Discussion: Balancing Unit Lines

[Ekolite]

I think I speak for most people on this forum when I say ''Who needs any line but melee?''. They are over-whelming the strongest and most versatile unit group, they're great for both the offense and the defence, city taking and fighting on open terrain. And what's more? They're cheap as anything.

The melee line makes all other unit lines redundant, surplus to requirements. In so many games I never research Horseback Riding (and if I do it's for Mobility 1 only). Similarly, I rarely research Hunting, and almost never research Archery. The only time I ever focus on any line but melee are in thos niche, niche cases, with the Hippus I use horses, with the Svartalfar I use recon, with the Bannor I use Crusaders/Paramanders etc . But in the vast majority of cases, and with the vast majority of civs you have no use for these units as the all-encompassing melee line is all you ever need, and researching these units also nets you a nice few economic bonuses.

I think something needs to be done, but what?

Recon

The reason I don't use Recon is primarily because the techs are so expensive for what you actually get, and because I perceive recon units to be essentially worthless, and catching animals to be too rare and situational to bother with. And then, to even get as much as hunters you have to build an expensive and utterly useless Hunting Lodge.

For this reason I would first suggest reducing the cost of practically everything in the entire line. Techs, units, the lot. Then I think it would be necessary to give recon units something that really goes in their favour. Firstly, free movement unaffected by forests, hills and desert. These guys know how to move and shouldn't be slowed down by these obstacles. Then I would probably add a few promotions that they can buy at certain levels such as the ability to use ''Mask'' (Under COE all Recon units get this for free), ''Hidden'' to represent their stealth, and perhaps also ''Marksman''.

Then I would give them a massive attack bonus in forests to represent their ability to trap and ambush the enemy.

Alternately, I would make recon units quite a lot stronger then melee, but with massive penalties for city attack. Melee would be the opposite, weaker (even with metals) but with a nice bonus in city attack, creating two separate roles.

Somewhere along the tech line, perhaps new hunting resources would have a chance to be generated in remaining woodland tiles (a reason to keep woodland) and maybe a bonus to forest yields (a la Sanitation with farms) could be nice. This would make FoL something other then totally useless for non-elves.

Cavalry

It's hard to know what to suggest for Cavalry. Maybe a few extra first strikes to represent a charge? Possibly even allowing them to use metals? They could have lower strength, metals, and first strikes? In my game I change Chariots to make them more useful, and fulfil their historical role more adeptly. They no longer require Trade, only horses and Construction. They start off with 5 attack and 2 defence and can use metals. They cost 120 hammers if I remember correctly, and have a penalty of 75% attacking and defending in forests to represent their need for wide open spaces ot be successful. This allows them to fill an interesting niche, and remain useful throughout the Iron age. However they are extremely vulnerable to assassins and if caught unawares are immediately destroyed, meaning that in many cases it is better to upgrade to more well-rounded mounted units. However Chariots are at their most useful during the Stone/Bronze age, while they only compete against warriors. However at this stage of the game, their high cost makes them a risky investment.

Archery

No idea, and I don't feel able to really discuss these in any detail. I can't remember ever building one!

Melee

Melee is the problem, almost certainly. So what should be done?

-Make metals rarer? Although this could potentially only make them relatively more powerful if you do get metals.

-Make the units more expensive? But thematically these should be the easiest to equip and train so how can this be justified?

-Increase their upkeep costs?

-Limit players to a certain amount of each only? Possibly allowing a new trait that increases this limit?

-Make them gain XP slower? After all, melee are essentially a rabble wielding axes until you get to Champions or so.

-Give Cavalry a large bonus against melee? 50% attack bonus?

How else could the melee line be balanced?

 

[Itherael]

This would make FoL something other then totally useless for non-elves.

Its not, infact many players have reported FotL success with a number of other civs most famously the Calabim.

