Upt?

[zatarra09]

Maybe Infinite Stacks arent the best method (i.e. stacks of doom)

But is cutting back to 1 Unit per tile the best solution? or would something in between work better?

 

[nokmirt]

If the game is using tactical strategy, hexes are the way to go. Think of the Avalon Hill tactical wargames of the 80's (keep in mind not all were one unit per tile, one example was a game called War and Peace, a Napoleonic simulation between 1805-1815). The only problem is that the AI needs alot of improvement. They should add supply, attrition, flanking attacks (attacking a unit from a behind or in the flank), rout, and pursuit rules. Let's make the game more complicated, smarten it up a bit.

It is funny the designers have added hexes and 1UPT but have never played a tactical wargame in their life, except for perhaps Panzer General (if they were lucky).

 

[BjoernLars]

I was actually thinking about this the other day, and I think two military units for the same tile would be most apt. The consequences that if a battle is lost, both units are lost.

Since battles are forced to resolved in one attack, the reason that both units are wiped out in one go would be due to such excessive force, i.e. a tank versus a spearman and an archer, or that both units are so damaged, it would be quite acceptable for both units to be wiped out in the event of a loss.

I think this would make combat more interesting and maneuvering units less burdomsome.

 

[Camikaze]

Poll doesn't have sufficient options.

Unlimited stacking is by no means a return to stacks of doom, yet there is no option for it.

The 2nd, 3rd and 4th options could've just been summarised as 'xUPT, where x is some arbitrary number'. For that's what such a limit would be. Arbitrary.

 

[HedBanger]

They should add supply, attrition, flanking attacks (attacking a unit from a behind or in the flank), rout, and pursuit rules. Let's make the game more complicated, smarten it up a bit.

If Firaxis or some modders come up with these rules I would be pretty excited to try them out! Although I like 1 UPT (even though I think the AI needs MAJOR improvements) I remember that I used to limit my stacks to about 10 in CIV with a mod.

 

[Onionsoilder]

1 UPT works great - it's just that the AI can't fathom how it works correctly.

 

[PEACE!]

i would defenitly go for this combination:
staking only melee + range

that way the ranged won't be exposed to frequent atacks anymore...and u won't be able to form those silly flanking bonuses with archers/other ranged units
meh.. just my thought

 

[WimpyTheWarrior]

I would love to see certain Techs unlock more UPT, like 2UPT at start, Military Tech gives 3UPT, etc.

 

[Tee Kay]

Unlimited stacking, but with greater diversity and flexibility in units than in Civ4.

 

[Tokira]

I voted for 1UPT as in my opinion it would be the best option of these if the AI could handle it. I noticed that I really like the 1UPT after I reinstalled civ4 and played it for a while. The wars seemed so boring with huge stacks of units and didn't require much tactics. I just like the tactical gameplay that the 1UPT brings to the game, though with the current AI 2-3 UPT would possibly be a better solution

 

[NukeEm]

I think 1upt is perfect. Though, there is a part of me that would like to be able to attach support units for bonuses or other things. Like in early game, priests, shamans, war chiefs for bonuses to the units for different battle situations. In more advanced eras you could add special commanders or equipment to change the role of a unit... Like say heavy guns for digging in, or combining a medic to create a medic unit to heal each turn, but it would deny certain promotions that would benefit the unit on offense. I like the idea of molding generic units into more specialized units so that units in your army have different purposes. But there would be the benefit of diversity in promotions if you stuck with a generic unit with no enhancements.

 

[aziantuntija]

Think your poll is a bit weird.

It should propably go like this:

1 UPT is perfect

2-3 UPT is perfect

4-6 UPT is perfect

6-10 UPT is perfect

Just ranged and Melee on the same tile, its perfect

Stacks of DOOM are perfect!

OR like this:

1 UPT

2-3 UPT

4-6 UPT

6-10 UPT

Just ranged and Melee on the same tile

Stacks of DOOM!

