Zone of Control - Should It Be Back?

[Lance of Llanwy]

I agree that only forts should offer ZOC. I like the new movement that in neutral lands you can't gain ZOC. I mean, it is neutral land. However, I don't think you can build forts outside your cultural borders can you? I forgot, been a while. Anyways, if you can't you should be able to and then forts should offer ZOC to anyone not in open borders agreement with you.


I agree on this. I would say that they should apply the same rule they do to cities only increase it. No fort may be built with 5-6 tiles of another fort. Or make it 3-4 tiles and add a 1 maintenance charge per fort. POssibly go up to 2 at a certain limit that is based on map size.

But I like the way units can move on top of other unit tiles if you are not at war. It makes more sense to me than the previous versions of ZOC. However, ZOC should be in the game but it should take more effort (i.e: Getting Mathematics & building a fort, and garrisoning units in the fort.)

Indeed. It isn't a difficult thing, especially in rough terrain, to bypass an enemy unit. The model offered above for interception is certainly interesting, though I further move Woodman II and Guerilla II impact it, even if the square in question isn't of the relevant terrain. Reason being that either one denotes to me being skillful at moving quickly in an organized fashion. It would be nice to get a hex-based map for this as well....

 

[Newbunkle]

For forts yes, but not for units. I think I've only ever built a handful of forts since I got the game. The enemy just runs right by them, lol.

 

[XxtraLarGe]

To shed some light on the subject, here's a quote from Sid about ZOC:

If you could change one thing about the original Civilization, what would it be?

Sid: Zones of control, I'll say. There were a number of ideas there that I thought were necessarily but added more complexity than play value. Some ideas like zones of control and maintenance cost, and things like that. Looking at it today, I might try to streamline the game a little bit more and make the rules not quite as detailed or obscure than some of them were in the original game. Overall, I'm very happy with the original design, but there's always a few things you would do.

So basically, even Sid wasn't too crazy about zones of control.

I think somebody has hit the nail on the head here though! I really like the idea of forts having Zone of Control, if you could build forts outside of your cultural borders. Yeah, give them a maintenance cost. Then people might actually use forts!

By the way, does anybody here ever actually use forts? I've never seen the A.I. use them.

 

[ohcrapitsnico]

By the way, does anybody here ever actually use forts? I've never seen the A.I. use them.

That is why we want ZOCs to make forts more valuable, I never ever once built one in civ IV or BtS. I loved ZOCs from civ III, I have no idea why it is so complicated to sid, there isn't much to it.

 

[RERomine]

I use forts, but they aren't worth a whole lot. During static periods, I'll build forts along my frontier as long as it doesn't remove some other type of improvement. If I'm at the point where I can waste time building and occupying the Maginot line, I'm usually too strong for the AI to mess with. It just gives my workers something to do while I wait for more units to get built. When I attack, the fort garrisons advance forward like skirmishers to keep the enemy from hitting my stacks with siege weapons. Rarely, has the AI attacked one of my forts and I haven't seen it build them either.

 

[de Mott]

ZOCs for forts would be a mighty good improvement. Maybe it should even be so that the unit victorious over the last fort defender shouldn't be able to move on the fort spot directly, unless it has a movement point left or there are other units to occupy the fort.

 

[occam]

First of all, I want to state up front that I am a ZOC fan. Big time.

I think that the lack of ZOC is jarring in three areas:

1. Forts. People have already covered this. Heck, bump the ZOC up to 2 in modern era!

2. Naval. Military ship design throughout history has always been interested in ZOC issues! If most military ships had a ZOC of 1 and battleships 2, that would make a lot of sense to me. And it might deter the DOW and land troops maneuver.

3. Tech advantage. It is immersion-breaking for me when a Keshik dances by my cavalry to pillage an improvement. What?? My fast-moving, long range cavalry can't stop or deter that? But that's what they teach at West Point! Better ZOC control would reduce the interest in the pillage-fights that the AIs have, and make for better wars; although someone would have to tell the AI.

I think that in those 3 areas, most folks would like/accept a ZOC.

Bonus! Even more ZOC ideas!

- promotions to increase ZOC accy, chance to activate, or even range of ZOC
- promotions to avoid ZOC (stealth)
- a unit or promotion to "root" or trap for one turn a unit that enters your ZOC
- higher terrain could improve ZOC
- no ZOC for melee specialists? (spearmen and/or axemen lines?)

I have never understood the downside to ZOC. If you raid deep into enemy's territory, you get peppered. That just makes sense to me.

- O

 

[XxtraLarGe]

First of all, I want to state up front that I am a ZOC fan. Big time.

I think that the lack of ZOC is jarring in three areas:

1. Forts. People have already covered this. Heck, bump the ZOC up to 2 in modern era!

2. Naval. Military ship design throughout history has always been interested in ZOC issues! If most military ships had a ZOC of 1 and battleships 2, that would make a lot of sense to me. And it might deter the DOW and land troops maneuver.

3. Tech advantage. It is immersion-breaking for me when a Keshik dances by my cavalry to pillage an improvement. What?? My fast-moving, long range cavalry can't stop or deter that? But that's what they teach at West Point! Better ZOC control would reduce the interest in the pillage-fights that the AIs have, and make for better wars; although someone would have to tell the AI.

I think that in those 3 areas, most folks would like/accept a ZOC.

Bonus! Even more ZOC ideas!

- promotions to increase ZOC accy, chance to activate, or even range of ZOC
- promotions to avoid ZOC (stealth)
- a unit or promotion to "root" or trap for one turn a unit that enters your ZOC
- higher terrain could improve ZOC
- no ZOC for melee specialists? (spearmen and/or axemen lines?)

I have never understood the downside to ZOC. If you raid deep into enemy's territory, you get peppered. That just makes sense to me.

- O

You're making it way too complicated. Make it simple: Your units have ZOC over the square they're on. Other players cannot enter the square you are on unless you have an open borders agreement. Forts have ZOC 1 radius around the square they are on. Same rule applies as for units.

 

[RERomine]

2. Naval. Military ship design throughout history has always been interested in ZOC issues! If most military ships had a ZOC of 1 and battleships 2, that would make a lot of sense to me. And it might deter the DOW and land troops maneuver.

I really like this one!

You're making it way too complicated. Make it simple: Your units have ZOC over the square they're on. Other players cannot enter the square you are on unless you have an open borders agreement. Forts have ZOC 1 radius around the square they are on. Same rule applies as for units.

This only seems to give units a ZOC when and where they shouldn't have it: neutral territory during peace.. Within one or the other's country, there would already be open borders or a war. In the event of war, the unit already has a ZOC over the square they are in. Forts, while they occasionally end up in neutral territory can't be built there so if one does end up there for one reason or another, it's usefulness is probably limited. Forts with a ZOC of 1 within ones own territory would be a improvement over no ZOC at all.

 

[dnewhous]

I don't mind about units, but definitely with forts, and using the old Civ2 version where units couldn't move past if there were a unit inside the fort - thus forcing the player to launch an attack. Would put some purpose back into using the structures.

This isn't good enough because you can't build a fort and a mine/farm/whatever on the same square, and the one place in the game where you really need a zone of control is on your valuable resource squares.

And by zone of control I mean that no enemy or neutral unit may go from one square adjacent to your unit to another square adjacent to your unit. They may only retreat or attack.

It's simple for me: I will not spend another penny on Civilization until this issue is resolved to my satisfaction.

 

[Boom12389]

This isn't good enough because you can't build a fort and a mine/farm/whatever on the same square, and the one place in the game where you really need a zone of control is on your valuable resource squares.

But you only need the farm/mine/etc in a BFC, and if the pillaging unit is in your BFC, your local troops should easily be able to kill it. You can fort any distant resources.

 

[pi-r8]

Oh wow I'm so glad that Civ 4 doesn't have a zone of control system.

"Sorry you can't move your tank forward- my warrior is blocking it with his invisible force field"

Such BS

 

[TheLazyHase]

Oh wow I'm so glad that Civ 4 doesn't have a zone of control system.

"Sorry you can't move your tank forward- my warrior is blocking it with his invisible force field"

Such BS

Well, the BS is not having ZoC.

"Sorry, I can't leave my tile to avoid them passing past us".

Especially for naval unit, it does not make much sense.

 

[pi-r8]

Well, the BS is not having ZoC.

"Sorry, I can't leave my tile to avoid them passing past us".

