A combat question about stacking

[Yolky]

I only had combat so far with single units. I am wundering when you have a stack, is it like Civ I, (wich I believe unless I read it wrong, hence I am asking) where your stack is in combat, wehter attacking or defending, that if the one unit loses the hole stack is destroyed?

Is that correct? What page can I find it in the manual where this would clear it up? I can't seem to find it now.

Thanks

Davor

[Martinus]

No, when one unit in a stack loses, the remaining units are not destroyed. For this reason it is usually better to keep units in stacks, rather than spread out (since in a stack the best defender always defends). I am saying "usually" since if the enemy has catapult, cannon or artillery, he can inflict collateral damage on all units in the stack.

[jonp]

You do realize there is an option where you can turn on stacking in combat!

Does anyone know how that works?

[Martinus]

It's simply a micromanagement solution.

You do it by holding shift and then clicking the portraits of units a'la RTS - then you can move them as one stack, and in case of go-to commands, allows you to have all units move at the same speed as the slowest unit in the stack (so if you are sending a settler with a warrior escort ahead, it makes sure the settler doesn't run off, due to faster move).

[jonp]

I dont think that is what I meant.

There is an option under advanced somewhere where it says combat as stacked units.

I am at work so I cant get the exact wording.

[Martinus]

Ah didn't know that. It could mean the combat works as in Civ 1 - i.e. you kill one unit and the entire stack is destroyed.

[meriadoc]

I know what you're referring to. The term "stacked combat" is somewhat of a misnomer, though.

What it allows you to do is to select more than one unit and issue one attack order to them. They then perform this order, one after another.

For example, I have 5 Warriors outside of a city. I select all five of them and order them to attack the city. Warrior #1 attacks. Then Warrior #2, etc.

It's unfortunately, not a true stacked combat system like they had in CTP2, where you could have armies of up to 12 units fighting each other simultaneously, but then again the CTP2 AI never made use of this feature that well, so maybe it's just as well that Civ IV uses this idea. At any rate, it's better than nothing.

[snepp]

Originally posted by Martinus I am saying "usually" since if the enemy has catapult, cannon or artillery, he can inflict collateral damage on all units in the stack.

Not entirely accurate (yes, I'm going to nitpick). Catapults can cause collateral damage to a maximum of 6 units, while cannons are 7, and artillery is 8.

[Yolky]

Originally posted by meriadoc

It's unfortunately, not a true stacked combat system like they had in CTP2, where you could have armies of up to 12 units fighting each other simultaneously, but then again the CTP2 AI never made use of this feature that well, so maybe it's just as well that Civ IV uses this idea. At any rate, it's better than nothing.

Hey just like people keep saying that Civ III is a good game once the patches and mods came out, the same thing can be said for CtP II. After you aply the Apolyton Patch or mod what ever you want to call it, the game is great.

Anyways, thanks for answering my question, I read in Sorens notes that the SoD (Stack of Doom) is no longer an option.

[meriadoc]

Originally posted by Yolky


Hey just like people keep saying that Civ III is a good game once the patches and mods came out, the same thing can be said for CtP II. After you aply the Apolyton Patch or mod what ever you want to call it, the game is great.

Anyways, thanks for answering my question, I read in Sorens notes that the SoD (Stack of Doom) is no longer an option.

At the risk of turning this thread away from Civ IV and towards CTP 2, I just want to say that I agree with you. CTP 2 is definitely a very good game, and an interesting slant on the Civilization theme. It isn't really better than or worse than Civ 4, but it complements the game nicely.

[Russian_King]

lol i agree with the above. CTP and CTP 2 were great games after the patches etc. i liked CTP 1 sea cities tho that ruled! Id love to see that in sid's civs some day. also i believe you should be able to chose between workers and PW systems as a civic (government change) or something.

So far i have been confused on a number of things about civ 4 like how to manage a city (has become a burdon) and what tile improvements to build where! theres SO MANY!! its ridiculous!! but i gotta love the cheking to see why ur opponents like u or hate u and their reasoning AND GOSSIP!!

[Shogun Gunner]

at the risk of having hammers thrown at me I did like several things from CtP. I always thought the criticism from the civ community of these products was how they differed from civ2. Actually, it seems civ3 got the same treatment.

many great innovations in CtP including the *true* stacked combat. Ranged weapons really played an integral part.