Bay 12 Games Forum

I'd imagine what's happening here is inefficient movement as well as incorrect assessment of risk.
Movement in Civ5 is extremely punishing relative to other civ games. One false hex and your one unit will be obliterated. Also, given how much more valuable each unit is in Civ 5, losing just the one can easily lose you the war.
A nooblet to the game will probably make these kind of mistakes often, and given that obviously he can't be making any mistakes, the game must be fucking wrong. It's clearly the logical answer.
Personally, I've taken cities with just two or three units and so has the AI.
Though I'm not really sure what's going on with this thread as this flamewar came out of nowhere.

Two considerations.
1. I've surrounded cities to the point that I can't get new units in. I'm pretty sure that "inefficient unit placement" isn't the issue.
2. If unit placement is so important to warfare, why is there nothing giving us hints on how to do it?!?

If you play "soft" and give ground to the AI you can get them to overextend pretty easily and thus isolate and destroy their units – do this before trying to take cities (unless the city is itself isolated).

The units were destroyed before my attempted siege.

It makes sense for sieges to take years at some points in history from a realism perspective, since they were often won by attrition.

Older-era turns are individually longer than any historical sieges.
And sieges generally require fortifications of the kind that aren't needed to make capturing cities a real pain in the neck.

Yeah, but you also have a single city in Civ 5 effectively taking up, say, the Entirety of France. So it can represent the resistance of the area as a whole, not just the specific city combat.

Even ignoring how such things should be represented with units in the area rather than just making cities impossible to take over in a reasonable amount of time, I haven't seen normal (ie, non-city-state and non-early-game) civs without a few cities.

How about this. Take the 10 largest cities in the worlds largest countries and try to occupy them without firing a shot. You would run up against a huge resistance even if that countries entire military was off on the other side of it or invading a foreign land.

Well, that depends. How many troops are you invading with? And what, exactly, qualifies as "huge resistance"? Is it enough for them to try, or would they need to drive off your army? (Not to mention that citizens having good weapons relative to the military is a pretty new thing, discounting pre-military times; a peasant with a pitchfork is no match for an armed, armored knight or even footsoldier. And, of course, modern citizens' firearms are outclassed by a variety of military technology.)
And why does this apply to even little 1-Pop burgs?

((Wait, what happened to Murder Night and their band of presumably equally politically-suicidally named followers? Did they clash with the Order?))

...
Crud. Forgot about them.
You know what? This would be a great thing to discuss in the OOC thread. If we had one.
But since we don't...well, Murder Night is a top-tier magician, with other powerful followers and a mundane army. I don't think the Order would bother her, and M.N. has enough domestic issues.

Kyle taps his chin.
"Hm... sounds more like a psychopath than a beast. Beasts have reasons ya know."

<Depends on the psychopath, depends on the beast, depends on the action.>

<*Yawn* Define 'murder'.>

<You beat me to it, I'll leave you to it.>

<Killing without discernible reason or remorse.>

<Be warned, Cyrielle, you will lose a fair chunk of respect if you screw this one up.>

1. News to me.
2. Not all do. From your description, not most do.

Oh.
So it wasn't supposed to be gibberish. Or a flower on a stick.

This argument about semantics has little to no bearing with the theory at hand at all.
So who the fuck even cares.

*raises hand*

<William, where are you going to place your bracelet? Needless to say, carrying a magical item on your person when trying to infiltrate an extremist organization opposed to magic isn't the wisest idea.>

<No problem. I'm wearing a long-sleeved shirt, and more importantly Lunette and Yomiko designed a device which masks the bracelet's magical signature while preserving its function. I appreciate the concern, though.>

"She doesn't love you like I do. To hell with her, if she hadn't gotten with you, she would have just gotten with Mallory. The only reason why she isn't with both you and Mallory at the same time is because he wouldn't have none of that crap. While I was training with you to get your curse under controle, she just googled her own problem. And it's not even something urgent! And while I, while everyone was risking their lives in battle, she, the immortal one, who already died twice in this castle and suffered no damage other than slight inconvenience, she the one who should have the biggest motivation and the lowest risk, stayed away from the fight as far as possible. All she ever does is take kisses and offer nothing in return. She doesn't even begin to deserve you."

<I understand that you're new to this, but that's a pretty terrible way to settle a dispute between friends, let alone someone you want to love you back. And you don't need my power to tell you that. Trying to guilt someone into loving you doesn't result in love, it results in guilt. Are you the kind of person who's so self-centered and heartless that someone pretending to love you out of a feeling of debt is as acceptable as actual love?>
<If you want Alice to love you, be the kind of person Alice wants to love. Trying to guilt her like you did? Demanding answers? Putting it into a you-versus-Rose situation, forcing her to choose a side? Probably not attributes of that kind of person.>

I thought I made it clear that I was defining scrambling as "data's being moved to funny places," while "data is just FUBAR'd" is "corrupted"?