Atlatlist loses it's unique promotion after upgrade

[DesertFox20591]

it seems that the Mayan unique unit (the Atlatlist) loses it's unique promotion (the Atlatlis strike) which is 50% ranged combat strength versus wounded units after upgrading to crossbow. i spammed like 10 of them and 2 of them already have logistics and indirect fire. should it keeps that unique promotion all the way to bazoka. all other civs UUs keep their unique promotions after upgrade

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

I don't think all other UUs keep their unique promotions after being upgraded, for example Nauresan's elephant (Siam's UU) loses its "Feared elephant" after being upgraded to lancers. Also, the Atlatlis strike is so powerful they would be too strong if it remained after being upgraded.

 

[Bromar1]

Well one of the Indonesian Kris Swordsmen's special random abilities they can get is Restlessness which gives +1 move and can attack multiple times. That promotion doesn't go away on upgrade

 

[Enginseer]

I don't think all other UUs keep their unique promotions after being upgraded, for example Nauresan's elephant (Siam's UU) loses its "Feared elephant" after being upgraded to lancers. Also, the Atlatlis strike is so powerful they would be too strong if it remained after being upgraded.

Legion's OP Fortify Promotion says hi.

 

[DesertFox20591]

I don't think all other UUs keep their unique promotions after being upgraded, for example Nauresan's elephant (Siam's UU) loses its "Feared elephant" after being upgraded to lancers. Also, the Atlatlis strike is so powerful they would be too strong if it remained after being upgraded.

if you play Siam you should get tons of UUs from CSs because of thier UA. it's not too strong to keep units their unique promotion because you need to keep those units and not lose them when they become obselete. i am talking here about immortal difficulty where early wars will cripple you (except some super early wars to farms XPs on archers). so in my case when it's time that i was ready to go a conquering war and take the Incan capital my Ataltlists woulld face Incan crossbows with logistics (because slingers don't lose their their logistics promotion). so you see in this case they have significant advantage

 

[Blue Ghost]

Is there documentation as to which UUs keep their unique promotions on upgrade? How do you decide whether a UU should keep its promotion, design-wise?

 

[DesertFox20591]

Is there documentation as to which UUs keep their unique promotions on upgrade? How do you decide whether a UU should keep its promotion, design-wise?

i think they all should keep it because as a human player in high difficulties you can't afford to lose too many units and replace them constantly. so preserving your UUs with their unique promotions and upgrades is one of the fun challenges in Civ V

 

[tu_79]

Is there documentation as to which UUs keep their unique promotions on upgrade? How do you decide whether a UU should keep its promotion, design-wise?

When the civ is military overperforming, or we suspect it could be the case. Optionally, when the other uniques are strong enough, as a mean of nerfing down that civ.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

I agree that Legions should lose the pilum promotion, as should many other UUs. But I still think that +50% damage against wounded units (meaning even enemy units with 99hp) is one of the strongest (unique) promotions. Promotions that other ranged units have increase combat strength either against units with over 50 hp or against units with under 50hp, while Atlalist strike increases against basically all units. Those promotions increase each by 15% (iirc), so even 3 promotions don't increase as much as the Atlalist strike (+50%). Logistics, while strong, is "only" one promotion, and one that comes with a downside (-30% CS), whereas Atlalist strike doesn't come with a downside. Atlalist strike also benefits you more commonly because it's tied to one of two basic unit functions (attacking (the other being defending)), whereas many other promotions need less common actions/set of circumstances to benefit from (for example the cover I promotion that Cataphracts get is useful only when being attacked by ranged/siege units, not when attacked by melee units).

Again, I think certain promotions should not be kept when upgrading (especially Pilum or Jaguar's +25 hp heal on killing a unit), but the OP of some UUs is not an argument for having the Atlalist OP, it's an argument for nerfing the other UUs that are OP.

 

[Emufarmers]

Is there documentation as to which UUs keep their unique promotions on upgrade?

A few of them specifically say in their Civilopedia entry they keep them when they upgrade, but for most it's not clear until you try it. We should probably fix that.

 

[Blue Ghost]

I think it's important that there's logical consistency to whether UUs keep their bonuses on upgrade, and it's not decided arbitrarily on a case-by-case basis. I assumed that there was a rule that was hammered out in the early days of VP, but it doesn't seem like there is a consistent one.

 

[tu_79]

I think it's important that there's logical consistency to whether UUs keep their bonuses on upgrade, and it's not decided arbitrarily on a case-by-case basis. I assumed that there was a rule that was hammered out in the early days of VP, but it doesn't seem like there is a consistent one.

It's a 'how this civ is performing' rule. So far it works.

