Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Harvestmoon, Jan 13, 2011.
and Civ 3 had it even more right with the whole stack dying when the city culture flipped
This is like the old SoD, except more powerful. Under the old SoD, the best defender was chosen for each attacker. Under your method, the attacker chooses (presumably the worst defender, or the unit they can just barely kill, or something of the sort).
This would be a complete disaster IMO, giving even more advantage to the attacker than exists in 1UPT.
@wurstburst: I beleive that is kinda the posters point. It makes stacks not very favourable for defense. Lean to split your troops up but with the added point below attack loses its advantage as well.
@HarvestMoon: More simply it only needs two points for simplicity. Choose defender in stack to attack makes stacks useless in defense (fairly rather that total destruction). Now to smooth it over only 1 unit per stack should be allowed to attack per turn. This makes stacks not great for attacking. Therefore using a stack for defense or attack is a bad tactic and its only there for easy manourability. No other changes are really required and its the simplist change to implement on Firaxis's part.
@bhavv: Civ2 was strategically broken. Entire stack kills versus unlimited attacks from a tile is an unbalanced mechanic. If attacks from a tile had been limited to one, then it would have been nearer to strategic combat balance.
Separate names with a comma.