I feel there is imprecision here. Too often 1UPT is contrasted with SoD as if Civs 5+ have strict 1UPT. They don't. Civ 6 had stacks, Civ 5 had stacks and Civ 7 has them (for logistics) is my understanding.
I'm aware that 1UPT allows some unit stacking to varying degrees. My view is that the "limited" stacking of 1UPT is ineffective, in terms of eliminating the effects I dislike... the "sliding puzzle" effect being one example, the eyesore of unit-spam occupying every tile of the map being another.
Civ 4 had absurd level of stacks, proverbial "stacks of doom"
"Absurd" is subjective. I didn't find the SoD absurd at all. I think it matched much better with the abstract nature of Civ. 1UPT "limited" stacking, and the unit-spam/sliding puzzle problems it produces are what I find absurd and off-putting.
One can still stack warplanes in Civ 5 and some other things to get decisive advantage. But not all things and the kitchen sink to throw at your enemy with a single roll of dice.
But of course this is not how Civ4 combat worked. There was generally no "throwing all things and the kitchen sink at your enemy with a single roll of the dice". You could, if you wanted to,
aesthetically/temporally resolve combat by moving the entire stack to attack "simultaneously" in one click, but that would only make it
appear to resolve the combat in one move. What was actually happening, is that the RNG was conducting dozens of rolls, automatically, one for every single unit's combat, in succession, that would play out in a split second (or sometimes for really large stacks, a couple seconds). Of course this was a far sub-optimal way to play, and folks would only do this if they were rushing and the combat was going to be relatively easy/straightforward... or they had no idea what the optimal order of attack was and they wanted to just let the computer handle deciding based on highest odds attacker v. highest odds defender (or whatever the system was, I forget).
What players would really typically do, is painstakingly conduct each combat manually, one unit in the stack at a time, to optimize the effectiveness of the attack, first with sea/air bombardment, followed by artillery/siege, followed by ground assault, all carefully chosen to optimize the result, by weakening certain defenders, sacrificing certain units, maximizing defense against counter-attack, and so many other considerations. SoD combat was
highly tactical, it was just also more abstract, because the attack was mostly coming from a much more limited number of tiles, usually just one or two.
You seem to prefer unlimited stacks, or very large stacks
I do, "unlimited" specifically.
and call That superior approach.
I call it "superior" (to 1UPT/limited stacking) in that it accomplishes the goals that
I prefer, ie., eliminating the "sliding puzzle" problem and cutting back dramatically on unit-spam covering the map. "Superior" is not a personal attack on your preferences. I'm not saying my preferences are "better" than yours. I'm explaining what my preferences/priorities are. I don't think that the "tactical" experience of having archers or cannons execute ranged attacks from what would be, based on the map abstraction, hundreds, or thousands of miles away, is worth what I have to give up to get that on an abstract map, ie, sliding puzzle logjams and map scenery covered in unit-spam.
One advantage to limited stacks, as you well know, is that they add the layer of tactical combat.
No, they don't. As explained above, "limited" stacking/1UPT does not "add" tactical combat, it just makes it
different and arguably, more complicated, than SoD/unlimited-stacking combat. However, as I've mentioned earlier. Making the combat more complicated than what allows the AI to effectively challenge the player diminishes the enjoyment of the game for some folks, who want the AI to be able to pose a significant military threat.
It used to be that AI with a monkey brain could use SoD to overwhelm superior opponent.
Sure... and that made the military/wargame component of the game much more enjoyable for lots of folks.
Now, human with the knowledge of chokepoints and terrain peculiarities can hold off superior force from capturing cities.
Again, this was always the case, even with SoD combat. A small force of Archers, Longbows or Machineguns could hold a city or chokepoint against vastly larger forces in Civ 4. The difference is that those elements you reference are
far more complicated now, so they are more susceptible to human exploits and/or AI shortfalls, leading to a dissatisfying combat experience, where as
@Lexicus puts it, "the player win every single combat by exploiting the battle mechanics". So ironically, by making combat more complicated with 1UPT, the game has actually made combat easier for the player to win, because the AI can't manage.
Thinking about it... that's possibly why many folks like 1UPT better than SoD... its easier to win against the AI. I don't mean that as a negative, or criticism of players who prefer 1UPT, everyone prefers whatever they enjoy in a game. I'm just making the observation that making combat more complicated potentially makes things easier on the player and harder on the AI... for now at least.
Or use a small well trained army and realise big gains using tactical combat. There is no overwhelming need to come back to super large stacks any longer, that was an early crude form
As a related aside... I remember combat in Civ 1... there was unlimited unit stacking, however, a critical game-defining difference, was that there was
no stacking effect on defense unless you were in a city or fortress. This meant that if your stack got attacked, the only unit that would defend was the strongest unit you had in the stack, and if that unit was defeated
you lost your entire stack
That system made defending from inside the city tile an essential tactic, because it was the only way you could effectively defend using all your available units.
Yes, AI being stupid could handle SoD warfare better. Which means Firaxis can work on AI more in future iterations, not nerf the very possibility of realising geographical, tactical warfare by making a step back within a constantly progressing abstraction known as Civilization series.
I'd like to see the game have an option to turn unlimited stacking on or off... that way those who prefer the SoD that allows the AI to be more challenging in combat can continue to enjoy that, while those who prefer the more complicated terrain tactics of 1UPT/limited stacking can enjoy that as well.
