What about Armies? (a la Civ3)

[Hesha]

1UPT seems to be one of the major issues for most unsatisfied players, so I thought a bit about the problem. Wouldn't it be a neat feature to reinstall the armies we know from Civ3 in a modernized form? The standard size was 3 but it went up to 4 or 5 units with wonders, if I remember correctly.
Features of an army:
1.) armies need a great general to be founded (its easier in CiV to get them than it was in Civ3)
2.) The units could keep their individual abilities
3.) every unit added to the army would provide +1 movement (2 have 3 moves, 3 have 4, 4 have 5,...)
4.) armies can move after attacking
5.) every unit in the army can attack independently, but will not move after defeating an enemy
6.) when attacked the most formidable (by terrain, unit type, health, etc.) unit in the army will defend (pikemen against horsies, etc.)

I can change this list, if you make suggestions. On the other hand I'm not sure if something like this would be possible...

 

[Creepy Old Man]

Given as you pointed out, the ready availability of generals in CiV, there would be a large number of armies. Enough, probably, that instead of wars being fought between half a dozen units on each side, they would be fought between half a dozen armies.

Since the AI has no ability to protect wounded units, by the end of the game, the player would have several armies that could wade unopposed through the AI's carpet of non-army spam. While this may be fun initially (I admit, I like having unstoppable units), I think it would ruin the game even further.

Maybe your idea could be revisited once the AI is improved.

 

[Shadow717]

The problem I think would arise is the same that would come up in Civ3, AI incapable of using armies, leading the player to having a massive advantage. If I recall correctly some of the Conquests senarios even started you with an army. The AI, being uncapable of deciding what would be best to put it in, would just throw in the first three units it came into contact with resulting in poor combinations like 2 spearman and maybe a warrior, or a swordsman if they got lucky.

 

[Solo4114]

This also wouldn't resolve the traffic jam issues, or the myriad other design decisions that exist to support 1UPT.

You still would have slow production of everything.

You still would have limited strategic resources.

You still would have no ARMY being able to occupy the same tile as any other combat unit.


And so on, and so forth.



I tried playing with the "Legions" mod last night, which basically removes any limits on how many units can occupy a space. It helped with some of the traffic jam issues, but the game was still boring.

 

[Ddude97]

1UPT seems to be one of the major issues for most unsatisfied players, so I thought a bit about the problem. Wouldn't it be a neat feature to reinstall the armies we know from Civ3 in a modernized form? The standard size was 3 but it went up to 4 or 5 units with wonders, if I remember correctly.
Features of an army:
1.) armies need a great general to be founded (its easier in CiV to get them than it was in Civ3)
2.) The units could keep their individual abilities
3.) every unit added to the army would provide +1 movement (2 have 3 moves, 3 have 4, 4 have 5,...)
4.) armies can move after attacking
5.) every unit in the army can attack independently, but will not move after defeating an enemy
6.) when attacked the most formidable (by terrain, unit type, health, etc.) unit in the army will defend (pikemen against horsies, etc.)

I can change this list, if you make suggestions. On the other hand I'm not sure if something like this would be possible...

Is this what you remember fomr civ 3 or what you think would work in 5? Cuz some of these things were not true about civ 3 armies (at least in vanillla don't remeber conquests)

 

[Hesha]

No no, that list of features is meant for CiV, not what I remember from Civ3...

You still would have slow production of everything.

Yeah, but that's a cause of the 1UPT (some claim)... And I could buy/build way more units than I usually need for my wars, so I see no problem there...

You still would have limited strategic resources.

That's no real bottleneck... in early game everybody offers their's as long as everyone is friends, you can use those first and save your own til later (if I perceived it correctly you automatically use ressources from trades first)

You still would have no ARMY being able to occupy the same tile as any other combat unit.

True. But I don't need an unlimited number of units per tile, I want more than one or two. So this would be good enough.
Units could only enter/leave armies in friendly territory (i.e. yours, friendly CSs and open borders)


And I never said this would make it a good game- My plan was to ease the pain.

 

[tomplum68]

I dont really see 1upt as a problem that needs tweeking...

Its a game mechanic, work around it and find ways to manipulate it into your favor

 

[timmey_o_tool]

I had the same idea but with a slightly different implementation.

1-Armies could be formed out of x-units, maybe 5.
2-Armies can only attack once per turn
3-Once the equivalent of an unit in the army is killed, it cannot be healed, it must be supplied with fresh guys
4-Normal units are now like some supply for the greater armies. They can attack, but are weak against armies and can be added to a wounded army. So you need backup. (this is a feature requested by many fans)
5-Units can stack, but not with armies. If the top unit (best defender) of the stack is killed, the whole stack is killed.
6-You can build armies, you don't need great generals for it
7-You would need higher unit production as they are eaten up by the armies

This would probably adress a lot of the cited "issues"

This also wouldn't resolve the traffic jam issues, or the myriad other design decisions that exist to support 1UPT.

You still would have slow production of everything.

You still would have limited strategic resources.

You still would have no ARMY being able to occupy the same tile as any other combat unit.


And so on, and so forth.



I tried playing with the "Legions" mod last night, which basically removes any limits on how many units can occupy a space. It helped with some of the traffic jam issues, but the game was still boring.

 

[bryanw1995]

Is this what you remember fomr civ 3 or what you think would work in 5? Cuz some of these things were not true about civ 3 armies (at least in vanillla don't remeber conquests)

in conquests they significantly beefed up armies.
1. zoc-free potshot at a unit moving from one adjacent square to another
2. move after attack
3. blitz
4. +1 attack and def power per 6 total points. ie, 3 knights are 12 total points on attack so get +2 to attack, but only 9 pts on defense so get +1 on defense, making them a 6 attack/ 4 defense complete juggernaut that the ai won't attack.
5. +1 move, based upon slowest unit in the stack.

so that hypothetical knight army would be 6/4/3, with all 3 moves available to attack. and the civ3 ai wouldn't attack an army unless it was nearly dead b/c they were programmed to not suicide attack you (much like the newly improved ai in civ5). that is usually a good move, but against an army it was the only way to kill it most of the time. the same thing would happen with a hypothetical civ5 army as well unless the ai was tweaked to auto-attack any army they could find. not to mention that with 1upt an army would be a LOT more powerful in civ5 even than it was in civ3. as much as I like the concept, I think that it would work much better in civ4 than in civ5.

 

[SpearMan153]

ahh civ3 armies so much fun... liking 1upt at the moment (although it does have its issues) so don't really want to change for civ5. Maybe for civ6...

if going for a stacking with armies system I'd make it that if you stack units the stack becomes like a civ3 army without needing a GG and you could take units in/out as wanted.

 

[Callonia]

I remember armies from civ 3, It can has one unit at minimum and five at maximum I think.

And, The speed of the army unit is determined by the slowest unit it has, meaning if it had three horsemen and one spearman it only can move at spearman's speed not horsemen.

Other problem is that, Ai refuses to suicide attack armies cuz that's only way to reduce army's health besides from indirect attacks unless the AI had its own army too and its also surprisngly powerful one at that, it will might attack my army unit.

 

[Polycrates]

While I thought Civ 3 armies were a great idea, and that it was a shame they weren't in Civ IV (Civ IV's great generals were pretty awful), I'm not sure they really fit Civ V. Essentially they were a way to empower a group of units provided they stuck together (with a bit of added risk); I think the current Great General bonus does pretty much the same thing extremely well within the Civ V combat system.

 

[cman2010]

I think it would be great if they implimented this in a expo, I like the idea of this especialy since citys are harder to take now might help with the citys that only have small passageways open to them people are complaining about.

 

[filli_noctus]

Interesting idea, I like 1upt but this has given me some inspiration.
These are only ideas I jotted down in ten minutes and it is quite a long list so there would almost certainly be balance issues, but here's my take on the idea:
1. Armies are formed by a GG, a unit that is stopped on a tile occupied by a GG is given the option to join the army, units that are ordered (not end a move due to pathfinding) to a tile with an army automatically join if there is still space. Spawn rate of GGs decreased and they lose the combat bonus.

2. A GG can only command a certain number of units. This can be increased by wonders such as the Pentagon, or promotions. Additional GG's can be added to the army to increase maximum size.

3. An army cannot perform any actions in the turn a unit joins, however multiple units can join in a single turn and there is no action penalty when a unit leaves.

4. Armies can only attack cities and other armies.

5. If an army moves into a tile containing an individual enemy unit, the enemy retreats. If the army contains any units with a higher movement rating than the enemy ONE of those units can be tasked to pursue it. The pursuing unit leaves the army and attacks in the tile the enemy retreated to. If the pursuer does not eliminate the enemy it is on the tile of the army but is not a part of it.

6. Instead of attacking an army, single units instead 'harass' it. A harassing unit selects a single unit in the army and attacks normally. The defender is automatically given fortification and flanking bonuses. If the harasser wins but the defender is not destroyed, the defender is pulled out of formation (stacked with the army, but not part of it).

7. Units stacked on an army due to points 5 or 6 must join the army (causing the army to give up that turns movement) or either the unit or army must move away.

8. This point describes armies attacking each other or cities, there are two ways to do this:
a) Combat is carried out on a tactical map, in a similar way to the Total War series (as I understand it) - probably outside the scope of the current game
b) Combat is calculated by the computer with no player input, possibly animated similar to Call to Power

9. Armies move at the speed of the slowest unit (can be increased by promotions)

10. Armies can gain promotions, these are given to the GG who originally founded the army. If the army is disbanded the next army founded by the GG has the same promotions

11. Battles between individual units considered 'skirmishes' and are not affected (except GGs can no longer help)

Just a few ideas, probably outside the scope of patches or modding (without the source) but could be doable in an expansion or once the source is released.

 

[TM Moot]

5-Units can stack, but not with armies. If the top unit (best defender) of the stack is killed, the whole stack is killed.

This, x 100.

 

[Selous]

Units can stack, but not with armies. If the top unit (best defender) of the stack is killed, the whole stack is killed.

this x 1000
i would like to see unlimited stacking, but death to stack if defender loses

 

[bryanw1995]

it would be fun, but there's no way that they ai could handle it (or any other civ series ai btw). that's why they took that feature out for c3 and cIV.