• Our Forum Hosts will be doing maintenance sometime in the next 72 hours and you may experience an outage lasting up to 5 minutes.

[Vote] (1-19) Proposed Replacements for Trailblazer Double Movement Promotions

Approval Vote for Proposal #19 (instructions below)


  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Recursive

Already Looping
Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
3,907
Location
Antarctica
Voting Instructions
Players, please cast your votes in the poll above. Vote "Yea" for every proposal you'd be okay with if it were implemented. Vote "Nay" if you'd be okay if these proposals weren't implemented. You can vote for any number of options.

All votes are public. If you wish, you can discuss your choice(s) in the thread below. You can change your vote as many times as you want until the poll closes.

VP Congress: Session 1, Proposal 19

Title: Replace double movement promotions
Proposer: @ilteroi
Sponsor(s): @ilteroi
Previous Discussion Thread: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/26-proposal-replace-double-movement-promotions.679360/

Proposal Details
why should a unit ever be faster in jungle than on plains?

concrete proposal for the trailblazer promotion line, taken from @DeAnno

Trailblazer 1: +1 Speed, +40% Withdraw chance
Trailblazer 2: +1 Speed, +40% Withdraw chance
Trailblazer 3: Ignore ZOC, Can enter mountains, Can embark without fishing


VP Congress: Session 1, Proposal 19a
Title: Trailblazer Scout Promotions Rework
Proposer: @pineappledan
Sponsor(s): @ilteroi
Previous Discussion Thread: https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...l-trailblazer-scout-promotions-rework.679580/

Proposal Details
This is a counterproposal to @ilteroi's proposal for removing double movement abilities from the scout line.
His proposal adds % withdraw chances as recompense for the lost double movement abilities. Withdraw chances have already been removed from the scout line in the past, because they were random chance mechanics and unpopular with certain members of the community.

Here is what I propose:
All Recon Units have base 3 :c5moves:moves and lose "Ignore Terrain Cost" (affects Pathfinder, Scout, Paratrooper, Special Forces, XCOM. Explorer and Commando are Unaffected)
  • Trailblazer 1:
    • +1 Sight.
    • Ignore movement penalties on forest, jungle, and hills.
  • Trailblazer 2:
    • +1 :c5moves:moves.
    • Ignore movement penalties from desert, snow, marshes, and rivers.
    • no penalty for attacking over rivers.
  • Trailblazer 3:
    • Ignores ZOC.
    • Can cross mountains and embark
    • +20%:c5strength: CS Outside friendly territory.
Other promotions:
  • Scouting 1(Available at TB 2 and Survival 2): +1 Sight
  • Scouting 2: +1 :c5moves:moves
  • Scouting 3: removed
  • Frogman (New promotion):
    • Available at TB III
    • Costs 1 Move to Embark and Disembark
    • No penalty to attack from embarked
    • +50%:c5strength:defense when Embarked
 
Last edited:

Tekamthi

King
Joined
Aug 12, 2016
Messages
774
The concern I have with either of these proposals, is the issue identified to fix was the "double movement" promos due to the movement cheese these impart; but then they add heavy movement bonus that will apply even more broadly than before? in PD's version, which it looks like we are headed towards, recon will be faster than, or at least as fast as most mounted units?

Also, why is CS% bonus outside friendly going away? This issue doesn't seem to be discussed at all in either of the proposal threads. Is there another thread somewhere that explored this aspect?

I voted nay-only; I agree a fix is in order but both of these need more time in the VP-community oven.
 

Stalker0

Baller Magnus
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
9,590
The concern I have with either of these proposals, is the issue identified to fix was the "double movement" promos due to the movement cheese these impart; but then they add heavy movement bonus that will apply even more broadly than before? in PD's version, which it looks like we are headed towards, recon will be faster than, or at least as fast as most mounted units?

Also, why is CS% bonus outside friendly going away? This issue doesn't seem to be discussed at all in either of the proposal threads. Is there another thread somewhere that explored this aspect?