 

[Ekolite]

That's for another thread. I tend to find most other religions to be more useful in comparison, making FoL seem quite weak with non-elves.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

You're really underrating mounted. It competes with melee just fine. They generally hit just as hard as melee units, the base move of 3 allows them to attack and kill a straggler then pull back to the safety of a melee/archery stack in the same turn, and by upgrading it with mobility/haste or commando you can use them to bypass the major fighting and hit a lightly defended city, or key group of reinforcements. Chariots are unlocked by two techs which are vital anyway, you need not detour to get them. They're worth the cost.

Archery's weird. It and melee basically do the same thing. Generally you want one or the other, not both. Melee's easier to research because both types rely on metals and metals are connected to melee, archery has situational defensive bonuses, but in the end both are slow, beefy, cost-efficient units that can be boosted with enchantment. Most civs prefer melee but a few (Amurites, Lanun, Ljosalfar) want the bulk of their mid/late armies to have bows. It's tricky to balance this.

The end of the recon line is killer, but hunters and rangers are underpowered as you say. Hawks are the main point of hunting, which... bleh. Early recon techs need to be cheaper. Hunters need to stop being able to carry hawks (rangers still could). That way rangers have a point.

If recon is so buffed, melee doesn't need a nerf. Mounted is already good, recon would become good, archery's problem isn't one you can solve by simply nerfing melee.

 

[Senethro]

I'll have more thoughts on this later but for now I broadly agree with Ekolite's identifying of the problem but not with his solutions.

Melee is the best conversion of hammers into hurting.
Mounted has its uses especially for Raiders as it gets to choose its fights.
Recon should be a resource-less option for aggressive defense but takes too long to research and has no economic benefit.

Can someone pull some numbers for the beakers a civ has to acquire to get Stirrups and to get Animal Handling? I think just cutting some beakers from the Recon line would be all thats required. Maybe some kind of extra tech paths that mix it up more with Archery line could help it too.

Theres been a lot of this kind of discussion recently. I wonder if theres the potential for a Very Nearly Vanilla mod which would be 99% Kael + co's work but with just a little interfering from balance interested people like us.

 

[Fafnir13]

I agree on lessening the costs of recon line. They do serve a useful roll, but it seems kind of niche. Do keep in mind that recon techs do lead to some nice things. The Good Baron stands out as one. Getting him early on can be a real game winner.

Melee does need some alterations, but in such a way that basic usage doesn't suffer. They should be darn good at attacking, forming the backbone of any offensive. Traditionally, that's how its always been.
However, melee has problems with mobility and is vulnerable to fast moving targets and ranged attacks. Ways to represent that in game could be extra damage from First Strikes when defending and increased odds of withdrawing for units attacking melee.
Tweaks along those lines would, hopefully, encourage a more rounded approach to army construction without being too detrimental.

 

[Fluffypaw]

Hiya

My first post here and I admit I haven't played FfH that much to be an expert, but I thought I'd still throw an idea here.

Archery's weird. It and melee basically do the same thing. Generally you want one or the other, not both. Melee's easier to research because both types rely on metals and metals are connected to melee, archery has situational defensive bonuses, but in the end both are slow, beefy, cost-efficient units that can be boosted with enchantment. Most civs prefer melee but a few (Amurites, Lanun, Ljosalfar) want the bulk of their mid/late armies to have bows. It's tricky to balance this.

If recon is so buffed, melee doesn't need a nerf. Mounted is already good, recon would become good, archery's problem isn't one you can solve by simply nerfing melee.

I don't remember if this was suggested before or has been in an older version of FfH, but what if the metals were moved to an economic line or made into a research line of their own? Then it wouldn't be necessary to research melee line to gain access to improved weapons, which would make other units lines more viable. This would make recon line stronger since they don't need weapon upgrades, wouldn't really affect mounted or archery lines and would be a nerf in melee line.

Also, considering late game, I think archery line should be able to use mithril weapons. Seems sensible to me that a mithril arrowhead would do better than an iron one...

Any thoughts?

Fluffypaw

 

[Senethro]

Still thinking about things.

