Counterproposal to https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/proposal-skirmisher-1-cs-12-11-cs.678965/
Foreword
Most people are dissatisfied with the current skirmisher line, specifically the promotion that gives them +CS in open terrain and -CS in rough. I know there was a "skirmishers count double for flanking" idea that passed in an old poll, but I've never submitted a formal proposal for my idea (which I've been using ever since the skirmisher line was changed). With a proper VP Congress, it's now time for me to spend a few hours to write this up once and for all.
You can experience this in full by downloading my mod and removing all sql files other than SkirmisherChanges.sql
Some History
Before the current version of skirmishers, they all had 4 moves and 1 attack, lower CS and slightly lower RCS than a same tier archer, and no combat modifier in any terrain. Chariot archers ended their turn when entering "rough" terrain, which was defined as forests, jungles and hills like vanilla. They functioned as an alternative ranged unit that trades bulk and strength for mobility.
They worked well and were quite balanced until people found a way to attack with them that's hard to be retaliated: with 4 moves, skirmishers could enter a rough terrain with 2 moves, attack with 1 move, then move back to the original (safe) position with the last move. Non-mounted melee and ranged units without Indirect Fire could not hit back due to the rough terrain blocking sight, and pre-Arsenal cities built on flat land were sitting ducks. Note that this was before garrisons made cities hyper tanky, so skirmishers were an unintended strategy to take down poorly-settled cities in less than 10 turns.
G, seeing rants on the forum, implemented the current Skirmisher Doctrine promotion to remove their effectiveness of shooting from rough terrain. Both @pineappledan and I came up with alternative ideas and put them into our respective modmods since then.
General Idea
My main gripe about Skirmisher Doctrine is that it affects both offense and defense stats when the problem was only about attacking; the entire unit line is useless in 3/4 of the map (assuming 50% water); and the AI can't handle terrain-based promotions well. I managed to come up with this idea that the AI definitely should know: 2 attacks per turn, essentially making the hit-and-run from rough terrain dealing only half damage. You would also have the choice of having the skirmisher stay in to do the full damage, but that would sacrifice the unit most of the time.
I used the damage formula to deduce that the old skirmisher was dealing ~40 damage to same tier melee unit. I originally made mine do ~20 damage, but settled for ~17.5 instead to compensate for the "option" of doing half damage to two different targets. They're taking ~45 damage from same tier melee (without flanking).
And then there's the XP problem. If you attack twice in one turn, you get double the XP... which is part of the reason why Logistics is OP. At first I reduce all skirmisher XP gains by 50%, but that doesn't do well with other sources that increase XP gain like Elite Forces and Oil Strategic Monopoly due to the additive nature. Lucky we have the option of removing XP gain after first attack now, so I went for that.
Lastly Light Tank and Helicopter Gunship gain Armor Plating to be more in line with the free combat promotions that everything gets in late game. This will help their survival against planes (not fighters in Helicopter Gunship's case) and Battleships.
Actual Stats
Well, we need to be specific
Skirmisher Doctrine (free promotion on all skirmisher line units):
+50% Combat Strength when defending against all Ranged Attacks.
May attack twice.
Beam Axle (free promotion on Chariot Archer and replacements):
Forest, Jungle, Marsh and Hills costs an additional movement point to cross.
Mongolia UA changed to
Mounted Ranged Units gain +1 Movement and +20% Ranged Combat Strength when attacking. +100% Tribute Yields from City-State bullying.
Armor Plating I given for free to Light Tank and Helicopter Gunship.
Logistics promotion made unavailable to ranged units with range 1.
Both Accuracy III and Barrage III lead to Parthian Tactics for mounted ranged units.
Only the first attack of each turn gives XP.
Skirmisher's role
You may argue that skirmishers, old or current or proposed version, don't have a clear role since they overlap too much with mounted melee/non-mounted ranged.
I'd say they have a unique use that other unit classes can't replicate, and yet you can't replace them with skirmishers either.
Mounted melee is in a bad spot right now, and this proposal won't solve the problem, but the one thing they're better at is to snipe out of position ranged units, especially siege. Mounted ranged can't do that since ranged units are pretty resistant to their attacks. Also, mounted ranged really doesn't appreciate being hit by ranged attacks, so they want to stay out of enemy ranged units.
Easy win for the knight.
Ranged and mounted ranged differ from having different range. Archers are limited by vision (unless Indirect Fire), and skirmishers have to shuffle and break formation to attack, making some units unable to attack for the turn. Skirmishers also don't function very well in hilly deserts.
A typical chokepoint/kill zone. A skirmisher would do higher damage to the swordsman than a composite bowman (one tech tier higher) if it can shoot twice. In this case, it may seem better to replace the composite bowmen with more skirmishers...
However, if you can kill the unit on the hills tile with the composite bowmen only, you're rewarded with one extra attack per front row skirmisher on the unit on the plains by the river. Note that this can't be done by pure skirmishers since you lose move points by shuffling units.
