Mod Request- Ranged Gunpowder Units

[mindseye1220]

If I knew how, I'd do it myself... But is there anyone who knows how to make Musketmen etc. ranged? Sorry if this has already been requested or created. Thanks!

 

[cephalo]

I was thinking that one way to do this right is to make them just like archers, but with a really high direct combat skill instead of a low one. That would prevent melee units from charging them, which makes sense since they have guns. The only problem then is that you wouldn't have anyone to capture cities.... Uh nevermind.

 

[TheCaptn]

I've also spent a good deal of time thinking about this. The immediate counter-argument seems to be that ranged gunpowder units would obsolete the line of bombardment units thereafter, but I think that could be overcome by using the terrain modifiers better.

My basic concept would look something like:

Archers: Range 2, shoot over obstacles upgrade, except hills (Longbowmen get the upgrade by default).
Crossbowmen: Range 2, more power, limited by obstacles.
Musketmen: Range 1, equal melee strength, city attack penalty (Musketeers get melee strength bonus, Minutemen ranged strength bonus, etc).
Riflemen: Range 2, strength favours ranged, limited by obstacles, city ranged attack penalty.
Infantry: Range 2, balanced strength, limited by obstacles, city ranged attack penalty.
Tanks: Range 3, strength favours ranged, limited by obstacles, hilltop bonus (defilade), forest/jungle penalty, city attack penalty

Etc...

In contrast the bombard units would have no obstacles, and maintain bonuses to city attacks.

This would definitely result in mid-late game battles being fought at standoff distances, which is exactly what I want to see happen. Tanks become vastly more strategic units, powerful when sited on hilltops, but they can still be out-maneuvered by artillery 'behind' other hills; or by aircraft.

I'm not quite sure where ships would fit in though. A destroyer should be able to outrange a tank, and bombard without obstacles, but Range 4 starts to seem excessive.

[edit]
Just a note on Musketmen and Range 1: I suggest that because you're looking at the first generation of smoothbore firearms, and it's more about their effective range. Historically it's also the period where ranks of troops would stand facing off against each other and fire in volley.

 

[TheCaptn]

The only problem then is that you wouldn't have anyone to capture cities.... Uh nevermind.

Since ranged units already have both ranged and melee strengths (the melee value being treated simply as defensive), I think we should just open that up and offer both buttons for the units in question, with the default attack being ranged.

 

[Abremms]

pretty sure there is a mod in the DB right now that allows archers, crossbows, and gunpower units a ranged attack at 80% power and a range of 1. if thats not what you'r looking for, you could at least peak at the code to see how they did it.

 

[mindseye1220]

Okay thanks. Another thing that could be added would be ranged bonus from atop hills. Or if your archer is on a hill, he can at least see over forests. I'll look for that mod though.

 

[Lord Shadow]

Very interesting plan, TheCaptn. However, I'd either reduce the range of tanks to 2 (for gameplay reasons) or increase that of artillery and later bombard units to 4. Point is artillery units should always outrange armour, obstacles aside. Realistically, the former have ranges around 10 times greater.

Having range 4 late bombard units would also create an interesting need for spotters, I believe, for artillery to enjoy its maximum range, given it'd be presumably outside its normal vision.

 

[TheCaptn]

It's tricky though, because Range 2 puts them on an equal footing with infantry units, where I'd really like them to outrange those. The role of infantry in my opinion should be in capturing cities, and I'd like tanks to be quite weak for that purpose (narrow laneways not being the natural home of armor).
So tanks are there primarily to support the infantry, secure approach corridors, and engage other tanks.

That Range 4 artillery idea gets more appealing the more I think about it. I'd assumed that artillery needed to see what it could shoot (i.e. Sight 4 to match) but firing blind, or needing spotters, is a really neat little way to balance it. The same idea could work for ships too.

---

I've been looking through the XML files (complete newbie) and it seems like you could just make them all UNITCOMBAT_ARCHER classes, but then they'd lose their ability to melee attack. Without there being a CombatClass that can attack both ways, can anyone give me a brief overview of what I'd need to do to add a whole new UNITCOMBAT_GUNPOWDER class? I'm kind of at a loss.

