Petition against a 1 unit per tile rule.

[AlpsStranger]

I am doing whatever the opposite of signing this would be. I *want* a one unit per tile rule.

 

[Hyronymus]

Wouldn't it be smart to add a poll if you like to check the opinions?

 

[MSTK]

I am surprised by the amount of ignorance in this thread.

For one, this hasn't even been confirmed. Complaining about something pre-emptively seems pretty ridiculous and at best childish.

For another, none of us have ever played a game with 1 unit per tile. If this rule is actually true, who do you think has played a game with it?
Firaxis.
Do you think that if they would make such a radical change in mechanics without first analyzing every pro and con, every negative effect, every gameplay aspect of it?

Do you know how absurd it is that people who have never even touched the game are complaining about a mechanic that Firaxis is spending hours and hours a day playtesting it to make sure it works?

If one unit per tile was in effect, who do you think the first person to raise a complaint about one unit per tile was?

Here's a hint -- it wasn't any of you guys.
Here's another -- it was someone in Firaxis, who actually played the game.

 

[Quintillus]

For another, none of us have ever played a game with 1 unit per tile. If this rule is actually true, who do you think has played a game with it?
Firaxis.

I've played such a game. It's Diplomacy, an excellent board game. And it works quite well in that game. I don't expect such a concept would work well in Civilization, and don't expect such a limitation to exist in the game, beyond perhaps as an option (similar to the many options on gameplay in Civ4's advanced game setup).

But there is at least one game with such a stipulation. And I'd highly recommend trying it, if you have a couple of free 4-5 hour blocks and 5-6 friends who are really into tactics, diplomacy, and board games. I've only almost lost a friend from that game once .

 

[MSTK]

I've played such a game. It's Diplomacy, an excellent board game. And it works quite well in that game. I don't expect such a concept would work well in Civilization, and don't expect such a limitation to exist in the game, beyond perhaps as an option (similar to the many options on gameplay in Civ4's advanced game setup).

But there is at least one game with such a stipulation. And I'd highly recommend trying it, if you have a couple of free 4-5 hour blocks and 5-6 friends who are really into tactics, diplomacy, and board games. I've only almost lost a friend from that game once .

Touche

Although I was more specifically referring to 1UpT in the context of a Civ 5 game, whose mechanics we do not know. Perhaps it is only one unit type? Perhaps it is strictly one unit? Maybe even one category of unit.

Do all units take damage at once? Do the special abilities of one or two units apply to the entire squad?

Will units have a zone of control?

There is just too much unknown and not enough experience to be able to justify any knee-jerk reaction, especially to something that might not even exist. Perhaps the most ridiculous thing to me here is the notion and inherent arrogance of a pre-emptive complaint.

 

[Tholish]

I'll sign it. Its not just an over blunt way to get rid of the SOD, its also a harbinger (along with ranged archers) of too much tactical on the main screen. Of course it will be modded out immediately. But please rethink this before its too late.

 

[nzk13]

I double-sign it.

 

[Panzeh]

It's simple but effective and makes terrain more important.

 

[elisk]

Look, I'm not suggesting that Firaxis is stupid, but there have been some weird mechanics in civ before. Remember when one unit's death meant doom for the whole stack in civ2? And the way that bombardment worked in civ4 was just strange. Why would culture and walls both be added in the same defense bonus? And why could siege engines launch projectiles at walls without risking damage, but had to engage units in combat? And up until 4, you could physically blockade your allies, and they could not move into the same squares as you without declaring war. While civilization is a great series, there have been many broken and strange features in it, and I think we the players should have a say in it. I, personally do not like the idea of a 1 unit per tile rule. It would limit what can be done with units, and make movement of troops a nightmare, no matter how it will be done. That is what I think. If you don't want to sign the petition, I am not demanding that you do so, and obviously have no right to. But I think there are plenty of people who agree with me, and am addressing those people. I don't mind if you write posts contrary to my opinion, but do not assume I am just making a knee-jerk decision. I have thought about how a one unite per tile rule would change the game, and in my opinion it would make the game less fun. It would be a clumsy and stupid way to fix the SOD problem. There are a multitude of different ways that could be solved. A few different ideas: supply lines, a health penalty for too many units in one square, bombardment that can damage all units in a stack.
I think that if people show that they really do not like this idea, Firaxis may see that and may change it's mind if they are considering a 1 unit per tile rule. I know that it probably won't change their mind, but hey, why not try. I also realize they probably won't use this rule, but it is better to start early, because the longer it is in place, the harder it will be to remove it, and not having a 1 unit per tile rule would be a good thing, in my opinion.

 

[grant2004]

There are certainly ways a 1 unit per tile rule could work, if other changes are made to the game, which I would expect, this isn't going to be Civ 4 with shinier graphics there are going to be some gameplay changes, and ideas looked at individually don't get proper representation of their effect on gameplay.

I strongly DO NOT endorse this petition, believing that it would be prudent to wait for a more detailed description of the game before passing judgement on its' features.

 

[Hadrean]

I do NOT endorse this petition, mostly because the Civ series has been great so far, and I doubt they will decide to mess up now. (Plus the fact that it would likely be too late to change) Whatever they are doing, it will be for a better strategic experience and I trust Firaxis to make a great game.

So what if there is a 1-unit per tile rule?
Now I have to actually plan on what units to make and where to place them, instead of making a giant SoD and go city to city.

 

[Doviello]

I also do NOT endorse this petition. Without the ability to create SOD's, wars will have fronts instead of conga lines. Imagine a game that goes to the modern age; invading a neighbor country with 2 dozen+ infantry and tank units will be epic, with units crossing the border from all sides (instead of one stack of 50 moving from city to city with fast-combat on).

Damn. Someone should mod this 1 unit per tile rule into civ IV, maybe making all units more expensive, so we can get a little taste of whats to come.

 

[Andrew_Jay]

I've played such a game. It's Diplomacy, an excellent board game. And it works quite well in that game. I don't expect such a concept would work well in Civilization, and don't expect such a limitation to exist in the game, beyond perhaps as an option (similar to the many options on gameplay in Civ4's advanced game setup).

Not a very good comparison, because Diplomacy's board is nothing like the grid/hex system in any Civ game:

Granted, you're saying that it does work in Diplomacy, but I see no reason why it would not work with Civ. One of the most common complaints is moving your units around - you'd have much more room for maneuver in Civ, rather than the couple dozen regions in Diplomacy.

Plus there's no way it could be an option that you would turn off and on. I know it sounds like a simple thing: 1 unit or lots of units, but turning off One Unit Per Hex would mean coding a whole new AI for path-finding and coding rules for which unit defends when a tile with two or more units is attacked. And then there's the issue of the UI and selecting one of multiple units in a tile.

 

[Minor Annoyance]

...Remember when one unit's death meant doom for the whole stack in civ2?...

I know that was in civ1 but I thought civ2 had collateral damage done to units in the same stack? Or was that just SMAC? In either case, that was intended to prevent the stack of death for occurring, which one unit per tile would do. But this is all speculation anyway. Didn't this all start because someone thought it looked like there was only one unit on each tile in a screen shot? Has there been any more than that?

 

[supersoulty]

To repeat my notion, I like the idea of having a limit on the number of units per tile, as it would help make the game both more strategic and more realistic. However, ONE unit? That's neither realistic, nor is it going to be alot of fun later in the game when most civs have large armies. What would be neat is if they made it so that "stacking" expanded with technology, so that you start out only being able to place two units per hex, but then can gradually place more... engineering, medicine, combustion, (and other techs) that allowed larger armies to be supplied and avoid the devastating spread of disease in real life. 6-8 would be a good final range for stacking.

 

[lostcause]

But this is all speculation anyway. Didn't this all start because someone thought it looked like there was only one unit on each tile in a screen shot? Has there been any more than that?

Much of this speculation comes from two sources: a Danish article discussed here and a Swedish article discussed here. Both articles have stated that there is a one-unit per tile rule.

While this gives the petition some legitimacy, it doesn't change the fact it's premature. I want to know more about the game's combat mechanics (and would like to play a bit as well) before I decide whether or not i like or hate the "one unit per tile rule." Hopefully the GamePro article is more detailed on combat.

 

[Chalks]

While the 1 unit per tile rule is confirmed as being true - any opposition to this before we have any idea how this will actually work in reality is ridiculous. Nobody understands how this mechanic will play so you cannot possibly say that it will be a bad thing.

Stifling innovation simply to maintain the status quo due to ignorance is a universally bad thing.

 

[Thormodr]

This thread is a simple knee jerk reaction and a fear of the unknown. It also akin to pissing in the wind. It's not going to get you anywhere.

People seem to gripe whenever changes are made in the Civ series because it usually means that they have to alter their playing styles. I remember the tremendous ing from some people when they started to try and crack down on ICS.

SODs are boring and not fun in my opinion. However, if you really want, I am sure you or others could mod in SODs. So it really isn't a big deal. I trust Firaxis. They've done a great job with the Civilization franchise.

 

[Thormodr]

While the 1 unit per tile rule is confirmed as being true - any opposition to this before we have any idea how this will actually work in reality is ridiculous. Nobody understands how this mechanic will play so you cannot possibly say that it will be a bad thing.

Stifling innovation simply to maintain the status quo due to ignorance is a universally bad thing.

Excellent post.

 

[LDiCesare]

I'm strongly in favor of 1 unit per tile. Panzer General, Fantasy General, Battle for wesnoth are examples of games with such a rule, and they are good games. Civ 1/2 didn't allow stacking (or at your own risk) and I preferred Civ 2 over Civ 4 in terms of military maneuvers (less micro for me).