This is not strategy game

[Dun Malg]

But with one thing I can not agree, that you can't satisfy casual players and hardcore ones at the same time. The rules can be simple and the game still may be demanding. Easy to learn, easy to beat on low levels, but demanding on higher difficulties...

Oh, I totally agree it's possible...

But maybe we are so small group that caring about us is not worhty any hour of work...

...but that's why it probably won't happen. There's no money in it. Unfortunately, the future is probably games more like Candy Crush than Civ IV.

 

[Fippy]

Yep, just as detailed by Sulla in his critique. Even Jon Shafer, the designer whose idea it was to implement 1UPT in an attempt to emulate the tactical combat model of Panzer General, admits it was a bad decision. He details this and concedes other errors, both resulting from trying to balance 1UPT and just bad decision making

..aaaand this should end that discussion, but naturally 1upt "fans" will come back, and back..and back....

P.S. game sells well cos *everything* with a famous name sells well these days.
Until you start considering how many peoples are online now, compared to back then.
That would put your % down again, and it's not all that great anymore.

 

[bladex]

agreed it's a war SIM

 

[KrikkitTwo]

The game is definitely too tactical.

The best way to solve it is with 1upt+SOD+air mechanics, ie 1 SOD = 1 unit, so my stack attacks your stack in 1 attack (not 20 atracks because I have 20 units in my stack)
Then add the "intercept"mechanic to all units...my fleet is based in my city, but it auto intercepts any enemy fleet/landing in X range.

 

[kornelm1978]

You invested in a district rather than military or expansion? And decided to build the one for faith/religion rather than science (or military/culture if you built elsewhere)? And you went on to research machinery rather than the middle (or top) paths of the tech tree?

Those sound like the sorts of decisions that are typical of a civ game....

Yes, and they are important but just in the begining. In later game it doesnt really matter what you build as the bonus gained is less value adding. So I can even agree, you make decisions in the beginnin while in later game the significanc of them is really not that important.

 

[kornelm1978]

I've seen Sulla's stuff, he's opinion exactly (he is quoting someone else but is saying it reflects his views closely) is where most of us are. Good start and a better start than civ5. Some bad stuff that he can't figure out how it got missed in testing. Frustrating UI. Confident it will get better.

I saw one video of Sulla for reference. He generally likes the game, but during the vid he says several times about 1upt stupidity design.

 

[Kimurae]

The game is definitely too tactical.

The best way to solve it is with 1upt+SOD+air mechanics, ie 1 SOD = 1 unit, so my stack attacks your stack in 1 attack (not 20 atracks because I have 20 units in my stack)
Then add the "intercept"mechanic to all units...my fleet is based in my city, but it auto intercepts any enemy fleet/landing in X range.

Or instead of a SOD or a common unit, you have 1 unit that has a size attribute, size is based on population you allocate or mercenaries you hire.

 

[Usama84]

Please tell me how deathstack spam promoted strategy in any way. 1upt is one of their best improvements ever

doesnt make sense why I cant stack my units in one tile... MAKES NO SENSE AT ALL, lol

 

[Usama84]

why do I need to spread out my units out so far away, so when the city gets attacked, I have to waste time bringing them to the battle

 

[van der Knivet]

The middleground solution to 1upt vs SoD already exists on the Civ Franchise. It's the way it worked on Civ II.

- No limits on stacking units.
- Killing a unit on a stack outside cities and forts kills the whole stack.
- Zone of Control that really worked as such (there is no way for an unit to go from a ZoC tile to another ZoC tile).

There is it. Done. You can stack whatever you want - extremely useful in peacetime and supply lines. But there is a real incentive to use 1upt on the frontline, thus generating strategic thinking. Also, this makes you have some possibilities, like defending your wounded unit with a healthy one, etc.

 

[Emi999]

I love how Endless Legend implemented the system: when moving on the map, a stack of 4 units (6 with proper techs) can be used but, when on battle, the map shifts in "battle mode" where stacks get unpacked and you have 1 unit per tile.
Too bad I stopped playing that game due to thr bad AI... To get this

 

[g0mer]

Honestly, this isn't a game of intense military strategy... Total War is better at that. Most of the strategy in Civ is more about your empire and less about the military, and that should have been pretty apparent if you did a little homework before spending the money. In this case it sounds like the remorse should be your own if anything, and not the fault of the game.

And strategy is pretty analogous to solving a puzzle. I'm not sure how you logically separate the two.

 

[Emi999]

I actually have no remorse and 1upt is just fine for me. I was just saying that there are examples of "middle ground" between SoD and 1upt. My only complains with civ6 are about diplomacy and AI. Hopefully they will be fixed my the devs/commimities in the next months/years

 

[Wintervoid]

It has been a long time since I played CIV but the reason I was happy to see SOD go away was because it felt like SOD took away some of the diversity in combat. As I remember it (And I may misremember) it was generally best to have one massive stack that would destroy everything in it's path. It often did not make a lot of sense to split your forces. I felt like I had one big Sledgehammer, and I would swing until I encountered a bigger Sledgehammer or a wall I couldn't break through. Now, I vaguely remember it being more complicated then that, as far as SOD composition, Flanking, Air power etc, but the general feel was one big Sledgehammer.

Another big difference was having Rail that would let you travel anywhere on the may with your SOD. Now I have to actually have some defensive forces instead of just relying on my SOD to be my quick reaction force anywhere on the continent.
I actually think that the SOD was more 'realistic' but the game play was not as interesting to me.

Again, I fully admit that it has been a LONG time since I played CIV, but I do remember being pretty happy w/ 1upt when I started playing CiV. Maybe it was just shiny and new at the time, but my memory of CIV was wielding a Sledgehammer

 

[Horizons]

Call to Power had the right idea for combined stacks and armies. When will Sid swallow his pride and admit someone else had a good idea?

 

[ThunderLizard2]

People who revert to mentioning the SoD don't really remember how civ4 played.
SoD = Stack of Doom
def: A stack that is unbeatable. A stack that can go around and conquer everything unchallenged

This is not accurate about SoD. They are more like the Oliphants in LOTR that you have to react to quickly to take down - usually with copious catapults or cannons. Often times they'd take out a border city but then run out of steam. It made for an adrenaline shot when they showed up on your border to reek havoc.

You also typically get warned/threatened by the AI in advance so it's a strategic choice whether to give away money or a tech or be prepared to take on a potential SoD.

Even Jon Shafer, the designer whose idea it was to implement 1UPT in an attempt to emulate the tactical combat model of Panzer General, admits it was a bad decision

Jon recanted 1UPT 4 years ago (although he's still trying to finish his At The Gates). Why didn't Firaxis/2K take heed?

 

[Karmah]

It s a bowling simulator ! it has been already established quite some time ago !