Questions for people who don't like stack of doom

aieeegrunt

Emperor
Joined
Jan 8, 2021
Messages
1,180
I've mentionned (in this very thread) that geopolitics isn't the strong point of Civ, especially in multiplayer. No matter what, if you are stacked by several opponents at the same time or see a cavalry unit going out from nowhere pillaging your stuff, going backwards, being hitted and recovering after being hitted, all that in the same turn, it can feel stupid.

If you are getting dogpiled, that’s not on the movement system

If your empire is so wide open cavalry can roam at will because you don’t have blocking units with interlocking ZOC’s, again, that is not on the movement system
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2021
Messages
372
Stacks of doom make terrain and especially chokepoints irrelevant in warfare.

UPT is going to the other extreme to fix it, but chokepoints, especially well-defended ones, should be hard to take because they limit how much forces you can bring to bear, not something you can just concentrate your entire army on in a single turn.
I do not follow here. Defensive properties seem to apply to stacks in terms of how many units will be lost in taking an entrenched position. In Civ IV, some early units including garrisoned barbarian archers can present quite the challenge to dislodge. Later on, taking a forested hill may translate into greater casualties. Defensive properties and promotions seem one of the ways defenders can survive larger stacks.

I played Saph's Silk Road map for Civ VI a couple months ago, and it prominently features chokepoints especially where the Himalayan, Pamir, and Tian Shan ranges converge. The map is very fun to explore, but an unfortunate side effect is that a single barbarian, religious unit, or encampment can be enough to shut down the whole Silk Road! I think 1UPT makes chokepoints too easy to defend. Where it has worked better for me, with double movement, is where the map generates six to eight tile gaps that naturally support fronts. Without those wider gaps, it is very unit-intensive to guard ranged and siege units on all sides from AI cavalry. Without mods, I do not usually see the need/benefit/fun of fronts, but with added mobility it can make sense.

I don't know about the games you mention, but that would be horrible in Civ because of the fog of war. It is already real with Gran Colombia having 7+ cavalry moves. Horribly frustrating in multiplayer.
No matter what, if you are stacked by several opponents at the same time or see a cavalry unit going out from nowhere pillaging your stuff, going backwards, being hitted and recovering after being hitted, all that in the same turn, it can feel stupid.
By 7+ moves for cavalry, does that come from the civilization ability plus a promotion, or is there a balance mod at work? After doubling base movement, a standard cavalry ought to have 10 movement and a standard Gran Colombian unit, 11. In that case, it would seem any player could engage in hit and run tactics across the border. That could have some unintended side effects. What is your strategy for combatting the bonus movement?

A parallel is naval combat in RFC or YnAMP where movement is doubled on ocean tiles. The fact that ships can fly out of nowhere with effectively a dozen or more movement points certainly makes colonization realistically risky!
 

Evie

Pronounced like Eevee
Joined
Jan 5, 2002
Messages
10,207
Location
Ottawa, Ontario
I talked mostly specifically of chokepoints. A lone tile between two mountain ranges should be a great defensive location regardless of terrain type, because it's a location where the terrain makes it hard to overwhelm a defenders with numbers. Stack of Dumb completely nullify that by allowing entire armies to dance on the head of a pin, making chokepoints pointless and just about who has built the most dumb muscles.
 

Naokaukodem

Millenary King
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
3,619
If you are getting dogpiled, that’s not on the movement system

No, but if *anything* of doom is related to fog of war and geopolitics, the movement system is too. :p

If your empire is so wide open cavalry can roam at will because you don’t have blocking units with interlocking ZOC’s, again, that is not on the movement system

Cavalry ignore Zones Of Control.
 

Isherwood1

Chieftain
Joined
Jul 26, 2022
Messages
1
I think stacks of doom were solved pretty well with mods that allowed for enormous amounts of collateral damage. But I think you could do better by using something like a disease mechanic to cause attritional damage per turn if the stack is too big. Like they lose health and they’re weaker. My biggest gripe with combat now is not the UPT, but the complete gutting of the promotion system. It’s absolutely terrible. It provides no flexibility and there’s no real decision making beyond a binary choice system. Even using random promotions like religious units or spies is a better solution. I really loved Civ4’s promotion system and think that the lack thereof is really limiting in Civ6. Combat is so watered down and boring now. And the AI is still absolutely terrible. And that’s not even mentioning how there is basically no AI usage of naval units at all.
 

Naokaukodem

Millenary King
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
3,619
By 7+ moves for cavalry, does that come from the civilization ability plus a promotion, or is there a balance mod at work? After doubling base movement, a standard cavalry ought to have 10 movement and a standard Gran Colombian unit, 11. In that case, it would seem any player could engage in hit and run tactics across the border. That could have some unintended side effects. What is your strategy for combatting the bonus movement?

A parallel is naval combat in RFC or YnAMP where movement is doubled on ocean tiles. The fact that ships can fly out of nowhere with effectively a dozen or more movement points certainly makes colonization realistically risky!

