Melee Units: 1% Taking cities, killing units, etc., 99% cannon fodder

[Gali]

Nah melee's specialty is their versatility. They can fight mounted and spears, carve up ranged and siege, use defensive bonus and take cover. Having some mounted for mobility can be quite good, but if you go into rough you need infantry. Longsword is 21 vs 16 for pike knight is 20v 24, big difference. Add in higher strength than spear, for survivability versus ranged and infantry is very useful. Its been changed from star Wide Receiver or striker to OL and thus feels weak but is still inredibly useful.

One thing I love about G and K is how I use a diverse army. Yeah infantry was nerfed a bit but its more that mounted and early spear, lancer is still weak and after is a joke I say it should go back into rifles or GW Inf., are better. Infantry is still very useful in an army, its just that I want ranged, siege, and mounted , plus actual naval support too.

 

[Polycrates]

Yes but I don't know if giving them a bonus against specific type of units is the way to go. It ends up being a bit to much of a rock paper scissors game which isn't my idea of in-depth strategy. Your strength should be more about the entire composition of your army, the situations and the ways you use them in the moment that determines their effectiveness. Not purely the ability to match up rock paper scissors bonuses.

Bonus vs melee isn't really about rock paper scissors, I don't think. They already tear ranged and siege to shreds (and mounted to a lesser extent) on the attack, it's about switching them over from defense to offense in those big melee scrums. A schwerpunkt unit that's the nutcracker for punching through the enemy lines and which can then wreak havoc in their rear and let your weaker melee units to the side push open the breakthrough with the extra flanking bonus they then get. Otherwise the defender retains the advantage in the melee scrums, and a defending spear can rely on rough terrain and the fortification bonus and healing to even the odds with an attacking sword. To me, this would also give swords the "rockstar" role that I think they need if they're going to require so much effort to obtain - spears are for defending, swords are for attacking.

Bonus vs wounded would do a similar job, I just sort of think that fits cavalry units a lot more closely.

 

[Darac]

Giving them a bonus against melee would totally make it a game of rock paper scissors...

Pikes/spears > mounted > swords > pikes/spears.....

Looks like rock paper scissors to me.

 

[KillingMeSoftly]

I think the Infantry path of units are perfectly fine as they are. They are technically not as strong as they once were (Pikemen are better than Swordsmen, but that makes sense), and Cities are much stronger now. However they benefit extremely well from promotions. Medic, Cover, March are all great and they make the best use out of terrain defense. Swordsmen > Longswordsmen > Musketmen, etc, is a very long and consistent upgrade path that really rewards you for keeping your guys alive. While they do require Iron to build and thus are stronger than Spearmen and Pikemen, the real advantage of having Iron is getting a jumpstart on creating elite soldiers.

 

[Naresh]

Giving them a bonus against melee would totally make it a game of rock paper scissors...

Pikes/spears > mounted > swords > pikes/spears.....

Looks like rock paper scissors to me.

It's not a strict rock paper scissors though.

Lancers can be effective vs pikes, pikemen hold their own vs swords, and caught in the right terrain swords decimate horses.

In vanilla the above is true. In GaK where fights last longer than a single round, it's more like rock paper scissors lizard spock.

 

[Darac]

It's not a strict rock paper scissors though.

Lancers can be effective vs pikes, pikemen hold their own vs swords, and caught in the right terrain swords decimate horses.

In vanilla the above is true. In GaK where fights last longer than a single round, it's more like rock paper scissors lizard spock.

Yeah I know, I'm saying that if swords and longswords got a bonus vs melee THEN it'd be rock paper scissors.

 

[Buccaneer]

I don't know, I had the best success ever with simple Swords/Catapult units doing a conquest in G&K than I have ever had in vanilla. I gave up on using Comp Bowmen on the offensive and stuck with melee units in taking cities. Small sample size though.

 

[Polycrates]

Yeah I know, I'm saying that if swords and longswords got a bonus vs melee THEN it'd be rock paper scissors.

Not sure I agree. Swords are already very good at attacking paper and scissors, I'm just suggesting making them good at attacking rock as well.

In fact, I'd argue that it would even further reduce the rock/paper/scissors effect, because currently it's really only ranged units that are any good at attacking melee, whereas swords would give you two options.

More just a swords as attackers, spears as defenders thing.

 

[Furycrab]

They buffed melee units strength, but I think they buffed City defense way too much. The only saving grace is that the siege promotion is available with just an armory.

 

[glider1]

No one so far has talked about this from the AI's perspective. After all we are trying to get this AI to be able to fight strong.

I worry that the AI is struggling to rotate melee properly in coordinated attack. What do you think about this aspect?

Cheers

 

[Kurtbob]

I have yet to build any swordsmen or longswordsmen in my G&K games. Spearmen and Pikemen do a decent enough job, however ranged and mounted are kings in my games. Ranged widdles down cities/units and the mounted runs in and captures the city/finishes off the unit.

Iron has become a rather useless strategic resource in my games (until navigation and the always useful Frigate can be built). Anyone else feel this way?

 

[MadDjinn]

Swords beat spear and Longswords beat pikes in combat strength.

That means that they already have a bonus vs. melee.

Plus, horse units don't have defensive bonuses, so swords beat horsemen and Longswords beat Knights if caught (though you'd still want a spear/pike in that situation for defending against the attacks of the horse units).

Every terrain/etc promotion on a sword/longsword unit is worth more raw combat strength than on a spear or pike (or other unit of the time).

Ranged units have weak combat strength, so that's already a bonus vs. ranged for melee units.

Swords/Longswords can easily get Siege (+50% vs. cities) and with their higher combat strength, that makes them good vs. cities as well.

They aren't too shabby at anything they do.

 

[Gliese 581]

I think a big part of the reason melee might appear weak is because the AI is so easily kited by ranged units and doesn't really apply maximum force in most scenarios, maybe attacking with a few units while aimlessly wandering around with others and not making a concentrated effort at exploiting weaknesses in the human player's army composition. Ranged units can exploit any such misplays from the AI to the fullest while melee units always have to trade dmg to get anything done.

 

[Darac]

This maybe true but it still doesn't sit right with me that I always think twice about attacking with my melee units because I'll end up flanked and with retaliation damage on the enemies turn, which is a sure way to lose units. So I pretty much never do it because melee unit upgrades are so useful, losing a unit is a big bummer.

 

[gladoscc]

I think that giving early melee units a +25% vs cities should balance it

 

[Darac]

I think that giving early melee units a +25% vs cities should balance it

Just swords and longswords should get buffed i think.