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

Choose your upgrade

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Abaxial, Jul 2, 2019.

  1. Snarf054

    Snarf054 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2019
    Messages:
    13
    Gender:
    Male
    Bring back rubber. Too many units use oil.
     
    acluewithout and lordofdonuts like this.
  2. Atlas627

    Atlas627 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    2,563
    Thought Anti-Cavalry units got a buff to their anti-cavalry bonus, but I can't find it anywhere in the code. Should they get one, considering they are trying to fight a more mobile opponent anyway?

    Edit: Speaking of mobility, did Anti-Tank and their upgrade get +1 Move?
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2019
  3. Sostratus

    Sostratus Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Messages:
    1,226
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    It appears to be a typo in the Unit Ability tooltip. The tooltip shows +14 while the combat preview (and results) show +10.
    Hence it wasn't in patch notes.

    What anticav units mostly suffer from, actually, is not bonus vs mounted but reduced base strength.
    I've written this before so I'll be brief, but there is a clear pattern in the game where units go up 10 strength per era. This is on a scale of
    25/35/45/55/65/75/85 for the ancient to atomic/info (the last upgrades are sort of clumped together.)
    There are some adjustments for each class too; namely, ranged units are 5:c5rangedstrength: lower than the era standard, and have -10:c5strength: compared to their :c5rangedstrength:. (This makes them weaker on defense. Also ranged units were super OP in past games.)
    Heavy cav have extra strength (+3-5) while light cav tends to have reduced strength.
    The warrior and slinger seem to have a -5str attached because they are available turn 1.

    Okay, where is this going: Ask yourself why pikes are at 41:c5strength: instead of 45:c5strength:. It doesn't make sense - pike and shot are at 55:c5strength:. Spearman vs chariot is the same as if you had 45 pikes vs knights. It's not unbalanced there, why would it be here? I'm going to skip over the entire problem they had where pikes used to cost more than knights too.
    Then we get to the modern era. The melee line almost perfectly fits the trend, except at infantry. Infantry and AT crew are at 70 instead of 75. This is why tanks are so dominant - the trend suggests a tank is actually right on target for strength. I strongly suspect infantry are weaker because there's no rifleman unit (but see than redcoats and gardes imperiale are at 65:c5strength:, exactly 10 over muskets) and somehow they thought this would create balance. This odd deviation actually affects other units too, like machine guns (they should be 80:c5rangedstrength:/70:c5strength:.)

    But while they boosted mech infantry early on from 80 to 85, back on trend, they never touched modern AT, who is stuck at just 80.

    What they most desperately need to do is push pikes to 45:c5strength: and AT crew/modern AT to 75:c5strength:/85.:c5strength:. Remember that +10 bonus vs mounted is a +50% multiplier. In civ5, anticav had a +50% multiple too. It's not the multiplier but the base unit; because those examples are so weak against everything, they won't survive to fight cav in the first place. They made a great backbone for unit strengths; they need only stick to it.

    AFAIK, no. I mean they have redeploy as a tier 3 promo still but that's it.
     
    acluewithout and Atlas627 like this.
  4. Atlas627

    Atlas627 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    2,563
    Ah, well that's certainly silly.

    I'm not sure why Pikes have reduced strength (maybe so they lose to Swordsmen?), but I can see an argument for Tanks being better than other units of the era: they can end the game quickly for a Domination victory. Infantry would be good for that type of offense instead of Tanks if Anti-Tanks were stronger against Tanks (Rock-Paper-Scissors), and is probably why Infantry still require Oil. Also, for all of the theme arguments, I think Infantry is supposed to be motorized. They use the Oil to get from place to place and then fight on foot once they get there.

    I think what Anti-Cav need is for that +14 bonus vs Cavalry to actually exist. Seems strange that they updated the tooltip but not the bonus itself.
     
  5. The_Quasar

    The_Quasar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    862
    Perhaps Infantry should be +1 movement, as a result of the oil requirement?
     

Share This Page