New Archery units!

[Playciv2948]

Lets face it, Archery units for the most part go unused. When was the last time you rushed Feud for Longbow? Or were stuck in a city with a bunch of archers while your land was crushed? Here is what I propose:

New promotion line for Archery units:

Bombard I 1% dmg to city defense
Bombard II 2% dmg to city defense
Bombard III 3% dmg to city defense
Bombard IV 5% dmg to city defense
Bombard V 7% dmg to city defense

Shoot I 1% dmg to units in next room
Shoot II 2% dmg to units in next room
Shoot III 3% dmg to units in next room
Shoot IV 5% dmg to units in next room
Shoot V 7% dmg to units in next room

Collateral I 1% collateral dmg
Collateral II 2% collateral dmg
Collateral III 3% collateral dmg
Collateral IV 5% collateral dmg
Collateral V 7% collateral dmg

Range I (requires combat I)
Range II (requires combat I, II)

New Unique Units:
Scout replacement, access to Shoot
Hunter replacement, access to Collateral
Ranger replacement, access to Shoot
Axe replacement, access to Collateral
Disciple replacement, access to Bombard
Priest replacement, access to Bombard
Archer replacement, 2 movement
Archer replacement, starts with Range I
Longbow replacement, starts with 2 movement
Longbow replacement, starts with Range II
Marksmen replacement, access to all Archery promotions, starts with Range II

I'm sure we can come up with other uses/replacement units, but lets start by getting Archery units back in the game and offense. 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 are optional %s of course, how powerful it should be further tested (with stacking and without?) so don't bother arguing strength yet.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I don't like the "Bombard" line (I really don't see archers at being good at wakening defences, only defenders), but I like the other promotions (although they need renaming, and there probably don't need to be 5 levels)

Your "Unique Units" certainly need some more fleshing out.


As much as I would like archery units to have ranged attack, I don't think Kael will go for it (mostly because he has specifically said so ) If you think you can convence him though, feel free to try.

 

[SwordofStriker]

Archery units would be a lot more used if they simply gave them the barrage function from AoI. Being that they won't, I don't foresee archery units getting a lot of love any time soon. I'd love to be proven wrong though.

 

[Farmer Bobathan]

Collateral damage makes the most sense, because of the hail of arrows, but I think that archery units should get collateral damage automatically. I would also suggest making it so that archers use their defense strength when attacking and don't move out of their square when either in a fort/castle/citadel/city, or fortified.

 

[Tobbe_1]

I absolutely agree, that archers need some improvement, right now I never build any archers, i even ignore archery unless i want to go for stirrups...and bowyers is usually the one of the last techs i research...

IIRC, the credo is atm that there should be one line of offensive units (melee) and a line of defensive units (archery). If you want to implement new ideas into this, I think it might be a good idea to bosst the defensive value of archers.

I think it would be an enormous help if archers could gain some better resistance against collateral damage (perhaps implemented in the city garrison promotions).

Right now, it is almost irrelevant what kind of units you put into your city as a garrison, with enough cats, they are dead meat...

If archers or city garrison gave some protection against those collateral damage, archers would definitely become an addition to the normal melee troops.

Furthermore, if archers would gain some better collateral damage protection, this would solve the "meteor problem". The enemy brings some archmages with meteor shower? Counter them with archers! They survive the meteors an can strike back...an the best aspect: even the AI would be able to use these tactics!

And this solution is not way of "reality"...archers fire their arrows and then run for cover before catapult-rocks, meteors and fireballs strike...

My two cents...

 

[Grey Fox]

I posted this in the Pikeman discussion thread a while ago.

