Civilization V- Might actually be good now. Stay tuned.

[Ingmar]

You do have to approach each city with a plan as to where your units are going to go and when they will arrive, yes. That's not a bad thing.

[Spiff]

It's far from perfect, but it does actually make it possible to defend a city even from a more advanced/militaristic civ. Whereas in previous incarnations you saw a stack of units an era ahead of yours coming and it was time to start packing and get the hell out of Dodge.

The combat is still the weakest part of the game by far, but now at least smaller (even single city) more focused empires are somewhat viable, so in that sense the 1 unit limit was overall a great change.

I thought maybe allow stacking but at a reduced effectiveness could be worth a try; so the second unit on a tile would be only 50% effective, the third 25% and so on.
If they ever add some semi-decent combat tactics to a Civ game though, it will be the end of me; they'll find my desiccated corpse at the computer years later, hand still on the mouse and a big fuckin smile on my face.

[Tannhauser]

For whatever problems the game had on release, the expansion and DLC fixed it.

...except for one-unit-per-tile, which Jon Shafer (the lead designer) has admitted was a bad decision. 

Guy selling a new game criticises his old game? By the power of Peter Molyneux's beard say it isn't so!

One unit per tile is significantly better than stacks of doom, and the patch upgrades and then the expansion fixed the issues he is talking about - which happened after he left. I couldn't go back to stacks of doom now, its just not as fun.

Shafer is a tard.  One unit per hex was a good idea.  His implementation was bad.  They didn't modify the maps enough to account for one unit per hex.  Civ V at release was pretty fubar, there's a reason he was sacked. 

[naum]

The one-unit-per-tile isn't necessarily a poor design choice. But the gameplay wasn't balanced (along with the move to hexagon map) so it was screwy and still grates on me at times even though through the patches and expansions, the game is now in a playable state.

Yes, large stacks suck, but I would have liked an alternative like introducing *supply* (serving as a variable "soft" cap that could fluctuate upon tile developments / selected tech levels) considerations that could constrict excessive stacking without the hard limitation that ends up hampering map logistics and movement.

[Paelos]

I think there's a good medium between stack of doom and restrictive one unit only.

[Ingmar]

The one-unit-per-tile isn't necessarily a poor design choice. But the gameplay wasn't balanced (along with the move to hexagon map) so it was screwy and still grates on me at times even though through the patches and expansions, the game is now in a playable state.

Yes, large stacks suck, but I would have liked an alternative like introducing *supply* (serving as a variable "soft" cap that could fluctuate upon tile developments / selected tech levels) considerations that could constrict excessive stacking without the hard limitation that ends up hampering map logistics and movement.

Restrictions are what makes combat tactically interesting, though. I don't see any upside to stacking units at all, frankly.

[Tarami]

I think much of it could have been alleviated by simply scaling maps and unit movement/abilities up. Most of my issues with 1UPT are about map congestion. It's just waaay too fiddly to arrange units because they are in eachothers' way and going around obstacles is just far too costly. With squares it's only a matter of going by an adjacent tile, without actually affecting path length (aside from rough terrain). With hexes the path gets one tile longer unless you have enough movement to pass directly through, which many units do not.

[Ingmar]

Plan your attacks better! It is true that it is easier to make tactical mistakes in combat in Civ V than it was in previous editions. I view that as all upside.

[Tarami]

For me it's not about combat specifically, it's unit management in general. It feels so very clunky and awkward.

[HaemishM]

For me it's not about combat specifically, it's unit management in general. It feels so very clunky and awkward.

This. It doesn't feel like tactical planning so much as working around the clumsiness of the interface and weakness in pathing AI.

[Lantyssa]

I'm with Ingmar on this.  I much prefer the single unit restriction.

Maybe add a toggle in the options, but I'd worry it changes the balancing of the game too much.

[eldaec]

You have to accept the restriction as an abstraction that represents the advantage of a properly planned attack, but once you do it works well until the very late phases if the game.

