xUPT

[Zai]

What if there was only one way through a mountain pass, and the city blocked the entrance, and a large civilization was on the other side. Then they could defend it indefinitely.

Isn't that called strategy?

The movie 300 comes to mind. Taking a defensive position between two obstacles should matter, whether it's a defensive city, fort, or just a group of elite soldiers blocking a pass. Kudos to the player who scouted out that pass and had the foresight to build a city there IMO. Though maybe city defense bonuses should be lowered a little, I think they can get up to like 200% right now which already causes headaches.

I really like this UPT thing, can't wait to try it.

 

[Dissonance]

Haven't read all 8 pages, so forgive if this has been mentioned.
But.

This could end up hurting the Bannor, which I play often, where the individual units as leaders often result in multiple leaders, meaning that it requires large stacks.

I don't usually surpass 15 units in a stack, but with a few Great Commanders, who knows...

 

[inuyashasama]

If they have an attack strength, then they should count toward the limit. They're just as capable as attacking as the rest.

 

[Grey Fox]

And their units can be within a certain range.

 

[El Yahpo]

What about casters? Most of there attack spells are range 1, with this on, most would have to get up close and personal. Don't know if thats good or bad though.
And also what happens with there summons? If they spawn randomly around them you might have them on the wrong side of the summoner and they can't reach the target city/unit

 

[arcticnightwolf]

What about casters? Most of there attack spells are range 1, with this on, most would have to get up close and personal. Don't know if thats good or bad though.
And also what happens with there summons? If they spawn randomly around them you might have them on the wrong side of the summoner and they can't reach the target city/unit

i think that summons shouldn't be counted towards UPT limit

 

[Abremms]

i think i originaly voted yes for this, but after some thought, i'd like to change my vote! 1upt will work in CiV because its built from the ground up. what your talking about doing here is bolting the mechanic onto a game that was never intended to operate in this way, and by making it optional you are severely limiting how many changes you can make to accomidate this new mechanic.

imo, either commit to it and rebalance around it, or leave it out.

also, it should be 1 upt. 2upt or 3upt or 15upt quickly becomes, essentialy, 1upt where one unit is that stack, and you are obligated to max out all your stacks. you may have a 5upt limit, but is anyone going to field a stack with 2 units if they have a choice in the matter?

no, i think unless your willing to fully commit and rebalance the game, this is a feature best left out.

but hey, i guess as long as i can turn it off, no worries.

 

[Venir]

I doubt the AI will ever be able to handle Pyre Zombies appropriately under such a system, but I voted for it. Should make things more interesting.

Besides, watching Os-Gabella blow up tons of her own zombies would be quite fun.

And hello. Just started playing RifE about a week ago, and found FfH2 about 2 months before that. Great mods, really looking forward to 1.3, quit dicking around already.

 

[Valkrionn]

What about casters? Most of there attack spells are range 1, with this on, most would have to get up close and personal. Don't know if thats good or bad though.
And also what happens with there summons? If they spawn randomly around them you might have them on the wrong side of the summoner and they can't reach the target city/unit

Already been addressed somewhere in the thread....

Summons will not count towards the limit. At least for now.

i think i originaly voted yes for this, but after some thought, i'd like to change my vote! 1upt will work in CiV because its built from the ground up. what your talking about doing here is bolting the mechanic onto a game that was never intended to operate in this way, and by making it optional you are severely limiting how many changes you can make to accomidate this new mechanic.

imo, either commit to it and rebalance around it, or leave it out.

also, it should be 1 upt. 2upt or 3upt or 15upt quickly becomes, essentialy, 1upt where one unit is that stack, and you are obligated to max out all your stacks. you may have a 5upt limit, but is anyone going to field a stack with 2 units if they have a choice in the matter?

no, i think unless your willing to fully commit and rebalance the game, this is a feature best left out.

but hey, i guess as long as i can turn it off, no worries.

I disagree with the majority of your points, honestly. Keep in mind, we have the ability to create modules... And have a launcher enabling the player to easily turn them on or off. This makes it very simple to balance around xUPT, without affecting those who choose to play without.

Also, I completely disagree that it should be 1upt; With some changes coming in 1.5, 5-8upt would be best. Enough to allow a range of different unitcombats on a tile, without allowing all of them. And that will be a very important distinction.

I doubt the AI will ever be able to handle Pyre Zombies appropriately under such a system, but I voted for it. Should make things more interesting.

Besides, watching Os-Gabella blow up tons of her own zombies would be quite fun.

And hello. Just started playing RifE about a week ago, and found FfH2 about 2 months before that. Great mods, really looking forward to 1.3, quit dicking around already.

Glad you like it.

And we're far from dicking around. In fact, much of the rest of the team is already working on 1.4.

