CEP: Armies

Thalassicus

Bytes and Nibblers
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
11,057
Location
Texas
I completed the basic plan for adapting Gem to BNW. I'm simplifying the project for this expansion to make the mods easier to use and maintain, so I merged some unit lines:

  • Merged vanguards (levy) with counter units (pike).
  • Merged strong ships (ship of the line) with common ships (galleon).

Other than these changes, I'm mostly using Gem as a starting point for army balance. BNW didn't change armies much. I spent several hours today carefully going through the unit list to consider smaller tweaks or changes. I expect to release an update within a few days once I have time to go through all the army files. :)

I expect to keep the rest of the Armies component much the same as in GEM. I copied some of my thoughts about this transition below.


Melee Combat

Think of modern "melee" combat as short-range attacks, like Infantry shooting at each other, or a sub and destroyer exchanging torpedoes and depth charges. It's not hand-to-hand fighting, obviously. Anything at short range is basically a "melee" in modern warfare. I think people get too focused on the image of units literally making physical contact like swords clashing or ships ramming. "Melee" changes its meaning in modern times. Keep this in mind when thinking about units like Infantry.


Ship Roles

The two basic roles for ships are common ranged land support, and killing other ships (including cargo ships). I like providing ship-killers an intuitive attack advantage vs common ships.

10 :c5rangedstrength: 7 :c5strength: 3 :c5moves: - common ship
____ 10 :c5strength: 4 :c5moves: - ship-killer

It's like horses countering bowmen. It's easy to understand and use. The ship-killer's speed and strength beats the weaker melee strength of the common ranged ship. I like how ship-killers benefit from hunting in packs for flanking bonuses with this design. I call them "hunter ships" for this reason.

This is my basic design of ship killers like the Trireme, designed to hunt down the slower and more common Galleys. The advantage of a Galley is the capability to attack land units.


Submarines

In the modern era, imagine a submarine trolling the waters between two nations during a war. The sub locates some merchant vessels, and takes them out safely with torpedoes. However, the sub's spotted by an enemy military escort. The sub engages in a deadly battle with the destroyer, exchanging torpedo fire with depth charges. Both ships suffer heavy damage from the encounter.

This is how lategame naval combat works in the mod right now. We can take out cargo ships without receiving any damage. This was the main function of submarines in real life. Attacking destroyers is much more dangerous. If we attack a destroyer with a sub, the two ships exchange fire with torpedoes and depth charges, each taking some damage.

This achieves several things for naval warfare:

  • Ships can bombard land units.
  • Ships can capture cities.
  • Two simple ship paths (melee/ranged).
  • Destroyers defend with depth charges.
  • Subs get a free first shot in combat.
  • Subs can perform the roles they did in in WW2 (merchant attacks, sinking navies, and landing guerrilla troops).

I'm very happy with this setup. :)
 
Cool. :) Agreed that the numerical balance in GEM is a lot better to work with on this area.

Couple logistical questions or concerns.

Does "counter" units include the more modern Lancer-ATG-gunship counter line? Lancers and gunships are probably the odder inclusions there because of the mobility advantage over spears.

Does this also mean that crossbows would upgrade to gatling guns but that pikes would upgrade to something else? "Skirmishers" or arques?, either one would be fine with me. The pike>gatling change in 3.05 was just odd. I assumed it was a temporary move, but I thought I'd check. It isn't pressing. We can wait and critique more once the next version comes out to even out some of the details. (Also as a details question, will this impact UUs?)

Marines and Airborne units are sort of floating nebulously from this description (this isn't terrible on its own).
 
I consider lancers a "hit and run skirmisher" like a submarine... units with high attack and speed, but low defense. Like you said, these are very different from slow counter units like spears or at-guns.

VEM added vanguards, and G&K added automatics (gatling and machine guns). My natural thought was why add two instead of one? Get rid of one and merge with the other. I thought of that all last year. I now realize I should have combined vanguards with counter units instead of automatics. It's a more natural fit. Vanguards are medics, scouts, and frontline troops, traits that don't really fit a machine gun emplacement. Those qualities do apply to paratroopers and marines.

I'm also thinking of renaming "Skirmishers" to one of the other names. It doesn't really fit a defensive unit, and is ambiguous with units that perform a "skirmishing" role like Lancers.

Archers (same as BNW)
  1. Archer
  2. Bow
  3. Crossbow
  4. Gatling
  5. Machine
  6. Bazooka

Vanguards
  1. Scout
  2. Spear (merged Sentinel)
  3. Pike (merged Levy)
  4. Militia (renamed Skirmisher)
  5. Conscript
  6. Airborne (merged AT)
  7. XCOM

Skirmishers (not an upgrade path)
  • Chariot
  • Lancer
  • Helicopter
  • Submarine
 
Merging marines and making the amphib promo better (merge with 2x defence on embarked, maybe faster embarking movement if possible), would be acceptable to having them as a separate unit. The amphib has to get a boost because you can just use hunter ships instead.

Airborne with an anti-tank function is a little strange, but otherwise that's a sensible path. Keep in mind the weak point of vanguards in practice (not in theory) was offensive ability for the AI was hampered. I'd be careful about giving movement promotions, which advantaged the human, and too few offensive capabilities (too low of strength or all-defensive promotions). The trade-off here would be some enhanced defensive capability by default rather than through promotion, maybe some extra counter capabilities (but not as strong as the default), and they shouldn't be as cheap to have if they can actually fight.
 
Oh, I would love to see a helicopter upgrade into a submarine. Blub, Blubb, Blubb... :D (I'm getting Transformer Images here...)