One thing I'd like to point out - While utterly impractical the Recon lines have a pretty fun dynamic. Some months back I was playing a high to low game vs. Turinturambar's AI and got placed with the Svartalfar with a rampant Calabim neighbour. I was of course crushed but I almost managed to force a stalemate through use of Recon and Archery units.
My Rangers made opportunistic attacks and after Combat I/Shock I were able to win fights where the enemy was in defensive terrain. My Assassins proved their worth by killing all the catapults in the Calabim stacks which meant they would often stand around outside my cities looking sheepish. Eventually they'd work up the courage to attack and get humiliated by the Archery units, whereupon the Rangers would swoop in and mop up the survivors.

Rangers are strong in the field but weak in cities. Archers are stronger in cities than unsupported attackers. Assassins destroy the enemy's support needed to attack cities. In this way you can cause these long painful guerilla wars in your own territory to your attackers.
It would be an interesting option for a civ which discovers that it has no bronze, expansionist neighbours and some kind of late game punch that it needs to survive long enough to use. Keeping it interesting is that its not a sustainable situation as it would only be a matter of time before Melee emphasis opponents get Mithril, Tier 4 stack destroying magic and offense reasserts itself again.

If nothing else discount Poisons because their role as an Anti-Support unit is interesting enough that it needs a bigger part in the game.

 

[Senethro]

And theres another thing!

Look at these costs. It almost looks as if when Tech: Tracking was cut its cost wasn't just added to Hunting, but added to Animal Handling and Poisons as well.

Tech costs

Hunting: 460
Animal Handling: 1800
Poisons: 1600
(Also, Animal Husbandry)
Totals: 2260 + 180 for AH
2060 for Poisons
4320 + 180 for both.

Animal Husbandry: 180
Horseback Riding: 360
Stirrups: 800
(Also, Archery, Mining)
Total: 1340 + 300 + 200

Archery: 300
Bowyers: 2400
(Also, Mining, Bronze Working)
Total: 2700 + 400 + 200

Mining: 200
Bronze Working: 400
Smelting: 1600
Iron Working: 2600
Total: 4800

Lets think about some of these. Why is Melee/Metal so expensive? Because Mining/BW are essential economic/defense technologies as they cut down forest/jungle and instantly upgrade all your warriors. Iron Working does the same with Axemen. Oh, am I forgetting that they both provide the highest strength unit for their Tiers?

Mounted: Its got a single economic tech in Animal Husbandry but at least its on the line to Trade. Look how cheap it is though. Those 120 hammer Horse Archers are expensive but they win fights as they arrive literally thousands of beakers earlier than their competitors. Who cares that they're a dead end tech?

Archery: Lumbermills are frequently underrated. Archery is obviously a reasonable investment even though Archers themselves aren't that useful if you're winning fights in the field. Bowyers is almost as expensive as Iron Working, gives a unit that requires Iron, doesn't lead to a useful part of the tech tree. You'd need a really good unique unit for this to be worth it.

Recon: Hunting is a poor economic tech and all Recon leads to is more Recon techs. The Tier 4 Recon units are great, but first you have to get there. Recon units main competitors are Mounted units who are obvously getting a better deal with cheap Stirrups.

Suggestion: Cut 200 beakers from Hunting, 200 from Animal Handling, 100 from Poisons, add 100 beakers to Way of the Forests and 100 to Hidden Paths (The elves are in a good place right now and don't need an advantage).

 

[cabbagemeister]

I don't remember if this was suggested before or has been in an older version of FfH, but what if the metals were moved to an economic line or made into a research line of their own? Then it wouldn't be necessary to research melee line to gain access to improved weapons, which would make other units lines more viable.

I also think this is the main issue with the unit type imbalance. As long as the melee line is tied to the metal-acquiring techs which buff other unit types, it will be the best unit line. The main issue is not with the relative strength of the unit types (well, maybe except for the fact that recon is truly too weak), but with the beakers-to-benefits ratios that are entirely skewed in favor of melee due to the fact that the melee line also grants metal access.

