This settler is blocking my path how?

[Lord Chambers]

I have a city on a tile, adjacent to the city is a foreign settler on a plains tile, and adjacent to this settler on the hex opposite the city is my worker with 2/2 moves at the start of his turn. The foreign settler stands between my worker and city on the only flat terrain.

As I understand it, my worker should be able to pass through the foreign settler and end its turn inside my city, as I have sufficient movement to do so. For some reason the game will not let me, and suggests a path through nearby forest that will take 3 turns to reach the city. Why?

 

[Maktaka]

When you hover over the tile, what is the terrain type? If it's marshes, that requires two move points to get through, which would stop you on the enemy civ's settler.

 

[Lord Chambers]

adjacent to the city is a foreign settler on a plains tile,

It's a plains tile.

 

[Ranos]

For whatever reason, non-combat units can't pass thru tiles occupied by foreign units of any kinds. I have no idea if it was intended or not but afaik, they haven't said a word about patching it.

 

[Callonia]

Part of reason why I refuse open borders. I'm usually forced to backstab the AI who I open borders with if his scout or settler is blocking me and turns is vital for reinforcements.

 

[glider1]

What about scouts blocking an attack? I had a situation where a friendly civ had open borders with my enemy. They parked a scout near the battle front I had while I was attacking my enemy. There was apparently nothing I could do get the scout away. The scout totally blocked my war effort because that square was critical to get units through. Is that another issue or just a minor issue? Even if that "friend" was working with my enemy to impede my war effort, how ridiculous is it, that one single scout can have such a huge effect? What am I missing in my logic?
Cheers

 

[NotSure]

This happens to me at least once in every game. I’ve had this screen and several others like it for a while and always intended to start a thread. I think the game would be better in many ways if there were less prohibitive movement rules. If you could stack at least one unit of the same type you could double worker production on important tiles, and attach ranged units to melee units, for example. This could really be a whole other topic, but I never play a game that I don’t see multiple circumstances where movement restrictions don’t frustrate me and harm AI performance.

Someday I would love to play a version of this game where ranged units promoted to ranged units and could stack with melee, great people did not count as any unit (they’re one person!), and workers could stack to at least two on a tile. That might be a little too much to ask for in this version of Civ, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect to move my worker two tiles away (through any other unit) without a 100 year delay in productivity.

http://i.imgur.com/cxIyb.jpg

 

[glider1]

Notsure, I share some reservations about movement rules with you. I could be deluded but I've come to the conclusion that the movement rules in Civ5 work only because players want them to work (we civfanatics have the underlying intention for the game to work). In actual reality, the movement rules as they are now, are completely broken in the sense that people that wanted to win the game could simply do that by working together to build unrealistic blocking lines against other players using a front line of scouts etc to impede attacks. If AI's can now read manuals and learn (as they apparently can with CivII), I think they would read the Civ5 manual and say huh?? They would play the game in such a way as to render it unworkable because they would have no intention to play "realistically" or with values of "sportsmanship". They would make all sorts of counter intuitive moves that exploit the move rules as they are now.

Just my opinion and I could be mistaken!
Cheers

 

[wobuffet]

The rules on stacking units from different Civs are very strict and don't seem very consistent. I once prevented Genghis Khan from taking over a CS I was Allied with by planting a Worker on only land tile adjacent to the city. After about 20 turns, his Keshiks called it a day and made peace.

 

[Ranos]

Notsure, I share some reservations about movement rules with you. I could be deluded but I've come to the conclusion that the movement rules in Civ5 work only because players want them to work (we civfanatics have the underlying intention for the game to work). In actual reality, the movement rules as they are now, are completely broken in the sense that people that wanted to win the game could simply do that by working together to build unrealistic blocking lines against other players using a front line of scouts etc to impede attacks. If AI's can now read manuals and learn (as they apparently can with CivII), I think they would read the Civ5 manual and say huh?? They would play the game in such a way as to render it unworkable because they would have no intention to play "realistically" or with values of "sportsmanship". They would make all sorts of counter intuitive moves that exploit the move rules as they are now.

Just my opinion and I could be mistaken!
Cheers

First, who would have the resources to produce multiple scouts just to park them in a spot to prevent one person attacking another? That is valuable production that could be used on much better things and valuable gold that could be used to purchase things or be the upkeep on a much more useful unit.

Second, the only way a single line of scouts could block movement would be if they were on an unbroken lline of forest/hills/jungle. Remember, all units have a minimum of 2 movement now so your combat units could just pass right thru that single scout. The onnly thing that would prevent would be the use of your GGs.

I do agree that having that one unit blocking your path or standing on the spot you want to build something on is a bit annoying, but not game breaking. If that happens I either wait patiently or try to go a different way.

It would be nice if there was a diplo option to ask another civ to move a unit. You would just have to enter the location and then they could refuse for a diplo hit or accept for a diplo bonus.

 

[glider1]

Eh Ranos
Yeah I agree with you mostly. It's just that we are thinking in an "agreeable" way about the movement rules in Civ5 that is my point. Future people or AI's might not do that. There are many possible ways to think outside of the square. You could park a few scouts near your neighbors city and prevent attacks from occurring on them or slow the attackers down to such an extent that the attack fails. In a sense you farm your neighbor so that no one can take them out until you are ready.

