inverse".

What I don't like the most is that the game now doesn't properly end moves of a unit. It's very common that you still have 1 movement point left, but cannot move any further. In this case you have to manually press "skip turn", because the game won't automatically go to the next available unit (in fact it cannot, because it cannot know whether you don't want to use the remaining movement point on something else). This slows the game a lot. A lot. A lot.
In CivV you almost always ended your move with 0 movement points left because you always was able to use them all if you wanted.

Alternatively, you can path to the target hex - you won't move to it, but you also won't move to it at the start of your next turn either; it will only be consumed at the end of that turn in the auto-movement phase, now that you have enough points for it. You can also manually move during that turn if you wish to redirect due to Barbarians or other enemies repositioning.

 

[DocRock]

Hmm sorry, didn't know that this was already discussed.

 

[Jonathan]

I have no objection to the 'new' system, it seems correct to me that units shouldn't be able to exceed their movement allowance!

In real life, units often fail to move as far as expected, for various different reasons. Moving further than expected also happens, but is probably less common.

I suppose it would be feasible to give a unit with one remaining movement point a 50% chance of moving onto a hill, and roll a die for it. I'd have no objection to that either, although it complicates things somewhat.

 

[qadams]

I'm fine with the new movement system overall. It does seem more realistic, and also more challenging.

What I do NOT like is the glitch where very often my turn will auto-end while I still have one usable movement point left, usually with a scout. That's extremely frustrating. Does this happen to anyone else?

Also, it drives me nuts that if I tell a unit to heal, but then change my mind and want the unit to move or to attack, I cannot do it. Why?? Arghh!

 

[Siptah]

I'm fine with the new movement system overall. It does seem more realistic, and also more challenging.

What I do NOT like is the glitch where very often my turn will auto-end while I still have one usable movement point left, usually with a scout. That's extremely frustrating. Does this happen to anyone else?

Also, it drives me nuts that if I tell a unit to heal, but then change my mind and want the unit to move or to attack, I cannot do it. Why?? Arghh!

+1

 

[Zuizgond]

This was already discussed. Part of my reaction will be a copy-paste of what I said earlier on this forum.


I also first thought that the new movement system is more realistic. But it's not.
Sure, in CivV it was quite weird that a unit with just 1 movement point left could with no problems climb a hill requiring 2 movement points. While some other unit with 2 movement points left would be able to do exactly the same thing and nothing more.
But in CivVI there are other problems. A unit with 2 movement points moves towards a hill and has 1 point left ... and cannot do anything at all. He still has movement points, but cannot move at all, not even half the hill.
So, a unit with 1 movement point can do exactly the same thing (= nothing at all) as a unit with 0 movement points. In fact there's not big difference from the CivV system in this concern, it's just "inverse".

What I don't like the most is that the game now doesn't properly end moves of a unit. It's very common that you still have 1 movement point left, but cannot move any further. In this case you have to manually press "skip turn", because the game won't automatically go to the next available unit (in fact it cannot, because it cannot know whether you don't want to use the remaining movement point on something else). This slows the game a lot. A lot. A lot.
In CivV you almost always ended your move with 0 movement points left because you always was able to use them all if you wanted.

Fully agree with this.

It also affects roads. They need so many eras before being useful. Medieval roads are fully useless except the bridge building. Industrial roads are close to useless as they only decrease movement cost by 25%. And modern roads have 50% decrease in movement cost, which is the same bonus as the basic roads in Civ4. Where is my railroad in Civ6?

 

[Victoria]

It would be possible to assume that a railroad follows the route of a road and that to use it you would have to start at a city and not be able to alter their action until another city was reached.
The old idea of jumping on a train track anywhere with an army and stopping where you needed to was a little OP.

 

[nzcamel]

I love the new movement rules Makes chases more interesting.

 

[TomKQT]

Fully agree with this.

It also affects roads. They need so many eras before being useful. Medieval roads are fully useless except the bridge building. Industrial roads are close to useless as they only decrease movement cost by 25%. And modern roads have 50% decrease in movement cost, which is the same bonus as the basic roads in Civ4. Where is my railroad in Civ6?

Oh, there are roads in Civ6?
Just kidding, I know there are roads. But I somehow never noticed they actually did anything regarding movement speed. They really should improve this a bit.

 

[Siptah]

I actually like how roads work now. There's a lot of micro management in moving troops with the road system and the new movement rules. But I really like it. Except for the few glitches noted above.
And Victoria's idea about railroads sounds great, too.

 

[TomeTraveler]

I'd like to see the "leftover" movement points actually used, when you have multi-turn movement plotted. For example, moving a warrior onto clear, then a hill, then clear again requires three turns currently. With using the leftovers, it would require two (one point for the clear hex plus halfway into the hill, second turn one point to finish climbing the hill, second point to enter the clear terrain.)

