Why stack of Doom was never a problem... patches were optional...

[Gorbles]

6 was on Switch.
edit: five was basically evolution of Civ:Rev

So, no, CiV wasn't. VI has little to do with it considering they reduced the impact of 1UPT in at least two different ways.

I get why people like or don't like things. But that's preference. Literally nothing more than that.

 

[gdr_willter]

I don't get where you got that impression. I don't prefer it over SoDs, but that's leagues apart from 'hating' it. And I'm just correcting people's misunderstanding of how SoDs worked.

You might want to read before you comment.

It's not specifically about you (really. I didn't used the word). I mentioned widely about this thread and long living hatred about 1UPT. Someone told about dull micro management of 1UPT, and someone told about strategic micro management of SoD... What's the difference? I didn't feel any fun from micro control of SoD to make better result, it wasn't felt as strategic choice at all. And when the micro management itself is not the problem, why not 1UPT? Units on real field of several tiles is more visible, more tactical, and more easy to take a reasonable risk. The only problem was the maneuver with micro management, but we agreed that there is the matter of micro management on both method either so let's push aside it.

Anyway now we faced the Civ 7's new 1UPT supported by packing Commanders. I hope this method will be good and will finally end this argument.

 

[fantsu]

So, no, CiV wasn't. VI has little to do with it considering they reduced the impact of 1UPT in at least two different ways.

I get why people like or don't like things. But that's preference. Literally nothing more than that.

I agree sir. Preference is the key, and I agree with you all the way.
SoD is deeper and more complex. Always. Its how wargames and simulation of units work in many games. Civilization-series was an masterful innovation from Meier. It is a way to have fun with your PC. I have always preferred more simple solutions in these games. I'd rather play two games than one that makes you go around with more unmeaningful tasks not really unchanging the outcome.
"Mobile" way was a blessing. Pick up and play. And have fun. Civ should stay as an entrypoint to 4X. Its not a negative thing. Its nice to have these cheaper solutions around to please more crowd into 4X.
But SoDs are more strategic. And history of war is interesting and more complex games deliver more authentic line-of-command that actually makes sense. Logistics units, minefield operations, pipeline builders, even POW camps around the military units. Civilization-series SoDs have always been so-and-so. I think IV still made it the best. At least you always had super medic and worker around while moving the stack making it more than just mix of spears, catapults, swords and archers. SoDs just with soldiers themselves are always uninteresting to me. Might as well make just 1UPT with few promotions.

 

[No. 2 Bunger]

It's just fun to see the statements like "1UPT is worse than SoD because of micro management" and "SoD has strategy when you do some micro management" at the same time.

I point again to the many consequences of switching to 1UPT, like map scaling, or reworked city sieges.

Anyway, I think 1UPT micro is worse mostly due to the thing they're apparently fixing in 7: moving a bunch of guys for an invasion is quickly painful. Fighting is fun, shoving an army through a jungle mountain pass one at a time is not.

But I don't think it really makes sense to talk as though stacks is something Civ might be headed back to, or argue the merits of each with the idea that maybe stacks could come back. 1UPT clearly has a lot of appeal, and they're sticking with it.

 

[aelf]

It's not specifically about you (really. I didn't used the word). I mentioned widely about this thread and long living hatred about 1UPT. Someone told about dull micro management of 1UPT, and someone told about strategic micro management of SoD... What's the difference? I didn't feel any fun from micro control of SoD to make better result, it wasn't felt as strategic choice at all. And when the micro management itself is not the problem, why not 1UPT? Units on real field of several tiles is more visible, more tactical, and more easy to take a reasonable risk. The only problem was the maneuver with micro management, but we agreed that there is the matter of micro management on both method either so let's push aside it.

Anyway now we faced the Civ 7's new 1UPT supported by packing Commanders. I hope this method will be good and will finally end this argument.

Other people's opinions are not my business. I prefer the micromanagement of SoD to that of the current implementation of 1UPT, but I agree maybe Civ7's will be a much better iteration.

