Melee Naval Units

[kiwimaster]

Does anybody else get a little annoyed that melee naval units can't move after attacking? It makes trying to do a naval-oriented war frustrating since you can't heal like melee land units can nor move away from enemy attacks like cavalry. And when doing coastal attacks, unless you have a fleet of ranged naval units to clear out all the enemy land units, the enemy units can recapture their city and instantly destroy the melee naval unit you had stationed inside as it spent all its movement points last turn on capturing the city.

Just wondering if it's just me or if others ever found this annoying.

 

[Gidoza]

Can't say that I've been annoyed by it. Maybe it could be a perk of one of the specialty naval units if it was needed, though.

 

[PurpleMentat]

With the kind of movement available to ships, letting melee move after attacking ends up with ships you can't see teleporting in, killing your ships, and teleporting back out of sight. Melee ships were recently given access to Medic promotions, and can get Supply at Coastal Raider II or Boarding Party II, giving you your 'anywhere healing.'

As for a land army repelling a naval invasion, makes perfect sense. You're not going to take and hold ground with just boats. If you could, invading Normandy would have been a cinch.

 

[Funak]

I gotta say that I'm completely fine with the current melee ships, they are really strong and really good at what they do. Sure being stuck in conquered cities is a pain, but that's a pain for landunits as well, that's why you have to clear out enemy units before you conquer the city.

 

[Zanteogo]

I gotta say that I'm completely fine with the current melee ships, they are really strong and really good at what they do. Sure being stuck in conquered cities is a pain, but that's a pain for landunits as well, that's why you have to clear out enemy units before you conquer the city.

Agreed.

I have always been sort of iffy on even allowing melee water units take cities in the first place. If you are in war, part of the point is preparing to take and hold cities.

 

[Kolaris]

Well there certainly needs to be a threat to coastal cities from the sea. Blockades aren't very effective, and bombarding doesn't even accomplish anything unless you take the city with a melee ship.

Or is there some malus for a city sitting at 0 health?

 

[Tubbilicious]

There have been times where I am highly reluctant to take a city, not wanting to increase my warmonger status. Perhaps there could be a negative for the person owning the city at 0 defence (outside of them actually having a city at 0 defence), or a positive for any further bombardment when not taking the city.

Maybe a small amount of plunder or culture.

 

[Gazebo]

Well there certainly needs to be a threat to coastal cities from the sea. Blockades aren't very effective, and bombarding doesn't even accomplish anything unless you take the city with a melee ship.

Or is there some malus for a city sitting at 0 health?

Blockades hurt their happiness (potentially quite a bit), can cause starvation, blocks naval trade routes from reliably getting through, and gives your naval units a CS boost. What's not to love?

Cities at 0 health have way more crime (more damage to the city = more crime). So again, you are hurting their economy.

G

 

[Kolaris]

Blockades mean being in range of the shore, so it's a temporary measure that leaves you weaker if their navy shows up.

Good to know about the crime though, that's a nice feature.