Wasn't the main advantage of the amphibious promotion the river crossing? But yeah, I agree reducing it to a promotion seems logical.

But yes, let's try it first and then look around again ;)

Lastly though, do you adapt the Unique Units already as well in this go around? They can become quite over/underpowered when they are not changed accordingly to their base unit...
 
If he does the sql method of modifying the base units as before, that takes care of most of the UUs by class modifying all the units of that class up or down. The special cases (battering ram, ranged knights/horsemen, anything that seems too weak or too strong otherwise) can be picked up after that.

I don't remember any Transformers that turned into a submarine from a helicopter... a car or a tank maybe. But they've changed those a lot since I was a kid. ;)
 
Sounds interesting, I look forward to trying it out, and seeing how effective the AI is in warfare.
 
Hm. The only issue I have with this is the promotions.

If the vanguard / spear line can still ignore terrain and increase movement via promotions then you really change the dynamics of warfare, especially in the hands of the Human. The AI can't handle hit and run attacks like they should. It makes sense when fast mounted units are used this way but using spears to rush the opponent and rush back almost seems like cheating.
 
Sorry but...

I really don't like the Scout --- Spearman upgrade path.

To me, it is all wrong. Scouts and Spearmen should be available together.

Scouts are all about mobility and vision. Spearmen are for defusing the devastating destruction of horsemen like barbarians. Scout sees them, someone else kills them. With this Scout/Spearmen sees them and then goes after them. No! no! no!

What do we get, mobile spearmen or 'uber' scouts?

Spearmen last for 2 eras, when a lot of exploration is still going on. Who does the bulk of that now?
 
We had vanguards and spears separate for two years, so I figure we can try this combined idea for a while. Let's test it through practical gameplay. If we don't like it, we can easily go back to the original system. :)
 
I definitely like the idea of having cleaner promotion lines. The spear line then becomes diversified by having promotion options. This should keep the support role specialisation that humans love (healing, exploring) but also allow the ai to have formidable armies on both offence and defence.

One question- do the ignore terrain bonuses of the scouts remain in place after promotion to spears? I feel this would be the way to go to encourage people to build a scout or three when they have the opportunity for the unique promotion. It also makes sending promoted scouts out to explore more exciting since they are almost irreplaceable.

Finally- alternatively do scouts have to become obsolete? Would it be possible to produce scouts at any time, but then have the time/cost issue of promoting them up to something useful?
 
Scouts' ignore terrain does not persist when upgraded. Later scout-like units can get it with the Recon 1 promotion, which costs experience and offers no strength bonus. This basically makes a unit like a scout since it weakens their combat strength.

The AI will specialize its units intelligently with promotions once I transfer over those AI enhancements from the later stages of GEM.
 
Not a priority but someone could perhaps make a graphic or spreadsheet to show the upgrades and promotions available.

Then we can see how it might play out.

I'll look into it.
 
I don't necessarily think that all units should be upgradeable to the next era's unit. If some units need to be hard-built and can't be upgraded, that makes the honour tree (with +15% unit production), forges, barracks etc. and heroic epic more useful. All of these are under-used at the moment.

The more every unit in the game becomes upgradeable the more you weaken forges/barracks/HE/honour policy. So If anything I think CEP should make LESS units upgrade rather than more.
 
Sorry, Thal, I've played a game with the new vanguard-spear units and I absolutely dislike them already. I don't think something with 3+ mobility, ITC and tons of defense should be in the game. Also, with their current promotions, vanguards are useles at attacking anything. Again. Making spears a little cheaper and weaker, and taking away "Siege" promotion from them would have been enough, imo.

You were talking about "skirmisher" unit line - what do you think about putting scouts in it and giving them some upgrade path & anti-barb bonus? This way, you can keep vanguards from becoming crazy heavily armored bunnies they are in 3.0.5, and give us some mobile recon&barb defense units. They would be a good unit to slap "Medic" promotion on, also.
 
Yeah, every game I've played so far, these new spears have been absurdly good at defense, which has made AI combat even more tedious than it was in GEM. Their mobility just muddles things up as well and makes units less intuitive. It makes more sense for land units - with the exception of scouts and horses - to only go up to 3 movement late-game.
You were talking about "skirmisher" unit line - what do you think about putting scouts in it and giving them some upgrade path & anti-barb bonus? This way, you can keep vanguards from becoming crazy heavily armored bunnies they are in 3.0.5, and give us some mobile recon&barb defense units. They would be a good unit to slap "Medic" promotion on, also.
This is near-identical to what I suggested in the other vanguard thread.
 
In my current game I have a spear unit with March, ignore terrain, and withdraw chance for melee combat. He is hilariously hard to kill and a god dang hero, i use him to attack barbarians way stronger than himself and he wins by healing every turn and taking no damage other than when he attacks.

It feels really silly, maybe if they were ninjas or something but not regular old spearmen.
 
The mobility promotions shouldn't have made a comeback (maybe ITC if it's by itself? but not +1 move, retreat promo should be reduced in % if possible if it stays), neither the units being weaker.

It should be enough to give some defence bonus by default rather than defence-only and mobility promotions. The change would be to reduce or remove the counter ability and replace it with a defensive capacity but leave in the non-resource ability to fight offensively at a somewhat capable level (I also wouldn't do the "adjacency" bonus, should have to take the Honor tree for that).
 
I haven't played yet, but question: Can we lock out some promotions if you take another? Because some of the scout ones are easily overpowered if they are easy to get for later units... And if you make the 'recon'-line intros not strong enough, they don't help the scout much...

I'm positive though we can get this problem in check by tinkering with the promotions a bit ;-)
 
Top Bottom