[Vote] (3-03) Proposal: Revert Ranged Line to pre-2.6 Version

[Stalker0]

Voting Instructions
Players, please cast your votes in the poll above. Vote "Yea" if you'd be okay if this proposal was implemented. Vote "Nay" if you'd be okay if this proposal wasn't implemented.

You can vote for both options, which is equivalent to saying "I'm fine either way", but adds to the required quorum of 10 votes in favor.

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 3, Proposal 3
Rationale: First to be 100% clear, I am not making this proposal because I think the new ranged unit model is bad. I think its working reasonably well. The reason I propose this is because it was one of the last big changes made before the congress system was made, and I think its reasonable to run it through the congress to ensure people prefer the new model to the old.

Proposal: Return the ranged line to the pre-2.6 version. If anything is missing here, again the goal is to change everything to be before the 2.6 version came out.

• Slinger: Removed
• Archer:
  • Returned to the Trapping Technology
  • Cost: 55 hammers
  • Obsoletes at: Mathematics
  • CS: 4
  • RCS: 6
• Composite Bowman
  • Returned to the Mathematics Technology
  • Cost: 90 hammers
  • Obsoletes at: Machinery
  • CS: 11
  • RCS: 11
• Mayan Atlatist
  • Cost: 80 hammers
  • Returned to Mathematics
  • Obsoletes at: Metallurgy
  • CS: 11
  • RCS: 11
  • +33% RCS when attacking wounded units
• Incan Slinger (name updated)
  • Cost: 55 hammers
  • On: Trapping
  • Obsoletes at: Machinery
  • CS: 4
  • RCS: 7
  • 80% withdraw chance
  • Ignore ZOC
  • Attacks reduce CS by 15% for 5 turns

 

[cidk2000]

Agree with this the slinger is a one tile wannabe and best if archers start at trapping ! the slinger is annoying with barbarians !

 

[Voremonger]

I like the current version way better. I like that I can immediately build ranged units for clearing camps and gaining XP without the need to get a technology that may otherwise be useless for my terrain or luxuries. Against barbarians I think the range doesn't really matter - in fact I want barbarians to melee attack my slingers since that way they will level up more quickly. Also previously the gap between composite bowmen and crossbowmen was too large I think. A small problem with the current version is that Mathematics is kind of useless though.

 

[cidk2000]

I like the current version way better. I like that I can immediately build ranged units for clearing camps and gaining XP without the need to get a technology that may otherwise be useless for my terrain or luxuries. Against barbarians I think the range doesn't really matter - in fact I want barbarians to melee attack my slingers since that way they will level up more quickly. Also previously the gap between composite bowmen and crossbowmen was too large I think. A small problem with the current version is that Mathematics is kind of useless though.

4 hits from a barbarian brute (two tag team) and its gone... same thing with pathfinders (chieftien difficulty) pulling it away doesent last long as the Barbs have extra move points too

 

[pineappledan]

I feel like I need to dig up the poll and original post for this change to explain why it was made and approved.

Yes. The slinger isn’t good. It’s a basic turn 1 unit; it’s specifically designed to be bad enough that you can’t rush another civ’s capital with them. They exist as a spacer so archers and CBows can come out later. This closes the classical-medieval gap in the upgrade line and pushes the first 2 range unit late enough that they can’t be used to snipe cities before walls.

 

[pineappledan]

Here is the original proposal poll should be able to grab the old CS/RCS from there:

POLL: Some Balance Changes to add to VP

Hello All, I have been hosting and updating a mod that contains numerous changes for base VP (link). I wanted to put some of these ideas out to a vote to see if the general VP community thinks any of these ideas are good enough to be added into main VP? Below is a list of all the possible...

forums.civfanatics.com

And original design idea post, involves a lengthy post in support of and explaining the benefits of the new slinger for the archer line and ancient/classical/medieval eras

Proposal: Add a ranged Slinger unit before Archer

The archer line is in a weird spot in the early game, which forces the 2 existing units in Ancient and Classical to be stretched too thinly. I will outline the problem in greater detail, and propose a solution: adding a new slinger unit, unlocked immediately at the game's start. [/SPOILER]...

forums.civfanatics.com

Are you planning on doing a ratification thread for all the other changes implemented in 2.6, or only slingers, @Stalker0?

Would this also involve moving the chop back to calendar again? Moving the catapult back to iron working? Reverting the Incan UU name back to “slinger”?

 

[azum4roll]

Mathematics should be more useful when the bonus vs domain proposal is implemented, giving Catapults a buff.

 

[pineappledan]

I originally proposed that Catapults be moved back to Mathematics, as those proposal threads will attest, but community feedback was that it would be better on Masonry.

 

[KlHannibal2]

Rationale: First to be 100% clear, I am not making this proposal because I think the new ranged unit model is bad. I think its working reasonably well. The reason I propose this is because it was one of the last big changes made before the congress system was made, and I think its reasonable to run it through the congress to ensure people prefer the new model to the old.

Proposal: Return the ranged line to the pre-2.6 version. I will list out the specific changes below (WIP, I need help getting all of the numbers in place). If anything is missing here, again the goal is to change everything to be before the 2.6 version came out.

• Slinger: Removed
• Archer:
  • Returned to the Trapping Technology
  • Obsoletes at: Mathematics
  • CS: X
  • RCS: X
• Composite Bowman
  • Returned to the Mathematics Technology
  • Obsoletes at: X
  • CS: X
  • RCS: X
• Mayan Atlatist (needs updating)
• Incan Slinger (needs updating)

I like your proposal. The old setup felt more fun to play.

 

[alchx]

Slingers are fun guys and provide some variety in the choice of starting units to produce.

But composite archers are too strong. They deal a lot of damage and are able to withstand heavy damage. The swordsman will die before he gets to them. And in a duel, the swordsman will lose, as he receives a lot of damage both in an attempt to reach the archer and during hand-to-hand fights.

 

[Tekamthi]

when slingers were first proposed under the old regime, I wasn't a fan -- having played with it a bunch now, i don't mind it for the most part; my gripes are thematic, mainly -- I don't like getting archers on calendar nor the name 'slinger', but these are minor concerns.

tbh i'd like to see a broader rework of early warfare, tying key units to resources: eg in pre-bronze age stone and wood is somehow important to your military, during bronze age there is some kind of 'bronze' resource, etc. I think this is where vanilla really dropped the ball as far as tech and resource progression, later on its fine more or less, there is at least some kind of resource/military connection. Something like this would go beyond slingers and archers but presumably affect them too. Anyway, off-topic....

I'm leaning towards keeping slingers but rearranging tech tree for better thematic relevance. Also, maybe slingers can be adjusted to have a more distinct role from later ranged units, eg. bonus in friendly territory, "plague" effects on attack, etc.

 

[Recursive]

@Stalker0 Please have a complete OP before making the proposal next time. This isn't great when following the discussion later.

 

[pineappledan]

@Stalker0 Please have a complete OP before making the proposal next time. This isn't great when following the discussion later.

Would this also involve moving the chop back to calendar again? Moving the catapult back to iron working? Reverting the Incan UU name back to “slinger”?

Still need an answer on this.

 

[Stalker0]

Proposal is now finalized.

 

[Stalker0]

Still need an answer on this.

Not touching anything else other than the archer line itself. chops/catapults all stay where they are. incan name would revert (though if that's a big deal to people I honestly do not care about old name vs new name)

 

[pineappledan]

Huzzah for getting our colourful Mayan UU back, which is just a different unit model and a wounded bonus…

 

[ma_kuh]

Don't sell it short, it's also buy 8, get 1 free!

 

[Legen]

I can sponsor this.

 

[Recursive]

Proposal sponsored by Legen.