[Morat20]

Meant to play for two hours, played for eight. So....yeah, not exactly the original Civ (I didn't blink and realize it was dawn) but still pretty decent.

The new method with hexes and ranges and stuff is a bit of a pain to learn.

[Merusk]

The only problem with the ranges - to me - is getting the modifiers down.  "What do you mean my archer has to be on top of him.. son of a bitch.."

[Sky]

The only problem with the ranges - to me - is getting the modifiers down.  "What do you mean my archer has to be on top of him.. son of a bitch.."

Huh?

[eldaec]

I think he's actually referring to the rules of direct/indirect fire and spotters?

[Morat20]

I think he's actually referring to the rules of direct/indirect fire and spotters?

Yeah, I really don't get that. There's a lot of "Why can't my guys shoot there?" stuff.

[Merusk]

Yes, that.  Often archers can hit 2 away, unless there's woods or jungle in the way.. or one of you is on a hill or in a river or..

Too often I think I have a shot and NOPE, move closer!

[eldaec]

Some dudes can only direct fire. They must be able to see the target square to fire.

Other dudes can indirect fire. They can shoot if any of their mates can see the target square.

You can't see through mountains/forests.

Range never changes.

Artillery, battleships, bombers can indirect fire. Most other dudes cannot.

Toward the end when your dudes can have half a dozen moves it is quite common to move a spotter right up to a target, have everyone shoot the target, then move your spotter out of range, all in one turn. Happens a lot in naval battles.

[rk47]

I think there's a good medium between stack of doom and restrictive one unit only.

CK2 understood this somewhat by adding supply cap on provinces. There's a certain limit and if there's more troops than the supply cap in the province, attrition occurs.
In CIV V you can easily call it the same and lower their attack power and HP per turn or something - perhaps a tech can increase stack limit by +1 / + 2 / +3

[Ingmar]

CK2 (which uses basically the same resource/supply system as all the prior Paradox strategy games) is a different type of game entirely. The 'right' design for isn't necessarily the right design for the other. All a stacking increase would do in Civ V is let you shield archers/siege behind infantry/armor more easily, which would basically kill the entire tactical layer they inserted in V.

[Teleku]

Yeah.  I think I'm really enjoying Civ 5 so much because the combat is so much more enjoyable than all the previous versions.  In all the other previous games, it was fuck terrain, tactics, or anything.  I'd just build up till I thought I had a critical mass of men to roll a city or more, then send the stack of doom to walk right up to the city, knock it over, then move on if I still had enough guys.  That was the extent of wars.

[Morat20]

I got irked yesterday because I'd disbanded most of my war machine after teaching France a lesson about what happens to backstabbers (they stop existing, for one) and then, well, I don't have any aluminum. And right between two city states is aluminum. Claimed by neither, but they're so close together I can't fit a city in.

So I made do with what I had. Which thankfully did involve a battleship, two carriers, and about five infantry units.

[Flinky]

Yes, that.  Often archers can hit 2 away, unless there's woods or jungle in the way.. or one of you is on a hill or in a river or..

Too often I think I have a shot and NOPE, move closer!

For all projectile units the rule boils down to a simple concept; You can't fire over a tile containing forest/jungle or a hill, unless your firing unit is itself on a hill.

As mentioned above, the Indirect Fire promotion allows you to ignore those sight restrictions. If you can see it (no matter who's providing the vision) and it's in range, you can fire at it.

[MrHat]

Also, you can upgrade Frigates to gain +1 to range, making them the most effective seige unit until Battleships.

I got irked yesterday because I'd disbanded most of my war machine after teaching France a lesson about what happens to backstabbers (they stop existing, for one) and then, well, I don't have any aluminum. And right between two city states is aluminum. Claimed by neither, but they're so close together I can't fit a city in.

