PAX-E VideoInterview with Dennis Shirk

[Newcomer24]

I don't think this sort of wild hyperbole is at all productive. You're not going to find anyone who disagrees with you that "generic military units" would be unfun. Accordingly, Civ5 will not have such a feature. But this says nothing about the feasibility of abstracting the transport system in particular, since both the developers and players are perfectly capable of recognizing the distinction between one particular unit type and every unit type. Address the actual issue, not your own strawman.

I was just pointing out that abstracting transports is no different than abstracting other things of the game.
You are removing a layer of complexity.

With separate transports you have to carefully plan your naval invasions... you can't launch a massive invasion out of the blue as building a good number of transports requires time and a few good costal cities. Not only that... you need to carefully place them in strategical checkpoints to quickly move troops from islands to the main land when there's the need.

Sure.. all of the above can be abstracted by making your normal units capable of transforming into ships at your wish.... but being this a strategy game I don't like to see strategical choices (where a good planning can make the difference) removed or automated.

 

[vidion]

Hopefully this improvement will result in pre-Astronomy naval action (think Battle of Salamis). In Civ 4 it was a pain to build dozens of galleys to do this. Also if you decide on a naval invasion in 500BC it would easy take several hundred years to get your galleys ready. I didn't find that very helpful.

About England in WW2, the main reason a naval invasion for Germany wouldn't have worked was the English naval power. You can still hopefully prevent a naval invasion I think using a good navy and good recon. Finally the circumnavigation bonus may actually mean something.

 

[Ahriman]

I was just pointing out that abstracting transports is no different than abstracting other things of the game.
You are removing a layer of complexity.

I don't like to see strategical choices (where a good planning can make the difference) removed or automated.

Did you enjoy manually removing pollution in Civ3? Were you upset when they made the game simpler by removing pollution, and abstracting it into "unhealth"?

Or do you concede that Not All Mechanics Are Created Equal, and that abstracting one feature is not inherently "no different" from abstracting any other feature.

I really like the point made above; to move units efficienctly on railroads, there is a complicated network optimisation problem (scheduling) involved. Are you annoyed that they abstracted this important issue, and did not include the strategic decision-making of building trains and deciding where to move them, to anticipate where you were going to need to move large numbers of units? The game would have been more complex if you'd had to do that.... which means it would have been better, right?

Water will still function fine as a barrier, so long as you actually have a navy to enforce the barrier, and as long as loading takes up the entire turn. More of a barrier than with transports, because you won't be able to load up and move on the same turn.

On the concern about costs; I'd have no objection to increasing maintenance costs of units while they're in "transport" form.

 

[Newcomer24]

Also if you decide on a naval invasion in 500BC it would easy take several hundred years to get your galleys ready. I didn't find that very helpful.

Yes it would take several hundred years... but so it does building land units... getting your swordsmen ready would take a few hundred years too!

Did you enjoy manually removing pollution in Civ3? Were you upset when they made the game simpler by removing pollution, and abstracting it into "unhealth"?

I really like the point made above; to move units efficienctly on railroads, there is a complicated network optimisation problem (scheduling) involved. Are you annoyed that they abstracted this important issue, and did not include the strategic decision-making of building trains and deciding where to move them, to anticipate where you were going to need to move large numbers of units? The game would have been more complex if you'd had to do that.... which means it would have been better, right?

Regarding pollution well it got removed but was replaced by a more advanced feature which made perfect sense as it's in line with the happiness system.

Railroads... I of course agree that there's a limit to the level of detail you can give to the game without messing everything up. But you can't compare (in my opinion) railroads to naval transports as they are different for many reasons, railroads are just faster roads.

Anyway... we will hardly find an agreement here... because you used to find transports boring while I liked the choices I had to take when managing them. On paper I don't like the change... but if they implement a good number of restrictions on when and where you can do the man-ship transformation I will get used to it with some time.

 

[bonafide11]

It doesn't seem to bother anyone that units move faster along railroads even in the absence of trains.

Good point, especially for only your sixth post!

For those who hate the new transport system, explain what sense it makes that tanks and other land units can drive faster on railroad tracks without trains? And would you prefer if you had to build trains to move the units on the railroad tracks?

 

[r_rolo1]

For those who hate the new transport system, explain what sense it makes that tanks and other land units can drive faster on railroad tracks without trains? And would you prefer if you had to build trains to move the units on the railroad tracks?

Just for the record, atleast in civ IV there is a land unit that can move less tiles via railroads per turn than by road

 

[Ahriman]

Anyway... we will hardly find an agreement here... because you used to find transports boring while I liked the choices I had to take when managing them. On paper I don't like the change... but if they implement a good number of restrictions on when and where you can do the man-ship transformation I will get used to it with some time.

Absolutely, I definitely do not claim that there is nothing being lost here for anyone, and I hope that players such as yourself who are losing a feature they enjoy will find the new system workable.

I also definitely sympathize with the argument that being able to transport a large number of units by sea should require some physical invesetment (eg in transport ships). I hope that in some way this is retained, by forcing you to build a significant navy in order to protect your

Anything which encourages a navy is probably a good way to go. And I think we can all agree that a crucial design goal is to make it very difficult to launch an amphibious invasion through the teeth of a superior naval force. Having a better navy should protect you; if you're on an island, you should be able to substitute navy for army and have that be a significant force. This has long been one of the biggest problems with Civ.

Just for the record, atleast in civ IV there is a land unit that can move less tiles via railroads per turn than by road

Really? Which one? I haven't played vanilla Civ4 in ages (too many awesome mods). Gunships??

