So Machine Gun has the strength of a Panzer?

Draskar said:
Maybe we have to concentrate on the BONUS of MG (Yellow triangle), no ranged unit has one (except for the bonus vs cities, but we can assume that MG doesn't have it).

Maybe is a bonus against artillery? but MG already have "Cover 2" by default.
And if MG have a special bonus like "shot at first sight" like the Citadel? (the map building created by Great Generals, im not sure about the name, my game is in italian)... maybe i'm travelling too much with my mind :)
Click to expand...

Cover 2 by default is confirmed? Where?
 
steave435 said:
Can easily be fixed by making any promotions that would make the MG overpower be lost on upgrade.
Click to expand...

Should we really start removing unique promotions though?

For other units they remain and they become extra powerful, but that is part of the allure of playing the civ then.

Removing a promotion here, would become a call to remove promotion's elsewhere:

(Like Cho-Ko-Nuh's extra Attack on Mech Inf/Rifles/Infantry)
(Janissaries full heal abilities on Rifles/Infantry/Mech Infantry)
Minutemen's sight on Rifles/Inf/Mech Inf
Etc.
 
Gucumatz said:
Should we really start removing unique promotions though?

For other units they remain and they become extra powerful, but that is part of the allure of playing the civ then.

Removing a promotion here, would become a call to remove promotion's elsewhere:

(Like Cho-Ko-Nuh's extra Attack on Mech Inf/Rifles/Infantry)
(Janissaries full heal abilities on Rifles/Infantry/Mech Infantry)
Minutemen's sight on Rifles/Inf/Mech Inf
Etc.
Click to expand...
Those civs are already balanced for that, but England is not balanced for having an extra range MG unit. On top of that, all those bonuses are available with a normal promotion anyway, except the healing.
 
ok ok :) 1-range for MG works quite well.

Ok, my mind is travelling again...what if the negative promotion is "setup before fire" allowing MG to fire AND melee (by not having the promotion "cannot melee")?

In this scenario, MG will be the WWI infantry, when setupped plays the role of strong defense unit, when moving it play the role of cannon fodder against setupped machinguns

It's quite revolutionary for the game engine, i'm sure about that, but think about:
1) Melee ships
2) If "missile unit=no melee" is a game axiom, why they needed a promotion to negate melee?

p.s. Another question: Fortified ranged units loses their status firing? I the answer is yes it's a problem for MG...
 
Montov said:
Cover 2 by default is confirmed? Where?
Click to expand...

Sorry it's not confirmed, the MG in the screenshot has the promotion, im supposing (due to the defensive attitude of MG) that Cover 1 or 2 is gained by default.
 
Draskar said:
ok ok :) 1-range for MG works quite well.

Ok, my mind is travelling again...what if the negative promotion is "setup before fire" allowing MG to fire AND melee (by not having the promotion "cannot melee")?

In this scenario, MG will be the WWI infantry, when setupped plays the role of strong defense unit, when moving it play the role of cannon fodder against setupped machinguns

It's quite revolutionary for the game engine, i'm sure about that, but think about:
1) Melee ships
2) If "missile unit=no melee" is a game axiom, why they needed a promotion to negate melee?

p.s. Another question: Fortified ranged units loses their status firing? I the answer is yes it's a problem for MG...
Click to expand...

That last question is a very good one, does anybody know?

I would not want to rule out what you are saying, but it has a very high melee strength, if it can actually use that offensively it would be very very overpowered, so i doubt that's the case. Seems illogical too, riflemen are the cannon fodder already ;)
 
Draskar said:
Sorry it's not confirmed, the MG in the screenshot has the promotion, im supposing (due to the defensive attitude of MG) that Cover 1 or 2 is gained by default.
Click to expand...

The screenshot shows no cover promotion, it shows 1 that looks like a shield, but it's the embarkation shield, not the cover shield. On top of that, it only has 1 generic bonus promotion and 1 generic negative, what those are is up to speculation. That generic bonus could be a defensive one to protect it from ranged attacks though.

I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from the current promotions though, that is something that could probably change very easily, it wouldn't take long to add "must set up" if they find it's needed.
 
A ranged attack results in losing the fortification bonus. That is the reason a barb archer in an encampment usually doesn't fire when you are in range. ;)

But that means a MG has full fortification for the first (surprise) attack, and thereafter it doesn't have. Which is not bad gameplay I think. You get heavy resistence from MG for 1 turn, but with persistence the opposing army will have a chance after turn 2 to take it out. It'll still be a good first defense to slow down the enemy, which is the primary function. But you need some kind of backup to get through it.

Draskar said:
Sorry it's not confirmed, the MG in the screenshot has the promotion, im supposing (due to the defensive attitude of MG) that Cover 1 or 2 is gained by default.
Click to expand...

There are 2 screenshots with MG, and none of them have Cover 2.
 
I'm sorry, it was the "embarkation promotion"...
 
Montov said:
A ranged attack results in losing the fortification bonus. That is the reason a barb archer in an encampment usually doesn't fire when you are in range. ;)

But that means a MG has full fortification for the first (surprise) attack, and thereafter it doesn't have. Which is not bad gameplay I think. You get heavy resistence from MG for 1 turn, but with persistence the opposing army will have a chance after turn 2 to take it out. It'll still be a good first defense to slow down the enemy, which is the primary function. But you need some kind of backup to get through it.



There are 2 screenshots with MG, and none of them have Cover 2.
Click to expand...

That could be the special bonus though, allowing it to stay in fortification even after attacking.
 
The only things we know for sure are:
-It is a ranged unit
-It has as much ranged strength as melee strength (60)
-It (probably) has one generic bonus promotion
-It has one generic malus promotion

What we have speculated is:
-The fact that it has as much ranged strength as melee strength leads to the speculation that it has only 1 range.
-60 strength is high, but other units' strength have probably been raised (the exact multiplicative factor is completely unknown).
-Since the damage formula has to be reworked to account for the new "100hp rule", the relative strength of 60 ranged strength vs 60 melee strength, which until now was 2/3, may be changed too.
-The generic malus promotion is probably "cannot melee attack", since all ranged units until now have it.
-The generic bonus is completely unknown and up to your wildest speculations. The screenshot doesn't give us the name of it, so it could even be morale (and thus be completely unrelated to the specific unit, rather an already known national wonder, for example), for all we know.
-We don't know either if the MG will be an upgrade from the archer-xbow tree.

Take into account too that the unit may be changed before the release of the expansion.

PS: sorry for pretty much repeating what you said, CYZ :p
 
It seems pretty likely that the MG upgrade from the archer line - anything else would just appear a little odd. But going straight from x-bows to MG seems like a massive gap. Any speculation as to what else they might add?

Grenadier seems like a possible choice, but they were assault troops, not support troops; so that doesn't really work. Possibly something akin to Voltiguer or the British Riflemen of the napoleonic wars? So light infantry with slightly longer range that stayed out of close combat. Historically they were deployed further ahead of line infantry, but so were MG so thats not really a problem.
They could also fit in the tech tree somewhere between musketmen and riflemen (no point trying to guess where when new techs are being added). I, for one, can't think of a single good name for them, other than light infantry which sounds pants.
 
Like I suggested before, someone should pop a question to producer Shirk to his Q&A about MG's.. I've already sent my question.. ;)
 
Lord Olleus said:
It seems pretty likely that the MG upgrade from the archer line - anything else would just appear a little odd. But going straight from x-bows to MG seems like a massive gap. Any speculation as to what else they might add?

Grenadier seems like a possible choice, but they were assault troops, not support troops; so that doesn't really work. Possibly something akin to Voltiguer or the British Riflemen of the napoleonic wars? So light infantry with slightly longer range that stayed out of close combat. Historically they were deployed further ahead of line infantry, but so were MG so thats not really a problem.
They could also fit in the tech tree somewhere between musketmen and riflemen (no point trying to guess where when new techs are being added). I, for one, can't think of a single good name for them, other than light infantry which sounds pants.
Click to expand...

I've had in my head a skirmisher line, first could be a javelin thrower or a slinger, like Inca uu, then a rifleman unit, maybe called Skirmisher.
 