I voted nay-only; I agree a fix is in order but both of these need more time in the VP-community oven.
my thoughts exactly
 

Anarcomu

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 4, 2022
Messages
70
In the current state, as soon as a scout reach traiblazer I, they're already as fast in forest/jungle as mounted units (4 moves) ; at trailblazer II, this applies to desert and snows as well, except mounted get a malus there.
When you reach scouting III, the base 3 movements gets you a max 6 move in one turn.
The only real difference here is that the heavy recon movement is no longer tied to terrain. But to say that they would be faster with this proposal sound realy false to me.
 

Tekamthi

King
Joined
Aug 12, 2016
Messages
774
the base 3 movements gets you a max 6 move in one turn... But to say that they would be faster with this proposal sound realy false to me.
a 5/6-move recon (by my count its 5 but maybe i am overlooking something) would be faster than a 4-move mounted unit.

Another confusing aspect here is the "ignore movement penalties" in PD's proposal -- is this supposed to be double movement?? recon already get ignore all terrain movement penalties, and PD doesn't propose to remove it. Gonna ignore the penalties twice? I really think these need some more work; we're gonna go from slightly broken to just plain broken if this is implemented
 
Last edited:

Anarcomu

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 4, 2022
Messages
70
Another confusing aspect here is the "ignore movement penalties" in PD's proposal
Actually, its proposal is a counterproposal to my own, see https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...ork-on-the-trailblazer-promotion-line.679577/

In my post, I proposed the said 3 movements and a removal of free movement.
Since its proposal looks a lot like mine, I strongly suspect that PD just didn't mention the removal of the recon "ignore movement penalty", but indeed it is exactly this.
So, it is not supposed to be double movement. At least I see it like this. @pineappledan could confirm this (or denie) so everyone could be fixed on it.
 

nekokon

Prince
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
435
The concern I have with either of these proposals, is the issue identified to fix was the "double movement" promos due to the movement cheese these impart; but then they add heavy movement bonus that will apply even more broadly than before? in PD's version, which it looks like we are headed towards, recon will be faster than, or at least as fast as most mounted units?
It's not to fix the double movement cheese per say as it's not a cheese to have 4 movements, just an illogical/intuitive that in some cases moving on flat land is slower than rough terrain. As long as the illogical part is gone (moving on flat land is always equal or faster than rough terrain) then it's considered solved.
It would certainly make sense that scout would move faster than mounted units in rough terrain. Also note that "scouts" aren't actually ppl walking on foot, they do use mount/vehicle realistically. It's because their combat power is on pair with a small group of footman/infantry that they're represented by units walking on foot.
 

Tekamthi

King
Joined
Aug 12, 2016
Messages
774
It's because their combat power is on pair with a small group of footman/infantry that they're represented by units walking on foot.
afaik could have mounts mixed in w/ unit graphics of these -- it is true that as this line moves on through history it would have relied on horses, then light vehicles later on, however the pathfinder probably not so much. If this is what we're trying to represent, then imo better to tie to the resources that would confer these benefits ie 2-base-move recon gain +1 movement promo if civ has access to horses, and loses it when they don't.

This thought makes a good case for the recon units being thematically as fast as mounted units, but there is a gameplay issue here as well: the two forms of mounted units we already have struggle to both bring value to the player, a third unit line with open terrain mobility just muddies this further.
 

ma_kuh

Prince
Joined
Sep 13, 2022
Messages
340
Clearly the solution to scouts outrunning light cavalry is to give skirmishers a scouting tree with +1 movement, +1 sight, and eventually "ignores terrain penalties".
 

pineappledan

Deity
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
8,427
Location
Alberta, Canada
Just so we are clear. The proposal is to remove “ignores terrain costs” from all scout units, give them +1 moves to start, and slowly add back movement cost ignoring in specific terrains. The current double move promos have scouts moving 4 tiles on 2 movement, while with either proposal scouts will be only able to move as far as they have movement for.

The big change is that pillaging and attacking will be less costly relative to movement.
 

nekokon

Prince
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
435
afaik could have mounts mixed in w/ unit graphics of these -- it is true that as this line moves on through history it would have relied on horses, then light vehicles later on, however the pathfinder probably not so much. If this is what we're trying to represent, then imo better to tie to the resources that would confer these benefits ie 2-base-move recon gain +1 movement promo if civ has access to horses, and loses it when they don't.

