[UI] (5-NS) Nerf to Medic I / II

[usadefcon1]

Medic seems too strong right now even considering that you give up the 10% CS increase, etc that you would have gotten if you had picked a different upgrade. Therefore I propose:

Medic I - This Unit and all Units in adjacent tiles Heal +5HP per turn when Outside of Friendly Territory.

Medic II - This Unit and all Units in adjacent tiles Heal +5HP per turn.

Spoiler Current Medic Stats :

Medic I - This Unit and all Units in adjacent tiles Heal +5HP per turn.

Medic II - This Unit and all Units in adjacent tiles Heal +5HP per turn. This Unit Heals +5HP when Outside of Friendly Territory.

 

[usadefcon1]

Even with the nerf, healing in enemy territory triples from +5HP per turn to +15HP per turn with both promotions. I think that's plenty.

 

[FinMc]

Why do you find medic too strong right now

 

[usadefcon1]

Why do you find medic too strong right now

+30 in a friendly city gets you back to full health in ~3 turns, seems very quick. Plus I don't see the AI using it very much which I think puts it at a disadvantage.

 

[Zanteogo]

Medic doesn't need any reduction in power. It wouldn't be used at all if it was.

 

[Stalker0]

Medic doesn't need any reduction in power. It wouldn't be used at all if it was.

While I don't agree with this proposal overall, I can't agree with this statement either.

Medic is simply put, an essential promotion. Having a medic either in the main frotn lines or just in the back healing up your wounded troops to get them back in the fight faster, ANY amount of extra healing will always see use. Sacrificing a single unit to make it a medic so that all of the units around it heal faster is always worth it.

 

[azum4roll]

It's a great promotion, just that it doesn't fit my play style so I don't pick it.

 

[ma_kuh]

I still prefer going back to the vanilla approach as a nerf:

> Medic 1 doesn't affect the source unit.

In this way, you have to commit three promos for a fast-healing unit, but you still get the army-support benefit without issue. Returns some of the flavor of "focus the healer" without the CS malus that was present in previous iterations.

I don't really have a problem with in-city healing, it's only 1 unit/turn, and also that +5 difference is much less important. I mean, you still need 4 turns to heal from 0 -> 100.

My issue with this proposal is that it feels like it's trying to address the balance of Medic relative to other promotions, but in practice won't change anything in normal (neutral-neutral territory) engagements, and buffs aggression fairly significantly.

Medic 1 would do nothing if you are defending your own territory, but helps aggressors right off the bat. The way it's written, Medic 2 would no longer give +10 HP in neutral territory, just the original +5 HP, so defending armies can catch up in the healing race with Medic 2, but you're essentially adding a promo tax on defenders, which are also more likely to have under-leveled units, so the promo is more costly. Again favoring aggressors. You'd be stuck with a promo that does nothing until Medic 2.

 

[usadefcon1]

I still prefer going back to the vanilla approach as a nerf:

> Medic 1 doesn't affect the source unit.

In this way, you have to commit three promos for a fast-healing unit, but you still get the army-support benefit without issue. Returns some of the flavor of "focus the healer" without the CS malus that was present in previous iterations.

I don't really have a problem with in-city healing, it's only 1 unit/turn, and also that +5 difference is much less important. I mean, you still need 4 turns to heal from 0 -> 100.

My issue with this proposal is that it feels like it's trying to address the balance of Medic relative to other promotions, but in practice won't change anything in normal (neutral-neutral territory) engagements, and buffs aggression fairly significantly.

Medic 1 would do nothing if you are defending your own territory, but helps aggressors right off the bat. The way it's written, Medic 2 would no longer give +10 HP in neutral territory, just the original +5 HP, so defending armies can catch up in the healing race with Medic 2, but you're essentially adding a promo tax on defenders, which are also more likely to have under-leveled units, so the promo is more costly. Again favoring aggressors. You'd be stuck with a promo that does nothing until Medic 2.

Any counterproposals would be welcome. I just think it's too strong in its current form.

 

[Stalker0]

You could always turn it back to its previous form before the latest proposal, aka where medic provided a -10% CS to the unit.

 

[ma_kuh]

I'm still not a fan of balancing medics by making them extra brittle when we can just tone down their regeneration instead. That said, I voted for the original proposal with the optimism that we could tweak Medic during ratification/after the fact, and that never happened. So I might be inclined to at least revert the lesser of two evils.

 

[Anarcomu]

If you want medics to be support units, why not reduce their attack strength ? They will still be able to defend themselves.

 

[Legen]

If you want medics to be support units, why not reduce their attack strength ? They will still be able to defend themselves.

Likely due to its synergy with March. Nonetheless, far more reasonable than the old defense penalty, and makes it less straightforward for ranged units (whose tier 4 promotion often stack CS penalties when attacking).

 

[Anarcomu]

I personally use one skirmisher to do the job : high mobility, additional flanking which is independent from unit cs, can quickly redeploy at the center of wounded units.

 

[axatin]

As far as I know the ability to heal adjacent units depending on friendly/enemy territory is currently not supported, this would require a DLL change.

 

[Stalker0]

PROPOSAL FAILED DUE TO LACK OF SPONSORSHIP