Simultaneous Move for Single Player Game

[polypheus]

It seems that in a couple of Civ versions now, simultaneous move is implemented for multi-player games. But for single player games, it is the flawed, I go you go system. Unfortunately this system is problematic because the attacker initiates while the defender just has to stand there and take the first blows. This is especially bad with 1UPT as the initiator can just choose to pick off weak units while the defense cannot counter.

So I am wondering, since simultaneous move is clearly already implemented for MP, why it wasn't made for the game period? It seems like it would be the way to go for SP as well.

 

[ProkhorZakharov]

I think having only simultaneous moves would inevitably lead to cries of "we don't want an RTS", but it would be nice to have it as an option. It would go a long way to dealing with the long wait between turns if the AI's able to do it's stuff while I'm considering my moves.

 

[humbe]

Well.. If you've got weak units exposed you're not ready for the attack and you're surprised, in which case the attacker should be able to take you by surprise..

I'd never use simultaneous move, but don't mind if there's an option for anyone that wants to.

 

[Biz_]

the attacker becomes the defender when the turn changes so it's no big deal

it's been this way in every turn based game ever. tried and tested system

 

[brento1138]

Honestly, I cannot stand simultaneous moves. Turn-based moves is what makes Civ the game it is. However, I respect your opinion and that everyone enjoys different things, so... my conclusion is that Firaxis/2K should allow both options in both single & multiplayer.

But if we were to choose between one of them, I'd probably give up / stop playing civ if it became "just another" simultaneous turns game.

 

[rf900]

..., but it would be nice to have it as an option. It would go a long way to dealing with the long wait between turns if the AI's able to do it's stuff while I'm considering my moves.

Yes it would be great to have it as an option and the horrible turn waiting time should be reduced a lot. Also if two units came close to each other they could end their move so the end result could be unpredictable. It would be good to have and additional order for units that would be follow enemy so instead of predicting his move it would more realistically pursue the other unit. If it is faster he will catch it, if not he will run away unless you are able to encircle it.

 

[Fariic]

There are XML files in the game for multi-unit formations. Dunno if that's got anything to do with multi or not, but it would be nice to be able to move units in formation to protect the weaker guys.

 

[Psyringe]

I can't see how simultaneous turns would pan out for a combat system that's so reliant on positioning and choosing the right target. Simultaneous turns work pretty well in a system like in Space Empires IV: You assemble your fleet, define combat tactics for it (this is a bit like writing a script that the units follow, including conditional moves like "This unit should retreat when it has less than 20% health)", and then the fleet fights against the opponent's flight (which has its own script). Designing the combat tactics for one's fleets (defining special objectives, guessing the opponent's tactics, trying to counter them, etc.) was part of the fun.

But in Civ5, I don't see how it could work. i never so a reason to use simultaneous moves in Civ4 either. How does it work in Civ5 multiplayer?

 

[Brawndo]

I have not played MP - how does combat turn out with simultaneous turns? I can imagine with the huge -33% open terrain penalty both players just camping defensible hexes until one finally gets impatient and moves his units

 

[The Great Apple]

Even with simultaneous moves the AI isn't really simultaneous, and, quite frankly, it wouldn't really work well if they were (AI can move a lot faster than the human... so basically turn based again).

So what would be the difference?

 

[rf900]

Even with simultaneous moves the AI isn't really simultaneous, and, quite frankly, it wouldn't really work well if they were (AI can move a lot faster than the human... so basically turn based again).

So what would be the difference?

It wouldn't be that hard to add a delay to computer moves to simulate a human player. And the gain? How about waiting 30 seconds for each turn change during 400 turns, that is 200 minutes, more than 3 hours looking at the screen waiting for your next turn in a standard game.

And I really prefer playing turn based, but I hate to wait so long between turns.