 

[KrugSmash]

I voted in favor a few weeks ago, and I'd just like to say again that I'm very much in support of this. Having the ability to make tactical decisions that really matter, instead of just blobbing a huge pile of units around the map, would be a very welcome change.

I'd also like to add my vote to the 'surround bonus', giving units a bonus to attack when they surround a tile with 3+ stacks. That would certainly encourage me to use more cavalry.

 

[Valkrionn]

I voted in favor a few weeks ago, and I'd just like to say again that I'm very much in support of this. Having the ability to make tactical decisions that really matter, instead of just blobbing a huge pile of units around the map, would be a very welcome change.

I'd also like to add my vote to the 'surround bonus', giving units a bonus to attack when they surround a tile with 3+ stacks. That would certainly encourage me to use more cavalry.

That is exactly why I personally will be playing with that option on.

As I said... There will be massive unit changes in 1.5... Which, when combined with the xUPT mechanic, bring the opportunity for the addition of a large amount of useful tactical choices.

Do I use mages? If so, do I protect them with X or Y units? Do I bring mounted units, for fast raiding, or do I bring X unit to prevent enemy withdrawal? You get the picture.

It will be a very welcome change, at least in my opinion. And it's optional for those who disagree. That said, it won't be in 1.3; Either a 1.3x patch, or in 1.5 with the unit changes.

 

[El Yahpo]

That is exactly why I personally will be playing with that option on.

As I said... There will be massive unit changes in 1.5... Which, when combined with the xUPT mechanic, bring the opportunity for the addition of a large amount of useful tactical choices.

Do I use mages? If so, do I protect them with X or Y units? Do I bring mounted units, for fast raiding, or do I bring X unit to prevent enemy withdrawal? You get the picture.

It will be a very welcome change, at least in my opinion. And it's optional for those who disagree. That said, it won't be in 1.3; Either a 1.3x patch, or in 1.5 with the unit changes.

sad face

 

[Calavente]

AFAIK, the UPT was developped in AND before announcement on cV ? no ?
Am I wrong here ?

 

[Valkrionn]

No idea, but it is far from a new concept. AND simply did it in a configurable way, which is what caught my attention; While it would be impossible to get those who desire such a system to come to a consensus on what the limit should be, xUPT allows us to implement it and have each person decide for themselves.

 

[Afforess]

AFAIK, the UPT was developped in AND before announcement on cV ? no ?
Am I wrong here ?

It was in direct response to Civ5, not prior. It was requested by users, and is one of the more popular features, although I don't understand it myself.

 

[Opera]

xUPT is simply awesome. SoD are just... ugh... sick?

 

[Calavente]

Ah, ok.
Sorry Afforess.
I thought I remembered some post I read before reading about cV.. but maybe the announcement was already made.
(I thought it would stop the "1upt will work in CiV because its built from the ground up. what your talking about doing here is bolting the mechanic onto a game that was never intended to operate in this way,")
In fact, many of the FFH things (even more with RifE and WM) are thing "bolt on a game that was never intended to operate this way" (especially spells...Etc).

 

[Abremms]

I disagree with the majority of your points, honestly. Keep in mind, we have the ability to create modules... And have a launcher enabling the player to easily turn them on or off. This makes it very simple to balance around xUPT, without affecting those who choose to play without.

Also, I completely disagree that it should be 1upt; With some changes coming in 1.5, 5-8upt would be best. Enough to allow a range of different unitcombats on a tile, without allowing all of them. And that will be a very important distinction.

you have a good point on having more than 1upt, and while i was aware of the module launcher, i guess i wasn'tt aware just how much they can alter the core game. I'll give it a shot. still not 100% sold, but i'll give it a shot

I'd still like to see a game fully rebalanced around 1upt, but i suppose that will happen soon enough once ciV is out.

 

[Abremms]

Ah, ok.
Sorry Afforess.
I thought I remembered some post I read before reading about cV.. but maybe the announcement was already made.
(I thought it would stop the "1upt will work in CiV because its built from the ground up. what your talking about doing here is bolting the mechanic onto a game that was never intended to operate in this way,")
In fact, many of the FFH things (even more with RifE and WM) are thing "bolt on a game that was never intended to operate this way" (especially spells...Etc).

my point is that when those FFH2 additions (like spells) were made, the game was balanced around them. bolting on a xupt mod without rebalancing the game around it is a bad idea, imo. but since Valk has said that is not the case then its all gravy.

 

[Grey Fox]

There have been a few mods similar to this one long before CiV was announced to use 1UPT. I've even made a few (unreleased) myself. One clone of Advance Wars which also uses 1UPT, and another mod which I will probably never release . Those were for Civ 4.

I even based my work on another mod so yeah it's been out there.


And I wouldn't say Magic and such from FfH2 is really balanced well. I mean even the stack busters from BtS have limitations on how many units they can damage.