I think it was Gran Colombia, with a great general and possibly a promotion too. (or some other odd bonuses, we never know :shifty:) (no mod, multiplayer vanilla)

What is my strategy for combatting the bonus movement ? You mean, what should have been my strategy in this very, single particular case ? Because that's the problem with civs abilities and multiplayer, you are constantly put in failure by some abilities that apparently come from nowhere, but that some some player may master. The examples are countless. Some on top of my head : being overrun by Scythia's cavalry very early. Being first in science in a island map, having a navy and exploring the map, and all your navy being one-shoted in one turn by your neighbour (strangely silent during all that time :lol: ) Brazil overpowered ships acquired... by culture. :hammer2:Funniest is that all my cities were coastal and had a campus in it, so easy science for Brazil player. Another example is playing TSL map with England as foe, it will conquer everything coastal in no time it's insane. All those are little strategies imagined by some shy players in secret, in order to win. That's another reason why I prefer blank civs all the same, rather than putting development efforts in creating abilities, units & buildings (that no one look at) instead of polishing seriously the mechanics or new revolutionary content in general, or having to deal with many artificial defeats/victories instead of playing with the same rules. (granted, "playing with the same rule" often ends up to "i had a bad start", but at least you don't have to learn by heart a list of dozens civs, I'm too old for that crap)

So, my strategy ? Declare war first to prevent this innocent cavalry healing right next to my borders and one-shot it with an archer. But that's afterwards thinking, because by that time, I was busy with something else and couldn't imagine Gran Columbia to declare war on me, isn't it ???

A parallel is naval combat in RFC or YnAMP where movement is doubled on ocean tiles. The fact that ships can fly out of nowhere with effectively a dozen or more movement points certainly makes colonization realistically risky!

It's not quite the same thing with naval units, because the seas and oceans are vast, uniform water masses. It might even not be big enough in Civ. (just as landmasses, but we accept to play on mini-dwarf planets since the start of the series. One direction devs could go is really make us feel how big the Earth or Earth II is, but they would have to change a couple things other than just the size, I'm just saying...)

By the way 99% of multiplayer games are on Pangaea map so it doesn't matter too much.
 

aieeegrunt

Emperor
Joined
Jan 8, 2021
Messages
1,180
No, but if *anything* of doom is related to fog of war and geopolitics, the movement system is too. :p



Cavalry ignore Zones Of Control.

You’re missing the point; if you leave important stuff undefended, it’s not the movement system at fault.
 

aieeegrunt

Emperor
Joined
Jan 8, 2021
Messages
1,180
Your short sentences don't impress me... aieeegrunt. Geopolitics is geopolitics. You can't be everywhere at the same time, even if you are a god player. That's the point.

So you got dogpiled and clearly are leaving yourself open with a side order of dumb broken mechanics in this game

None of which has anything to do with movement

I mean I could vomit a wall of text and spaghetti quotes if you want but that essentially the gist of it
 

Naokaukodem

Millenary King
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
3,619
No I didn't get dogpiled. I don't take it personnally as you seem to pretend with this verb "dogpiled". So leave me alone, please thx. Being stack attacked is just a side of this topic, as in as in my first or second post in this topic : "stack of doom" is being called like this because of the surprise effect to see unbearable number of units suddenly appear to your borders, that it be AI or another player. The link between the two is geopolitics, that's just what I was noticing. It's a nice word, you should try to learn it.
 

BackseatTyrant

Queer Anarchotranshumanist
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
285
Honestly, 4X games of this type should give the player the option in the game setup, whether to limit the amount of military units that may overlap on the same tile or not. I guess the problem would then be that the QA team would be given twice as much work to do, as they have to account for two wildly different playstyles that have, as far as I can tell, pretty opposite demands
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2021
Messages
372
I think it was Gran Colombia, with a great general and possibly a promotion too. (or some other odd bonuses, we never know :shifty:) (no mod, multiplayer vanilla)
...
Funniest is that all my cities were coastal and had a campus in it, so easy science for Brazil player. Another example is playing TSL map with England as foe, it will conquer everything coastal in no time it's insane. All those are little strategies imagined by some shy players in secret, in order to win.
...
So, my strategy ? Declare war first to prevent this innocent cavalry healing right next to my borders and one-shot it with an archer. But that's afterwards thinking, because by that time, I was busy with something else and couldn't imagine Gran Columbia to declare war on me, isn't it ???

Thanks for clarifying about the extra movement... For a moment, I forgot about Great Generals! I have little experience with multiplayer, but I do see your point about preparing for any number of threats with all the various civilizations and situations. From what little I know, it is a surprise to hear you settled the coast, as even with Brazil it is a bit of a race against frigates. I also gather due to Pangaea maps, there is on average less land per player than in single player, so even with coast behind you a great percentage of your territory is vulnerable to hit-and-run raids.

In my experience, Civ IV AI is generally adept at pillaging strategics and luxuries the first turn of war via either raids or espionage. To this extent, those stacks made raiding pretty easy, and doubling movement points without increasing the map size would probably leave even more of your empire at risk of these attacks! I have seen some use of fronts in Civ V multiplayer, but not sure about Civ VI. In general, it seems Civ IV AI mostly figured out stacks, Civ V AI had some decent tactics for 1UPT, but who really knows what happened combat-wise with Civ VI.

I can see the appeal of blank civilizations for multiplayer, but I will always favor rich designs with strategy implications :D On a side note note, generally accurate earth maps for Civ VI make the Pacific feel appropriately huge, but whether due to unit movement or trade route length I prefer the versions where they cut most of it out. I do wish double movement on ocean became part of the base game just to facilitate intercontinental transit from the early modern on.
 
Top Bottom