SOD - Ruins games

I would like to play a game with that excellent AI.
And I know nothing about computers. But from a cost/profit point of view,
that invention/build/program/whatever would pay very well, if:
It comes with a custom choice allowing the player to choose,let's say % perfection for the AI;
The core ideas could easily be adapted (by programmers of course) to any strategic thing.
Best regards,
 
For the record, I've been beaten by the AI in a cultural victory before - and narrowly won victories (before the AI can get the last city to legendary, but 2 others are already there) at least twice that I can remember off the top of my head - so, yes, I can confirm the AI will go for cultural victories, at least down on the noble/prince shallow end of the pool where I like to swim!
 
Last game I won on Emperor I beat Pericles by 2 turns. If I hadn't launched my Spaceship when I did, he would have won a cultural win.
And my first real Immortal try ended with Isabella launching her spaceship a few turns before I finished mine.

But on the topic of SoD's, so yeah I think the game would be more fun if there was some limit on stack sizes.
 
Wouldn't a limit on stack sizes just mean instead of a stack of death, you'd have a blob of death or a line of death?

I guess to me, I think this would hurt defenders - after all, a city is one tile. If the tile limit is, say, 10 units, then I can have 10 units defending my city. There are 9 tiles surrounding my city that could hold 90 units... not good!

I realize this is an exaggeration (I don't see anyone letting themselves get surrounded like that) but I do think that you could easily see 3 or 4 max stacks approaching your city, which would cause you to either have to have garrisons outside the city to attack incoming invaders (which I'd hate, though it is an interesting idea) or be outnumbered about 4 to 1 at BEST case.

So, though I'm not a fan of the SoD, I think it's a better game mechanic than the alternative of limiting number of units per tile.
 
Cities would have more units possible, or bonuses.
And nothing stops the defender from defending in the field.
 
Well, lots of interesting replies and discussions, some of which went off on a tangent. :D
Anyway, in my current game, similar issues have arisen, and it appears that it may be my strategy which is making me look at SOD's negatively.

Think I'll have to start a new thread to discuss those though.

Ian
 
I seem to remember there being a fairly complex mod a few years back that gave bonuses for multi-unit stacks up to a point (combined arms) but penalties when that stack was too large (crowded). It worked pretty well, as the values were fixed. It worked pretty well.

In addition, certain units should be able to benefit from crowded SODs. In particular, siege units should be able to do more collateral at higher levels against stacks with more units, and should get bonuses from defending against a SOD as well, based on the number of attackers (hey, we don't even need to aim anymore!), with machine guns possibly getting added bonuses in this regard. Using bombers en masse against a crowded SOD would be two steps away from a war crime.

Furthermore, if zones of control were re-introduced in some fashion, it would become sound for players to break up their stacks in order to exert more control over the countryside and stop a defender from harrying their stacks to death, which could be done by defending units acting as irregulars. Fortresses in particular should have this benefit, forcing the attacker to either bypass or neutralize them in order to prevent the defender from picking them apart. Numbers of broken-up SODs with lighter units acting as anti-skirmisher screens would be an ideal result, while the defender could use their homeland advantage to a more significant extent.
 
Cities would have more units possible, or bonuses.
And nothing stops the defender from defending in the field.

The lack of cultural [defense] bonuses tends to dissuade me from defending in the field.
 
Top Bottom