I simply dislike micromanaging movement more than fights. Fights are thrilling. It's a roll of the die (which you can weight in your favour, but often less than you want). Moving units across the map in 1UPT is tedium without the excitement. Moreover, it's manifestly unrealistic. How big is a tile that can fit a modern urban metropolis? How many soldiers are in one unit? So why would an archer unit prevent another unit from being in the same tile? Even if the unit needs to live off the land, there's no way the maths work.

Of course, ultimately civ is a game, and 1UPT is not quite a step too far in the unrealistic department for me. But it's still a bit of a headscratcher.

 

[ariosto]

It's just fun to see the statements like "1UPT is worse than SoD because of micro management" and "SoD has strategy when you do some micro management" at the same time.

I would say that. Civ V is literally unplayable for me because of 1UPT.

we agreed that there is the matter of micro management on both method either so let's push aside it.

No, let's not. The scale of "micromanagement" is absolutely incomparable.
First of all, saying that choosing the order of attack with SoD is micromanagement is very strange. I can argue that choosing unit and target in 1UPT is a micromanagement as well. There are more targets in 1UPT. You can't select several units to attack in 1UPT. You also need more than one hit per unit in Civ V. Honestly, I don't feel this is tedious in both cases, but these things are comparable.
Also, even if you say battles are micromanagement in SoD, there are only so many of them, like once every 5-10 turns. In Civ V you need to manage movement of every single unit every single turn. I haven't even started fighting and I'm already tired! For most of the war turns the hardest thing for me was to find an empty tile. With SoD this is not a question at all.
Then you can select you stack, say "I want these 20 units to be there in 8 turns" and forget about them for this time. It is impossible for 1UPT because units will interfere with each other in the middle of the road. You have to remember which tile is already "locked" in 8 turns to avoid sending several units to the same tile. I don't have to think about those things with my stacks and that is huge QoL issue.
Worst of all, you can't even say "I'll just ignore 1UPT and play peacefully" because you can't even stack your workers either. They mess each other up too! It is questionable whether it is realistic to put two hundred tanks on the same tile. But there is no excuse for why I can't put two workers, a settler, a missionary and a great engineer on the same tile.

I see Civ 7 generals system addresses this issue and I hope it is good enough to make the game playable. Thats the most critical thing for me personally.

 

[Lazy sweeper]

I would say that. Civ V is literally unplayable for me because of 1UPT.

No, let's not. The scale of "micromanagement" is absolutely incomparable.
First of all, saying that choosing the order of attack with SoD is micromanagement is very strange. I can argue that choosing unit and target in 1UPT is a micromanagement as well. There are more targets in 1UPT. You can't select several units to attack in 1UPT. You also need more than one hit per unit in Civ V. Honestly, I don't feel this is tedious in both cases, but these things are comparable.
Also, even if you say battles are micromanagement in SoD, there are only so many of them, like once every 5-10 turns. In Civ V you need to manage movement of every single unit every single turn. I haven't even started fighting and I'm already tired! For most of the war turns the hardest thing for me was to find an empty tile. With SoD this is not a question at all.
Then you can select you stack, say "I want these 20 units to be there in 8 turns" and forget about them for this time. It is impossible for 1UPT because units will interfere with each other in the middle of the road. You have to remember which tile is already "locked" in 8 turns to avoid sending several units to the same tile. I don't have to think about those things with my stacks and that is huge QoL issue.
Worst of all, you can't even say "I'll just ignore 1UPT and play peacefully" because you can't even stack your workers either. They mess each other up too! It is questionable whether it is realistic to put two hundred tanks on the same tile. But there is no excuse for why I can't put two workers, a settler, a missionary and a great engineer on the same tile.

I see Civ 7 generals system addresses this issue and I hope it is good enough to make the game playable. Thats the most critical thing for me personally.

Automatization and key shortcuts are a separate threads just for this very issue.
I have proposed multi-selection with AoE style, or shift-select.
Include flags to tell all units of this type around this flag, and other similar features for a better living.
None of these are on the horizon atm. But again, this is another story...

It is time to reverse the cycle, and go back to SoD where it was left at its peak, that is Civ 3, and not 4, with its kamikaze catapults, and no armies, as they
were the most effective counter-argument to SoD. So much that the latest patches removed the Ai the capabilities to build them... giving actually a BONUS
to human players. Otherwise 90% of players was going to be gobsmacked at Chieftain...

Removing armies brought civ IV players to the perception that SoD was really bad, because without them, everyone could be gobsmacked without warning from
every mid-tier civ with enough units. Razing down your cities in one turn. If they retained Armies, the rage against Sod would have never reached such levels
of absurdity, that eventually lead to 1Upt.

 

[GoneFishingX]

It is time to reverse the cycle, and go back to SoD where it was left at its peak, that is Civ 3, and not 4, with its kamikaze catapults, and no armies, as they
were the most effective counter-argument to SoD. So much that the latest patches removed the Ai the capabilities to build them... giving actually a BONUS
to human players. Otherwise 90% of players was going to be gobsmacked at Chieftain...

Removing armies brought civ IV players to the perception that SoD was really bad, because without them, everyone could be gobsmacked without warning from
every mid-tier civ with enough units. Razing down your cities in one turn. If they retained Armies, the rage against Sod would have never reached such levels
of absurdity, that eventually lead to 1Upt.

This is like the 3rd time in this thread that you aggressively push the idea that players are mostly bad and childish. That somehow an AI opponent needs to be capable of killing a player with ease. That the goal of a game of civ is to survive by the skin of your teeth.

It feels like you're trying to push the toxic 'get good' mentality common in the dark souls community. That mentality sucks and I am franky tired of you constantly pushing it as an ideal. I'm glad you're having fun with Civ 3. It's a fun game. Every civ game is fun and someone's favorite for a good reason.

Armies/bombard don't fix the core flaw with 'SoD'. That flaw is how 90% of the map is unused in warfare. Wars are stale. Almost all combat occurs at a city. Just because the AI can actually pose a substantial threat doesn't remove that core issue.

Edited: I put 1upt instead of sod in the final paragraph.

 

[ariosto]

It is time to reverse the cycle, and go back to SoD where it was left at its peak, that is Civ 3, and not 4, with its kamikaze catapults, and no armies, as they
were the most effective counter-argument to SoD

I haven't played civ 3 so I may be missing something here. How are armies the counter-argument to SoD? SoD can also consist of armies

 

[hoplite_fan]

With Civ7 being separated into three different eras with three different combat mechanics, my suggestions for each era are as thus:

Ancient era:

Ancient era catapults are useless for anything but city sieges

Starting with swordsman, meele warrior unit types have the exclusive promotion "charge", which grants them the option "prepare for battle" . Whereas they will mark one unit, which they can move and attack on the next turn, and get attack bonus when attacking said unit

Starting with swordsman, meele warrior unit types have the exclusive promotion "sapping", which grants them the option "sapping" . Whereas they will mark one defensive building, and spend the next two turns preparing for the attack, the action will be interrupted if they get attacked . If it doesn't get interrupted, they get a combat bonus and attack as if the city doesn't have fortications

"Charge" and "Sapping" are mutually exclusive

---

Exploration era:

Exploration era trebuchets are useless for anything but city sieges and fort attacks

Exploration era cannons are named "siege cannons" are weak without promotions, but can be specialised for either city sieges or anti-naval warfare

Starting with the knight, heavy cavalry unit types have the exclusive promotion "breakthrough", which grants them the option "breakthrough". Whereas the Knight will mark one unit, second and consecutive attacks on the same unit deal more damage if the unit's HP drop below 90

Starting with the knight, heavy cavalry unit types have the exclusive promotion "patrol", which grants them the option "patrol". Whereas the Knight will mark two adjacent tiles, if any enemy unit moves to that tile or to any tile adjacent to it, the knight will automatically move and impose ZoC over that unit

"Breakthrough" and "Patrol" are mutually exclusive

---

Modern era:

Modern era cannons are named "field cannons" are weak without promotions, but can be specialised for either city sieges or anti-naval or land unit warfare

Modern era artillery and mobile artillery are weak without promotions, but can be specialised for either anti-naval attacks, land unit attacks, artillery duels or concealment

Starting with machine guns, archery ranged unit types have the exclusive promotion "suppression", which grants them the options "suppression". Whereas the machine gun will mark one unit, it will deal less damage but it will prevent that unit from using "prepare for battle" option

Starting with machine guns, archery ranged unit types have the exclusive promotion "ambush", which grants them the options "ambush". Whereas the machine gun will be integrated with an infantry unit, movement speed is limited to one turn, but defense option is stronger after three turns if infantry does not get attacked . If infantry moves afterwards, the bonus is lost . The extra defense bonus only lasts one turn

"Suppression" and "Ambush" are mutually exclusive

 

[Lazy sweeper]

This is like the 3rd time in this thread that you aggressively push the idea that players are mostly bad and childish. That somehow an AI opponent needs to be capable of killing a player with ease. That the goal of a game of civ is to survive by the skin of your teeth.

It feels like you're trying to push the toxic 'get good' mentality common in the dark souls community. That mentality sucks and I am franky tired of you constantly pushing it as an ideal. I'm glad you're having fun with Civ 3. It's a fun game. Every civ game is fun and someone's favorite for a good reason.

Armies/bombard don't fix the core flaw with 1upt. That flaw is how 90% of the map is unused in warfare. Wars are stale. Almost all combat occurs at a city. Just because the AI can actually pose a substantial threat doesn't remove that core issue.

I am from the Big Noses, frankly speaking, I have no clues about the Skinny Teeth, you might well introduce me, perhaps are they of your acquaintance?
Poor soul, ye might be burning a molar in yer spoken mouth of truth, A-mountain.
Aggressively... --------.... more like poking a Teddy Bear... and no I haven't filled the dots.

I have played Civ VI yestarday, and by the end of turn 200, middle of game, I had like 20 cities vs 6 average of Ai, but the flaw was not about the unused map, I filled all of it.
It was that to end a turn, I had to do something like 400 clicks!!! I just quit out of despair... that's the main flaw... if the Ai has to calculate the same amount of clicks, I'd assume the Ai would choose instant death if given a choice! This is about LIFE and DEATH!

All automatizations, armies, and other good for living things that went away, could come back, it's not a toxic mentality to reiterate simplification is not about purging what you don't like or worst try regulate it, adding in fact more levels of complexities...
With SoD you could right click over a stack and Fortify all of them. In ONE click. In CoD you can't even draw a rectangle, or shift-select multiple troops, let alone the F shortcut for Fortify a unit doesn't fortify a unit...

look at the facts...

NO Warmongering MOD - essential in Civ VI
NO loyalty MOD - essential in Civ VI
NO pop ups - essential
INFINITE PROJECTS MOD - essential...

and the list goes on and on... people likes to have a good experience... otherwise all these mods would not exist? Right?

 

[gdr_willter]

look at the facts...

NO Warmongering MOD - essential in Civ VI
NO loyalty MOD - essential in Civ VI
NO pop ups - essential
INFINITE PROJECTS MOD - essential...

and the list goes on and on... people likes to have a good experience... otherwise all these mods would not exist? Right?

Don't use the word "Fact" in this way. Then how can you explain the larger player group of Civ 6 without Mods than any other Civ titles? Mobile, Console, Epic, and even some Steam Civ 6 players never used any Mod. And on the other hand, you definitely know how may Mods in Civ 3 and 4. Does it means they have bad game system?

 

[Lazy sweeper]

Don't use the word "Fact" in this way. Then how can you explain the larger player group of Civ 6 without Mod than any other Civ titles? Mobile, Console, Epic, and even some Steam Civ 6 players never used any Mod.

Democracy?

 

[gdr_willter]

Democracy?

Oh come on. Stop dealing with the players who aren't same with you as dumb public.

 

[Arcaian]

look at the facts...

