New Beta Version - 1-11 (1/11)

[civplayer33]

The archer change is experimental - it may not stay, so I don't want to make any sweeping changes. Let's leave it as-is (no range, no indirect fire) and see how it goes. Even if the promo tree is off for a bit, let's wait.

G

Alright; I'll submit the changes for this solution anyway since I've already written and tested them and the IsMounted() check should be included in either case...if the Archer range is reverted later it's easy to revert that part of the changes (it's just the tool tip update) and if you don't want to include that part you can revise my pull request.

 

[Gazebo]

Alright; I'll submit the changes for this solution anyway since I've already written and tested them and the IsMounted() check should be included in either case...if the Archer range is reverted later it's easy to revert that part of the changes (it's just the tool tip update) and if you don't want to include that part you can revise my pull request.

It's easy to update.

 

[Gazebo]

Alright; I'll submit the changes for this solution anyway since I've already written and tested them and the IsMounted() check should be included in either case...if the Archer range is reverted later it's easy to revert that part of the changes (it's just the tool tip update) and if you don't want to include that part you can revise my pull request.

Thanks!

 

[civplayer33]

'tis done, but note the new issue I opened...something seems to be wrong with the deployment mechanism.


On a different note: AFAIK air units don't actually get XP when they make Interceptions or Sweeps, correct? If so, I think this should be changed...maybe a regular Sweep without resistance shouldn't give XP, but a Sweep with resistance or a Sweep that applies this "strafing damage", as @vyyt called it, should, IMO.

Also, since the new Sweep change, which I like, has now buffed the Dogfighting part of the Fighter promotion tree even further, there should really be something done to buff the Ace Pilot line, since currently Air Units specializing in interception have way too many promotions to churn through until they get to be decent interceptors: they have to invest three promotions to get from Interceptor I to Interceptor IV for 100% interception chance and then they still need to grab those Ace Pilot promos to actually be on the level of sweep-specializing planes in strength...seems unfair; plus, the sweepers even get the "Sortie" promo in their line (+1 range and +1 Interception).
So I think that Sortie should be removed from the Dogfighting side and Ace Pilot should get some additional bonuses, like maybe +1 Range on AP II and +1 Interception on AP III, while giving Fighters Interceptor II or III by default so they at least don't have to spend so many promotions just to get a good interception chance.

A further way to make air units more interesting, which seems to be necessary, as people have even been calling for their complete removal, would be to integrate Improved Air Recon into VP, which allows using Sweep to relocate the Air Recon visibility area for the turn...this could potentially be a great boon for the AI as well since, IIUC, they greatly benefit from more visibility; if they could be trained to Sweep the combat area first, before moving their land units, they'd see a lot more of the battlefield that way and should make better decisions, which would help equalize the human's ability to anticipate and remember enemy unit positions.

 

[Gazebo]

'tis done, but note the new issue I opened...something seems to be wrong with the deployment mechanism.


On a different note: AFAIK air units don't actually get XP when they make Interceptions or Sweeps, correct? If so, I think this should be changed...maybe a regular Sweep without resistance shouldn't give XP, but a Sweep with resistance or a Sweep that applies this "strafing damage", as @vyyt called it, should, IMO.

Also, since the new Sweep change, which I like, has now buffed the Dogfighting part of the Fighter promotion tree even further, there should really be something done to buff the Ace Pilot line, since currently Air Units specializing in interception have way too many promotions to churn through until they get to be decent interceptors: they have to invest three promotions to get from Interceptor I to Interceptor IV for 100% interception chance and then they still need to grab those Ace Pilot promos to actually be on the level of sweep-specializing planes in strength...seems unfair; plus, the sweepers even get the "Sortie" promo in their line (+1 range and +1 Interception).
So I think that Sortie should be removed from the Dogfighting side and Ace Pilot should get some additional bonuses, like maybe +1 Range on AP II and +1 Interception on AP III, while giving Fighters Interceptor II or III by default so they at least don't have to spend so many promotions just to get a good interception chance.

A further way to make air units more interesting, which seems to be necessary, as people have even been calling for their complete removal, would be to integrate Improved Air Recon into VP, which allows using Sweep to relocate the Air Recon visibility area for the turn...this could potentially be a great boon for the AI as well since, IIUC, they greatly benefit from more visibility; if they could be trained to Sweep the combat area first, before moving their land units, they'd see a lot more of the battlefield that way and should make better decisions, which would help equalize the human's ability to anticipate and remember enemy unit positions.

A person called for it. Not people.

G

 

[civplayer33]

A person called for it. Not people.

G

Akshuallieee...another person has affirmed it, making it two persons, thus people

But seriously, several other people have agreed in the air unit thread that for interceptor planes the amount of promotions is too large and that they are individually too weak, for example, which is one of my points.

 

[Asterix Rage]

A person called for it. Not people.

G

+1=3

 

[civplayer33]

Oh ohhh...looks like we got a mob forming!

 

[pineappledan]

Is there a place to sign up for the countermob of people who don’t want to lose an entire unit domain?

I do like the idea of using air sweep to give vision X radius around the selected tile though. As someone who has to do precisely 0% of the work, That sounds both doable and useful

 

[kenneth1221]

Don't get me wrong, VP is a ton of fun, but both nerfing Archers to 1 range and removing the entire air unit line would signify a significant phase transition in the design of the mod. It'd go from "the base game is unbalanced and unfun in certain mechanical ways and this mod will rebuild the game to fix that" to "humans are too good at this game so we're going to remove unfair mechanical benefits they have over the AI." And I mean, sure, that's alright, since the mod isn't called the "Community Balance Overhaul" anymore.

I cannot imagine the "should we remove air units"/"is it necessary to vocally dissent against the removal of air units" conversation happening even a year ago. Heck, I wouldn't have even anticipated the "let's nerf archer range because some vocal group of people exploit archer rushing" conversation either. Yet here we are. The thing is, some of us are casuals who play VP in part because it's a lot easier to build superwide empires than the base game. And I would bet that there are a non-significant number of people who play the mod but never comment on balance.

I guess my post boils down to "think of the casuals" and frankly I have no idea how popular a sentiment that will be here.

 

[crdvis16]

Don't get me wrong, VP is a ton of fun, but both nerfing Archers to 1 range and removing the entire air unit line would signify a significant phase transition in the design of the mod. It'd go from "the base game is unbalanced and unfun in certain mechanical ways and this mod will rebuild the game to fix that" to "humans are too good at this game so we're going to remove unfair mechanical benefits they have over the AI." And I mean, sure, that's alright, since the mod isn't called the "Community Balance Overhaul" anymore.

I cannot imagine the "should we remove air units"/"is it necessary to vocally dissent against the removal of air units" conversation happening even a year ago. Heck, I wouldn't have even anticipated the "let's nerf archer range because some vocal group of people exploit archer rushing" conversation either. Yet here we are. The thing is, some of us are casuals who play VP in part because it's a lot easier to build superwide empires than the base game. And I would be that there are a non-significant number of people who play the mod but never comment on balance.

I guess my post boils down to "think of the casuals" and frankly I have no idea how popular a sentiment that will be here.

Are casuals more likely than more hardcore players to care about the archer becoming 1 range? If anything I'd assume that it's hardcore players that would care about something like that. I would imagine it's hardcore players that obsess over unit balance and overpowered strategies while casuals play the game more low key. I would think a casual player would start a game, see that archers are 1 range, say "weird but ok", and move on with playing the game.

As for air units getting removed, given Gazebo's response in this thread and his planned updates to air units it doesn't seem very likely that will happen. I also think you'd see near unanimous opinion that removing air units is a bit extreme from casuals and hardcore players alike.

 

[Gazebo]

Don't get me wrong, VP is a ton of fun, but both nerfing Archers to 1 range and removing the entire air unit line would signify a significant phase transition in the design of the mod. It'd go from "the base game is unbalanced and unfun in certain mechanical ways and this mod will rebuild the game to fix that" to "humans are too good at this game so we're going to remove unfair mechanical benefits they have over the AI." And I mean, sure, that's alright, since the mod isn't called the "Community Balance Overhaul" anymore.

I cannot imagine the "should we remove air units"/"is it necessary to vocally dissent against the removal of air units" conversation happening even a year ago. Heck, I wouldn't have even anticipated the "let's nerf archer range because some vocal group of people exploit archer rushing" conversation either. Yet here we are. The thing is, some of us are casuals who play VP in part because it's a lot easier to build superwide empires than the base game. And I would bet that there are a non-significant number of people who play the mod but never comment on balance.

I guess my post boils down to "think of the casuals" and frankly I have no idea how popular a sentiment that will be here.

Air units aren't going anywhere. Just because there's a discussion going on doesn't mean I'm going to oblige.

