Qgqqq, they are Archers, not marchers. Axemen would be marchers
I don't mind an initial no-tech-required Training Yard that allows Archers/Axemen/Horsemen.
-----
My idea for archers is probably as thus
Civ Traits
Dexterity (ljos civ trait)
free Mobility1 and Woodsman1 promos to Archer units
Sinister (svart civ trait)
free Flanking 1 and Drill 1 promos to Recon Units
Buildings
Palisade: +10% defense, Walls: +40% defense
Promotions
Flaming Arrows (enchantment 2): +1 fire damage, +50% city attack
UnitCombatchanges
Archery Unitcombat: Access to Shock 1-2, Formation 1 only, Cover 1-2.
Units
Archer
4 str, 1 move. 20% withdrawal, access to flanking.
25% vs melee, -25% city attack, +25% city defense
free 'Defensive' promotion.
targets Melee first in combat
Longbow
7 str, 1 move. 20% withdrawal, 30% max collateral, 3 max units affected
+1 first strike, +25% defense in hills, -25% city attack
free defensive promotion
Firebow
5 str +1 fire damage, 1 move. 20% withdrawal.
+1 first strike, +25% defense in hills
free defensive promotion, flaming arrows promotion (+1 additional fire damage), fire2 promotion\
--> firebow would start 5 +2 fire, while max Longbow would be 7 +1 fire
--> firebow would have +50% attack vs cities, lacking the same city attack penalty as the longbow, yet also lacking its natural collateral. Instead FB collateral comes from its fireballs.
------------
then Axemen would have +20% city attack, and Champions would have +10% city attack
Melee units could only gain Cover1, but could get Formation 1-2.
*** was thinking of giving Archery Unitcombat a special version of Formation1 that requires combat 2, as formation 1 does currently.
And! giving normal formation 1 a boost by only requiring combat 1. That way, melee have access to formation1 earlier than archers do, in addition to being the only line with access to Formation 2.
**Note: Archers can attack melee first in combat outside cities, but longbows cannot. Why? The longbow, with its collateral, is already a strong enough contender, not to mention having 1 extra strength than a champ assuming no metals. In Civ4 (and FFH) 1 extra strength can be huge ... maybe not as huge as raw numbers, but still a pretty big deal. Having access to 7 str while being cheaper than a ranger (aka same cost as a champion) can be quite significant.
Crossbows would remain unchanged except for their free Defensive Promotion.
Marksmen wouldn't get the free defensive promo (will only get that if upgraded from archer rather than assassin) but will gain 2 natural movement instead of 1, and will have a requirement of only level4, rather than level6.
--------------
Stables: +2 mounted exp +1 trade route @HBR. Archery Range: +2 archer exp +10% defense @Archery. Barracks: +2 melee exp +10% healing rate @Bronzeworking.
These buildings would be required for the t3 and t4 units of their respective lines.
Training Yard: +1 happy w/ Nationhood, requires no tech.
allows the building of Axeman, Horseman, and Archer. (once you get their proper techs).
A specialized city can still get the respective building (Stable/Range/Barracks) if they want +2 exp for that particular unit type. These specialized buildings therefore come at the same tech that enables the t2 unit, even though they are only required for the following t3 unit and beyond.
----------
additionally catapult cost should be lowered to 60 or at least 75. (imho)
Warriors can upgrade into Archers, Axemen, and Rangers. In this way you can get a Ranger with March more easily than using a disciple of leaves.
In this way, with proper tech investment, your early game could be switching back and forth between the three 'martial' disciplines. Would imho make the early-game combat more streamlined and interesting.
generally speaking, archers would beat melee, melee would beat horses, and horses would beat archers. However, combine the boost to walls with the defensive promo, and archers would pretty much hold a walled city against anything. Walled cities would need Seige + Melee to take, at least early game. An alternate strategy would be massed mounted units with flanking promos.
In my opinion this would only serve to encourage mixed unit tactics ... at least for the nations that are in a defensive or losing position. I would consider this an improvement upon the original game.
I don't mind an initial no-tech-required Training Yard that allows Archers/Axemen/Horsemen.
-----
My idea for archers is probably as thus
Civ Traits
Dexterity (ljos civ trait)
free Mobility1 and Woodsman1 promos to Archer units
Sinister (svart civ trait)
free Flanking 1 and Drill 1 promos to Recon Units
Buildings
Palisade: +10% defense, Walls: +40% defense
Promotions
Flaming Arrows (enchantment 2): +1 fire damage, +50% city attack
UnitCombatchanges
Archery Unitcombat: Access to Shock 1-2, Formation 1 only, Cover 1-2.
Units
Archer
4 str, 1 move. 20% withdrawal, access to flanking.
25% vs melee, -25% city attack, +25% city defense
free 'Defensive' promotion.
targets Melee first in combat
Longbow
7 str, 1 move. 20% withdrawal, 30% max collateral, 3 max units affected
+1 first strike, +25% defense in hills, -25% city attack
free defensive promotion
Firebow
5 str +1 fire damage, 1 move. 20% withdrawal.
+1 first strike, +25% defense in hills
free defensive promotion, flaming arrows promotion (+1 additional fire damage), fire2 promotion\
--> firebow would start 5 +2 fire, while max Longbow would be 7 +1 fire
--> firebow would have +50% attack vs cities, lacking the same city attack penalty as the longbow, yet also lacking its natural collateral. Instead FB collateral comes from its fireballs.
------------
then Axemen would have +20% city attack, and Champions would have +10% city attack
Melee units could only gain Cover1, but could get Formation 1-2.
*** was thinking of giving Archery Unitcombat a special version of Formation1 that requires combat 2, as formation 1 does currently.
And! giving normal formation 1 a boost by only requiring combat 1. That way, melee have access to formation1 earlier than archers do, in addition to being the only line with access to Formation 2.
**Note: Archers can attack melee first in combat outside cities, but longbows cannot. Why? The longbow, with its collateral, is already a strong enough contender, not to mention having 1 extra strength than a champ assuming no metals. In Civ4 (and FFH) 1 extra strength can be huge ... maybe not as huge as raw numbers, but still a pretty big deal. Having access to 7 str while being cheaper than a ranger (aka same cost as a champion) can be quite significant.
Crossbows would remain unchanged except for their free Defensive Promotion.
Marksmen wouldn't get the free defensive promo (will only get that if upgraded from archer rather than assassin) but will gain 2 natural movement instead of 1, and will have a requirement of only level4, rather than level6.
--------------
Stables: +2 mounted exp +1 trade route @HBR. Archery Range: +2 archer exp +10% defense @Archery. Barracks: +2 melee exp +10% healing rate @Bronzeworking.
These buildings would be required for the t3 and t4 units of their respective lines.
Training Yard: +1 happy w/ Nationhood, requires no tech.
allows the building of Axeman, Horseman, and Archer. (once you get their proper techs).
A specialized city can still get the respective building (Stable/Range/Barracks) if they want +2 exp for that particular unit type. These specialized buildings therefore come at the same tech that enables the t2 unit, even though they are only required for the following t3 unit and beyond.
----------
additionally catapult cost should be lowered to 60 or at least 75. (imho)
Warriors can upgrade into Archers, Axemen, and Rangers. In this way you can get a Ranger with March more easily than using a disciple of leaves.
In this way, with proper tech investment, your early game could be switching back and forth between the three 'martial' disciplines. Would imho make the early-game combat more streamlined and interesting.
generally speaking, archers would beat melee, melee would beat horses, and horses would beat archers. However, combine the boost to walls with the defensive promo, and archers would pretty much hold a walled city against anything. Walled cities would need Seige + Melee to take, at least early game. An alternate strategy would be massed mounted units with flanking promos.
In my opinion this would only serve to encourage mixed unit tactics ... at least for the nations that are in a defensive or losing position. I would consider this an improvement upon the original game.