Machine Gun with 2 Attack Range 1.0

[Ryika]

The fact that Machine Gun is a defensive weapon is NOT an argument to it having a range of 1. For the combat dynamics of the game to work, the defensive weapons must match the offensive weapons in range. Otherwise, the offensive ranged weapons can be stationed out of the range of the defensive weapons and keep pounding on the city ad infinitum. Thus, a single Frigate can stay out of a machine gun's range and beat a city into oblivion.

Not really, it depends on the role of the defensive range unit. The strength of Machine Gun Type Units is that they can crush Melee of equal strength, because in a 1-on-1 they do damage twice, but only take damage once (when they're in the defensive position). That makes them very durable as the "Melee-Replacement" for defensive play, which is perfect for "hold your ground"-situations.

They do of course need "actual" Ranged Units as Support, or they're just sitting ducks.

 

[silverberry13]

Not really, it depends on the role of the defensive range unit. The strength of Machine Gun Type Units is that they can crush Melee of equal strength, because in a 1-on-1 they do damage twice, but only take damage once (when they're in the defensive position). That makes them very durable as the "Melee-Replacement" for defensive play, which is perfect for "hold your ground"-situations.

With all due respect, but I didn't find melee units to be worth the trouble building much. You normally need to lag just one, behind a whole swarm of range attackers, to take the city once it's been pounded into dust.

 

[Ryika]

...which comes from AI incapability and balance issues, that doesn't change that the design behind the unit itself is solid.

I do think there's a problem with upgrading a unit into what is essentially a new unit role though. That problem also existed in Civ V, where you often wanted to keep your XBows unupgraded for a long time even though the upgrade was already available.

 

[silverberry13]

...which comes from AI incapability and balance issues, that doesn't change that the design behind the unit itself is solid.

No, this applies to human play, as well. The problem is that the melee units don't soak damage much better than do the ranged ones, so there is little reason to establish a melee front line to protect the ranged attackers. Whereas the ranged units in that front line would add to the fire hurled at the enemy. When several ranged units fire at a single enemy unit, it goes puff very fast, so the combat evolves into a shooting duel, where units on both sides are picked one by one by concentrated fire. If your ranged units have range higher than 1, then you can concentrate many more on a single enemy unit than you could with melee ones. Even the best unit can't withstand such ganging-on. Consequently, what matters is how many ranged attackers you have brought.

 

[Ryika]

No, this applies to human play, as well.

...which comes from AI incapability and balance issues,

balance issues,

 

[silverberry13]

I do think there's a problem with upgrading a unit into what is essentially a new unit role though.

Quite agree. This is a new role. Suddenly, your city defenders are no longer good for their role. Bummer.