(1-WD) Skirmisher Rework (double attack version)

[Zanteogo]

I definitely haven't felt like they replace archers in my games, but I know many people have anecdotes one way or the other on these things. What I try to keep in mind when evaluating skirmishers vs. archers is that skirmishers cost more than archers, both in production and in resource. They should win in equal numbers. Knights are another popular power spike, and win hard against many of their contemporaries for the same reasons.

I'm pretty sure skirmishers also aren't out-dueling knights either, but I find a flaw in the mounted melee line is that they just have so fewer tiers than e.g. skirmishers. It's hard to have a "fair" fight between the two, and if they're one of the few counters it'd be no wonder skirmishers feel so uncounterable.

I used to be in the same boat, but I think people who feel this may haven't utilized mounted ranged units to their full potential. Once you find their "grove", for lack of a better word, they start replacing you ranged units, and certainly replace your mounted melee units.

It's similar to ranged and siege units on attack. Yes, ranged units move faster, and get terrain defense, but once you master the unit flood strategy, range units become a niche unit, that usually just get in the way while attacking. I have a couple of them on defense and sometimes use them on fake attacks to draw away defenders, but they make up a small part of my army for most of the game. It doesn't help they get weaker and weaker compared to other units as the game progresses either.

On the highest levels the AI pretty much replaces their entire army in a couple turns, so this may be different while playing them, but on the mid difficulty levels, this certainly is true.

I ask anyone who disagrees, try a couple games without ranged and mounted melee and build mounted range units instead. Once you get used to how they currently work they become half your army. The only hold back is if you run out of horses, which is just down to really bad luck.

 

[ma_kuh]

Thanks for sharing that perspective, I'm far from the most prolific player, and I definitely don't prefer aggressive strategies generally, so seeing how others handle their wars is interesting to me. I have used skirmishers as main army in a few games and the current skirmisher doctrine has admittedly succeeded in making them feel great in open terrain and abysmal in hills or jungles. They don't die, so I guess I agree they're never really losing, but their kill time becomes so long that it just feels like a stalemate. The instant army reloads don't help, and is the main reason I don't play on the highest levels: it's just not fun to feel like you should be winning a war but there's so many free resources for AI that you aren't.

The siege vs. ranged comparison is also interesting; I guess I've started gravitating towards using siege more than ranged as you describe, but again mostly because they do x2 damage against cities, which is where you eventually want to end up in an aggressive war.

Where I would like to see the balance going:

1. Mounted units get bogged down in difficult terrain (either lower (3) movement for early iterations, or costing more to enter), and are fragile enough to pick off when collapsed upon.
2. Foot soldiers have easier and more rewarding access to Woodsman and Amphibious (taking them doesn't severely cut their damage progression).

If spears in the jungle could punish horse archers, do you think that would change how you're approaching mounted combat?

 

[usadefcon1]

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.

Why don't we just keep this but for the whole line and buff their stats accordingly...

Or instead of a stat buff give them a withdrawal chance from melee.

 

[azum4roll]

Why don't we just keep this but for the whole line and buff their stats accordingly...

Or instead of a stat buff give them a withdrawal chance from melee.

The penalty is only given to ancient era skirmishers because of the lack of range 2 units on that tier to counter them. Later on we don't want to make them completely useless in 50% of the land.

 

[Recursive]

@azum4roll Skirmishers have been hugely changed in the new October 1 release. Given the exceptional circumstances, I'll give you the opportunity to withdraw your proposal as it may no longer be applicable. You can also edit your proposal if you still want to go through with it. Please respond within 72 hours or I will consider the thread closed.

 

[azum4roll]

Please close this for now. I'll need time to complete my 2.6 game to start working on 2.7 stuff...

 

[Recursive]

Closed as requested.