 

[Galbias]

Haven't played Rome but I'd be kind of disappointed if Legions lost their unique promotions on upgrade. Some civs like Rome and Aztecs are definitely meant to be played aggressively but their UAs only reward you for performing well in war instead of giving you a unique edge with the war itself like Mongols or Huns UAs do, or some UBs like Japan/Zulus.

More topically, some unique promotions staying on upgrade and some not is fine. It would be nice if it was a bit clearer which was which in the unit descriptions though.

 

[Blue Ghost]

What if you used a different color for the icons of any promotions that are lost on upgrade? This can apply to things outside of UUs as well, like the warrior's Brute Force or the war elephant's Feared Elephant.

 

[DesertFox20591]

I agree that Legions should lose the pilum promotion, as should many other UUs. But I still think that +50% damage against wounded units (meaning even enemy units with 99hp) is one of the strongest (unique) promotions. Promotions that other ranged units have increase combat strength either against units with over 50 hp or against units with under 50hp, while Atlalist strike increases against basically all units. Those promotions increase each by 15% (iirc), so even 3 promotions don't increase as much as the Atlalist strike (+50%). Logistics, while strong, is "only" one promotion, and one that comes with a downside (-30% CS), whereas Atlalist strike doesn't come with a downside. Atlalist strike also benefits you more commonly because it's tied to one of two basic unit rategy functions (attacking (the other being defending)), whereas many other promotions need less common actions/set of circumstances to benefit from (for example the cover I promotion that Cataphracts get is useful only when being attacked by ranged/siege units, not when attacked by melee units).

Again, I think certain promotions should not be kept when upgrading (especially Pilum or Jaguar's +25 hp heal on killing a unit), but the OP of some UUs is not an argument for having the Atlalist OP, it's an argument for nerfing the other UUs that are OP.

i don't agree with that. one of the basic prospective in Civ V is how to use your UU to defend your victory or conquer others to either stop them from snowballing or win yourself and that comes to your UU type and how you benefit from their unique promotions wisely on defensive or offensive through the entire game. that means you keep them behind to strike a major blow in (in case of slingers/janissaries) or make them as a strong front line or even behind enemy lines (in case of Impis/Samurai). finally keep your good progression in game by upgrading these units and use them in later eras

 

[matlajs]

i think that any unique unit should lose its unique ability. nerf it maybe but thats all. UU/UB/UA/UI are only things making diference between civs.

 

[tu_79]

I don't get why you all are getting so upset for a bit of inconsistency. Right now, having some unique units weak, others strong, others keeping special abilities, others missing, just adds variety. As long as the overall performance of a civ is on par to the others, it's ok. I'd say it's even great to have such variety and manage to keep them almost balanced.

 

[Blue Ghost]

I don't get why you all are getting so upset for a bit of inconsistency. Right now, having some unique units weak, others strong, others keeping special abilities, others missing, just adds variety. As long as the overall performance of a civ is on par to the others, it's ok. I'd say it's even great to have such variety and manage to keep them almost balanced.

The problem isn't balance or even fun. The civs are all balanced and very interesting to play, and that's great. But the lack of consistency makes the mechanics difficult to learn and understand. When people don't know whether or not their civ's unique unit keeps their features on upgrading, it hurts their ability to learn the game and feel like they know what they're doing. In my opinion, internal consistency and comprehensibility are just as important as balance for the health of a game.

Though fun is also a major factor in the argument. Each UU is only on the field for a small section of the game, and after a civ's UU obsoletes, the civ loses a major part of their uniqueness. Letting UUs keep their promotions lets the civ be more unique and interesting for longer. That's the argument anyway, and while I'm inclined to agree, I'm open to counter arguments. But I'd like to keep fun as the main focus for the decision, since that's the ultimate goal in designing a game. Balance is only useful in the service of fun.

 

[tu_79]

The problem isn't balance or even fun. The civs are all balanced and very interesting to play, and that's great. But the lack of consistency makes the mechanics difficult to learn and understand. When people don't know whether or not their civ's unique unit keeps their features on upgrading, it hurts their ability to learn the game and feel like they know what they're doing. In my opinion, internal consistency and comprehensibility are just as important as balance for the health of a game.

Though fun is also a major factor in the argument. Each UU is only on the field for a small section of the game, and after a civ's UU obsoletes, the civ loses a major part of their uniqueness. Letting UUs keep their promotions lets the civ be more unique and interesting for longer. That's the argument anyway, and while I'm inclined to agree, I'm open to counter arguments. But I'd like to keep fun as the main focus for the decision, since that's the ultimate goal in designing a game. Balance is only useful in the service of fun.

But this does not require consistency, only clear documentation. Stating whether promotion is kept on upgrade should suffice.

 

[vyyt]

But this does not require consistency, only clear documentation.

I think giving a different color to the promotions lost upon upgrade would be the best documentation. The Communitas mod did that.