It depends on how much choice the attacking unit has of which defender they face, and how much choice the defender has of which unit does the defending, and how much each of them can tell first. All of which are areas where I think there's room for debate.
Give Certain Units Special Attack Abilities
- Thread starter MosheLevi
- Start date
It depends on how much choice the attacking unit has of which defender they face, and how much choice the defender has of which unit does the defending, and how much each of them can tell first. All of which are areas where I think there's room for debate.
- That makes it increased maintenance for promotions. It sounds like the rich guy now rules the game. Rich = Power would upset the game balance, as every single strategy would then boil down to a generic "3:1 Economic to Military City". The strategy aspect of the game would be ruined.
Oh, and Ragnar would indeed be Sid(Near-Invincible)
- Armored Units are Infantry's worst enemy at that age. Also, there would just be ANOTHER special ability on ANOTHER unit that would just be used.
- Oh, so now it's just an overpowered promotion?
"These special promotions work better when attacking individual units or small stacks because that is the only time you know for sure that you can use the special ability."
- I know for sure by hovering my cursor over the stack or defender I want to attack. Many of the units would become obsolete, and, once again, the game would become extremely streamlined, and the only thing you would need is a lot of money.
No techs, no, no, no, just push that science meter to zero and watch the super units flood in! |DDD
Oh, and a rich Tokugawa would become unstoppable, as well, but with the new additions, Ragnar would become the overpowered beast of destruction.
Having more money translating into having more power seems fairly straightforwardly positive, to me. It seems a large part of how the game already works. Be it by buying upgrades or rushing units or whatever mechanism,
This does assume that that ability is kept in the game.
I've proposed a fairly simple solution to this one before; exponential growth of unit capacity. Make it so that half a dozen Iron Age legions will reliably trash thirty Broze Age spearmen, pump up the tech differentials enough, and science zero is no longer a workable strategy.
This one is simply solved too; get rid of leader traits.
MosheLevi
Prince
You are bringing up an already existing issue.
You can rush the production of military units by spending extra coin.
So according to you the game already have a serious issue.
Again, you can do something similar today.
You can rush the production of military units by doing the same thing.
You are raising none existing issue here.
Large number of units + Normal Promotions = Small number of units + Super Promotions.
This equation can be balanced.
Well, to the money = power thing, money is already powerful enough. If you make money automatically translate into being a nearly invincible being with the ability to kill anyone and everyone, it would be a bit less balanced, no?
It's part of espionage, so I believe that would be in the game.
Oh, you mean what RoM has? Yeah, that would be a good idea. However, that super promotion that the unit would get would still make that much, much less of a challenge.
Get rid of leader traits, a balanced thing, to make way for super promotions? I don't think that one would be a good idea.
-----
"You are bringing up an already existing issue.
You can rush the production of military units by spending extra coin.
So according to you the game already have a serious issue."
- Yes, you can rush it with a civic. You misread my post, then brought up an equally strange reply.
Someone rich can rush units, however, they cost a LOT to rush. Making the super promotion cost as much as a rushed unit would just cause it to go unused, because people wouldn't care.
Also, rushing super unit = Rushing normal unit for anyone who is rich.
Once again, overpowered, underpowered. Only choices.
It's part of espionage, so I believe that would be in the game.
Oh, you mean what RoM has? Yeah, that would be a good idea. However, that super promotion that the unit would get would still make that much, much less of a challenge.
Get rid of leader traits, a balanced thing, to make way for super promotions? I don't think that one would be a good idea.
-----
"You are bringing up an already existing issue.
You can rush the production of military units by spending extra coin.
So according to you the game already have a serious issue."
- Yes, you can rush it with a civic. You misread my post, then brought up an equally strange reply.
Someone rich can rush units, however, they cost a LOT to rush. Making the super promotion cost as much as a rushed unit would just cause it to go unused, because people wouldn't care.
Also, rushing super unit = Rushing normal unit for anyone who is rich.
Once again, overpowered, underpowered. Only choices.
MosheLevi
Prince
You are still NOT getting it.
Right now we can train units faster by spending extra coin (in the city screen).
Players can also spend extra coin to upgrade their old units to the most current units.
Instead of doing that players can BUY a special ability promotion for coin.
The cost for such special ability promotions can be balanced with the amount of coin it cost to produce units faster in the city production queue.
It is just a matter of balancing how much coin each special ability costs.
Well, then it is just a matter of making them cost a bit cheaper so people would care and would use them in some cases.
Buying a large, mainly overpowered promotion is VERY different from rushing your units, and upgrading your units.
Upgrading is just turning an older unit into a newer unit for cash, and is basically rushing a unit, HOWEVER, giving someone, say "50% against Tank" is MUCH different.
If you balance the coins, it will cause rich people to become INSANELY powerful for a low amount of actual unit maintenance.
If you make it higher, the ability will become a waste of space.
If you make it too low, it'll be abused by everyone.
Upgrading is just turning an older unit into a newer unit for cash, and is basically rushing a unit, HOWEVER, giving someone, say "50% against Tank" is MUCH different.
If you balance the coins, it will cause rich people to become INSANELY powerful for a low amount of actual unit maintenance.
If you make it higher, the ability will become a waste of space.
If you make it too low, it'll be abused by everyone.
How is this not already the case, is my question ? Money lets you buy more upgrades. Money lets you buy units faster.
I think if people wanted a real counterbalance to money being military might and an insuperable advantage, it has to come from somewhere else entirely; closest I've come yet is some notions about culture that few people seem to like very much,
Yes, but give that action a specific cost, perhaps ? Enough that you have to think carefully about when to do it ?
RoM ?
Depends on the scaling. I was thinking of it as, say, six legionaries can handle forty spearmen without breaking a sweat, but if you "superpromote" one spearman to the extent where he can once take down a single legionary and if you can only afford to do that once or twice, that's a balance-changer without being a balance-destroyer.
I'm just noodling the consequences of this "superpromotion" notion; I don't like it myself, I don't even like regular promotions, it requires far too much focus on individual units for my liking and I'd much sooner get rid of it altogether and keep whatever benefits of specific promotions people actually want to keep as upgrades to different units entirely. I don't think leader traits are balanced, though; they force you towards a certain set of strategies regardless of whether that's useful in the context of the specific game, but that turns into another argument entirely.
MosheLevi
Prince
Players who rush unit production can produce large stack of units quickly.
Can’t you understand that?
Players who choose to purchase special ability promotions will end up with smaller stack of units but with more powerful units.
Why can’t you get that?
Players can then choose between rushing unit production (to have more units) or purchase special ability promotions for some of their existing units (to have better units).
This will give us a game with more options to play.
I am sure FA can balance the cost of rushing units VS purchasing special ability promotions.
How is "everybody can do it" abuse ?
Your logic here makes perfect sense to me.
What still does not make sense to me is the benefits of implementing the "more units vs. better units" choice with the mechanism of promotions, super or not, rather than the mechanisms of unit upgrade and rush-buying respectively.
What fundamental difference does it make to say "I buy a special ability for unit X to do Y" compared to "I upgrade unit X to unit X' that is just like unit X except that it can do Y" ?
MosheLevi
Prince
Well, then we make it in between, not too high and not too low, lol.
That is what balance is all about.
Shackel,
Are you just arguing for the sake of arguing?
That is open for exploration and for debate.
I just gave one example earlier for Infantry that can purchase sticky bombs to have 50% bonus VS Tanks and Mech Infantry.
Since this is a big bonus (VS the normal 25% bonus) it should be limited.
Buying this promotion for a cost will insure that it is not used too often (so it is not OP).
In addition to that players will only buy “one time use” only.
Once the ability has been used the player can buy this promotion again (at a certain cost).
This will balance the fact that this promotion is very powerful.
I think that this idea can be combined very well with the “Ambush” ability I suggested in another post.
These units can then be used for guerilla warfare and to pillage enemy improvements.
- First of all, enough with the rudeness. To me, it sounds arrogant. If I have a separate opinion, you're going to have to deal with trying to defend yours, rather than trying to yell at me for NOT liking you opinion.
If I have a 20 stack of tanks I bought by rushing(which would highly damage one's economy and bank), and someone comes in with 20 infantry, I should win.
However, with yours, it would be more or less...
I have a 20 stack of tanks going towards your city. On the turn it stops outside of the city walls, your infantry come out, and destroy my units with sticky grenade special abilities.
If the person is rich, on the next turn they would just flood BACK into the city, and buy more sticky grenades. Once again, if it is too low, then the game immediately becomes streamlined, getting rid of the uses for many other units. It would then make Infantry > Tank(No.)
Once again, if it costs too much, it will be ignored. By the way, why DO you never seem to talk about that one, leaving me to have to repeat it. A lot. D:
"Players can then choose between rushing unit production (to have more units) or purchase special ability promotions for some of their existing units (to have better units)."
- Will your 2 Infantry beat my Tank? Possibly, but the chances are still low.
Will your 1 Infantry with a Sticky Grenade Special Promotion for 50% against Armored Units kill my Tank? Of course it would.
See where the whole "Unable to be balanced" thing comes in?
You completely ignore the option of making the "promotion" 20% or 25% against Armored Units, halfway between the extremes you outline.
You also ignore the option of making it sufficiently expensive that running in and recharging is something someone can only do a very limited number of times and has to carefully choose where to apply, without making it unusably expensive.
It's hard not to read this as stacking your argument to force the conclusion you want. I think this is a dumb idea, myself, but your counterargument just does nothing for me.
MosheLevi
Prince
No, there is NO such thing as "Unable to be balanced".
Everything can be balanced.
You are just being stubborn and making illogical statements.
Frankly I am tired of trying to explain this to you again and again so I will just make a few last comments and NOT respond to you any more.
Moderator Action: Trolling - warned
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Infantry has 20 strength and tank has 28.
If you give infantry 50% bonus VS tanks (with sticky bombs) then it would be 30 VS 28.
So in most cases the infantry will win (60% - 70%).
However, if tanks get 25% promotion VS gunpowder units then it would be 30 for Infantry VS 35 for tanks.
So in this case Tanks will win most of the time.
As you can see Infantry is NOT overpowering.
So you see, based on my previous statement this comment of yours is NOT true.
You should still win with tanks as long as you got them the promotion VS gunpowder units.
Besides No one should build an entire stack of Tanks.
They should mixed their units so they can counter any unit.
Good points rysmiel.
Too bad you don't like the idea.
In any case that would just add a new option to the game.
Players can continue to use the normal promotions.
Personally, I'm just going to start ignoring Moshe after this, because he seems to only repeat himself as I apparently do not break down my posts into quarter-step by quarter-step.
It would take a large overhaul of the system itself to balance it, something that would end up making many others angry.
If you could buy promotions, then the Promotion system would then become useless. This is why you cannot buy promotions right now unless you count paying for the barracks/civics as "buying promotions".
THAT is why it is impossible to balance without messing up the game. I've noticed that you, Moshe, have used "Well, change [Already fine thing in game] and the idea would work fine]", which is fine, until it starts getting TOO large just to make way for a single idea.
Give tanks the special ability against gunpowder units, and it's UNDERPOWERED. You see, the balancing issue is what brings this idea down to it's "knees".
You want me to be specific about the "Unable to be balanced" thing? So be it.
Your idea cannot be balanced without editing many other things in the game, and even then there will be many issues. It seems like your ideas are mainly to make the game streamlined and easy on all levels.
Also, I do realize that no one would send 10 tanks... Unless there are 10 infantry standing in a city, and even then, it would probably be followed by a much larger stack. It's an example.
Oh, and rys, I HAVE thought about making it sufficiently expensive, and, to be honest, I don't think it can be. It would have to be a different number for each unit, however, it would end up unwanted if it really WAS sufficient.
Moderator Action: Trolling - warned
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
It would take a large overhaul of the system itself to balance it, something that would end up making many others angry.
If you could buy promotions, then the Promotion system would then become useless. This is why you cannot buy promotions right now unless you count paying for the barracks/civics as "buying promotions".
THAT is why it is impossible to balance without messing up the game. I've noticed that you, Moshe, have used "Well, change [Already fine thing in game] and the idea would work fine]", which is fine, until it starts getting TOO large just to make way for a single idea.
Give tanks the special ability against gunpowder units, and it's UNDERPOWERED. You see, the balancing issue is what brings this idea down to it's "knees".
You want me to be specific about the "Unable to be balanced" thing? So be it.
Your idea cannot be balanced without editing many other things in the game, and even then there will be many issues. It seems like your ideas are mainly to make the game streamlined and easy on all levels.
Also, I do realize that no one would send 10 tanks... Unless there are 10 infantry standing in a city, and even then, it would probably be followed by a much larger stack. It's an example.
Oh, and rys, I HAVE thought about making it sufficiently expensive, and, to be honest, I don't think it can be. It would have to be a different number for each unit, however, it would end up unwanted if it really WAS sufficient.
Moderator Action: Trolling - warned
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
MosheLevi
Prince
Lol.
It's funny how you twist things...
It's funny how you twist things...
Moderator Action: Discuss the topic - not each other
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
What would really be a good use of special unit abilities would be a MINELAYER unit of some kind, that could lay landmines against enemy armor, and only another new unit, minesweepers, could find and disarm these mines. These mines would work like worker improvements, basically, adding something onto the map. The enemy cannot see them. However, the minelayer should only have 2 or 3 mines and then he disappears like a Great Person, otherwise it is much too powerful, especially on small maps.
Landmines would appear on the map like unexplored territory to minesweepers; as soon as they come into line of sight of a mine then it appears on that player's map.
This could add a whole new element into choke points and such, especially if there could be a 25% chance or something that the disarming could go awry and the minesweeper would be killed or at 50% health for easy killing by your own forces.
I am personally very against this sticky bomb thing that would easily allow infantry to kill armor... Leave that to your own armor/bazookas/anti-tank guns/gunships. Seriously. Tanks are already quite vulnerable to these in conjunction with air raids.
The grenades, a one-time use against infantry, I am for, but I think they should only be a one-time use Promotion after you reach level 4 or 5 with that infantry, or something similar, because again 50% bonus on other infantry, they don't stand much chance, especially if including Pinch.
Well, there would be an alert to let you know, like if you had sighted "an enemy near X city", or if a forest had grown. You know.
Landmines would appear on the map like unexplored territory to minesweepers; as soon as they come into line of sight of a mine then it appears on that player's map.
This could add a whole new element into choke points and such, especially if there could be a 25% chance or something that the disarming could go awry and the minesweeper would be killed or at 50% health for easy killing by your own forces.
I am personally very against this sticky bomb thing that would easily allow infantry to kill armor... Leave that to your own armor/bazookas/anti-tank guns/gunships. Seriously. Tanks are already quite vulnerable to these in conjunction with air raids.
The grenades, a one-time use against infantry, I am for, but I think they should only be a one-time use Promotion after you reach level 4 or 5 with that infantry, or something similar, because again 50% bonus on other infantry, they don't stand much chance, especially if including Pinch.
Well, there would be an alert to let you know, like if you had sighted "an enemy near X city", or if a forest had grown. You know.
Similar threads
- Poll
