View Single Post

Default 

August 1st, 2013, 04:06
Originally Posted by Roq View Post

As for the lack of stacking in recent Civ games. That's a step in the wrong direction, from a strategy POV because it increases micromanagement of battles; and it's a very gamey mechanism that has nothing to do with simulation. That is certainly something I'd hate to see in Paradox's grand strategy games. Besides that is hardly a "fundamental" innovation, since it's just totally obvious you can stack or not… Hex based maps are as old as war games are…
I think I understand a little bit where you are coming from, but for me, I'd have to say that I have the complete opposite opinion. Removing "stacks of doom" is what revived my interest in Civ, having "burned out" on Civ up to that point - I never could get into Civ 4 because I was so tired of how warfare played out, and because warfare is such a major part of Civ, I just couldn't stomach the stacks anymore. If Civ had the same depth as Paradox games in other facets of gameplay, I might not have minded the stacks as much, but to me, throwing stacks at each other just made the experience seem a little bit shallow.

Paradox's games, however, don't focus quite so heavily on warfare. Sure, it's there in heavy doses, but it has so much more depth to the other mechanics that I don't mind the simple warfare aspects. Still, I would greatly appreciate more direct control in these situations. A grid or hex-based solution might not have been the best answer for Civ, but for me, it added much more tactical depth and actual meaning to troop type, placement, formations, battle-lines, movement, etc.

Basically, I personally prefer as much direct control over outcomes as possible, especially when it comes to warfare. Whether I win or lose should depend on my tactical abilities and awareness, not how big my stack is.
Nerevarine is offline

Nerevarine

Nerevarine's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#22

Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 839