June/July Patch Notes

[roguepro92]

Snipers!

does massive damage but can only fire once every 2turns, cannot fire on same turn it moved, or the turn after it moved <-- must set up a whole turn before firing.
can only shoot once every two turns as in can't set up, and just shoot every turn after.
takes a whole turn to "set up"
like in real life, snipers set up, wait, pick good place and time etc.
move on turn, set up next, attack on 3rd.
snipers do not shoot fast.
will actually require PLANNING.
something the AI programming might have problem with
has 3range and if on hill/city has 4range.
snipers tend to shoot long range, don't let FPS games fool you.
can only have set # of them like 1 sniper for every 5 land unit?
because no army is made out of only snipers.
50/25/25 chance to instant kill the opponent <-- opponent must be ground unit but not armored, tank, heli
50% chance to instant kill
if instant kill, the sniper remains in FoW
25% chance to do no damage
if missed, ONLY the tile the sniper is on is revealed until the sniper moves 2tiles away from it.
25% chance to only do partial damage <-- cannot trigger if the target is already below 5hp.
if partial hit, the sniper is only revealed for the next turn.
to make it less OP, have to pick which target the sniper WILL shoot. pick the target unit on the turn the sniper "sets up" if the target unit moves out of the 3/4 range then the sniper can move 4tiles that turn.
the sniper normally has 3movement speed.

sniper ignores terrain modifier and cannot fortify.
can get a promotion that allows use of enemy roads as friendly. promotion be fairly early like level 3-5.
cannot be seen if no enemy units within 2tiles of it. <-- anti-planes.

snipers are like worker/great people. if attacked. dead.
snipers can only defend themselves if already "set up", if just on "move" it'll instantly die upon being attacked and the attacker does not take damage but does gain xp.

so there is a reason to make a ranged unit not just to set them in city <-- excluding siege/air/water units when dubbed "ranged"

it wont be overpowered cuz it takes turns before the sniper actually fires.

 

[Calouste]

Quickest solution to upgrading ranged units to gunpowder is to dump the irrelevant promos and returned the xp to the player to reassign.

 

[Civsassin]

Quickest solution to upgrading ranged units to gunpowder is to dump the irrelevant promos and returned the xp to the player to reassign.

The point was not to upgrade them to gunpowder but to upgrade them to a more advanced ranged unit.

 

[buddynugget]

I've been playing civilization IV forever I'm literally building a new beast computer for this game and the many others that are coming out. All thanks to hotseat is this patch released yet? If not I hope it is by next Friday that's when my computer will be complete. I'm really looking forward to it. Git civilization v in a box right next to me . Major selling point.

 

[Putmalk]

Instead of making Snipers ridiculously complicated, perhaps an approach similar to what I'll be doing in my WWII mod (currently WIP, 60% done or so)

Sniper
Ranged Unit
Move: 3
Range: 3
Cost: 200-300
Strength: 18
Ranged Strength: 38-44
- Must set up prior to firing
- Bonus vs. Infantry (50)
- Penalty against Cities (33)
- Penalty against Tanks (50)
- Is Invisible (Submarine)

Visible by units that can see Submarines (in the mod, Scout Cars will be able to as well)

 

[joyous_gard]

I too was thinking new Hanging Garden is way overpowered. +5 hospitals are pretty strong and that is late game. +10 early game is dominating. The only negative could be too much growth but that is a pretty nice problem for a single city.

EDIT: I also want to be able to upgrade crossbows to something useful. Anti-personnel ranged units.

 

[Valkrionn]

For the love of ALL THAT IS HOLY, do not add a freaking sniper unit.

Snipers are blown so far out of proportion in modern gaming that it is not funny. Please, please at least keep them out of Civ.

A far better unit would be a mortar team, or some other form of field artillery (as compared to siege artillery, which is already in game).

 

[Putmalk]

For the love of ALL THAT IS HOLY, do not add a freaking sniper unit.

Snipers are blown so far out of proportion in modern gaming that it is not funny. Please, please at least keep them out of Civ.

A far better unit would be a mortar team, or some other form of field artillery (as compared to siege artillery, which is already in game).

I see nothing wrong about adding them in. Snipers are an integral part of warfare and field artillery seems like a superfluous addition. Snipers as a ranged unit makes perfect sense.

 

[thadian]

i still like mortar crew better but sniper also covers the theme and while i despise the idea of it, its marketable.

 

[Bezurn]

I say no to snipers. Snipers use stealth to position themselves to get a good shot at a target. Snipers cannot hold ground, as any battalion could sniff out a sniper. Unless the sniper unit has massive defensive penalties then they would just be ridiculous overpowered, or if so super squishy, and with air units right around the corner would get crushed. Snipers also operate in small groups or attached to infantry units for support. They are not the mainstay of any army.

Make Crossbows promote up to Riflemen and refund or transfer their ranged promotions to melee. Would probably take a bit of programming time, but it would be much better than introducing a unit type that is too closely related to cannons / artillery in functionality.

 

[Putmalk]

You don't have to make snipers function as stealth targets if it will adversely affect gameplay. I support the idea because they make sense as land ranged units. They can just be crossbowman upgraded, you understand? Gameplay > realism always.

 

[Valkrionn]

I see nothing wrong about adding them in. Snipers are an integral part of warfare and field artillery seems like a superfluous addition. Snipers as a ranged unit makes perfect sense.

....There is so much wrong with that statement.

Okay. Let's go down the list.

1. Snipers serve a small role on the modern battlefield. Don't get me wrong, they can be important... When they assassinate high-value targets. This is at a far smaller scale than is represented in civ, however.
2. They take just as long, if not longer, to set up as a modern siege weapon, and after one shot have generally blown their cover and must move. This runs counter to the entire point of a post-crossbow ranged unit; Something that can keep up with the army and has ranged attack.
3. Calling Field Artillery "superflous" is patently ridiculous. I guarantee you, if you go back and check which of the two has had a more important role historically, and CONTINUES to have a more important role, it will NOT be snipers.
4. Snipers have a hugely inflated reputation due to games such as Modern Warfare or Call of Duty. They do not work this way in the real world.

The ONLY thing snipers have going for them is sheer marketability due to children whose sole knowledge about warfare comes from modern FPS's. Sadly, this may be enough to see them implemented... But I will argue with any forum-goer, or developer, or anyone else I can reach, against it.

 

[Valkrionn]

You don't have to make snipers function as stealth targets if it will adversely affect gameplay. I support the idea because they make sense as land ranged units. They can just be crossbowman upgraded, you understand? Gameplay > realism always.

While Field Artillery make far better sense, and keep to the common "the battlefield expands in the modern era" explanation for why Riflemen are not ranged.

A modern era ranged unit is a good idea (though I would say Rocket Artillery currently embodies a hybrid ranged/siege unit, so combining the lines at that point would work), but snipers are simply NOT a good idea.

 

[GenjiKhan]

The ONLY thing snipers have going for them is sheer marketability due to children whose sole knowledge about warfare comes from modern FPS's. Sadly, this may be enough to see them implemented... But I will argue with any forum-goer, or developer, or anyone else I can reach, against it.

Since Civilization isn't a FPS game style,I think one simple suggestion is to convert ranged promotions to melee promotion when you upgrade Crossbowman to Rifleman.

 

[MadDjinn]

In theory warriors and horsemen are death to chariots, but warriors are easily avoided, and AI horsemen not that common.

However, I'm used to playing with them on TBC, where they have the 4 move and 7 attack range, but also move-after-shoot. If the new patch won't give that, they're not as valuable... but still much more useful than archers, especially when upgrading to knights.

hence why I dislike some of the mods. 7 Ranged Attack is ok. 7 attack range is two+ times the range of an artillery piece. that's not very smart.

so much hate for chariot archers. if only there were some way you could put units in front of them so they can't be attacked directly by melee units

the going into rough terrain penalty is overemphasized. consider that any standard 2 move unit (such as say an archer or catapult) going into rough terrain also can't do anything afterward.

er, if you have to do that, just build/buy an archer.

the only time to make chariot archers over actual archers is when you're upgrading to Keshiks or camel archers. (or getting siege for a mande cav rush)

 

[Valkrionn]

Yes, that's the simple way... But it is NOT the right way.

Right now, an entire unit role simply vanishes in the modern era. Modern Siege units do not gain the ability to fire without setup until rocket artillery, I believe two unit tiers later? The best, simplest thing to do is to introduce at LEAST one new ranged unit, move the "no-setup" ability back one unit tier, and combine the two lines that way.

 

[Putmalk]

....There is so much wrong with that statement.

Okay. Let's go down the list.

1. Snipers serve a small role on the modern battlefield. Don't get me wrong, they can be important... When they assassinate high-value targets. This is at a far smaller scale than is represented in civ, however.
2. They take just as long, if not longer, to set up as a modern siege weapon, and after one shot have generally blown their cover and must move. This runs counter to the entire point of a post-crossbow ranged unit; Something that can keep up with the army and has ranged attack.
3. Calling Field Artillery "superflous" is patently ridiculous. I guarantee you, if you go back and check which of the two has had a more important role historically, and CONTINUES to have a more important role, it will NOT be snipers.
4. Snipers have a hugely inflated reputation due to games such as Modern Warfare or Call of Duty. They do not work this way in the real world.

The ONLY thing snipers have going for them is sheer marketability due to children whose sole knowledge about warfare comes from modern FPS's. Sadly, this may be enough to see them implemented... But I will argue with any forum-goer, or developer, or anyone else I can reach, against it.

1. Fine, I'll agree with you there.
2. So, you can make them set up after every ranged attack. Making them very strong against infantry gives them some utility. They can work like siege units, except much quicker (3 move as opposed to 2, for example), have the same range as Artillery, and have them pick off targets that aren't armored. Perhaps this would work better in a scenario setting (that's how I plan on making mine).
3. I called them superfluous because we already have a unit called Artillery. What would be the point of breaking that up several times into different denominations of Artillery? Wouldn't Field Artillery have to set up before an attack anyway?
4. This is completely irrelevant.

I have no preference either way. While I would like to see a modern ranged unit, if they keep the system as it remains and just convert promotions I would be happy as well. It really makes no difference to me.

 

[Randall Turner]

Yes, that's the simple way... But it is NOT the right way.

Right now, an entire unit role simply vanishes in the modern era. Modern Siege units do not gain the ability to fire without setup until rocket artillery, I believe two unit tiers later? The best, simplest thing to do is to introduce at LEAST one new ranged unit, move the "no-setup" ability back one unit tier, and combine the two lines that way.

Well, that's Horse Artillery -> Self-Propelled Artillery. (Where the SPA and "Artillery" co-exist, a bit awkward, they're the same thing.)

Dunno. Think maybe simple is the way to go. Can't get worked up over it. <shrug>

 

[roguepro92]

what i dont get is how someone can think that
a unit that can only attack once every THREE turn is OP?
or a unit that can't defend itself is OP?

it was just an idea. don't start trolling boys.
dont like it, dont reply and don't read my next post.
too late btw.

 

[Valkrionn]

1. Fine, I'll agree with you there.
2. So, you can make them set up after every ranged attack. Making them very strong against infantry gives them some utility. They can work like siege units, except much quicker (3 move as opposed to 2, for example), have the same range as Artillery, and have them pick off targets that aren't armored. Perhaps this would work better in a scenario setting (that's how I plan on making mine).
3. I called them superfluous because we already have a unit called Artillery. What would be the point of breaking that up several times into different denominations of Artillery? Wouldn't Field Artillery have to set up before an attack anyway?
4. This is completely irrelevant.

I have no preference either way. While I would like to see a modern ranged unit, if they keep the system as it remains and just convert promotions I would be happy as well. It really makes no difference to me.

Like I said, the main point of this should be to preserve the role of ranged units... Which includes the ability to move and shoot. Setup shouldn't be involved.

Ancient Era siege, of both types, took time to setup... But we're talking modern era. Our siege weapons take no longer to reload than most guns, and this is more or less true no matter how far back in the gunpowder age you; A trained team could reload just as fast as most firearms, right up until the advent of the machinegun (and they've caught back up since then). Really, modern siege only takes time to "setup" for gameplay reasons; Virtually all setup time can be represented by the time it takes to move the unit into position.

Well, that's Horse Artillery -> Self-Propelled Artillery. (Where the SPA and "Artillery" co-exist, a bit awkward, they're the same thing.)

Dunno. Think maybe simple is the way to go. Can't get worked up over it. <shrug>

Honestly, neither can I, aside from not wanting to see a sniper; I'm not too concerned, not when we gain Air units in the modern era.