Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

is poly more active?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    A good solution is management for the stack, ie load it into one superunit, make it better/worse/optimal based on number of units in the tile and the composition/something that AI can handle based on relatively simple rules and roll.

    So the solution is easy management of units and not limitation of unit numbers per tile or otherwise.
    Socrates: "Good is That at which all things aim, If one knows what the good is, one will always do what is good." Brian: "Romanes eunt domus"
    GW 2013: "and juistin bieber is gay with me and we have 10 kids we live in u.s.a in the white house with obama"

    Comment


    • #17
      Didn't Civ3 allow you group units into an army if you had a leader. Not the same mechanic, but a similar idea.
      One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.

      Comment


      • #18
        Hearts of Iron uses a stacking penalty which is a much slicker way of handling it than "archers fire over spearmen" and other nonsense.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Dauphin View Post
          Didn't Civ3 allow you group units into an army if you had a leader. Not the same mechanic, but a similar idea.
          Yes it did. I miss that feature.
          "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." - Hillary Clinton, 2003

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by regexcellent View Post
            Hearts of Iron uses a stacking penalty which is a much slicker way of handling it than "archers fire over spearmen" and other nonsense.
            I agree that ranged combat in Civ5 is screwy. Archers shoot farther than gatling guns.

            That's stupid.
            To us, it is the BEAST.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Sava View Post
              I tried playing civ4 again recently. I was never a critic of SoD before. It's all but unplayable for me now. I don't want to spend my time shuffling around dozens of units.

              I think a good solution might be to have a per-tile limit on a certain number of troops... and units be given a manpower value. That way, you can have a giant army without the tedious unit movement.

              And no, the "move all units in stack" command is not a good solution.
              Bah, wars in Civ4 are quick. Wars in Civ5 take so damn long trying to shuffle all my units one by one (where as Civ4 you can group them and move them all at once). Not to mention turn times in Civ5 are so bad.

              But I'm actually bored of both games right now.

              Comment


              • #22
                Turn times in Civ 5 aren't bad if you have a good PC... 10-15 seconds at most for me during late game
                To us, it is the BEAST.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Not bored yet from Civ IV, which I find quite remarkable after all those years... from time to time I play Realism Invictus, like Civ 4.5, or 5.5 - .5 in a good way.
                  Socrates: "Good is That at which all things aim, If one knows what the good is, one will always do what is good." Brian: "Romanes eunt domus"
                  GW 2013: "and juistin bieber is gay with me and we have 10 kids we live in u.s.a in the white house with obama"

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I haven't heard much about Civ 6. I'd think in a year or two is when we first hear about it given timing of past releases.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X