only the best combat class bonus within a category of combat classes to matter.
Umm... This is indeed an interesting option.
In general, this might affect some of the criminal (or one of the stealthed types) as they gain a similar bonus as archers, and many of the later era cavalries that count as both mounted and gunpowder.
This should help balance them (cavalry) against the other units, as they gain the movement speed in exchange for being possibly worse in combat.
In the worst case that it's too much of a downside, the strength bonus against them might go at the same fashion- the better wins, so a pikeman and axeman will both get a very good bonus, but axeman with anti-cavalry promotion won't be better.
I WANT large cities to really be able to pump some XP into them late-game so they can take those higher tier crime control promos that open up as the game goes on.
While it might not be the correct way to go about it, an option to solve this:
LE gets experience as civilians/LE, the same way that units will get xp for being combatants/melee. This means they won't get as much XP from buildings.
In addition, higher tier units will get some free promotions. This is done in for two reasons: a) Newer units shouldn't be under-trained compared to their predecessors when it comes to policing (if anything, they should be better at it) and b) it balances the "I wish I could build lower tier for more effective crime control" (as a higher level promotion grants a much higher effect than a low level one)
I'll have to make that a v39 project. (Raledon... maybe you could help with the coding on some of this stuff now that we've gotten you up to speed on DLL compiling? I'm willing to bet this makes sense to you and I could help guide you to where certain things are taking place if you need it.)
In general, sure.
Currently working a bit on the xml-enum generalization so that the XML guys could change their mission's order, and such. I got the parsing part done, and I'll talk with you (hopefully) tomorrow when it's finished on plugging it to the DLL .
I'm not sure what can be said about the base in this case BUT you point out that knights, being on the line of dismounting mounted warriors, should also have the melee combat class. That would be a bit of a bug that stems from land units not having gotten the FULL chart investigation yet. If the mounted infantry does not have commando, neither should the knight either... not sure how that pans out.
There is Knight and Mail Knight units. In terms of stats, I have yet to find a difference. We could refactor one to be in the mounted infantry chain, and the other to be in the cavalry chain.
The ~20 power units also have multiple guys, one could be changed for that role, so that only when melee weapons become obsolete they switch to gunpowder.
It might be possible to do this for the other mounted units as well, so that an horse-archer will count as both archer and mounted (it might be so, but I seem to remember it as not being the case).
This will, essentially, give a bigger downside to using mounted units. At the same time, It will be a choice which units to build, aside from raw power/bonuses (I've rarely felt I have a meaningful choice)
In regards to commando specifically, I've come to find it as a really bad promotion when it's freely given to all mounted units.
Beside how it helps steam-rolling units rampage in the opponent's territory, it means there is no real way to stop units from running amok inside your territory. A highwayman, for example, could go about 24 tiles (X6 speed or so from roads at that era, 4 movement). This allows him to be at the heart of your empire to cause trouble without any real way to oppose it. It also means that you ought to have cavalry for defense, as a normal walking unit may be unable to catch up to it (and we don't want a strong unit in every city).
I could see it as something a noble/great commander grants, and as a promotion given to normal units at a later era, though.
Another option (I think?) would be to separate commando into two promotions, the first giving road using up to 1/2 (so a unit moving on a 1/6 road moves at 1/2 still), and the second allows full utilization. It's still a strong freebie to mounted units, but it will be harder to rampage.
In other words- units with commando move too much.
I'm not against eliminating the Strength up promotion lines and turning them into just one line of +1 bonuses. I was running the current structure as a test to see if I could give Quality a little more value but I think it just ends up giving quality too much value.
As I noted further in the post (saying here in case you miss this line of thought when you read later), the might up is a really good promotion at the early game. It's quite fun that, for a change, I'm thinking about which promotion will be more effective.
At later ages, +1 is close to nothing, though, so it might be better to link the promotions to unit's era instead of the unit's quality. A +0.5*era (or some other number) base sounds like it will keep the promotion as a viable choice as the game progresses.
) should still be very much defense-oriented, the following units could be given a more versatile role as long as they were (at least) very hard to rebuild, so that there is a real decision to be made between offense and defense. It should also shift the balance a bit in favor of builder-players, but not overly so: You can overcome these unts, if you are extremely well prepared.
doesn't seem that impossibly high in that light. Remember a certain Mounted Infantry? I wonder what strength that unit can reach if it is upgraded now when quality upgrades are kept.
).