This thought makes a good case for the recon units being thematically as fast as mounted units, but there is a gameplay issue here as well: the two forms of mounted units we already have struggle to both bring value to the player, a third unit line with open terrain mobility just muddies this further.
This would be unnecessarily complicated. We can just keep the inuendo that "scout is fast unit so they can move further than mounted units in heavy combat equipment" and be done with it. As long as there's no illogical within the unit itself (like the same units moving faster in rough terrain than flat land) then it's good as is.
 

pineappledan

Deity
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
8,427
Location
Alberta, Canada
i'm not complaining, but this looks to me to be an amendment, and such is verboten right now
It’s not an amendment, it’s implied in the proposal. What would be the point of giving units “ignore costs in X terrain” if they already ignored costs in ALL terrains?
 

josh4

Warlord
Joined
Oct 15, 2022
Messages
122
Clearly the solution to scouts outrunning light cavalry is to give skirmishers a scouting tree with +1 movement, +1 sight, and eventually "ignores terrain penalties".
Clearly it isn't. Scouts doesn't require horses. Exploration is already a a blitz. You can cover whole continent in 20 turns or 30. The answer would be to nerf scouts to have lower movement, not leap over junges with 4 movement like now. I vote nay.
 

ma_kuh

Prince
Joined
Sep 13, 2022
Messages
340
I apologize, I was being flippant, I don't actually think 5+ movement is terribly fair, especially once roads are involved. It's very difficult to balance, especially with freedom from terrain, in terms of ability to gut a city's improvements once free-pillaging comes in.

My personal opinion is that scouts should behave like resource-less skirmishers, and both should be able to fulfill a reconnaissance niche. It doesn't matter right now, but I think I might propose something like giving the Trailblazer line to skirmishers next session... especially since they aren't designed to be damage machines as much anymore.
 

pineappledan

Deity
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
8,427
Location
Alberta, Canada
I abstain btw, even though one of these is my proposal. :p

There’s a large contingent of people on the forum who think that scouts moving slower in unencumbering terrain — like open plains and roads —is dumb. This has never bothered me much, but I’m not in love with to the current system either. As the guy that did the last scout promotion rework though, I feel I have a pretty good handle on their promo lines and submitted what I thought a good balance would be in that new paradigm.
 

ma_kuh

Prince
Joined
Sep 13, 2022
Messages
340
I wasn't around when withdraw was a part of accessible promotions, but I'm very curious how that played. Can you share any experience with that?
 

nekokon

Prince
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
435
I wasn't around when withdraw was a part of accessible promotions, but I'm very curious how that played. Can you share any experience with that?
You don't need to be around that time to see the effect. Scout moving 6 tiles through enemy road while ignoring ZOC is already a huge pain, since you have to kill them or fully surround them in 1 turn, which isn't viable with just garrisoned troops.
If they can also withdraw from melee you just can't do anything to them.
 

ma_kuh

Prince
Joined
Sep 13, 2022
Messages
340
You can shoot them though, and that'd be the designed counter, in my opinion. I don't know the math exactly, but doesn't speed also play a part in the withdraw chance? And surrounding terrain? Was scout somehow ignoring those aspects? And yeah, move-6 seems excessive, if that was also the case. I would have thought the withdraw chance would be in-place of the extra movement; sort of like you get the free moves, but only on enemy turns, not also on your own turn.
 

nekokon

Prince
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
435
No the 6 tiles movement is from railroad, not from withdrawing chance, even though they do move extra tile with that. Withdrawing chance doesn't give extra movement on your own turn.
At the same tier scout can handle quite a bit of ranged attacks, get bonus defending/outside of friendly zone/terrain and can pillage for free so it's still quite hard to kill them with ranged garrisoned troops in 1 turn. Melee troops do more dmg and can block railroad tile so enemy scout would get significantly slowed down thus easier to kill than ranged. Withdraw from melee promotion negatives that advantage.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom