ls612's C2C Units

[Thunderbrd]

Here's another thought. Something that I include with every stack is a passive recon unit. This is a unit with +X sight range promotions, staying with a stack to increase its sight range. I find these units very useful for finding new AI cities if I only have one or two armies in the field (of course, these days, thanks to Barbarian Generals and really using the AI strength value to be able to safely declare war, I usually have way more armies). This is as opposed to an active recon unit, moving around on its own, scouting unexplored territory or updating your maps.

I wind up using Hunter-class units instead of Recon-class units for this job. The reasons why:

• Rangers and up get Hunting Sight II for free for +2 sight range. Scouts/Explorers can only get Sentry for +1 range, and only if they have enough XP to hit level 4 (Combat III + Sentry)
• Recon units are pretty vulnerable to Assassins. I notice the AI loves to use them. Hunters don't have that vulnerability.

This feels wrong, that I'm using Hunters in preference to Recon units. You have probably discussed this somewhere, but I think Recon units should have access to the Flanking and Hunting Sight promotion lines. Does anyone else do this passive recon? Also, I'd rather not have to rely on a Mounted unit. Recon units are pretty much always available, but Mounted units are not so guaranteed.

I find myself doing something like this and I think its wrong with both Hunter and Recon units outright. However, it shows an interesting need for rapid defense units, units that can get around quickly but can put up a great fight when attacked as they hold positions exceedingly well, even if not much chop in taking them when attacking. I feel that Recon units should be units that avoid fights wherever possible and flee from them at the drop of a hat.

 

[Vokarya]

I find myself doing something like this and I think its wrong with both Hunter and Recon units outright. However, it shows an interesting need for rapid defense units, units that can get around quickly but can put up a great fight when attacked as they hold positions exceedingly well, even if not much chop in taking them when attacking. I feel that Recon units should be units that avoid fights wherever possible and flee from them at the drop of a hat.

Agreed, but I don't think rapid defense units really fit into the general system of the game. Until motorization comes along, fast units are attackers (mostly Mounted), not defenders; investing in a good road system allows you to shift slower units, but that's a function of the roads, not the units. I'm just talking about using one Hunter/Recon per stack to give the entire stack a boosted sight range.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Ah... yes, it does seem odd that Hunters would have a better sight range than recon. They should probably be at least equivalent there.

On the second part of that note, are assassins targeting Recon first in the stack? If so, perhaps it should be switched so that they're targeting Hunter units rather than recon (or just both). I know they are supposed to target Healer units first but they could have a few settings like that...

 

[Vokarya]

On the second part of that note, are assassins targeting Recon first in the stack? If so, perhaps it should be switched so that they're targeting Hunter units rather than recon (or just both). I know they are supposed to target Healer units first but they could have a few settings like that...

Yes, Thief-class units target Recon units first. That seems like a very weird ability. Do you know why that was done? I would especially hate to lose Healer units that way since they aren't cumulative, so you only normally want one per stack.

 

[Thunderbrd]

This gets back to that abstraction about individual vs group units in part. But the other part is to make the stealth units target what should be the less powerful but more useful units in a stack.

I like this but they should be going after Hunters just the same. One advanced use of Monks that should soon be available with SubCombat definitions, would be to stand as a good defensive line against these kinds of attacks on a stack. Monks should be very good at defeating assassin types and should be considered Healing Combat Class among their definitions so would pop up in front of any assassination attack on the healers.

 

[strategyonly]

Ah... yes, it does seem odd that Hunters would have a better sight range than recon. They should probably be at least equivalent there.

On the second part of that note, are assassins targeting Recon first in the stack? If so, perhaps it should be switched so that they're targeting Hunter units rather than recon (or just both). I know they are supposed to target Healer units first but they could have a few settings like that...

Yes, Thief-class units target Recon units first. That seems like a very weird ability. Do you know why that was done? I would especially hate to lose Healer units that way since they aren't cumulative, so you only normally want one per stack.

OK guys inform me what exactly you want changed in the Thief/Rogue/Assassin line then, and i will change it then . . .

 

[LumenAngel]

Stealth units focusing non-military units first seem fair for me.

 

[Thunderbrd]

OK guys inform me what exactly you want changed in the Thief/Rogue/Assassin line then, and i will change it then . . .

I think it just warrants inclusion of Hunter Combat Class to their list of target firsts.

Scout lines should also have equal free visibility promos as Hunters.

 

[strategyonly]

I think it just warrants inclusion of Hunter Combat Class to their list of target firsts.

Done, in next SVN

The sight part is DH's files.

 

[Vokarya]

This gets back to that abstraction about individual vs group units in part. But the other part is to make the stealth units target what should be the less powerful but more useful units in a stack.

I like this but they should be going after Hunters just the same. One advanced use of Monks that should soon be available with SubCombat definitions, would be to stand as a good defensive line against these kinds of attacks on a stack. Monks should be very good at defeating assassin types and should be considered Healing Combat Class among their definitions so would pop up in front of any assassination attack on the healers.

I'd like a "Picket" ability or promotion to designate a unit as a "guards-first" unit. I generally put two anti-Mounted units (Spearmen/Pikemen) and two anti-Melee units (Axemen/Heavy Axemen) in each stack to protect against counterattacks. Giving the guard units a promotion to be able to protect the recon and healer units against stealth units would be great.

I think this is what Destroyers currently do against Submarines. If you have capital ships escorting Transports, Submarines can attack the Transports first. But if you have destroyers in the stack, the destroyers defend first.

 

[intlidave]

I'd like a "Picket" ability or promotion to designate a unit as a "guards-first" unit. I generally put two anti-Mounted units (Spearmen/Pikemen) and two anti-Melee units (Axemen/Heavy Axemen) in each stack to protect against counterattacks. Giving the guard units a promotion to be able to protect the recon and healer units against stealth units would be great.

I think this is what Destroyers currently do against Submarines. If you have capital ships escorting Transports, Submarines can attack the Transports first. But if you have destroyers in the stack, the destroyers defend first.

Promotion is one way of doing this, but how about giving this ability to Animal units (Guard dogs and their ilk)

 

[Thunderbrd]

Ok, in light of the way I'm programming some things soon I have to say:
1) Easily achieved. We establish a Retinue Guard combat class, give that combat class to the list of target firsts on all types that go for a specific combat class in a stack, and tag the Retinue Guard combat class to a promotion as a subcombatchangetype. This would be tough for the ai to see the value of since its a very odd manipulation but it'd work nicely for establishing the effect at least.

2) Trained dog types should just get Retinue Guard as a default sub-combat.

3) I'm going to address some visibility issues down the road that would cause a dog to most likely come up first if an assassin starts sneaking in (the dog not only would have some combat bonus over a criminal combat class but would also likely be the main unit in the stack to be able to SEE the criminal unit as it attacks and thus be the one not penalized for being Stealth Attacked. All part of a stealth modification I'm still looking into.)

 

[intlidave]

BTW I also noticed a few units suffering graphics problems:
Dolphin mech, robotic imperial guard, light AA gun - clipping issues (too many models in unit)
Lightning warrior - problems with 3D model (torso misaligned with legs)
Modern medevac helicopter - treated like ground unit

 

[Ostrogsky]

I have some observations according to the recent proposals concerning the units data.
I read about the recent proposals Intlidave' a, and not all seems to be appropriate to me.
First I describe important observation, then the rest.

Above all there is an error concerning aviation: IL-2 may land on aircraft carrier, but if upgraded to B-52 it shouldnt land (now only when You go to the city with B-52 and then come back to the carrier it really cannot land on it). The bug is in the possibility of upgrading airplanes on the carrier and not in the city only.

It is certainly the bug and it may be a reason for this, that AI does not produce any aircraft, we must seek cause of error.

My proposal on the aircraft stationed in the gear is as follows:
Since true bomber have never (except one exception) remained stationed in the gear, I would suggest that there should be one improvement at sea - after selecting promotion they would become marine bombers, e.g. 80% against ship and-70% against aeroplanes.

In this way will be more realistic and unless simply on the occasion.

 

[ls612]

BTW I also noticed a few units suffering graphics problems:
Dolphin mech, robotic imperial guard, light AA gun - clipping issues (too many models in unit)
Lightning warrior - problems with 3D model (torso misaligned with legs)
Modern medevac helicopter - treated like ground unit

1. Yes, I'm aware of the GFX issues for the Dolphin Mech and the Robot Imperial Guard. I had originally asked for new models for them, but Hydro said that the ones he provided would do. I don't notice the issue though until I zoom up real close, so it isn't the biggest of deals.

2. Sounds like a wrong KFM, does anyone know where the Lightning Warrior graphics originally came from?

3. Great, I made that. I'll take a look and see what is going on. EDIT: Fixed on the SVN.

 

[Hydromancerx]

2. Sounds like a wrong KFM, does anyone know where the Lightning Warrior graphics originally came from?

Here.

 

[ls612]

Here.

Ah thanks, fixed now on the SVN.

 

[Ostrogsky]

Would it be possible that the army was modernized only in the cities and to this combined with the capital?
Today, a new kind of retooling weaponry takes several years, and the game is one round, which in the era of modern may take 3 months.
The point is that while the previous version was OK in earlier times, in the industrial and the next is bizarre, please imagine that we can turn the whole infantry into a mechanized infantry (Bradley), and for example, when we attack several cities and the enemy suddenly produces armored vehicles that changes the balance of power.
I do not know how to correct it to make it the best, hence my suggestion.
I also thought of a special building to enable upgrading in the city, but I do not know if AI can handle this.

 

[Nimek]

@Ostrogsky

I sugested to make a game option disable unit upgrades or realistic unit upgrades.

Upgrade clubman to spiked clubman is realistic but upgrade from cavalry to gunship is unrealistic. Talk with modders maybe someone will like to add this gameoption and program it.

If someone will agree we can make a thread and discuss what upgrades are realistic and what not and how entire system should work

 

[Desolator]

Maybe the code for that is already in there somewhere dormant, because IIRC AND (1.76) had this option with siege weapons. Upgrade was tied to siege weapons workshop, so you could upgrade your siege weapons only in a city vicinity where the sww was built. (Sou had to move (back) to the city's BFC to upgrade.)