Monthar said:
I think ya'll are overlooking exactly what the increase from 10 to 100 HP would do without also increasing the strength of all units, so let me enlighten you. With the current strengths two of the same unit fighting each other with no bonuses on flat grasslands would do about 5 damage. With the current 10 HP that's 50%, so a minimum of 2 turns or two of that unit to kill the enemy unit. Increasing the HP to 100 would mean taking 10x the attacks to kill that same unit, so either 20 turns or 20 of your units to kill 1 of theirs.

Now if they also increased the strength of all units to about double their current strength that 20 turns or 20 units drops to only about 10, because the units are now doing about twice the damage per hit. Even if, as I suspect, the strength increase is only 66.7%, thus making the infantry also have a strength of 60, that 5 damage per hit become about 8.33, reducing it from 20 hits to 12 hits for that same kill.

Let's put this into perspective. Your scout upgrades to archer. You use it and your warrior to take out a barb camp. The barb is fortified giving it a 50% bonus, so it generally takes 2 hits from the archer and 1-2 from the warrior to clear that camp, so a minimum of 2 turns. Now they increase the HP of all units from the current 10 to 100. Do you really want to have to spend 20 turns or send a full army to deal with a single barbarian brute in its camp? Especially since it'll most likely spawn 2 more units in the time it takes to clear it with just that archer and warrior, or even the time it takes to build/buy enough units to reduce that to a reasonable number of turns.

Also look at just how fast units become obsolete on standard speed in the current game. Making combat take up to 10 times longer by only increasing the HP to 100 and not also increasing the strength of all units would only exacerbate this problem.

Now let say they did double the strength of all units. That would turn the infantry into a 72 strength unit vs the machine gun's 60 strength. Would it then make any sense what-so-ever to have those ridiculous restrictions on the machine gun ya'll keep harping about?
Click to expand...

You also can change what strengths cause what damage values. So you say you are multiplying their health by 10, and to compensate you need to multiply strength by 10. This is not necessarily true. You can do it this way, sure. To compensate for x10 hp, you need to multiply DAMAGE by 10. Not strength. Damage. One way to do that is to multiply strength proportionally, or you could simply increase the base damage units do. So that they do 50 damage per standard hit instead of 5.

If this is what they have done, then 60 is a really high stat for strength of a machine gun. And stop wording everything you say so poorly. You are not 'enlightening' people and there is no point in telling people to stop 'harping' on 'ridiculous restrictions'. This is a place for discussion, not insults. Implying that they are unenlightened or stubborn or whatever is impolite.
 
Not to mention it's all speculation. We simply don't know by how much strength or resulting damage is going to be increased. We don't know if the 60 damage from the machine gun is serious or if they're still changing things.
 
GamerKG said:
You also can change what strengths cause what damage values. So you say you are multiplying their health by 10, and to compensate you need to multiply strength by 10. This is not necessarily true. You can do it this way, sure. To compensate for x10 hp, you need to multiply DAMAGE by 10. Not strength. Damage. One way to do that is to multiply strength proportionally, or you could simply increase the base damage units do. So that they do 50 damage per standard hit instead of 5
Click to expand...

No, you can't. Damage is based on the ratio of the attacking units strength compared to the defending unit. A 500 strength unit will do the same damage to a 400 strength unit as a 50 strength unit will do to a 40 strength unit.
 
And it's completely impossible for the game designers to change that ratio?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lonecat Nekophrodite
Millennia Review: Military Units.
Replies
0
Views
436
Lonecat Nekophrodite
Lonecat Nekophrodite
S
Late Game War Tedium Discussion
3 4 5
Replies
84
Views
7K
stii
S
A
Late game siege rework discussion
Replies
7
Views
1K
Arthur Jama
A
Recursive
  • Locked
New BETA Version - 4.5.1 (February 28, 2024)
9 10 11
Replies
211
Views
24K
Recursive
Recursive
Lonecat Nekophrodite
Navy in Civililzation 7
Replies
11
Views
1K
dagriggstar
D
Top Bottom