NO Warmongering MOD - essential in Civ VI
NO loyalty MOD - essential in Civ VI
NO pop ups - essential
INFINITE PROJECTS MOD - essential...

Interesting that despite calling these 'facts', I've literally never even heard of these 'essential' mods - and I play with a fairly heavily modded Civ 6 regularly.

 

[GoneFishingX]

Oh come on. Stop dealing with the players who aren't same with you as dumb public.

This guy is just obviously trolling at this point. I had hoped it was good faith delivered with goofy ESL word choices and sentences.

 

[Lazy sweeper]

Oh come on. Stop dealing with the players who aren't same with you as dumb public.

Look, I get it, some of you like the current trajectory and that is ok.
I am not against innovation, and to build new models is hard, especially when there consequences derives from years
of analytics and when a voice says the data is wrong, he gets torched, before he could also finish the sentence, as the data is
wrong because it does not take into accounts some important variables, like a software bug.
It's just one bug, hidden in millions of lines of code, but it breaks the game. It's insignificant. It's just one small bug.
But if you refuse to look at it, it can destroy your entire library potentially.

So, mods are there, yet you deem them dumb because data shows barely anyone in the real world is using them.
I'm sorry if this seems like a troll attempt undermining a fortified concept of security.

But here we are, on our fortified positions, one side defending SoD, and another one moving along...
Either side is right on their own merit, without having to resort to personal attacks.

Love.

 

[Lazy sweeper]

Don't use the word "Fact" in this way. Then how can you explain the larger player group of Civ 6 without Mods than any other Civ titles? Mobile, Console, Epic, and even some Steam Civ 6 players never used any Mod. And on the other hand, you definitely know how may Mods in Civ 3 and 4. Does it means they have bad game system?

I don't have a Switch. I was researching for Civilization VI anthology for the Switch reviews, as I was suspecting a Civ VI physical copy with all DLCs
would not be available for the Switch. I had a Dsi and a 3DS and Never once connected to the Internet. I just bought games on a cartridge, and used them as they came. So thinking about it, mods requires a Internet connection, and to me, judging from my personal experience, I'd never ever go online to look for downloadable content...

googlin switch Civ VI mods, it says that you need custom firmware to even run mods?
I understand why console gamers uses no mods... if it comes at the risk of bricking your console...
I'd never do that in a million years... just play Vanilla... even for DLC you need to install content on an SSD...
Again, I'd never do that... We all know how the Nintendo online shop story ended for the 3DS and Wii...
I wasn't convinced before, and after what happened, it has only cemented my feelings towards online content...

PS: sorry this is way outside the thread content but I thought I had include this...
I also somehow trust Steam untill now... Nintendo an Sony? Not a chance...

btw, what you mean by bad game system???
I have literally no clue what are you on about...
Like, PC is the Master race??? I never said that...
Please help me I'm at a loss...
The presence of an identifier doesn't make the opposite a presence of a ghost...
You're looking for something I didn't design, nor mention here...
I was just talking about Mods in general...

 

[Lazy sweeper]

Oh come on. Stop dealing with the players who aren't same with you as dumb public.

PS: I'm sorry if I didn't want to hurt anyone with the Democracy comment, it was unappropriate probably.
It started with 6 french foreign troops in civ V, in VI it was just a new deal card, and by now it might be a slot for codexes...


Once we had transport ships... we could put two units initially, and to move an army of two plus the leader, we had to wait untill Astronomy...
Now Commanders probably have the Jesus Christ promotion and can walk on the waters...
This is a serious thread, It has serious implications how we approach the subjects.
Metaphors or not, mods were essential for people that loved the game as it was the best tactical-strategic game on the market for years...
So no. I will not make dumb excuses given some circumstances.

Can we get back to the topic now?