G

 

[civplayer33]

Just to be clear, I'm not in favor of removing air units at all, neither is @Asterix Rage, I'm sure; I simply think that they are lacking by far the most compared to the other unit domains, which is why I'd like to see more changes to them than "just" the Sweep thing (though I do like that change). The reason I pointed out that removal was mentioned was to impress upon Gazebo to get him to make some more changes, which is why I gave some suggestions, as well.

So my position is that I'd like to see XP from Interception and certain Sweep actions, some changes to the Fighter promo tree that I have detailed in my previous post and maybe the inclusion of Improved Air Recon, along with a closer look at air unit balance and the mechanics...there's also several bugs that affect air units currently.

@Gazebo: should I make a pull request with some Fighter promo tree changes?

 

[Gazebo]

Just to be clear, I'm not in favor of removing air units at all, neither is @Asterix Rage, I'm sure; I simply think that they are lacking by far the most compared to the other unit domains, which is why I'd like to see more changes to them than "just" the Sweep thing (though I do like that change). The reason I pointed out that removal was mentioned was to impress upon Gazebo to get him to make some more changes, which is why I gave some suggestions, as well.

So my position is that I'd like to see XP from Interception and certain Sweep actions, some changes to the Fighter promo tree that I have detailed in my previous post and maybe the inclusion of Improved Air Recon, along with a closer look at air unit balance and the mechanics...there's also several bugs that affect air units currently.

@Gazebo: should I make a pull request with some Fighter promo tree changes?

New sweep action already gives XP, 1 per hit. Not a ton, but it is something.

Pull request is fine, but I'll review for balance. Happy to get a lift on it, though.

G

 

[kenneth1221]

Are casuals more likely than more hardcore players to care about the archer becoming 1 range? If anything I'd assume that it's hardcore players that would care about something like that. I would imagine it's hardcore players that obsess over unit balance and overpowered strategies while casuals play the game more low key. I would think a casual player would start a game, see that archers are 1 range, say "weird but ok", and move on with playing the game.

From one casual to another, I guess we need to agree to disagree. If I, a casual, playing my first VP game, was to build an archer and saw that it only had 1 range, I would probably go "1-range archers? This is as useless as Gatling Guns in BNW. I wonder what other opaque changes this mod makes?"

Hardcore players care about consistent balance across multiple games. Casual players care about having fun. Part of the fun of ranged units is fighting at range. I personally believe nerfing unit range is an unnecessary sacrifice of fun to balance. (Though personally, I may be weird. I wait at least a day after each patch releases to see if there are any game-breaking unfun bugs before getting invested in a game where some mechanics are either outright broken or seem too unfair to be fun to me i.e. passive religion spread or cities oneshotting units.)

Of course there's a wide range of responses from "weird but ok" to what I just said, but if you google "Civ 5 gatling gun" you get a lot of people complaining that they don't know how to use the base game 1-range gatling gun or calling it useless. I believe the response to the 1-range archer change will at somewhat resemble the apparent internet consensus on the gatling gun.

Air units aren't going anywhere. Just because there's a discussion going on doesn't mean I'm going to oblige.
G

Good to hear! It's your mod. For the record, my opinion on air units is that they're in the same state as naval units ~1 year ago, before the current suite of promotions came into play. These air unit changes seem like a big step in the right direction. But like I said, you're the primary designer, and a camel is a horse designed by committee.

 

[pineappledan]

A distinction between casual and hardcore for vp is arbitrary at best. I mod civs for VP but I play mayyybe 1 game a month at king difficulty? I have a ton of knowledge about the ins and outs of the database, but have no interest in pushing the AI to its limits. Does that make me a casual?

It’s not just the 1 range archers. Oh, we get a Shoshone pathfinder as our starting unit? .... and we can BUILD pathfinders? that’s weird.
Oh, our city can’t hit that barbarian 2 tiles from my city now? That’s frustrating.
What is a council? Wait, there’s only 1 point of science per city in ancient, and no science for population??? This is crazy!
Oh what the hell, Gatling Gun Archers? Are all ranged units this bad? Forget this.

that science part almost lost me for my first 2 games; I just found the progression so slow and awkward coming from vanilla.

 

[civplayer33]

New sweep action already gives XP, 1 per hit. Not a ton, but it is something.

Ok that's fine then; I've been able to confirm that Interceptions give XP as well (2 XP on standard speed)...I just didn't notice before.