So imo, you are forcing people who like 1upt to say that 1upt is perfect or otherwise they should vote something else. Thats a biased poll.

EDIT: I like 1upt but im NOT going to vote that it is perfect.

 

[LDiCesare]

I votedd 6-10 but I'd actually say 12. Call to Power had the best combat system in the series, and is 12 units per stack.

 

[Montov]

A xUPT system is adding way more micromanaging, because only 1 unit on a tile would not be optimal. You would always need x units, but you have multiple (times x) downsides of 1UPT: transporting in a limited battlefield, changing formation, etc.

But a xUPT also introduces the downsides of the stacks: the awkward attacking/defending rules (that could fill a whole topic on its own), less tactics in fighting and so on.

In fact, civ5 had a pretty good implementation of 1UPT (besides the intelligence of the AI): units can survive a losing battle (encapsulating a good aspect of stacks) and promotions that encourage specilization (more then the Combat I-VI in civ4). But promotions could be better (like, more 'smaller' promotions to further specialize)

Allowing melee and ranged units on the same tile would be the worst option, because the whole point of ranged attacks is that they are vulnerable in direct combat, but can do damage without losing health. Always having a strong melee unit to counter that effect would completely ruin the balance.

 

[JLoZeppeli]

I prefer the ArmyPT, building armies lead by generals with a tactical hex map, where fight the battle, that pops up when needed.... No stack of doom, no 1UPT, they are stupid design choices for monkeys...

Get rid of these wargaming-driven features can give a boost to the gameplay.

 

[PEACE!]

let's not forget that this game IS turn by turn,and not real time...

 

[vincentz]

9
xxx
xxx
xxx

or 16
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx

I like stacks (for epic battles and realism) but while on the right path in civ4 it wasnt implemented good enough. While stacks it was still 1 vs 1 battles. It also lacked certain tactics (some of these come into my mind), as the only option more or less was to "move to enemy tile" like in civ1. Its scary that Firaxis almost hasnt evolved combat in civ in 20 years and Civ 5 certainly doesnt seem "new thinking" with its 1 UPT.
Having seen Waterloo yesterday http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterloo_%28film%29 it just seems all wrong with 1UPT in a Civ game, and I really really really hope that civ 6 is not 1UPT. That alone would make me not want to buy the game.

I also wish, that instead of just programmers, codemakers and graphic artists, they would actually come up with a team that LOVE history, and try to implement things, not for their popcultural effects, but from a perspective were it made historical sense. (in other words I would hope a 50+ year old "wiseman" would oversee rather than a 26 year old "kid") I think the franchise has earned enough money to hire consultants in different fields : diplomacy, battlefield tactics, "empire" management etc.

 

[markantony]

1upt is stupid. The game is strategic, not tactical. A battle between four spearmen, three cavalry and four archers should not take up half a continent.

There were many things that could have been done to limit stacks, but Firaxis wanted to make the game appeal to a "wider audience" so they took the easy option and dumbed the game down, rather than increase the complexity.

SoDs could have inccurred a penalty in food, commerce and production to reflect the costs of having an army in the field. For smaller empires this would be a major balancing act.
Stacks should gradually degrade the tiles they are on, reflecting the army forageing.
They should also incurr a movement penalty.
Healing of units should cost money and resources.
All of these penalties should increase as the stack gets larger.

Considering these options seems to have been beyond the capabilities of Firaxis imaginary new target market.

 

[LDiCesare]

But a xUPT also introduces the downsides of the stacks: the awkward attacking/defending rules (that could fill a whole topic on its own), less tactics in fighting and so on.

You should really look up Call to Power. Battles were auto resolved with a system combining mixed arms (melee/ranged/flanking).

 

[JLoZeppeli]

let's not forget that this game IS turn by turn,and not real time...

It's quite possible that you have not ever played Call to Power and Imperialism, i was speaking in TBS terms....

When the armies clash, then pops out an hex map where you play your battle or leave it to the AI resolution (so even warmongers can play their tactical wargame, ife they want)....