An iron chariot or an iron longbowman are good units which in principle offer enough advantages to compete with a champion. In practice, it's completely infeasible to use those units when you have to either research down TWO completely different lines (Iron Working + Bowyers or Construction) compared to the champion's one-line research, or go without metals and leave the units dramatically weaker.

Unfortunately correcting this issue would mean dramatically rebalancing the tech tree, which I think Kael is probably loathe to do at this point in development. Time for some ambitious mod-modders to step up!

 

[Zongo]

Recon

The reason I don't use Recon is primarily because the techs are so expensive for what you actually get, and because I perceive recon units to be essentially worthless, and catching animals to be too rare and situational to bother with. And then, to even get as much as hunters you have to build an expensive and utterly useless Hunting Lodge.

For this reason I would first suggest reducing the cost of practically everything in the entire line. Techs, units, the lot. Then I think it would be necessary to give recon units something that really goes in their favour. Firstly, free movement unaffected by forests, hills and desert. These guys know how to move and shouldn't be slowed down by these obstacles. Then I would probably add a few promotions that they can buy at certain levels such as the ability to use ''Mask'' (Under COE all Recon units get this for free), ''Hidden'' to represent their stealth, and perhaps also ''Marksman''.

Then I would give them a massive attack bonus in forests to represent their ability to trap and ambush the enemy.

Alternately, I would make recon units quite a lot stronger then melee, but with massive penalties for city attack. Melee would be the opposite, weaker (even with metals) but with a nice bonus in city attack, creating two separate roles.

As you say, recon units can mask at will if they follow CoE. So you build Nightwatches and upgrade them to Assassins. Et voilà, all of your Assassins mask at will. You need money for that? You need money for EVERYTHING in the CoE. Make it anyway you can, like the bounty hunter promotion. You will be continuously waging war in the darkness with your assassin army, so why not?

The recon units have an implicit advantage - there is no promotion against them. You have cover, shock, formation, scourge... but nothing against recon units.

They also have the explicit advantage of poison blade, which other lines can't get.

Ideally you produce Nightwatches, buff them with fire arrows, then upgrade them to Assassins and buff them with poison: an 8-6 unit with mask, marksman and a first strike.

Do you want to further buff them? Just let them wear metal: bronze, iron, mithril.

Civilization flavour: the Svartalfar recons get Sinister, +1 attack. The Sidar ghosts hide at will, and keep this ability after upgrading to shadows.

 

[Tasunke]

see! see how early horsearchers arrive!!! and you still don't think Hippus and Kurios are Tier 1?

 

[Senethro]

see! see how early horsearchers arrive!!! and you still don't think Hippus and Kurios are Tier 1?

Horse Archers are Str6 for 120 hammers, Axemen are Str5 for 60 hammers. Harchers can win battles but not wars because they can't take core cities from smart opponents. They only become a threat if you feed them lots of XP and they grow to the point where they have +100%Str from promotions. But that takes effort and time, so if you can do it you deserved it.

So, melee units are good even if you're lazy while mounted units can be successful but only if you put some effort into it. Except for Tasunke, who has a worldspell that lets him be really lazy.

What the Kurios have to do with anything, I have no idea!

 

[Ekolite]

As you say, recon units can mask at will if they follow CoE. So you build Nightwatches and upgrade them to Assassins. Et voilà, all of your Assassins mask at will. You need money for that? You need money for EVERYTHING in the CoE. Make it anyway you can, like the bounty hunter promotion. You will be continuously waging war in the darkness with your assassin army, so why not?

The recon units have an implicit advantage - there is no promotion against them. You have cover, shock, formation, scourge... but nothing against recon units.

There is that, but how significant is that when the AI hardly uses shock promotions anyway?

They also have the explicit advantage of poison blade, which other lines can't get.

Which requires priests of leaves, a totally different tech line and an often sub-par religion. Elves are obviously discounted from this.

