1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Can we please go back to melee unit dominance over ranged please?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Ravellion, Dec 2, 2013.

  1. KmDubya

    KmDubya King

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    632
    Location:
    Nong Bua Lam Pha, Thailand
    Should the game be balanced for deity play or for the other levels?

    If overpowered units and tactics are the only viable way to win on diety, should that trump any and all balance concerns at the lower levels?
     
  2. Ninakoru

    Ninakoru A deity on Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2002
    Messages:
    658
    Location:
    Madrid, Spain, Europe
    Absolutely not. Moreover, he's saying: In a game with less exploits, difficult AI modes shouldn't rely so much in production/maintenance bonuses.

    IMO the game should be worked towards a MP game on prince, then adjust bonuses for the increasing difficulties.
     
  3. JimBobV

    JimBobV Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Messages:
    160
    I agree. Its already silly that you can even damage cities with archer units. If the city has walls, how are arrows supposed to do any damage? In fact, the only thing that really could actually do damage to a city was siege units. Other military units we're used to cut off the city from supplies, take down any opposing forces, and secure the city once captured. I think most of the time cities actually surrendered when they had been choked out for long enough. As long as you could block a city of supplies, you could eventually starve them out.
     
  4. KrikkitTwo

    KrikkitTwo Immortal

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    12,316
    The AI melee spam is Supposed to crush you on higher levels
    OP bows are an exploit the player uses to make Deity not really hard.

    By simply Decreasing Strength of C-bows and X-bows (and possibly Camel Archers and Keshiks)
    You would solve a lot of problems

    To solve the Catapult/Trebuchet problem either
    1. decrease the strength of City ranged attacks
    2. give them a defensive bonus v. cities (not just an attack bonus)


    To solve all the problems at once, then just decrease the amount of damage done by Any ranged attack (siege units and cities will do better if combat is spread out over multiple turns.. because of setup time and autoheal)
     
  5. Krajzen

    Krajzen Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2013
    Messages:
    2,840
    Location:
    Poland
    Somewhere in the Downloads there is mods called Battle Lines which adds Winged Hussar's promotion (force enemy to run away) to ALL melee units. I must try that surprisingly simple complete revolution in combat system, because it sounds like making combat much more dynamic. I recommend trying that, maybe it helps?
     
  6. Ravellion

    Ravellion Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    Messages:
    595
    Location:
    Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Nicely put and I am mostly in agreement. I am wondering whether we will get a last balance patch... and whether this should be in it.
     
  7. SemperFi2382

    SemperFi2382 Mitten Marauder

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    321
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Well, in all fairness they are using "fire arrows" to theoretically set the city ablaze. At least that's how I justify it. Not that I'm disagreeing, because it is strange but not like they can take the city either. As an example (not a great one, but just for visuals) in The 13th Warrior, they shoot fire arrows to wreak havoc before melee soldiers charged in which brings me to my next point.

    City combat in general needs improvement because I still think you should have to clear out the occupying enemy unit before capturing. The defense bonus when garrisoned just doesn't do "enough" to stop an attacker. When a near dead unit can capture a city occupied by a full health unit (even if eras ahead), it will still win since the city itself has no HP at that point.

    In the previous example, the city defenders were still able to fight back, despite the city being pretty jacked up. However, as it is, that isn't the case.
     
  8. KrikkitTwo

    KrikkitTwo Immortal

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    12,316

    I agree.. city combat should probably
    1. lower city "defense from population/techs"
    2. increase city defense from Garrisoned unit's Combat Strength
    3. increased city defense from buildings (which are fairly worthless... they should be needed for a reasonable defense in that era)
     
  9. SideScroller

    SideScroller Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    14
    It's silly really, without cover II and medic II, I find my melee and siege to be completely useless. It's so painful to build a catapult on marathon (I only play marathon) and see it die in one-two shots. And on the flip side, as soon as I get a unit with +range the game is broken, enemies just throwing their lives away.

    The only real solution to this that I can think of is to intentionally sandbag yourself and not abuse them, I find myself doing this a lot when the devs fail to balance a game
     
  10. VicRatlhead5199

    VicRatlhead5199 King

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    966
    Location:
    Michigan
    One thing that made ranged dominant over melee was splitting the medic and cover promotions. Melee units can handle a lot of punishment when they have cover 2 and medic 2. They could combine them back into 1 promotion each to make melee units more durable quicker. Then you'd have a solid meatshield at level 3 instead of level 5. If melee units could absorb more focus fire you'd be forced to use melee units of your own to protect your ranged units. I never did like that change to the medic and cover promotions.

    I still like the idea of giving ranged units a penalty vs. cities like mounted units. It'd make siege units a more attractive choice. Comp. bows made catapults basically worthless and trebuchets don't get much use because you already have a boatload or archer-types to upgrade to crossbows (I think trebs are underrated, they do topple cities with castles much faster than crossbows). Siege units don't start to be really attractive until cannons and even then you still don't generally stop using crossbows because now you've got them all highly promoted with range and/or logistics. It doesn't truly get better until they take a range away with gats and add one with artillery. IMO a buff for catapults might not be a bad idea. Get people building them earlier and the ranged dominance would be a lot smaller.

    Those two things would really help balance the units out more but wouldn't require sweeping changes to the game.
     
  11. Vitruvius

    Vitruvius King

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2013
    Messages:
    862
    Another thing about promotions is that melee need 3 shock/drill for march but ranged need only 2. March really makes melee more useful because u dont need to stop to heal, if it takes only two shock/drill for march then it would make them Much better.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
     
  12. VicRatlhead5199

    VicRatlhead5199 King

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    966
    Location:
    Michigan
    Yeah, that is weird. I normally am pushing hard for range and logistics on my archer types. I skip over march more often than not, so I'm not sure whether that tips the balance any or not.

    I just hope that if there are balance patches in the future they don't overcompensate and nerf archer-types into oblivion like they did mounted units.
     
  13. Civilmyzation

    Civilmyzation Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2013
    Messages:
    80
    agree. I'd rather see some buff or change to melee promotions, than archers or ranged to get nerfed.
     

Share This Page