What about a simple rule change that would fix it? All military units from different civs can stack so long as they are not at war. The only time that stacking is not permited, is when the units are at war on each other. This makes simple sense. Two units at war with each other would not be trying to occupy the same tile unless they were fighting each other. It would produce pretty weird situations where you could have some units from various civs on the tile not at war, and some units on the tile that are at war......

This would simplify the path finding computations that the AI has to make and improve the quality of the AI just with that one change. It would get rid of all of these unanticipated side effects that we the players are not exploring because they are not very agreeable or nice, but are there never-the-less.

Cheers

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Eh Ranos
Yeah I agree with you mostly. It's just that we are thinking in an "agreeable" way about the movement rules in Civ5 that is my point. Future people or AI's might not do that. There are many possible ways to think outside of the square. You could park a few scouts near your neighbors city and prevent attacks from occurring on them or slow the attackers down to such an extent that the attack fails. In a sense you farm your neighbor so that no one can take them out until you are ready.

What about a simple rule change that would fix it? All military units from different civs can stack so long as they are not at war. The only time that stacking is not permited, is when the units are at war on each other. This makes simple sense. Two units at war with each other would not be trying to occupy the same tile unless they were fighting each other. It would produce pretty weird situations where you could have some units from various civs on the tile not at war, and some units on the tile that are at war......

This would simplify the path finding computations that the AI has to make and improve the quality of the AI just with that one change. It would get rid of all of these unanticipated side effects that we the players are not exploring because they are not very agreeable or nice, but are there never-the-less.

Cheers

The problem with that rule is "at war" changes.. what happens when 2 units are on the same tile, and one declares war on the other? (do they both get bumped, or only one of them, is there a duel to the death?)

It would be nice if the rules were Slightly more developed, ie
You can "bump" rival units if
1. It is in your territory (so my worker can bump your spear out of the way in my territory)
OR
2. in Neutral territory your combat units can bump non-combat units (so my spear can bump your worker out of the way in neutral territory)
OR
3. My combat units can bump weaker units that I am at peace with when I am in enemy territory. (my spear bumps your warrior when I am at war with the third party who's territory we are in.)

 

[Hustapha Thool]

I have certainly had blocks, and have quit a game twice over them, the first was a early in a game, there was very little space to expand and a foreign scout was behind my lines in the only spot I could expand to. The second was much worse, mid game, i had a trireme , maybe even a caravel who was on autopilot, the ship ended up in a city and I got the message that I must move it out of that occupied space. The problem was it did not have enough moves and it was blockaded. There was no way I could end the turn.

 

[glider1]

Krikitone love the ideas on bumping. It might actually be quite fun and add a bit more interest as well. I'm a bit concerned about bump rule 3. Does bumping expend a move point and what are the consequences of that?

The thing is that like HustaphaThool says, the oddities in the current rules are genuine and real. I've had a situation where an AI by accident parked a scout in a choke point and left it there. That one scout blocked my entire army from moving through the choke which dramatically altered what would have been a sensible strategy, all through one scout. Add a second or a third scout to this mix and you can turn the game into a farce.

Since the occasions are uncommon where many units would be stacked, I just go for an automatic duel if war is declared or a popup scheme. The first point is that only one military unit of each civ would be stacked and so an automatic duel would be easy to resolve. Perhaps a popup could display to let the player decide which unit will be attacked in the duel (likewise for the AI). Whatever is done, it will on occasions get a bit tricky unless we modders sort it out in an elegant way.

But it is just a tile or two we are talking about on the entire map. The issues that I see are:
1) If at peace units can stack, how frequent would these automatic duels be both in time and space (on the map).

2) How would you sort out the user interface to let the human know that there are multiple units on the one tile? If could be as simple as an extra graphical flag that highlights the fact and the actual details of what units are stacked are revealed with a mouse hover-over. But will there be a provision left to us by Fireaxis to add graphical features to the game through modding?


Cheers

 

[Superluminal]

If you declare war on China you can stone the Settlers to death with your coastal city Sippar.

 

[Ranos]

I have certainly had blocks, and have quit a game twice over them, the first was a early in a game, there was very little space to expand and a foreign scout was behind my lines in the only spot I could expand to. The second was much worse, mid game, i had a trireme , maybe even a caravel who was on autopilot, the ship ended up in a city and I got the message that I must move it out of that occupied space. The problem was it did not have enough moves and it was blockaded. There was no way I could end the turn.

In the first game, you could have just DoW on the civ with the scout then built your city after the scout was either destroyed or moved.

In the second game, you could have just deleted one of the boats in the city and ended your turn.

 

[Pep]

I have a city on a tile, adjacent to the city is a foreign settler on a plains tile, and adjacent to this settler on the hex opposite the city is my worker with 2/2 moves at the start of his turn. The foreign settler stands between my worker and city on the only flat terrain.

As I understand it, my worker should be able to pass through the foreign settler and end its turn inside my city, as I have sufficient movement to do so. For some reason the game will not let me, and suggests a path through nearby forest that will take 3 turns to reach the city. Why?

It's indeed a bug. It's been reported in the Confirmed Bugs subforum:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422094