Ideas for new promotions

• Arrow Barrage I - Requires Drill II and Archery (would require archery units to have iCollateralDamageMaxUnits set to some number)
  • +25% Collateral
• Arrow Barrage II - Requires Drill IV and Archery
  • +25% Collateral
  • +20% vs Melee
• Precision - Requires Drill III and Archery
  • +20% vs Heroes
  • +20% vs Mounted
• Ambush - Requires Woodsman I, Drill I and Archery
  • +20% Attack and Defense in Forests
  • +1 First Strike Chance
  • +20% Withdrawal
• Drill V - Requires Drill IV and Archery
  • +25% chance for First Strike Chances (making it 75% I think? The first strike might still lose the round if I understand correctly)

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

Hey, firebows are way cool. Everyone expects Amurites to use mages, and then there's these fellows... attack, then defend your conquests!

But in general, I use archery units in BTS but not so in FFH, because tech are expensive and you need to spend all your beakers to specialise.

 

[clut]

I rarely use archers while playing FfH.

Archers should have some kind of attack that is only available whilst in a city or a castle (or equivalent), whereby they can fire a volley of arrows without risk of being hurt themselves. This would have to be a weak attack, to prevent them being to powerful.

 

[marioflag]

Archery are not so good because defensive units in general are weaker than units used for offensive purposes due to the fact that promotions are really powerful in FfH2.

Some of these promotions would be really needed to make Archers more powerful, the problem with Collateral Damage promotions is that they weaken the usefulness of Artillery units, so it's not a real solution until also those units would be buffed, but it's yet to be seen whether it would introduce new balance problems.

The cheapest solution would be to make promotions at vanilla levels, but current promotions are WAD.

An intermediate solution would be to make Archers capable to use automatically Barrage when attacked so that they would be more useful when used in defense, without making them more powerful attacking, also in this case other non archer defensive units would need some boost to their defense strength to balance them.

 

[Ecofarm]

I grudgingly get archery for Gilden. Rarely for stirups. Maybe crossbows, only if Lurchuirp. I can't imagine bothering otherwise.

An interesting promo line might make them more a part of the game; however, I understand not wanting them to take over with many cool range affects.

How about just some of that stuff, like the promos from Grey Fox, a bombard II promo, and a range II. Then add the UU (fleshed out, of course) to further utilize this new mechanic.

 

[DeaExMachina]

A return of the Drill line to Civ IV Drill would be appreciated. Also a change in the tech tree to give a reason to research the Archery line would make an immense difference.

 

[MrUnderhill]

One of my biggest complaints is the cost of the Bowyers tech. Right now Bowyers costs 50% more than Iron Working by itself (which is a nasty "sticker shock" for human players), and even if you count all the techs leading up to Iron Working and Bowyers, Bowyers comes out to be about 300 more than Iron Working.

Techs required to get Iron Working:
Crafting (120) + Mining (200) + Bronze (400) + Smelting (1200) + Iron Working (1600)
Total Cost: 3520

Techs required to get Bowyers:
Crafting + Mining + Bronze (see above.)
Exploration (125) + Hunting (300) + Archery (300)
Bowyers (2400)

Total Cost: 3845

Moreover, even if they were the same tech price, the Longbowmen you get from Bowyers are simply worse than the Champions you get from Iron Working (not counting special cases like the Amurites or Ljosalfar).

For the same cost, they're worse on offense, and they can only go as far as iron weapons (Champions can get Mithril). Even if you did specialize in longbows, you'd need Iron to get them to their max strength anyway, so why not skip the longbows and get the much better champions instead?

My belief is not that Archery units are bad; I've used them before and they're great, but Melee units are just as good at defense and better at offense. If Axemen and Champions took a 1 hit to their defense (and maybe Immortals, too; Berserkers already suck at defense, and Warriors need to have good defense because they're your first defenders), then Archers would be more useful for city defense, and maybe even find their way into stacks to ward retaliation off of wounded melee units. To keep with flavor, the Khazad and other melee-centric cultures could receive an "Armored" promotion (like Dexterous or Sinister) for their melee units, restoring the lost defensive strength to what it is right now so they can still use melee units for defense.

To sum up, my suggestions are:
Lower the cost of Bowyers to 2000; a little pricier than Iron Working but with fewer requirements.
Improve the Drill line some more.
Make melee units less useful for defense overall.

