(4-19a) Proposal: Atlatlist and Bowman promotion swap

[Legen]

Spoiler Atlatlist stats, Mayan UU :

Cost: 100 (from 110 )
Unlocked at Mathematics (instead of Currency)
Combat: 13 (from 12 )
Ranged Combat: 14
Range: 2
Movement: 2

Atlatl Strike (+33% RCS when attacking Wounded Units; kept on upgrade)
May Not Melee Attack
Naval Target Penalty (-20% CS when attacking Naval Units)

Spoiler Bowman stats, Babylonian UU :

Cost: 70
Unlocked at Calendar
Combat: 8 (from 6 )
Ranged Combat: 10 (from 9 )
Range: 2
Movement: 2

Indirect Fire (-10% RCS when attacking. Ranged attacks may be performed over obstacles, as long as other friendly Units can see the target)
Naval Target Penalty (-20% CS when attacking Naval Units)

Proposal:

• Atlatlist gains Indirect Fire, replacing Atlatl Strike.
• Bowman gains Atlatl Strike, replacing Indirect Fire.
  • Atlatl Strike renamed to Marksmanship.

Rationale:

An idea came that Babylon and Maya would likely benefit more from their UUs if Indirect Fire and Atlatl Strike were swapped.

For Maya, it makes sense to pair their jungle bias and flavor with a promotion that is reliant on such kind of terrain to shine. Indirect Fire is a valuable promotion when fighting in terrain that blocks line of sight, notably dense forests and jungles. Maya has strong incentives to settle in the middle of such terrain due to their UI and tends to preserve its trees, as the UI works well with forest/jungle related buildings. As such, Maya's wars usually happen where Indirect Fire is most valuable at; their terrain bias could be turned into a reliable military advantage with it.

In contrast, Atlatl Strike tends to shine when forests and jungles are not around. The +25% CS those tiles give to the defender (for reference, hills grant +10% CS) greatly mitigates that +33% RCS, negating the sting Atlatl Strike would otherwise have. Add that these tiles also block line of sight, limiting your ability to engage and focus fire with archers, and you have a preference for an open field, preferably chopping nearby trees that could act as cover for an enemy. All of which run counter to Maya's preference for heavy forested terrain.

For Babylon, it makes sense to pair the defensive flavor set by their UB with a threatening garrison unit, consolidating Babylon's theme of fortified cities. Atlatl Strike could allow for a strong follow-up to the city's attacks and retaliations, so that an invader can't afford to maintain an assault or siege for long. And Atlatl Strike performs best in a wide open terrain, where you're in most need for a strong garrison. This isn't an uncommon scenario; when resources are abundant in an open field, Babylon is more willing than usual to settle there due to the extra safety from its UB. And clearing trees is common for this civ, either due to needing a place for another Academy, or to cultivate farms to feed scientist specialists (for even more academies), incidentally removing potential cover against Atlatl Strike.

In contrast, Babylon's lack of a preferred terrain and extra tendency to chop trees don't work well with Indirect Fire's reliance on the right terrain to shine. And the -10% RCS also makes the unit a less threatening garrison overall, working against Babylon's defensive theme.

 

[gwennog]

If the idea seems good, it is necessary all the same to keep a certain historical reality. An Atlatl is a spear-thrower, a weapon made to shoot straight at the target and not in a bell above an obstacle.
Nothing to say to change the promotion of the Bowman but on the other hand, I would rather see for the Atlatlist a range lowered to 1 tile but with a huge damage bonus for example.

 

[azum4roll]

And the -10% RCS also makes the unit a worse garrison overall, working against Babylon's defensive theme.

I don't get this point.

 

[Enginseer]

What azum4roll said.
The Babylonian UU does have +1 RCS and the promotion, giving them 9 RCS except the difference here is that you can get extra RCS back from promotions (0.9 vs 1)

 

[KlHannibal2]

If the idea seems good, it is necessary all the same to keep a certain historical reality. An Atlatl is a spear-thrower, a weapon made to shoot straight at the target and not in a bell above an obstacle.
Nothing to say to change the promotion of the Bowman but on the other hand, I would rather see for the Atlatlist a range lowered to 1 tile but with a huge damage bonus for example.

I would see indirect fire fornMayas in a more abstract way. Something like atlatlists closing fast inside jungle, striking, and disapperaing.

Realism-wise, this would mean making them a 1 range unit with 3 moves, move after attack, and ignore forest/jungle terrain cost. But this would make them less useful and not fir the ranged unit line. So I would settle with indirect fire as an abstract representation of this tactic.

Same goes for the Iroquois prowler.

 

[gwennog]

I would see indirect fire fornMayas in a more abstract way. Something like atlatlists closing fast inside jungle, striking, and disapperaing.

Yes, it can actually look like that.

Realism-wise, this would mean making them a 1 range unit with 3 moves, move after attack, and ignore forest/jungle terrain cost. But this would make them less useful and not fir the ranged unit line. So I would settle with indirect fire as an abstract representation of this tactic.

I really like this idea and if the Atlatlist replaced the archer we would be in the continuity of the slinger.

 

[Legen]

I don't get this point.

What azum4roll said.
The Babylonian UU does have +1 RCS and the promotion, giving them 9 RCS except the difference here is that you can get extra RCS back from promotions (0.9 vs 1)

I meant that an attacker can be dissuaded from approaching a city if the ranged damage taken from the city + garrison is expected to be very high. You've probably been on the receiving end at times, in which an unit approaches an enemy city and takes so much ranged damage that you decide to keep your current forces away from it for a while. The UB's extra +2 to the city helps in this regard, and a ranged garrison can further support that if it also provides a stronger attack. The -10% RCS on Indirect Fire does the opposite of that, while Atlatl Strike would provide that stronger attack.

I really like this idea and if the Atlatlist replaced the archer we would be in the continuity of the slinger.

BNW civ had the Atlatlist as an archer that unlocked earlier, and some versions of VP had the Bowman as a composite bowman instead. Nothing really prevents these two UUs from having the unit they replace swapped if you want, and I think it makes sense to have the Atlatlist being a continuity of the slinger. Though, that's a separate proposal.

 

[gwennog]

I think it makes sense to have the Atlatlist being a continuity of the slinger. Though, that's a separate proposal.

My proposal was in the direction of making a 1 range atlatlist as proposed by @KlHannibal2 . But I will not make a counter-proposal to yours, I am tired of the functioning of the Congress with proposal and counter-proposal and finally something that passes by 3 votes difference. I think that a single proposal resulting from compromise is more valid, otherwise, I will vote yes or no, or will abstain and do my little homemade tweak to correct what I don't like.
But in the end, your proposal doesn't bother me, it's just that I'm misleading the Atlatlist with respect to a historical vision, but that's not unacceptable at all.

 

[Legen]

I'll sponsor this.

 

[Recursive]

Proposal sponsored by Legen.