(1-WD) Skirmisher Terrain Promotion only affects RCS when Attacking

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rekk

Emperor
Joined
Dec 9, 2017
Messages
1,895
Counterproposal to: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/proposal-skirmisher-1-cs-12-11-cs.678965/

The old Accuracy and Barrage promotions from the base game used OpenRangedAttackMod and RoughRangedAttackMod, which only affected Ranged Combat Strength when attacking. We could use these instead of the current OpenFromMod and RoughFromMod to enforce the hit and run nature of the skirmisher.

Note that these modifiers are determined using the tile that is being attacked, not the tile the skirmisher is standing on. It would also stop the skirmisher from losing combat strength while in rough terrain.
 
Last edited:

Stalker0

Baller Magnus
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
9,384
Counterproposal to: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/proposal-skirmisher-1-cs-12-11-cs.678965/

The old Accuracy and Barrage promotions from the base game used OpenRangedAttackMod and RoughRangedAttackMod, which only affected Ranged Combat Strength when attacking. We could use this to enforce the hit and run nature of the skirmisher.

Note that these modifiers are determined using the tile that is being attacked, not the tile the skirmisher is standing on. It would also stop the skirmisher from losing combat strength while in rough terrain.
But if that's on attack, how does that remove the skirmishers tankiness? Wouldn't they still get their +40% CS bonus on defense for open terrain?
 

Rekk

Emperor
Joined
Dec 9, 2017
Messages
1,895
But if that's on attack, how does that remove the skirmishers tankiness? Wouldn't they still get their +40% CS bonus on defense for open terrain?
They would no longer have the defense modifiers. They would  only have modifiers to attack.
 

azum4roll

Deity
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
2,096
Note that these modifiers are determined using the tile that is being attacked, not the tile the skirmisher is standing on. It would also stop the skirmisher from losing combat strength while in rough terrain.
The original reasoning for the current skirmisher doctrine was that skirmishers can easily attack without risk of being counter-attacked by moving into rough, attacking and retreating back to the original tile. This potentially brings back the problem if the target tile is open.
 

Stalker0

Baller Magnus
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
9,384
I think the main issue with this proposal is it’s all encompassing. With the skirmisher itself I could see for the reasons I mentioned before but I don’t have the issue with the later units, their tankiness is better countered by their contemporary units. I doubt we could do this without adjusting the stats on several units.
 

Zanteogo

King
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Messages
949
I think the main issue with this proposal is it’s all encompassing. With the skirmisher itself I could see for the reasons I mentioned before but I don’t have the issue with the later units, their tankiness is better countered by their contemporary units. I doubt we could do this without adjusting the stats on several units.

Agreed, this is why I lean more into to proposal that just changes the combat power of the unit.

I will say however, as it stands now, ranged mounted units are just overall better than melee mounted units in most ways all the way down the tech tree. Melee mounted units tend to leave themselves open to counter attack after they attack, mostly due to their loss of movement on attack is based on the tile they are attacking. (including zone of control) The AI has become much better at unit grouping, causing something that wasn't an issue in the past, to be a current issue.

I might make a separate proposal on this down the road unless someone else would like to.
 

Recursive

Already Looping
Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
3,591
Location
Antarctica
Proposal sponsored by me (in current form).

(This indicates that I am able and willing to perform the code changes required for this proposal if the community votes Aye on it. Other coders are free to sponsor this as well.)
 

pineappledan

Deity
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
7,825
Location
Alberta, Canada
This doesn't solve the fundamental problem with skirmishers that they are too much like mounted melee units, except they get to attack without retaliation.

Skirmishers lack an identity, and fiddling with some percentages on a unique promo that doesn't fundamentally give them a new ability doesn't change that. We should scrap the open/rough terrain bonus.
 

Stalker0

Baller Magnus
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
9,384
Skirmishers lack an identity
I agree, and in hindsight this was always the problem with the unit class. We made a brand new unit class without every really assessing why it was needed, it fit historical ideas of "light calvary" but we never asked what part of the Civ 5 war model does it fill that we don't have currently. And so the niche clashes that resulted were in some ways inevitable, it was always going to step on the toes of some other class.

But before we start wholesale changing the unit AGAIN, we need to firmly answer that question: What place does the skirmisher fit in the civ 5 war model? (not history, not our desire, but what unique benefit can it provide that is actually needed in civ 5 style warring).

1) Scouting - We have an entire line for that
2) Mobility - Mounted melee already does this well
3) Softening up units - Archers do this pretty well
4) Pillaging - Scout line and mounted melee can cover this.
5) Support Augmentation - This is probably the era that we could best look at, and it was an idea we batted around a bit. We make a unit that doesn't perform well on its own, but makes other units a lot cooler. We have talked about using plagues, double flanking etc, but I think those were denied due to coding difficulties.
 

Rekk

Emperor
Joined
Dec 9, 2017
Messages
1,895
We have talked about using plagues, double flanking etc, but I think those were denied due to coding difficulties.
They weren't denied; no one has gotten around to doing the dll work for it. Double flanking was actually approved.
 

Zanteogo

King
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Messages
949
But before we start wholesale changing the unit AGAIN, we need to firmly answer that question: What place does the skirmisher fit in the civ 5 war model? (not history, not our desire, but what unique benefit can it provide that is actually needed in civ 5 style warring).

I see them as a hit and run unit. To balance them with melee mounted units they should do less damage but be able to escape easier.

Problem is right now they do what melee mounted units do, but just better.
 

Recursive

Already Looping
Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
3,591
Location
Antarctica
@Rekk Since you have hugely changed Skirmishers 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. :)
 

Recursive

Already Looping
Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
3,591
Location
Antarctica
Closed as requested.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom