1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

What is the solution to 1UpT?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by TheMarshmallowBear, Sep 21, 2011.

  1. TheMarshmallowBear

    TheMarshmallowBear Benelovent Chieftain of the BearKingdom

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7,641
    Location:
    Inside an Ikanda.
    My personal view : I truly hated the Stacks of Doom in previous Civ Games, I never wanted to spend 100 turns building up a army to take out enemy units and cities, I mean even the barbarians had stacks.

    In CiV I was more finally able to go be the warmonger and not worry that I will always lose, so I am for 1UpT.

    But I've read and read that everyone hates, and I can understand why, being used to stacking for Four games and several eps. But maybe there is a solution to satisfy both sides?

    Do you think people would be satisified if in game options you could toggle between 1UpT and Stacks Allowed?

    How about if the whole system was re-done, and maybe done like in Total War? with Armies? You could have units divided into several gropus within the army (long-distance, defensive, offensive) etc? I think that could work and would limit the amount of units in a stack but still allow it.
     
  2. forty2j

    forty2j King

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2010
    Messages:
    735
    Location:
    NJ
    Personally, I think they simply need to loosen the rule for non-combat units, allow pass-through of units of other friendly civs, and provide a shortcut to identify a "formation" and move that formation to a "muster point". The hardest part of 1UPT for me is giving an order to move someone to a spot halfway across the world, and 2 turns later he forgets that order because some other unit crossed in to his eventual landing spot.
     
  3. OrangeNinja

    OrangeNinja Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    19
    Then you forgot where you wanted him to go and it messes your whole start. -.-

    I'd really like a ranged + melee unit at the same tile. Maybe even 2 melee and let the whole 3 die if they're out of hp.
     
  4. TheMarshmallowBear

    TheMarshmallowBear Benelovent Chieftain of the BearKingdom

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7,641
    Location:
    Inside an Ikanda.
    I agree, non combant units + Scouts should be able to cross over other units.
     
  5. chazzycat

    chazzycat Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,917
    I like 1UPT in general, and am also not a big fan of stack of doom. I think a hybrid solution is unlikely, since 1UPT is such a big part of the balancing picture, many things would have to be re-thought if any stacking was allowed, and it would end up being a different game.

    I also agree with forty2j in that they can improve a couple aspects of 1UPT without altering the system too much. Not being able to have a worker & great general in the same hex, for instance, is pretty silly. I can see how not stacking workers is part of the balance, but there's no reason why a great person can't share a tile with a worker.

    Group commands would be cool, although I don't have this problem to the same extent. Generally it's better to give a new command each turn anyway, rather than set a waypoint on the other side of the world.
     
  6. TheMarshmallowBear

    TheMarshmallowBear Benelovent Chieftain of the BearKingdom

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7,641
    Location:
    Inside an Ikanda.
    Maybe Units can stack but need to be the only unit on the tile to attack, I really hate wasting a turn to seige a city because there is a mountain in my way but a unit is free to attack, and I have to choose between attack or move to get the other unit.
     
  7. CoolLizy

    CoolLizy King

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2001
    Messages:
    631
    Location:
    Kentucky
    1upt is not the problem. It's the solution.

    Honestly, I think the system is more in need of tweaks than it is a complete overhaul.

    While it's annoying when it happens, I prefer that it stay that way. Because of the tactical nature of combat in Civ V, you need to actually plan your assault so that units aren't tripping over each other instead of just jamming more things into place. It forces the player to make an actual decision beyond "Attack! Attack! Attack!"
     
  8. Yngvi

    Yngvi Chevalier du Tastevin

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    172
    Location:
    Frogtown, USA
    Three easy steps, without violating the spirit of 1upt:

    1. Allow 2 units on one square, but only one can act. If these are combat units, and (the stronger) one is attacked and destroyed, both are.
    2. A variation of this on the sea: one embarked unit and one naval unit. It is too easy to destroy embarked units otherwise. (I say this for the AI's sake, not my own.) If the ship is destroyed, so is the embarked unit. This would help to give navies a greater role in this game.
    3. If you have open borders with a civ, one of yours can stack on one of theirs. If both of you are at war with another civ, defending is like point 1. If only one is, that one can still be attacked without affecting the other unit (except nukes).
     
  9. GoodSarmatian

    GoodSarmatian Jokerfied Western Male

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2006
    Messages:
    9,408
    Gender:
    Male
    No solution needed.
    There are very few positive changes from Civ4 to Civ5, and 1UPT is one of them.
     
  10. Rince

    Rince King

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2002
    Messages:
    673
    Location:
    In your city, poisoning your water!
    Any stacking capabilities (even limited like 1 melee + 1 ranged) would lower the tactical depth of combat.

    That being said, the system could be made much simpler while still keeping the requirement that there can be only 1 upt at the end of the turn.

    Another possiblity: Have a "mobilization" mode for units during which they can stack but not take part in combat. At the destination the units in the stack can "deploy" one-by-one into free hexes surrounding the stack, respecting 1 upt. This would make for easy transport but would still not lead to stacks of death as they could not attack anyway.
     
  11. LegionSteve

    LegionSteve Motörhead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,127
    Location:
    England
    I don't have a problem with stacks. I wouldn't have a problem with 1upt either if it were implemented slightly better.

    I still wouldn't allow stacking of military units at all.

    I would allow unlimited stacking of civilian units, to reduce tedious worker micromanagement. They could keep the restriction that only one worker can build something on a hex, but let others move onto that hex.

    Opponents' units should not block my civilian units unless we are at war - at the moment I refuse all open borders request because the AI's carpet of poo flooding across my land is too annoying.

    Someone suggested one navy unit and one embarked unit be allowed to share a hex, that's a good idea, might even help the AI slightly.

    Apart from that it just needs a much better interface. I can't believe they still haven't added the ability to click a unit which already has move orders and see where it is going. Epic fail firaxis.
     
  12. The_Quasar

    The_Quasar King

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    862
    I agree that there is nothing wrong with 1upt, after all, it's worked well for chess for a long time!

    Stacks are wrong, period. To revert to stacks, of any sort, is to regress.

    However, I agree that there is a lot more work to be done on 1upt... it is much better now, but it still has a long way to go to maximise it's potential.

    I hope Fraxis persist with 1upt into the future, and develop it more and more into Civ6 and Civ7. Each time it's tweeked, it gets better, and I believe that it is likely to continue to do so.
     
  13. Xiao Xiong

    Xiao Xiong Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2009
    Messages:
    480
    1UPT is OK but there are some tweaks to it that have been suggested here that would make it better:

    1. Ability to order units around as a group, maybe have them follow a great general, so you can move a whole mass of them roughly where you want them, and then organize them to suit once they're closing in on their target.

    2. More intelligence from the units on what to do if another unit gets in their way

    3. Ability of units to "pass through" each other so long as they end the turn on separate tiles (so temporary stacking, then you would be forced to move one by end of turn)

    And generally with unit movement:

    4. If I click a destination tile I should have some way to see the route that is going to be taken. Too often I don't realize there are a few other units in the way, and my unit starts going backwards, in search of a route through the fog.

    I think 1UPT is a good idea, but I think some improvements could be made to make it a little less tedious moving units around.

    My biggest problem with 1UPT is that the AI is so bad at it. A successful attack on a city requires a sudden swarm and co-ordinated bombardment/strike. The AI sometimes does that. But sometimes it throws a pathetic number of units at a well defended position in some sort of ridiculous suicide attack.
     
  14. Becephalus

    Becephalus King

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    725
    1upt is much better. I don't think "But I've read and read that everyone hates" is true.

    Some portion hates, another portions likes. Personally I find 1upt much easy to use and more sensible than stacks.
     
  15. Sefren

    Sefren Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    20
    Maybe have road, rail and water hexes have 3 units per tile.
     
  16. KrikkitTwo

    KrikkitTwo Immortal

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    12,358
    A solution would be to eliminate what made the Stack of Doom so powerful, Defeat in Detail.


    1 Stack of 2 Swords v. 2 individual Swords..... which wins? the Stack of 2 Swords

    Primarily due to unit healing. (RockPaperScissors unit types also makes a Stack more powerful)

    My solution would be to eliminat unit healing, instead every unit is a "stack".... ie
    1 Stack of 20 Swords v. 1 Stack of 10 is a Single Combat.... in which both the Winner+loser lose some Swords and Never recover them. (unless they rebuild them and add them to the stack) So you only have Dead "units" no "damaged units"
     
  17. MkLh

    MkLh King

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    905
    Location:
    Finland
    1UPT itself is fine. I don't think any compromise between SoD and 1UPT would work. The problem is that the UI isn't sophisticated enough to handle 1UPT when the number of troops grow. One simple improvement would be allowing to put captions on tiles like in Civ4. Even that simple addition would help moving large armies as one would remember which tile he has sent an unit already.
     
  18. JamesCivFan

    JamesCivFan King

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Messages:
    604
    Location:
    Greece
    I suggested that solution in the past as well. Having limited stacks is the way to go. It will make the AI better in combat too, considering that its Great Persons and ranged units will be under protection , so it will seem like it's playing better.

    After all, the AI is far better in handling stacks, than analyzing and calculating lots of info regarding what to do next (combat wise) in 1UPT. There should be flanking bonuses for "armies next to each other" and everything like that, and at the same time we would avoid both Stacks of Doom and Carpets of Doom. Not to mention traffic jams.
     
  19. glider1

    glider1 Deity

    Joined:
    May 29, 2006
    Messages:
    2,897
    Location:
    Where animals hop not run
    :goodjob:

    In order to keep the conversation on Xupt civil and friendly, we have no arguments on Xupt because we must remember that the day will come when civ will be 0upt and everyone will be happy. Tiles are an arbitrary mechanic. All units, buildings and cities can be controlled by vector maths. We should be able to place buildings anywhere we like on the map relative to the city center. Units should be able to move to any point so long as their area boundary does not intersect. This was already done in Rise of Nations many years ago and it was great. Once it is done, civ will be awesome because we will be able to build creative cities that have interesting possibilities for defenses and economy, and we will be able to place units much more flexibly. We have to wait until standard PC motherboards come in multiples of 32 processors and finally the world operating system hegemony Microshifty write an operating system that makes adding processors as simple as adding ram and just as cheap.

    Cheers
     
  20. Psyringe

    Psyringe Scout

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,394
    Location:
    Berlin, Germany
    For me, the solution to 1upt is to remove this limitation. The advantages of 1upt (no stack of death) can be achieved much better by other means (combat rules that take stack composition into account, adding logistics as a passive game mechanic that prevents stacks from getting too large, etc.). 1upt is probably the worst way of addressing these issues since it breaks the AI, doesn't match at all with the scale of the map, and turns even simple actions like building a road (or moving a group of units) into micromanagement hell.

    Asking for a solution to 1upt is like asking for a solution to tuberculosis. It's easy: make it go away.
     

Share This Page