 

[Lazy sweeper]

With Civ7 being separated into three different eras with three different combat mechanics, my suggestions for each era are as thus:

Ancient era:

Ancient era catapults are useless for anything but city sieges

Starting with swordsman, meele warrior unit types have the exclusive promotion "charge", which grants them the option "prepare for battle" . Whereas they will mark one unit, which they can move and attack on the next turn, and get attack bonus when attacking said unit

Starting with swordsman, meele warrior unit types have the exclusive promotion "sapping", which grants them the option "sapping" . Whereas they will mark one defensive building, and spend the next two turns preparing for the attack, the action will be interrupted if they get attacked . If it doesn't get interrupted, they get a combat bonus and attack as if the city doesn't have fortications

"Charge" and "Sapping" are mutually exclusive

---

Exploration era:

Exploration era trebuchets are useless for anything but city sieges and fort attacks

Exploration era cannons are named "siege cannons" are weak without promotions, but can be specialised for either city sieges or anti-naval warfare

Starting with the knight, heavy cavalry unit types have the exclusive promotion "breakthrough", which grants them the option "breakthrough". Whereas the Knight will mark one unit, second and consecutive attacks on the same unit deal more damage if the unit's HP drop below 90

Starting with the knight, heavy cavalry unit types have the exclusive promotion "patrol", which grants them the option "patrol". Whereas the Knight will mark two adjacent tiles, if any enemy unit moves to that tile or to any tile adjacent to it, the knight will automatically move and impose ZoC over that unit

"Breakthrough" and "Patrol" are mutually exclusive

---

Modern era:

Modern era cannons are named "field cannons" are weak without promotions, but can be specialised for either city sieges or anti-naval or land unit warfare

Modern era artillery and mobile artillery are weak without promotions, but can be specialised for either anti-naval attacks, land unit attacks, artillery duels or concealment

Starting with machine guns, archery ranged unit types have the exclusive promotion "suppression", which grants them the options "suppression". Whereas the machine gun will mark one unit, it will deal less damage but it will prevent that unit from using "prepare for battle" option

Starting with machine guns, archery ranged unit types have the exclusive promotion "ambush", which grants them the options "ambush". Whereas the machine gun will be integrated with an infantry unit, movement speed is limited to one turn, but defense option is stronger after three turns if infantry does not get attacked . If infantry moves afterwards, the bonus is lost . The extra defense bonus only lasts one turn

"Suppression" and "Ambush" are mutually exclusive

So basically you would like to nerf ranged siege units against other units, and I can see why...
Civ VI suppression fire from multiple cities, barracks, and a couple of cannons, would vaporize anyone in one turn...

Suppression, ambush, and Sapper promotions on the other end seems intended to boost units effectivenes in siegieng cities, or trench warfare, or both...

You still have to squeeze one unit into the last remaining hex of the city you want to defend or take, and if you can't even store two or three cadets inside the last bastion
of resistance... so if a city produces a cannon or machinegun, and a tank, one of the two has to go outside the walls... cities will continue to fall like leaves once all other suppression fires are dealt with.. I have always been against cities with their own HP, because Ai would not build not even a basic defensive unit sometime and just prioritize walls, and then some archers,
and after walls fell, the HP of the unit would not matter and die instantly. The new city capturing mechanic is still a mistery to me but I can see your suggestions as moving
towards a stronger tactical approach to all combat mechanics in general. I like it. It's creative response.
Especially Patrol I would rank top suggestion. Naval units in EU3-4 all have patrol, over multiple territories, in constant loop.

A mod in civ VI allowed for scouts to create outposts that could then be used by some other units under your command, and the outpost would boost view of +1 tiles in all directions.
I would like it could make it in the base game this time. Maybe combined with Patrol... with an advanced button to add some waypoints for the patrol... that would be great for defence.


Now, would the Ai use it? That is also a question... if Ai fears surprise attacks maybe yes... it could make Ai better at dealing with Human players guerrilla tactics??? It's a bet...
I would allow 2Upt optionally also, or allow mini armies of three different units to combine into a single one, without commander....

Then make a commander promotion to make him move up to six 3x units armies in a line or wedge formation, or just all of you units now will follow him, and stack up to 6x tile and then on a line.. sort of select all units of the old SoD times.... it would make thousands of people's life easier