Should mounted units have flank attack bonus against all previous siege units?

Should units have flank attack bonus against a current siege unit AND obsoletes

  • YES. Cavalry and cuirassier should have the bonus also against catapults and trebuchets.

    Votes: 120 90.2%

  • NO. It would unbalance the game.

    Votes: 13 9.8%
  • Total voters
    133
P

Pep

King
Joined
May 28, 2002
Messages
688
Location
Spain
In my last game, I almost lost a city because of a big stack of enemy catapults and trebuchets. It was my mistake because I upgraded my knigths to cuirassiers believing they would retain the flank attack bonus against catapults and trebuchets...

I can understand horse archers have a 50% bonus against catapults while knigths don't, because knigths have 10 strength base vs 6 base + 3 (50% bonus) = 9 strength of horse archers. So knigths (the upgrade path of horse archers) are better than horse archers.

What I can't understand is that cuirassiers are worse than knigths (and even horse archers!) againsts stacks of catapults or trebuchets. I think cuirassiers should have the flank attack bonus against cannons (as it's now) AND against catapults and trebuchets. Same for cavalry. And also I think helicopters should have the flanking attacks bonus against ALL siege units.

[UPDATE] Added edited CIV4UnitInfos.xml (based on 3.13 patch). Changes:
- Added flank attack vs catapults and trebuchets to cuirassier, conquistador, cavalry, cossack
- Added flank attack vs catapults, trebuchets and cannons to gunship

EDIT: attachment removed
 
This happens so many times when my cavalry attacks a civ which has spammed lots of trebuchets and catapults.
 
I believe that mounted units have the flanking bonus against siege units from their own era as well as adjacent eras. Not against greatly advanced or greatly ******ed technology.

Horse archers shouldn't have a bonus against cannons, for example, and if I'm being desperately attacked by catapults in the Napoleonic era, I should be able to handle it without a bonus.


Field Marshal- Why didn't you disable and destroy the enemy siege weapons?!!

Curiasseur Colonel- Sir! We killed their defending spearmen. I sent a company to capture their mules, another to blow up their munitions caissons but we couldn't find so much as track or a trace of them!

Field Marshall- But surely you could dispatch the crews and disable the mechanisms?

Col. - I sent a company each to do just that , Sir! The catapults were surrounded by scattered and piled boulders We couldn't pursue safely by horseback, and when we dismounted, we couldn't run fast enough in our breastplates to kill them . We had hammers and spikes to jam the fuseholes, but they didn't even have barrrels! So we just put boulders in the mechanisms and rode back.
 
Cuirasseurs do not get flanking vs Trebs and Cats. I can attest to that most definitely: Last night I had to kill 119 of Mehmed's Cuirasseurs just to get to the bottom of his stack, overrun his trebs, and take back my city. Foolish me, I had thought that I would be able to kill the trebs before they got there. . .

I did have fun. . .

. . . but I probably would have had more fun if he hadn't had those trebs :)
 
This drives me nuts, actually. Having a tech advantage should not prove to be a disadvantage when fighting a big SOD from a primitive civ.

EDIT: On second thought, perhaps this is for balance reasons. Collateral damage is the only mechanism a Civ behind on techs has of standing any chance whatsoever in combat. Maybe it should stay as-is, regardless of how frustrating it can be.
 
The problem is that cannons need steel somthing the AI Civs somtimes dont get till quite late, i've fought battles vs AI civs with grenadiers, cuirassiers & riflemen, an for there siege units....you guessed it catapults an trebs.

This of course made getting to the siege units very hard, it seems odd that you are rewarded for using outdated siege teck, with your more modern gunpowder an mounted units, over someone using modern siege teck with those same units, in short as it stands at the moment not only does it make some upgrades (knights>sars) a downgrade in some respects, but it's quite imbalanced as someone with cannons is actually at a disadvantage to another player of similar teck level who has decided to stay medieval on his his siege teck
 
Goodgimp said:
This drives me nuts, actually. Having a tech advantage should not prove to be a disadvantage when fighting a big SOD from a primitive civ.

EDIT: On second thought, perhaps this is for balance reasons. Collateral damage is the only mechanism a Civ behind on techs has of standing any chance whatsoever in combat. Maybe it should stay as-is, regardless of how frustrating it can be.
Click to expand...

Ding! Ding! Ding!

That and spamming. If I'm behind in tech, and The Apostolic Cartel is boxing me in, it's my only shot.
 
Of course they should. A cavalry unit injures cannons in a stack, but can't touch catapults? Its just abusable by an attacker, especially in multiplayer (I imagine).
 
As it is now is actually a player EXPLOIT! Now that you are aware of it, you can USE it by not upgrading all of your units. You know dang well that the AI won't utilize it well.

I do not comprehend the design philosophy for the current rule. Perhaps it will be explained, or maybe changed in the (estimated) mid-September patch.
 
When a stack is reduced to just cats and trebs, a knight attacking it destroys the entire stack if he wins. That's another feature that's lost if you upgrade to cavalry.
 
Krikkitone said:
no I don't think so
Click to expand...

That's a bit of a shame, mind you, sometimes you can destroy 4 siege via flanking, so that would be 4 XP plus whatever you get from the unit you killed, assuming you survived of course, not a bad haul.
 
Is there an easy way to allow mounted units to have the flank attack on all previous siege weapons as well, like editing an XML or something similar? I absolutely hate the fact that I am disadvantaged for having more advanced units, especially when facing those 50+ stacks
 
I can see why all with flanking attacks shouldn't flan against all previus units (if I squint), but surely a cuirassier isn't so modern that he's forgotten what a catapult is. Some softening up of this rule by allowing some to flank against some previous units would seem apropriate.
 
Edit the unitinfo.xml file. Each mounted unit has a list of siege units it can flank attack as part of its entry.
 
CloudedSun said:
Edit the unitinfo.xml file. Each mounted unit has a list of siege units it can flank attack as part of its entry.
Click to expand...

I am not sure how exactly to add new units. Here is what it says:

<FlankingStrike>
<FlankingStrikeUnitClass>UNITCLASS_CANNON</FlankingStrikeUnitClass>
<iFlankingStrength>100</iFlankingStrength>
</FlankingStrike>

Do I just add UNITCLASS_CATAPULT or whatever after the canon entry? Separated by a coma?

My only other encounter with editing XML was to increase the range for paratroopers and that was easy enough :)
 
I think that later units should absolutely have flank attack against earlier units.

Maybe there could be flank attack levels (only appearing with Helicopter and Mounted units):
1 - Catapult (possible basic for Horse Archer)
2 - Catapult, Trebuchet (basic for Knight, possible basic for Horse Archer)
3 - Catapult, Trebuchet, Cannon (basic for Cuirassier, possible basic for Cavalry)
4 - Catapult, Trebuchet, Cannon, Artillery (possible basic for Cavalry)
5 - Catapult, Trebuchet, Cannon, Artillery, Mobile Artillery (basic for Gunship)

In addition to that concept, there could be promotion(s) advancing that level (Flanking III etc.), which would allow Knights to have flank attack against Cannons or Chariots to have flank attack against Catapults. That would unfortunately led to possiblity of War Elephants having flank attacks, which shouldn't be possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Simple fix using AI friendly/Existing Game Mechanics to end the World of Axeman and the World of Catapults
Replies
2
Views
1K
MassRiflemen
M
E
[BTS] Earth Equatorial Islands - a more accurate realistic map for Civ4 BTS RFC
Replies
5
Views
285
HNation
HNation
M
UU/UB's and Wonders for map type, map speed and tech trading type
Replies
5
Views
1K
sampsa
sampsa
H
CIV4 BTS - Engineering Attack GUIDE
Replies
4
Views
3K
Re-loader
Re-loader
amateurgamer88
AG Land Combat Mod for AGYRM
Replies
3
Views
1K
amateurgamer88
amateurgamer88
Top Bottom