Moderator Action: Edited thread title to conform to VP Congress rules, added link to first proposal at the start of the post. - Recursive
Foreword
Most people are dissatisfied with the current skirmisher line, specifically the promotion that gives them +CS in open terrain and -CS in rough. I know there was a "skirmishers count double for flanking" idea that passed in an old poll, but I've never submitted a formal proposal for my idea (which I've been using ever since the skirmisher line was changed). With a proper VP Congress, it's now time for me to spend a few hours to write this up once and for all.
You can experience this in full by downloading my mod and removing all sql files other than SkirmisherChanges.sql
Some History
Before the current version of skirmishers, they all had 4 moves and 1 attack, lower CS and slightly lower RCS than a same tier archer, and no combat modifier in any terrain. Chariot archers ended their turn when entering "rough" terrain, which was defined as forests, jungles and hills like vanilla. They functioned as an alternative ranged unit that trades bulk and strength for mobility.
They worked well and were quite balanced until people found a way to attack with them that's hard to be retaliated: with 4 moves, skirmishers could enter a rough terrain with 2 moves, attack with 1 move, then move back to the original (safe) position with the last move. Non-mounted melee and ranged units without Indirect Fire could not hit back due to the rough terrain blocking sight, and pre-Arsenal cities built on flat land were sitting ducks. Note that this was before garrisons made cities hyper tanky, so skirmishers were an unintended strategy to take down poorly-settled cities in less than 10 turns.
G, seeing rants on the forum, implemented the current Skirmisher Doctrine promotion to remove their effectiveness of shooting from rough terrain. Both @pineappledan and I came up with alternative ideas and put them into our respective modmods since then.
General Idea
My main gripe about Skirmisher Doctrine is that it affects both offense and defense stats when the problem was only about attacking; the entire unit line is useless in 3/4 of the map (assuming 50% water); and the AI can't handle terrain-based promotions well. I managed to come up with this idea that the AI definitely should know: 2 attacks per turn, essentially making the hit-and-run from rough terrain dealing only half damage. You would also have the choice of having the skirmisher stay in to do the full damage, but that would sacrifice the unit most of the time.
I used the damage formula to deduce that the old skirmisher was dealing ~40 damage to same tier melee unit. I originally made mine do ~20 damage, but settled for ~17.5 instead to compensate for the "option" of doing half damage to two different targets. They're taking ~45 damage from same tier melee (without flanking).
And then there's the XP problem. If you attack twice in one turn, you get double the XP... which is part of the reason why Logistics is OP. At first I reduce all skirmisher XP gains by 50%, but that doesn't do well with other sources that increase XP gain like Elite Forces and Oil Strategic Monopoly due to the additive nature. Lucky we have the option of removing XP gain after first attack now, so I went for that.
Lastly Light Tank and Helicopter Gunship gain Armor Plating to be more in line with the free combat promotions that everything gets in late game. This will help their survival against planes (not fighters in Helicopter Gunship's case) and Battleships.
Actual Stats
Well, we need to be specific
Skirmisher Doctrine (free promotion on all skirmisher line units):
+50% Combat Strength when defending against all Ranged Attacks.
May attack twice.
Beam Axle (free promotion on Chariot Archer and replacements):
Forest, Jungle, Marsh and Hills costs an additional movement point to cross.
Mongolia UA changed to
Mounted Ranged Units gain +1 Movement and +20% Ranged Combat Strength when attacking. +100% Tribute Yields from City-State bullying.
Armor Plating I given for free to Light Tank and Helicopter Gunship.
Logistics promotion made unavailable to ranged units with range 1.
Both Accuracy III and Barrage III lead to Parthian Tactics for mounted ranged units.
Only the first attack of each turn gives XP.
Skirmisher's role
You may argue that skirmishers, old or current or proposed version, don't have a clear role since they overlap too much with mounted melee/non-mounted ranged.
I'd say they have a unique use that other unit classes can't replicate, and yet you can't replace them with skirmishers either.
Mounted melee is in a bad spot right now, and this proposal won't solve the problem, but the one thing they're better at is to snipe out of position ranged units, especially siege. Mounted ranged can't do that since ranged units are pretty resistant to their attacks. Also, mounted ranged really doesn't appreciate being hit by ranged attacks, so they want to stay out of enemy ranged units.
Spoiler Example with Knight + Heavy Skirmisher :
Easy win for the knight.
Ranged and mounted ranged differ from having different range. Archers are limited by vision (unless Indirect Fire), and skirmishers have to shuffle and break formation to attack, making some units unable to attack for the turn. Skirmishers also don't function very well in hilly deserts.
Spoiler Example with Composite Bowman + Skirmisher :
A typical chokepoint/kill zone. A skirmisher would do higher damage to the swordsman than a composite bowman (one tech tier higher) if it can shoot twice. In this case, it may seem better to replace the composite bowmen with more skirmishers...
However, if you can kill the unit on the hills tile with the composite bowmen only, you're rewarded with one extra attack per front row skirmisher on the unit on the plains by the river. Note that this can't be done by pure skirmishers since you lose move points by shuffling units.
Moderator Action: Edited thread title to conform to VP Congress rules, added link to first proposal at the start of the post. - Recursive
Last edited by a moderator: