I actually like that Machine Guns suck. It’s a good balance having ranged be initially fairly strong but later in the game basically getting nerfed. So, you have to be careful not to over invest in a unit with basically a very limited lifespan.
You are trying to make reason of a game where AT crews are portrayed as Pioneer squads, with handheld AT weapons, instead of having actual cannons and vehicle launchers to use against cavalry/mobile armour. Machine guns can be a large calibre (20 mm +) , making them a small cannon of sorts, and can be placed on high elevation in bunkers, overlooking the vicinity and terrain. That is actually how are they deployed in numbers usually - put them on a hill or tall building, defended by concrete emplacements, and have them shoot over the enemy.
If they can make the range of units modal, I would make it Range of 1 (+1 if it starts its turn in a district or defensive feature). So it will have a range of 2 when it can be deployed properly from a defensive positions.
Exactly. Machine guns should damage and pierce through the first tile while continuing to the 2nd tile. /s
I'm just glad they're making a pass on base units for perhaps better balance. We'll see if it shakes out, but at least they are making an effort.
It will be interesting to see what gets changed between the press release build and actual release of GS. The differences may shed additional light on their design intentions/goals or what proved too potent after in-house testing.
While I agree that the German players (Writing Bull and Steinwallen) play too slow, I have to state something in their defense: both cater for very different groups of viewers as they not only explain the mechanics at great length, but also (in all their Let‘s Plays of any game) make a story out of what they play. It‘s never about winning or playing good, it‘s about the story potential and often also role playing. It‘s about how they tell the story and how the at least try to make it a well told journey instead of a series of smart clicks. I very much like the approach in general and when it comes to other media - for example, I think reading a book for the plot is missing the point of a (good) book, so why should I watch someone just play a game when I could play myself if he‘s not making more out of it besides playing? The exception is learning about a new game or learning stuff from better players. My problem with the narrative approach as done by Writing Bull is that it doesn‘t work that well with civ VI since it just takes too long and there are too many minor things and decisions that don‘t need to be talked about.
You are trying to make reason of a game where AT crews are portrayed as Pioneer squads, with handheld AT weapons, instead of having actual cannons and vehicle launchers to use against cavalry/mobile armour. Machine guns can be a large calibre (20 mm +) , making them a small cannon of sorts, and can be placed on high elevation in bunkers, overlooking the vicinity and terrain. That is actually how are they deployed in numbers usually - put them on a hill or tall building, defended by concrete emplacements, and have them shoot over the enemy.
If they can make the range of units modal, I would make it Range of 1 (+1 if it starts its turn in a district or defensive feature). So it will have a range of 2 when it can be deployed properly from a defensive positions.
What are you even talking about? My main concern is about balance, and not having completely rubbish units. You are the one who seems to be trying to 'make reason' of the game, with your machine gun suggestion.
Yes, I would prefer it to be a mortar team and the machine gun changed to a defensive unit, but that will never happen.
So the catch with wind farms is that they cost you a lot of production due to the placement rules and you will need more than one in most cities. Mali will like them.
Why do they need to be on hills though? Just for the balance?
I actually think all ranged units should be 1. It would limit their usefulness of course. But they would still fill a niche as city defenders, defenders in encampments and forts.
Agree with that. Certain units just become stupid, especially when you can increase the range even more with drones. It's happened more than once where I can just place an artillery and drone inside an encampment of mine, and obliterate the nearest AI city from complete safety. But that said, it would require a balance pass since stuff like Catapults are already hard to use even with their range of 2.
no death stacks again please , ever. As someone that played since civ1 release upto today , each iteration , the death stack idea is horrible. Even if you allow 2upt it is getting overpowered since you can pair best 2 defenders against everything and then put behind them you range unit and behind them your siege unit with drone which the AI cannot do anything against. Already played that version to many times and it is much more fun in multiplayer to think about strategy with 1upt.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