 

[UWHabs]

I like it, except for the parts that I don't like. My changes that would be nice to see:
-The game needs to treat any unit without valid moves left on its turn, and no possible action, as having completed their turn. So when my unit has 1/4 move left, don't ask me to skip what's left of his turn.
-Ranged units should probably have 1 full move point to be able to shoot. Once you get to industrial and later roads, it's not fair that a ranged unit can move twice and then shoot, while a melee unit can move twice and be left with a useless half a move point
-Alternately, fractions should "round up". So if my melee unit has 1/2 a move point, he should be able to move onto a tile that takes 1 move. Then at least the industrial roads would give an extra move to melee units. Or maybe you have that only work on roads?
-Scouts should have a promotion where they can use partial moves to go onto a tile. That should be the first promotion instead of hill/forest.
-Barbarian "scouts" as mentioned should have their movement dropped. They should be 2-move units so that you can chase them down easier.
-Religious units should be on a separate layer, like traders. They can block each other, but shouldn't interfere at all with any other units.
-There should be some ability to "stack" with friendly units of other civs. At the very least, the regular stacking rules should apply - so if an opponent has a missionary or warrior wandering through my territory, I should still be allowed to move a builder onto the same tile. Sure, block my missionary or warrior, but at least let the non-combat layer stack with friendly units. And if you happen to declare war while stacked, just have a simple rule to teleport some units, or auto-capture them, or whatever.
-As for railroads, maybe you could do something like what happens with airlifting and aerodromes: once you research railroad, if your unit starts in a city, it can teleport to any city within, say, 10 or 15 tiles that's connected by rail. This would also simulate well how all units would move the same speed on railroads, unlike previous games where for some strange reasons, tanks would move around on super-high-speed rail, while infantry always had to take the slower commuter trains.

 

[nzcamel]

-Religious units should be on a separate layer, like traders. They can block each other, but shouldn't interfere at all with any other units.
-There should be some ability to "stack" with friendly units of other civs. At the very least, the regular stacking rules should apply - so if an opponent has a missionary or warrior wandering through my territory, I should still be allowed to move a builder onto the same tile. Sure, block my missionary or warrior, but at least let the non-combat layer stack with friendly units. And if you happen to declare war while stacked, just have a simple rule to teleport some units, or auto-capture them, or whatever.

Agree with these points.

 

[@Rob76]

I vote for bringing the Civ5 system back. And it's not a close call--the new system is that awful. Until we get relief, check out the Quo's Rocketboots mod. It gives one additional movement point, enough to give substantial, but not complete relief.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

I liked the new movement system when I first heard about it; it seemed more logical than the old one, and I also thought it would make terrain more important. All that's still true. But my experience of it in Civ VI has been unpleasant. Movement values are just too low. 2-movement units just take forever to get anywhere. Melee units were already the big losers of 1UPT in Civ V; Civ VI has made that even more extreme.

Moreover, the movement system aggravates the traffic jam issues of 1UPT. It is very hard to move around units that are in one's way. And because units move slower and take more turns to get where they need to go, more clicking is needed. If you need to move a 10-unit army around the map, those extra clicks add up. All this might be less of a big deal if players could build roads where they wanted; but Civ VI does not permit that. Players have less ability to construct roads than they have ever had, even as the movement system exacerbates the need for them.

However, with one simple change, I actually like the new movement system. All you have to do is increase the movement of all units by 1. Suddenly, when everything has at least 3 moves, the system starts to work. Terrain is actually more distinct and important with the extra movement. With 2 moves, a swordsman or a builder cannot distinguish between rough (forested or hilly) and super-rough (forested and hilly) terrain. With 3 moves, that distinction matters. Bottlenecks are less of a big deal because all units are better able to navigate them. Oh, and 4-move Scouts become actually worth building.

 

[nzcamel]

I get the feeling that many who hate the lower movement points only started with CiV. CiVI is far more in line with the movement of units in the series; and I prefer that myself.

I'll agree that 1UPT does lead to some bottlenecks in annoying non war situations. In my first game of VI, I had open borders with Kongo, but there was no way that my scout (let alone any slower unit) was getting through his clutter of units around his city flanked by mountains. I think this could be addressed by units from different Civs who aren't at war being allowed to share the same tile; at least if no empty tiles are available in their range of movement.

 

[drubell]

Overall I'm content with the movement system, despite the fact that there is a lot of potential for unit clutter, but I agree that trying to catch barb scouts is really frustrating. I wish that, if barb scouts discover a city, the scout's movement is lowered from 3 to 2 until it gets to the barb camp. Intercepting a barb scout is almost impossible.

My least favorite part is when a barb scout finds a civ that is NOT mine and they send a raiding party after me because I happen to be closer than the civ they're "supposed" to raid

 

[GhostSalsa]

Ach, I do not agree that the new system leads to more thoughtful play. Like diplomacy, there's very little return on investment in VI in trying to get around the map, so I just stop trying.

Endless Legend (a game I bring up a lot but actually find boring overall), makes movement fun and complex even though it "gives you a ton of it." You can choose to split fast units out of armies for a few extra moves any given turn, but instantly are at a higher risk of losing high value units. that's thoughtful and doesn't require limiting your footprint on the map of the game that presumably you care about what is happening most places in.

And there's no increase in realism from V here.

Why is a wooded hill harder to climb for non-mounted, most relevantly scouts? Have you ever climbed an unforested hill? There's nothing to hold onto. Previous successful trails are hidden. So on some grades, bald hill is harder. Trees are the ladders of hills.

Why is wooden hill harder to pass for non-mounted than flat woods? It's very easy to get blocked and turned around in any woods. But a big ol hill provides a guide system. Unless we're comparing to really really level, clean woods, which should be just as passable as flat land.

Why is it so easy for non-mounted to zip through a desert? Have you ever walked through a desert? Constantly it's rocks and cactus patches blocking your way and making you lost. Not to mention what are you even drinking hello it's a desert you died.

Why are you going to bed rather than crossing the river. Either cross and go to bed late or wake early and cross. People can cross rivers at night.

And why are you sitting at the base of the hill with movement left. To make me think? I'd rather not. I'd rather you just started going up the hill. You are my movey around guy if you won't move than you aren't doing your job in the game, so you either you or the game wasn't designed right.

An iteration of the VI system that I would find passable (still not truly interesting or realistic, but not too punishing either) is letting units at 1mp end turn on high cost tiles and starting the next turn with -1 mp.