 

[Lord Shadow]

I've been looking through the XML files (complete newbie) and it seems like you could just make them all UNITCOMBAT_ARCHER classes, but then they'd lose their ability to melee attack. Without there being a CombatClass that can attack both ways, can anyone give me a brief overview of what I'd need to do to add a whole new UNITCOMBAT_GUNPOWDER class? I'm kind of at a loss.

*sigh*

Looks like that's yet another thing that can't be modded with XML alone. XML\BasicInfos\CIV5UnitCombatInfos.xml is exceedingly unhelpful. It's only a bridge between the hidden mechanics and their text descriptions.

 

[Liquidated]

How about remove ranged attacks from non siege units all together?

Wrote some ideas over here...
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=9717629&postcount=6

ok done pimping that idea honest.

But yeah civ5 really dropped the ball on the entire ranged unit tech stopping at xbows



Cheers!
-Liq

 

[sleepingbear]

Very interesting plan, TheCaptn. However, I'd either reduce the range of tanks to 2 (for gameplay reasons) or increase that of artillery and later bombard units to 4. Point is artillery units should always outrange armour, obstacles aside. Realistically, the former have ranges around 10 times greater.

Having range 4 late bombard units would also create an interesting need for spotters, I believe, for artillery to enjoy its maximum range, given it'd be presumably outside its normal vision.

Spotters, sounds like an upgrade path for scouts.

 

[SomethingWitty]

How about grenadiers for early gunpowder era, and mortar teams for later gunpowder era. Weaker than cannons/artillery, but no need to set up.

 

[Lord Shadow]

Grenadiers throw hand grenades. They have nowhere near the range of standard ranged units.

 

[sleepingbear]

Grenadiers throw hand grenades. They have nowhere near the range of standard ranged units.

So give them a range of 1, while morters would have a 2. Can archers really shoot from the mainland to island? They can now with a range of 2.

 

[mindseye1220]

I miss the grenadiers though. They don't need a range, but I fell they should be included somehow.

 

[kajillion]

How about adding new ranged gunpowder units like Marksman->Sniper->Laser Infantry. The lack of ranged units after the industrial era irks me more than the lack of realism so I wouldn't care if existing units weren't given ranged attacks.

 

[TheCaptn]

Spotters, sounds like an upgrade path for scouts.

I'm not sure that Lord Shadow meant a dedicated spotter unit, just that the attack range of artillery would exceed its visual range and therefore require other forward units to make the targets visible.

Personally I'd prefer it if someone made a spy/secret agent upgrade for the scout, letting them explore rival territory. As it stands they're obsolete by the time the ruins are all gone and horsemen come into play.

 

[Evalis]

I think civ 5 scrapped realism for fun in the case of ranges. Archers really should not be able to shoot farther than riflemen. Range 2 is probably outside the capability of any normal human being considering how large the tiles are supposed to be (enough to hold a fully manned farm). However if they only had a range of 1 then they would be gobbled by melee units and take away from the importance if tactically placing them behind melee units. Giving the infantry type units a range of zero was more for the purpose of having a frontline defender than to mimic the realism in advanced warfare.

 

[DasGuntLord01]

I think I might play around with this. Here is my brain-dump of ideas on how I would do it.

1) All ranged units also have a melee ability. The strength of these attacks is based on the units. For example, archers are better at range. Arqubusier or Musketmen (being an EARLY gunpowder unit) are very effective up close, but can harrass at range.

2) The ranges of these units need to be reworked. However, given the Scale and one-unit-per-tyle limitations, there is no realistic way to represent range. As a rule of thumb, I would have any non-siege ranged unit for a given era have one less range than the siege unit for that era. For example: Archers and Crossbowmen ranged 1, Catapults and Trebuchets ranged 2. Riflemen ranged 2, Cannons ranged 2 (3 with rifling). Infantry ranged 2 (3 with advanced ballistics), Artillery and Rocket Arty ranged 3 (4 with advanced ballistics).

No gunpowder unit should get the bombard ability (except artillery and rocket arty of course), so terrain can still block shots as normal.

3) To balance the increased range, have long range shots have less strength. (Possible?), as in 100%, 80%, 60%, 40%.

PROBLEMS: Is it
1) Possible to have a unit have a ranged AND melee attack? (EDIT: No, since a unit can only have one combat class, which determines it's mission set)
2) Possible to decrease the strength of an attack based on range?

Time to start testing!

 

[mindseye1220]

Would an entire new unit class have to be created? Is that very difficult? Sorry, I don't know much.