Do Ranged Units Need Attention/Fixing?

[smallfish]

Could be 4 tiles "sometimes"

That is a lot of promotions. I salute thee, good sirrah.

 

[timtofly]

Keep in mind that 'real' artillery (late industrial/early modern) could shoot very very far. So a 'range' of 3 is ok.

If you're looking to 'balance' archer/ranged units, then the key thing to do is to remove the minimal one damage/shot. The calculation would need to allow for zero damage shots, which IMO, is key to finding the right balance.

(archer vs. GDR - GDR shouldn't die)

This also means that as city strengths go up (better defenses/more modern) then older ranged units won't do any damage, so you must upgrade or walk away.

I think the archer unit should be looked at as to weaken, but not destroy a melee unit. I also think they can be used to draw city fire or seige unit fire to keep your own mellee units from "drawing" all the fire. I also think that they should upgrade to a sniper unit and then maybe a stealth marine unit to keep the archer/unit alive into late game.

In late game they should be able to be wiped out by a tank, but still weaken it in tandem with another melee unit. I think that they should make great garrison units instead of melee or seige units. They should enhance the range power of a city to balance out seige units attacking the city.

 

[jbevermore]

I think the archer unit should be looked at as to weaken, but not destroy a melee unit. I also think they can be used to draw city fire or seige unit fire to keep your own mellee units from "drawing" all the fire. I also think that they should upgrade to a sniper unit and then maybe a stealth marine unit to keep the archer/unit alive into late game.

Dunno about that last part. A sniper isn't really a full fleged "unit" per se. You wouldn't see a group of 1000 snipers holding a city.

I would like to see some form of asymmetric warfare in Civ though, that could form a similar function.

 

[timtofly]

Dunno about that last part. A sniper isn't really a full fleged "unit" per se. You wouldn't see a group of 1000 snipers holding a city.

I would like to see some form of asymmetric warfare in Civ though, that could form a similar function.

They would be handy in taking out a gunship or anti tank unit though. I am sure that fighters and jets could handle that, but they have to be "stationed", and an "archer" unit would be more mobile.

I just hate giving up a range unit to become a melee. It does not make any sense to me. Snipers may be a little "niche" but they are a ranged unit, and today's marines are even longer range tactical units.

 

[CornPlanter]

I like them as they are. Ranged units are supposed to be powerful. There's a reason nobody in real world has hand to hand combat armies anymore.

 

[jbevermore]

I like them as they are. Ranged units are supposed to be powerful. There's a reason nobody in real world has hand to hand combat armies anymore.

There is, soldiers are still trained in hand to hand combat. But not nearly enough to represent in game.

I don't really mind that modern infantry is treated like a melee unit in CiV simply because compared to bombers, ICBMs, and rocket artillary a simple M16 might as well be hand to hand.

 

[jtb1127]

The ones that can fire over mountain ranges certainly do.

 

[jbevermore]

The ones that can fire over mountain ranges certainly do.

I don't think I've ever seen the AI get a ranged unit with indirect fire.