Especially for naval unit, it does not make much sense.

If you don't want them to pass you, kill them when it's your turn. If you're not strong enough to kill them, why would you be able to block them?

 

[Molybdeus]

The only reason to void ZOC that I can think of is to make war boring and hence force people to go more "interesting" victories rather always by comquest......

ZOC made movement a complete PITA in peacetime in civ2. I remember in the WW1 scenario navigating the English channel was basically impossible. I disliked it in Civ1, but in Civ2 it was just terrible.

If they brought it back, I would quit playing if it affected movement in peacetime.

 

[Aserjiek]

perhaps in addition to unit types such as gunpowder, naval, etc., there would be era types, and units from one era could not block units from another.

 

[PieceOfMind]

In a way, the Sea Patrol function almost provides a Zone of Control, in that units on that mission will intercept any pillage attempts in adjacent squares even when it's not their turn. Not quite the same thing though, obviously.

I think it's clear there are going to be realism arguments for and against ZoC because of the need to make the game turn based. Combat in real life is certainly not turn based.

I'd say ZoC bye-bye is a good thing overall. It's a bit weird in naval combat, sure, but it's the lesser of two evils.

 

[ScribJellydonut]

By the way, does anybody here ever actually use forts? I've never seen the A.I. use them.

Yes, tons. I think I've used one in at least every game of Civ 4 I played, I honestly don't see how you guys avoid them. As far as I know with Beyond the Sword forts:

1) Can act as a naval base, or a canal, allowing up to two to be connected and ships can travel through them. This is unbelievably helpful in games where a straight would be unbelievably useful. It allows you to move a ship somewhere in 1 turn that would take 10. Also, if you're in a naval type war, you can build forts along the coast every few tiles or so to allow your ships to retreat after attacking, and heal up on the fort where the enemy ships cannot go. I know it's kinda cheap, but it works.

2) Forts serve as airbases. Since each city has a hard limit on the amount of planes that are allowed to be based there, this is really helpful in games that make it all the way to flight. You can have extra planes on patrol and have extra planes to bomb enemy units or defenses. Especially if you have say only one city that is within air operations range of an enemy city, just construct a few forts along your borders, post a few infantry(the planes can be destroyed with no ground defenses sitting on the fort/airbase), and you can bomb the living hell out of the city with two or three times as many planes as you could otherwise.

3) For those of you that don't make it that far, in most every game I've played so far there has been at least one good choke point somewhere on the map that some point in the game I control, and putting a fort there saves on the amount of defensive units you have to make. One fort with 12 archers on it blocking land access three cities is better than shuffling 12 archers around 3 cities, trying to make them count. Any promotion that your units have that would give them city defense(i.e. the archer's natural ability or the city defender upgrades) count to the defense when that unit is on a fort, too.

The only thing I would have changed for sure, is an option for workers to "leave forts when automated." Sometimes I automate my workers, and don't care if they change my mines into windmills or such later in the game, but for some reason they will change a fort that I'm using as a straight into a farm or something equally useless that's not within any cities working tiles(but that is in my cultural borders). It doesn't make any sense, lol, but they do it all the time.

 

[dnewhous]

But you only need the farm/mine/etc in a BFC, and if the pillaging unit is in your BFC, your local troops should easily be able to kill it. You can fort any distant resources.

And if I leave my tile to kill the unit on my left side then I let the unit on the right side slip on past so he can pillage my road and render me temporarily unable to produce iron based units. Since my unit left his fortified position it took more damage than it would have had it been playing defense, making it weaker for the next fight.

It just leads to a boring cycle of hack and slash where I spend all of my energy building units and fighting off barbarians.

It totally ruins a game that would otherwise be 20X better than Civ II.

Building a fortification on the same tile as a mine/farm/etc is not essential, but it would be awfully nice.

 

[dnewhous]

ZOC made movement a complete PITA in peacetime in civ2.

The only nuisance I experienced is that the A.I. would interpret non-military units (like the Explorer) as a threat and maneuver its units to block their passage. This meant that you needed to go exploring early in the game for it to be the least bit useful. It made caravans more difficult than they should have been because 1) it was impossible to learn where all the other cities were located 2) IIRC, the other civs would put units in their way which would constantly ruin their auto-route, which could be worked around because caravans could ignore zones of control.