 

[blacksmit049]

Just a thought, I thought the units cannot enter city, unless the units are hostile. How is it possible, probably the water units can enter city tiles. Just asking though, enlightened me, someone??

 

[zarakand]

Exactly in a TBS you have way more time...also to all those people who hate galleys/galleons....

how would the Spanish have found the Americas?

how would the Mongols invade Japan?

Sure these will all work with Civ5,but expect the AI to navally invade you alot more then ever before....

There's a difference between hating them in real life and thinking they don't add much to game play value....

 

[zarakand]

I know I'm gonna miss ambushing a bunch of transports with my fleet of battleships

I agree this was a lot of fun in Civ IV! Yet, it would only make sense that land units in water would be very weak against a naval battleship of any kind. I imagine this would still stay a very fun part of the game.

I know this is a heated debate, but I really think that this is a good move and takes away annoying micro.

 

[r_rolo1]

Really? Which one? I haven't played vanilla Civ4 in ages (too many awesome mods). Gunships??

Exactly Better said, all units in civ IV travel at a constant speed of 10 tiles/turn in non-enemy rail tiles, regardless of what is their base speed ( maybe to simulate they being packaged in the train ), unlike roads, that multiply by 3 the base moves of the unit... This makes gunships faster on road ( 4*3 = 12 ) than on rail ( 10 )

 

[Thyrwyn]

dedicated transports didn't exist until the modern era. I won't miss them in civ V

 

[frekk]

The new ocean rules are great. Big thumbs up. There will be alot more naval action, and finally, there will be a point to building fleets of warships. The AI will be transporting its units by water much more, so will human players. Imagine the potential for units like submarines, which up until now, have been useless except to deliver nukes. All warships ... triremes, frigates, everything ... instead of just being frills, these units will become critical. Salamis, here I come!

 

[Tomice]

The new ocean rules are great. Big thumbs up. There will be alot more naval action, and finally, there will be a point to building fleets of warships. The AI will be transporting its units by water much more, so will human players. Imagine the potential for units like submarines, which up until now, have been useless except to deliver nukes. All warships ... triremes, frigates, everything ... instead of just being frills, these units will become critical. Salamis, here I come!

Yes, an easier system could help the AI being capable of invading over the sea. That alone would make it a good system. In fact, the sea barrier function is exagerated in civ4, no problem in partly losing it!

 

[Ahriman]

Yes, an easier system could help the AI being capable of invading over the sea. That alone would make it a good system.

Absolutely, making the AI better at military and non-military expansion over water will be a big plus. Now we just have to make sure it knows how to protect its transports

 

[Craxymaxy]

I like the units getting on boats idea

As long as this takes up the remaining movement points of units upon "getting in" their boats and has a higher maintenance cost while they are in their boats then i'm a fan

The British saved there army in WW2 by just putting their soldiers on any boat they could find and sailing back to england

EDIT: Its the miracle of Dunkirk

 

[CTH]

I guess this will mean that workers and settlers also can be transports. THAT is a good improvement in my book, no longer do I have to build a ship just to get a worker out and work the 1 tile island that my city has in its radius! I allways get a bit irritated on that.

 

[timtofly]

I propose that units will end their turn x many hexes as they have left once they enter a water hex just like they would on a road or railway. I know that it has been suggested that roads will not change movement rate, just using it as an example of how we are used to playing the game. Since the movement is alleged at a minimum of two, and the emphasis now is on terrain, it would be simple to give ocean hexes a movement cost like any other terrain. If you have 3 moves left, then you have a range of some or hopefully more than that to get you out to sea.

If you just landed an invasion force your ships would still be there, unless you wanted to improve moral and burn your ships behind you.

It should also balance out exploration at the beginning of the game. Your explorer on the high sees would not be destroyed by a militant floating chariot, at least until they landed and had a brief look around.

 

[Asylumer]

The problem with units turning into ships is how it destroys what they're attempting to do with 1uPH with the ability to set up a front line. Barriers may not have meant much in earlier Civilization games but with the new system the ability to create choke points and limit the amount of enemies you face at once becomes much more important. A front line is much less formidable when your enemy can simply turn into a boat and swim around your defenses from any direction. At least with a transport system the enemy needs to invest in his fleet and the transports cannot cut across land. If units become boats then the defender has to set his navy against an enemy that can ignore the long sea route detours and potentially evade the enemy navy all-together. Essentially, the shortest path between two places for ground units is a straight line, and naval units don't have that luxury.

Workers however, could benefit from Wonder Twin abilities, as their free movement doesn't threaten gameplay like universal movement military forces do.

There was a game designer who mentioned how their plans to do transport this way were scrapped (for good reason), but I can't manage to find the interview. I did however find a Design Blog by Christopher Park about how he encountered an unexpected design problem with a Space 4X due to the lack of terrain features. He also talks about the effects terrain can have on strategy and how the AI behaves. It's at least partially related to the subject at hand since the issue with self-transporting units is how it destroys an aspect of strategy important to the genre.

Removing water barriers would be like allowing a Rook to leap units as a Knight does in chess - the effects are further reaching than a simple movement modification.

 

[bonafide11]

I guess this will mean that workers and settlers also can be transports. THAT is a good improvement in my book, no longer do I have to build a ship just to get a worker out and work the 1 tile island that my city has in its radius! I allways get a bit irritated on that.

Exactly. That was one of the more annoying things in Civ IV, and one of the reasons I'm really excited about this change. It was such a hassle to get the worker on a galley, bring him to the city to work one tile, then return him to the mainland. It made me not want to settle islands ever. Now it'll be easy to just move the worker over there, so I'll be much more eager to move settlers and workers over to islands to settle islands.