Ideally you produce Nightwatches, buff them with fire arrows, then upgrade them to Assassins and buff them with poison: an 8-6 unit with mask, marksman and a first strike.

Which requires Mages with Enchantment 2. Another tech line. Before you get to this point any sensible person would have destroyed you using the melee line.

Do you want to further buff them? Just let them wear metal: bronze, iron, mithril.

Making the metal line even more important then it already is...

I strongly agree with seperating melee and metals. The advances in melee units seem to be primarilly in terms of improving discipline and formation, so perhaps the Warfare -> Military Strategy line could be used as a base line for moving the melee units across to?

 

[Lone Wolf]

There is that, but how significant is that when the AI hardly uses shock promotions anyway?

So, if I give the AI more weight to Shock, the recon units' value will be a bit higher. I'll do it in my XML.

They also have the explicit advantage of poison blade, which other lines can't get.

Which requires priests of leaves, a totally different tech line and an often sub-par religion. Elves are obviously discounted from this.

Poison Blade is Nature II arcane magic, not Divine. Still, a different tech line, but at least not a sub-par religion.

 

[Ekolite]

Ah my mistake, but yeah the point still stands. You need mages, you need two mana types that you might otherwise not choose, etc etc.

 

[xalien]

They also have the explicit advantage of poison blade, which other lines can't get.

Ideally you produce Nightwatches, buff them with fire arrows, then upgrade them to Assassins and buff them with poison: an 8-6 unit with mask, marksman and a first strike.

Melee units have enchanted blade which with higher unit strength provides bigger bonus than flat +1 combat (e.g. 20% of 8 is 1.6), although +1 with combat 5 becomes +2. OTOH poison is useless against all non-living things.

AFAIK flaming arrows after upgrade is removed from non-archery units.

 

[Senethro]

Ok, so Zongo was wrong in 10 different ways. What do you guys think about balancing the unit lines then?

 

[Tasunke]

well, one nice thing about recon units is that there are NO PROMOTIONS AGAINST THEM!!!

possible balancing (to buff recon) is to:

A)allow shock 2; perhaps cover 2 as well, but then would need to reduce their city attack or City-strength in general.

B)Also allow freedom of movement. AKA ignore terrain penalties. Also, as earlier stated, removing the hunter's ability to carry hawks would increase a ranger's usefulness. Perhaps even have all rangers (and beastmasters?) ignore the penalty from crossing a river. If the river penalty and ocean penalty are indeed separate, then this would be a good idea imho. However, I do not want to see rangers attacking from a ship at sea xD ... rangers with THAT kind of amphibous would need to buy the promotion, imo.

C) reduce the cost of Hunting and Animal Handling, and add that cost to the Beast Mastery tech

Beastmasters are a fine unit by themselves. I do not think they need to be changed at all.

**Ive always considered Rangers as acceptable units in situations where upkeep is more costly than production (usually an elven situation), including the fact of Svart rangers having 8 attack strength, when combined with the utility of raider + 2 base move can be quite useful.

***Ive also considered HorseArchers as generally worth the extra investment due to
A) arrive earlier so better chance for XP
B) easily achieved high withdrawal rates ... long term high survivability rates. You can choose your battles and more than likely survive them, even with low-level units.

 

[hbar]

I strongly agree with seperating melee and metals. The advances in melee units seem to be primarilly in terms of improving discipline and formation, so perhaps the Warfare -> Military Strategy line could be used as a base line for moving the melee units across to?

I've always wondered why this isn't the case. It seems like more a holdover from base Civ then a design decision. If melee had a separate line from metal, and if more units (read: archery, some mounted, some divine) were able to use metal weapons, then the balancing issues would be much easier. The biggest problem is that melee has no downside (besides shock, which is out of the player's control), and has all upside because of the chance of discovering an incredibly valuable resource. If metal resources were decoupled from the melee line, then many more strategies would be viable.

OTOH, if this were the case, BW and IW would probably need a new bonus.