Restrictions on the number of stackable units?

[Ladath]

I was just studying Byzantine Empire part of world history.

According to the records, Cosntantinople was one of the strongest fortresses of the history.

Three directions were waters, where underwater chains blocked passage of any unauthorized ships.

Even the land side was protected by several layers of walls, protected by efficient and powerful army.

The main reason it could stand such nubmer of attacks was limit on amount of attacking force due to geography.

But then, in Civ3, it is no use.

In Civ3, player can stack infinite number of units on one tile, which is offendingly absurd on realistic sense.

Such 'cheating' renders fortresses built on the choke point no use.

I think it should be altered, so that only the limited size of units can stack on one tile.

What is your opinion on this?

 

[Berrern]

This is a very good idea, I like it! I remember in Civ2 (or was it Civ1?), if you stacked a lot of units in a tile, and ONE of those units were killed, the whole stack vanished This method is far from optimal for limiting units per tile though (which is probably why it's not in Civ3) - and a system like you're suggesting would be much better!

It looks like a lot of work though, so maybe it's better suited as an idea for Civ4 rather than a C3C patch

 

[Dell19]

A couple of problems would be that a city could be made undefeatable as if there is only one route and more units are allowed to be stacked in a city then the defenders would have a huge advantage. There is also the problem that a human player would be able to cope far better with the limits by stacking 2 movement units behind 1 movement units whilst the AI would probably weaken it's attacks further by moving any unit into the first stack and limiting its options.

Its still a good idea though and has some interesting possibilities where an army may have to come from several directions to attack a city.

 

[Rik Meleet]

I do not like this idea. It's an attempt to change parts of the game which are functioning well because it is different historycally.

If you limit the max number of units on a tile, you give the benefit more and more to the defender, which already has sufficient benefits. Just because the defenders are so benefitted; stack-tactics were invented. "If it's no use attacking with a single unit, then we need to attack with more units". If you limit this, then the balance will shift, undesirably, more to the defensive side.
Remember: there is already a cost for attacking; the production and upkeep-cost of units.

 

[Khift]

Although it may be more realistic, I disagree with it. Too big of a change for something too specific. And, as Rik Meleet said, it would further enhance the defenders to the point to where it'd be practically futile to attack cities.

 

[Gengis Khan]

Realism should never get in the way of good gameplay.

 

[Dell19]

It was what I said as well

It might be workable when you consider that a stack could be split into at least 3 groups that would reach the city at the same time and thus balance out the advantages that the AI has. The problem would be that this would mean having to use non optimal terrain when normally a stack would follow the hills and that a city with only a couple of connecting tiles could be turned into a city that was almost impossible to take, which may be realistic but perhaps not fun.

 

[Berrern]

Well, instead of making the limits terrain-based, there could be more defensive build options. For example, the Worker could create something like 'outer walls' (as described in the first post), which would effectively limit enemy movement/access/storage to that tile

 

[maverick_mw]

You do have to consider that putting restrictions like this could possiblly make for far deeper tactics, as instead of just ploughing through the enemy with a SOD, you have to consider what units go where etc.

Obviosuly, the restriction would have to be more than 1, maybe around 5-8. Attacking cities should be no problem if you can surround it, but as for bottle-necks, that is the main failing of such a restriction, unless of course the restriction applies to city defenders also.

Although I think it would allow greater tactics, it would make things much much more complicated, which is not necessarily a bad thing. However, I doubt the AI is up to that kind of task.

It would be better as an option, for us to choose for ourselves.

 

[Dell19]

An idea would be to have unlimited stacks on most terrain like grassland on plains but limit stacks on mountains so it would be a rare occurance in the game for one city to be located in a spot where it was very difficult to attack effectively.

 

[marioh]

I like the idea of limiting of stacks on mountains, but no limits on any other terrain types. It makes sense, and I don't think it'd change gameplay in a way which would be detrimental to the overall fun of the game. Of course, the AI, on the other hand, may have serious issues with this type of modification and it could limit the AI's already limited effectiveness with regards to strategy.

 

[Dell19]

I think this has largely turned into a potential idea for Civ4 where the AI will have been magically improved

 

[fuzzy_bunnies]

Anyone think that military units shouldn't be able to cross mountains at all without a road? I think making mountains impassible would add more to the strategy aspect of the game, creating in-land choke points etc. Having to create a row of forts all long my border just seems out-of-character compared to fortifying choke points between mountain ranges etc.

I kinda miss the Civ2 restrictions on not being able to move if already adjacent to an enemy unit/city, then at least you could space out those forts for a bit more realism.

 

[Khift]

Yep. I first found no-move mountains in Rhye's earth map, and I have to say that I love 'em. I wish I had a mod so that it was that way in every map.

 

[Dell19]

I tried having several types of terrain impassable but I didn't balance the map in the process so I had a huge advantage starting in the best terrain... I think I will try it again with a different map at some point or try some of the mods that already include impassable terrain.

 

[Khift]

I think what he did (Rhyes), though, was make all standard military units wheeled, which means that jungle and mountains are impassable. Once you've got that down, randomly generated maps should still work.

 

[Dell19]

Its possible to simply set mountains as impassable using the editor... Although using the wheeled option for units would mean that some units could be allowed to use mountains which could be interesting if scouts could.

 

[Khift]

The only units I believe he let on mountains were Workers, Scouts, and Settlers. You had to have a Worker build a road on the mountain to let other units up there. Also, he gave units attacking from a mountain a 100% attack bonus.

I think he let Keshik Horse Archers on mountains too, but I forget.

 

[kb2tvl]

Limiting unit size on a stack to 100 or so seems resonable to me... This would encourage combined arms.

 

[Dell19]

Limiting unit size on a stack to 100 or so seems resonable to me... This would encourage combined arms.

Thats not much of a limit... I've had more than 100 units in an attack force before but it wasn't necessary for even half of them to make up one stack... At least against the AI...