Pull request is fine, but I'll review for balance. Happy to get a lift on it, though.

Okay good, I'll submit something tomorrow, probably.

 

[pineappledan]

It occurs to me that resting influence at 30 with city states is going to throw a ton of “losing grasp on X” up at you every turn. Could you set the influence to 35?

 

[CrazyG]

Let's talk about barbarians.

Just tried a two player game, on turn 3, he moved his pathfinder onto a hill. There are two barbarians on the other side, the pathfinder dies. That is such a huge loss, it seriously just cripples his entire game. I collected like 10 ruins while he got none, and I'm two social policies ahead by turn 60. I agreed we could just restart, because his early game not only is difficulty, it is unfun.

On the restart, I'm annoyed because I went from great land to tundra, but hey, I still think its the right decision. I lose about 90 food by getting raided by barbarians within 20 turns, on an already low food start. Now CrazyG, were you being greedy? Why didn't you build a military unit?

Well, I did! I had already bought a warrior, the barbs just run past him to annoy the city. They also terrorize it, so I get that archer later. I lose some culture too. Which is great, that way even if I wanted to take authority, the barbs would all be dead by the time I got culture for kills. The warrior did stop a few raids, but I would need at least 3 units to stop them entirely, which isn't reasonable. This is going to get even harder if archers have one range.

I don't think there is a single thing either of us should have done differently in these games. It happens to me most often when I already started on tundra, like come on man. It feels so bad to experience this. After spending all that time setting up Civ and getting my friend to try the mod, we just decided to play another game.

We have this thing were barbs just avoid for territory for X turns, depending on difficulty. Frankly that isn't a solution. It was added to address these complaints, but it doesn't. Along with no 2 range for cities, they are really hard to deal with early game, the 1/10 games you get swarmed.

Can we please take away the barbarian penalty on pathfinders and scouts? It just is not a necessary feature, they already have really low CS. Personally, I would also like to try beginning the game with a warrior and a pathfinder. In vanilla most people agree you should build scout first, but in VP most people do monument or shrine (the photojournal section serves as evidence). Especially if you play without ruins.

PS- everyone I have shown VP to has found starting with an old Shoshone pathfinder confusing. It is only used because we needed the art, right? I think swapping it with the scout would be a good move.

 

[SuperNoobCamper]

Let's talk about barbarians.

Just tried a two player game, on turn 3, he moved his pathfinder onto a hill. There are two barbarians on the other side, the pathfinder dies. That is such a huge loss, it seriously just cripples his entire game. I collected like 10 ruins while he got none, and I'm two social policies ahead by turn 60. I agreed we could just restart, because his early game not only is difficulty, it is unfun.

On the restart, I'm annoyed because I went from great land to tundra, but hey, I still think its the right decision. I lose about 90 food by getting raided by barbarians within 20 turns, on an already low food start. Now CrazyG, were you being greedy? Why didn't you build a military unit?

Well, I did! I had already bought a warrior, the barbs just run past him to annoy the city. They also terrorize it, so I get that archer later. I lose some culture too. Which is great, that way even if I wanted to take authority, the barbs would all be dead by the time I got culture for kills. The warrior did stop a few raids, but I would need at least 3 units to stop them entirely, which isn't reasonable. This is going to get even harder if archers have one range.

I don't think there is a single thing either of us should have done differently in these games. It happens to me most often when I already started on tundra, like come on man. It feels so bad to experience this. After spending all that time setting up Civ and getting my friend to try the mod, we just decided to play another game.

We have this thing were barbs just avoid for territory for X turns, depending on difficulty. Frankly that isn't a solution. It was added to address these complaints, but it doesn't. Along with no 2 range for cities, they are really hard to deal with early game, the 1/10 games you get swarmed.

Can we please take away the barbarian penalty on pathfinders and scouts? It just is not a necessary feature, they already have really low CS. Personally, I would also like to try beginning the game with a warrior and a pathfinder. In vanilla most people agree you should build scout first, but in VP most people do monument or shrine (the photojournal section serves as evidence). Especially if you play without ruins.

PS- everyone I have shown VP to has found starting with an old Shoshone pathfinder confusing. It is only used because we needed the art, right? I think swapping it with the scout would be a good move.

Not a very fringe case, it happens not so frequently but occasionally enough to make it annoying.
Producing a unit is not going to happen with 4 raiders and buying one is also not going to happen thanks to gold stealing.

Spoiler :