COMBINED ARMS

[Juin]

'You know that one unit per tile thing we were doing? Well we're still doing that, totally, we're just expanding on it so that we're not doing that any more.'

That's a cute way to back-pedal lol.

[Badhabit]

Where did you get this part?

[Chaos12Legion]

Originally posted by Juin Roet:

'You know that one unit per tile thing we were doing? Well we're still doing that, totally, we're just expanding on it so that we're not doing that any more.'

That's a cute way to back-pedal lol.

Its still not one tile its a better system than both civ 4 and civ 5... I just hope they never go back fully to the civ 4 system it was bad.

[Illimitus]

Yes, make the "one unit" an entire army by combing units. Make available with "leadership" tech.

[Sendokami]

It will probably work like in civ 3.

[Illimitus]

Civ 3 had a great system.

[Juin]

Originally posted by Badhabit:

Where did you get this part?

From the store page, about this game section, sub-section: COMBINED ARMS:

"Expanding on the “one unit per tile” design, support units can now be embedded with other units, like anti-tank support with infantry, or a warrior with settlers. Similar units can also be combined to form powerful “Corps” units. "

Originally posted by Patrikseve:

Its still not one tile its a better system than both civ 4 and civ 5... I just hope they never go back fully to the civ 4 system it was bad.

Oh, definitely. I mean, I'm all for it, it should give a better balance and tactical options; not that I thought one unit per tile was terrible. But it's just the phrasing that makes me chuckle.

[Illimitus]

FYI an Army is a stack of Doom in real life; one of the great choices in warfare is whether to mass or to spread out. 5 hurt the game strategically and tactically with 1UPT, perhaps capping it at 3 to 6 UPT would have been a better choice.

[kireta]

Originally posted by Patrikseve:

I just hope they never go back fully to the civ 4 system it was bad.

I don't get how people were not able to deal with stacks in Civ 4, when whole siege class effectively served as "stack control" units. Not to mention there's nothing unfair about losing to enemy who can severly outproduce you.
On the other hand AI could never handle 1UPT combat. Fighting war with AI in Civ 5 was nothing short of seal clubbing.

As for Civ 6
Allow stacking. Keep ranged attacks of siege weapons, enhance collaterial damage, and even stacks of doom will become deathtraps. Limit attack range of non-siege ranged units to adjective tiles only.

[p0T@T0]

Hope they won't turn back to the civ 3-4 times regarding the number of units per cell.

[strigvir]

Originally posted by Juin Roet:

From the store page, about this game section, sub-section: COMBINED ARMS:

"Expanding on the “one unit per tile” design, support units can now be embedded with other units, like anti-tank support with infantry, or a warrior with settlers. Similar units can also be combined to form powerful “Corps” units. "

Sounds like another mechanic AI wouldn't know a ♥♥♥♥ about. Terrain-based promos were bad enough, now there are unit combos on top of this.

[Enigmatic]

Can a flying unit go same tile as a ground unit? As long as it's not Civ 4 stacking, That way annoying and made you feel evil for nuking.

[Dorian Gray]

I always liked the "Combined Arms" combat feature. It gave more of a tactical sense to even strategic-level games & and a reason to diversify force composition.

This could have been a component of Civ6 Division & Armies compositions, as anybody with any Order of Battle (OOB) experience knows that "Tank" Armies are not a simple grouping of 3 "Tank" Divisions, but would actually be more along the lines of a 1 to 3 ratio of armor to [mech] infantry.

That may have been more detail than the designers wished to go, but it would have made it a lot more interesting. I could easily see new Division / Army possibilities based on the merging of various sub-unit types.

But as it is now, Divisions & Armies are nothing more than a 1-dimensional, cheesy way to implement unit stacking. :(