(5-WS) Counterproposal: Withdraw From Melee Change (Pt 2 - Withdraw -> Melee Damage reduction for certain units)

[BliTTzZ]

MAGI: This counterproposal was merged int with the mainline proposal, and so is no longer necessary.

Original proposal

The only change compared to original proposal is what bonuses Alhambra provides.

Original:
Jinete promotion now gives: All mounted units take 15% less damage when defending from melee.

Counterproposal:
Alhambra now gives 2 separate promotions for melee and ranged mounted units.
Jinete promotion now provides 15% damage reduction from melee attacks when defending.
Melee mounted units now receive Scara promotion. It provides 15% damage reduction when attacking.

Rationale:
Cavalry historically is not very good at defending, but with proper traning they can reduce losses during swift and well executed attack. Also ranged mounted cavalry are more fragile than melee mounted cavalry and use their speed and agility to avoid being hit at all (evasion).

 

[N.Core]

Counterproposal:
Jinete promotion now gives: melee mounted units take 15% less damage when attacking, ranged mounted units receive +1 movement.

This is technically unfeasible. Mounted Ranged and Archer units shared the same Unit Combat.

 

[Anarcomu]

Ranged units and skirmisher already do not share all promotions, I doubt adding a specific promotion to all skirmisher named "Jinete" giving +1 movement is unfeasible.

 

[N.Core]

Ranged units and skirmisher already do not share all promotions, I doubt adding a specific promotion to all skirmisher named "Jinete" giving +1 movement is unfeasible.

You have to understand how building provides promotion works to know that it's unfeasible.

 

[BliTTzZ]

Updated the proposal.

 

[Recursive]

This is technically unfeasible. Mounted Ranged and Archer units shared the same Unit Combat.

Ranged units and skirmisher already do not share all promotions, I doubt adding a specific promotion to all skirmisher named "Jinete" giving +1 movement is unfeasible.

You have to understand how building provides promotion works to know that it's unfeasible.

It isn't. It may require new code to do so, but it's absolutely possible to apply a promotion to specific units without applying them to every unit in a combat class. It isn't modmodder friendly but the standing policy is that modmods adapt to VP, not the other way around.

And if this is the case perhaps we should separate the combat classes, if possible?

 

[pineappledan]

The easiest way to do it would be to copy how the mongol trait does it, which is to add a table allowing players to give a free promotion to specific unit classes.

That would also allow buildings to assign more than 1 promotion, and give a lot of control to modmodders.

 

[BliTTzZ]

Reversed back to original proposal.

 

[Stalker0]

Reversed back to original proposal.

MAGI: Its a bit unclear here if you are keeping the original proposal with ONLY the jinete change, or if you just making the jinete change.

If its the latter, its good as is. If its the former, I would copy the original proposal into here, and then just note the specific change for clarity.

 

[Recursive]

The easiest way to do it would be to copy how the mongol trait does it, which is to add a table allowing players to give a free promotion to specific unit classes.

That would also allow buildings to assign more than 1 promotion, and give a lot of control to modmodders.

Agreed, that's a better idea. Unit classes are both VP and modmodder friendly.

 

[azum4roll]

So every modmodder will have to remember to add it to both the Mongolia list AND the Jinete list if they add a new mounted ranged unit class (just EE I guess).

I dislike the addition of +1 move to mounted ranged though. Just the mounted melee part is enough.

 

[pineappledan]

Even if you made an entire unit combat class for skirmishers, separate from the archer combat class, that wouldn't solve the other issue this proposal faces: A wonder can't give 2 different promotions on empire.

I agree, the +1 movement to a unit that already has 5 movement seems a bit lame. I would rather increase their damage.

 

[BliTTzZ]

MAGI: Its a bit unclear here if you are keeping the original proposal with ONLY the jinete change, or if you just making the jinete change.

If its the latter, its good as is. If its the former, I would copy the original proposal into here, and then just note the specific change for clarity.

It is the former.

Even if you made an entire unit combat class for skirmishers, separate from the archer combat class, that wouldn't solve the other issue this proposal faces: A wonder can't give 2 different promotions on empire.

I agree, the +1 movement to a unit that already has 5 movement seems a bit lame. I would rather increase their damage.

You have a point. What about -15% damage from melee attack when attacking for mounted melee and -15% damage from melee attack when defending for mounted ranged then?

 

[azum4roll]

I don't know why you have to make two promotions with the same name that do different things. It's very confusing to players.

 

[Recursive]

That's a valid point, the promotions should probably have different names.

 

[BliTTzZ]

Updated OP.

 

[pineappledan]

I don't know why you have to make two promotions with the same name that do different things. It's very confusing to players.

On that note, something really ought to be done about the 3 different lightning warfare promotions.