 

[DeaExMachina]

I've been thinking, since we tend to enjoy to mix magic and normal stuff together why not mix magic with bows a bit more then Amurite Firebows?

First lets examine XP in FFH. We know that an army that goes out and does war who turns their sights upon a turtle who has barely killed more then a couple barbs all game is going to have a cake walk trampling that turtle underneath. So how does the turtle get XP to defend itself?

Enchantment Mana and Archery Ranges. Right now the Archery Range isn't needed for the higher level bow units. If we say put the ability "Archery units Fortified in the city containing an Archery Range and access to Enchantment Mana gain 1 XP a turn" we would be able to get some strong XP going for the turtle player to ward off the rampant aggressors attacks. Of course this would require a bit of an investment in the arcane line which would mean you couldn't get it right off the bat (unless you start with Enchantment like the Amurites which makes even more sense for their unique Firebow) but still provide strength in the long run of the game.

 

[Rex rgis of Ter]

I think i would use archery units way more if Boywers wasn't so expensive. I would like to see collateral damage as well. To reinforce their role as defenders maybe they could cause collateral damage only when defending.

 

[Maian]

Realistically speaking, archers shouldn't get any range bonus if you consider the size of the world. The range of archers is measured in meters, while each plot is kilometers wide.

Speaking of realism, it's a pity Civ4 doesn't incorporate mixed unit battles. Archers and infantrymen are supposed to work together when attacking. In medieval battles, archers softened up the enemy before the infantry and cavalry (if any) reached each other. It's rare for the archers to win the battle by themselves unless they have overwhelming numbers or superior tactical position or the enemy is low on morale. (NB: I'm not a military or history buff, but this should be obvious.)

I'm not sure how to replicate that in Civ4. In fact, it's probably impossible with some form of mixed unit battles (or some way to simulate that effect).

 

[Grey Fox]

Speaking of realism, it's a pity Civ4 doesn't incorporate mixed unit battles. Archers and infantrymen are supposed to work together when attacking. In medieval battles, archers softened up the enemy before the infantry and cavalry (if any) reached each other.

Softening up is represented by Collateral, and to some degree withdrawal.
Which have been suggested in this thread.

It's rare for the archers to win the battle by themselves unless they have overwhelming numbers or superior tactical position or the enemy is low on morale. (NB: I'm not a military or history buff, but this should be obvious.)

And historically, Longbowmen could defeat a superior (in numbers) enemy, especially if it was inexperienced fighting against such tactics.

 

[OctopusOverload]

No need to doubt archers causing collateral damage, that's what they had flaming arrows for.

As for archers in combat, longbowmen played several pivotal roles in Agincourt (Azin?), if one is to believe all the documentaries.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

How about making archery units in a city with an archery range slowly gain free xp? That way they could still be defensive units, but could get the benefits of the promotions that melee units get from offensive wars.

(If longbowmen were still a separate branch of the tech tree from crossbowmen I would suggest making them gain xp from archery ranges but makeing crossbowmen gat less or no free xp, and/or making only the longbowmen branch have the barrage ability. Longbowmen would however be more costly and either weaker or unable to get weapons upgrades.)

I'd still like to see the AoI type barrage function added (maybe with a small chance of making the unit gain xp), but I don't expect that to happen.

(Personally I've never liked the idea f making one unitcombat all offense and another defense. Units should be more flexible than that)

 

[Maian]

Softening up is represented by Collateral, and to some degree withdrawal.
Which have been suggested in this thread.

Yes, but that's only for the offensive side. The defending side doesn't have a chance to "counter-soften". You would think that archers on both sides would have first strike collateral blows, but they don't. Plus, archers should be protected by the infantry, so unless that infantry was defeated or they were flanked, they should have nearly 100% withdrawal.

 

[Grey Fox]

Well thats First Strikes + Defensive bonuses I guess.