So I made do with what I had. Which thankfully did involve a battleship, two carriers, and about five infantry units.

Re: lack of strategic resources - you can often trade your surplus luxury items for strategic resources, or if you have enough gold, straight up buy a stack from someone.

[Morat20]

Re: lack of strategic resources - you can often trade your surplus luxury items for strategic resources, or if you have enough gold, straight up buy a stack from someone.

It's my second playthrough and I'm on a relatively easy difficulty level. Nobody else has the tech needed to get aluminium. Or can they get it/find it once anyone sees it?

[Shannow]

I got irked yesterday because I'd disbanded most of my war machine after teaching France a lesson about what happens to backstabbers (they stop existing, for one) and then, well, I don't have any aluminum. And right between two city states is aluminum. Claimed by neither, but they're so close together I can't fit a city in.

So I made do with what I had. Which thankfully did involve a battleship, two carriers, and about five infantry units.

Snort.  The correct response is to conquer one of the cities and claim the resource for your own. 

[Tannhauser]

Wait until you have a map with only a single uranium resource! 

[Morat20]

Snort.  The correct response is to conquer one of the cities and claim the resource for your own.  

I did. I mean, I still HAD some military and really it's hard to stand up to bombers with pikeman and cannon.

Edited to add: Trying for a cultural victory, and what do I get? Two seperate starts surrounded by assholes. Ridiculously aggressive asssholes. I don't make enough early military units. (Plus, not being able to raze inconviently placed City-States is annoying. I needed that city gone to place my next one for best use).

[Maledict]

No matter your plan to victory you *are* going to end up at war with someone at some point. If going for a cultural victory then just keep your captured cities as puppets and fight limited wars rather than going on a wholesale rampage across the continent.

[Ingmar]

It doesn't really jump off the page but the Temple of Artemis is probably the best early game wonder - that "10% growth" is actually 10% more raw food production which multiplies with other growth mods, which means bigger cities and more production earlier. Beeline that, build some archers that it also helpfully helps you build faster, and you should be able to hold off just about anyone at the start.

[Maledict]

Yeah - it's highly prized by the AI for that reason and is a hard one to get at the higher levels.

My favourite ever style of game is playi g as Aztecs, going for tradition and grabbing that wonder and then building a specialist economy. You end up with cities at 45 pop and higher by the end game.

(Extra bonus - the bonus works on maritime city state food bonuses as well).

[Sky]

I just found out the game tracks your responses like "Oh, my bad I didn't mean to expand into your territory, totally won't happen again."

Got a message years later (I hadn't pushed it because Pachy had a ton of troops and I could hear the drums from 7 Cities of Gold), "You totally didn't let that happen again." Had to laugh, because I usually would keep expanding.

[Morat20]

Yeah, I just worked out last night (way too late at night, I was dragging at work) that puppet cities don't count towards your Culture costs for social upgrades, but you do get an obediant city (even if you can't control it) and culture and I think luxuries from it.

Currently I'm teaching the damn Celts a lesson.

When i get tired of regular Civ, I'm looking forward to trying that Fall from Heaven thing, which I haven't tried. :)

[Sky]

Things took a turn for the bad with Pachy. I get a spy and drop it in his capital. Then I start my long range plan of building around him and send a bunch of settlers with a decent little army to sneak through a mountain pass he needs... Then my spy tells me he's been using that pass to funnel troops to attack Rome. I turn around and let Caesar know what's up and decide to be a bit opportunistic. I send the settlers back home and set up the army on the borders as he declares on Rome. Then Pachy threatens me for the troop buildup and I don't take his crap. We enter war while his troops are all off fighting Rome, and I swarm his cities as the two city states on his flank attack as my allies.

Woops.

I roll through him, then hit the weakened Rome. Then finally agree to help China wipe out the Norsemen (they've spent the entire game weakening each other)...and it's just me and China on the continent. Poor, stupid Pachy started the whole powder keg.