Ranged Promotions

[tu_79]

This is not a chance to add stuff, but rather to make sure that I didn't miss an intended change based on CrazyG's graph from earlier

I think CrazyG designed this with a separated siege tree in mind. Anyway, removing city damage from the ranged tree is good enough to not complaint any further.

For what it is worth, splash damage does work, and the AI does know how it works. So that's cool.

Precisely the promotion you fighted more against!

 

[vyyt]

Anyway, removing city damage from the ranged tree is good enough to not complaint any further.

I agree.

 

[Aldebaran1997]

Someone said this several months ago, but I guess it doesn't matter anymore.

Okay, then. Nevermind.

Btw, is it technically possible to add "Overwatch" promotion which makes ranged unit pre-fire with 30% of their RCS when they are meleed by enemy like vice versa of Impi? Not a suggestion, just wondering.

 

[tu_79]

Okay, then. Nevermind.

Btw, is it technically possible to add "Overwatch" promotion which makes ranged unit pre-fire with 30% of their RCS when they are meleed by enemy like vice versa of Impi? Not a suggestion, just wondering.

Probably. Make it work like a citadel.

 

[Gazebo]

I think CrazyG designed this with a separated siege tree in mind. Anyway, removing city damage from the ranged tree is good enough to not complaint any further.

Precisely the promotion you fighted more against!

Siege units still get the city attack bonus promotions as before. So they're unique.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Alright, here's the working set of changes:

If I did not mention it here, it did not change, so let me know if I missed something. This is not a chance to add stuff, but rather to make sure that I didn't miss an intended change based on CrazyG's graph from earlier.

For what it is worth, splash damage does work, and the AI does know how it works. So that's cool.

G

Seems good, but when will we get to try it out? Accuracy IV/Barrage IV seem like promos I won't be taking before the very end aside from rare cases, but besides that all seems to be fine in a sidegrade-ish way.

 

[Mitch.sp]

Alright, here's the working set of changes:

...
Parthians (requires Barrage 3) - +1 movement


G

What about a more suiting name like Parthian Shot?

 

[ElliotS]

Currently the base promotion for damaging units below 50% health is weaker both because of the RCS and because doing 60 damage to a unit at 70 HP counts for all 60, but doing 60 damage to a unit at 45 loses 15 damage.

The better promotions at the end make up for it IMO, but I'm not satisfied with how homogenized the paths feel aside from final promotions. It's better than before, but I'd rather have the wounded units one revert to it's old version (any HP other than 100%) and change the >50% hp to a different bonus.

I still like hardened (10% , 15% ) but that wasn't that everyone else wanted. So please give your suggestions for a base promotion path.

 

[ashendashin]

Per ElliotS request, I'll bring this up here. I'm not sure if it's been brought up in this thread, but how about a promotion line focused on forced retreat? It would have a clear difference for whether or not you want to pick off units or break enemy lines, and also give the AI better defense against aggressors, since ranged units would have a heavier role in pushing back attackers. Any way this would heavily favor the player or not be used properly by the AI?

 

[kawyua]

Okay I just wanted to respond to Gazebo's post about his disagreement with terrain specific bonuses:

Understandably, giving the player too much power to min max can be bad balance for the ai, but I'm kind of confused.

The +damage >50% and <50% is a great solution for the ai, because they can actually use it. Though the whole point of this is in not being min maxed to death. By lowering the damage output possible from the player, it give the ai time to react to the situation. Thus, the little advantages and tricks that we know aren't clear advantages. Why does it matter if its a little asymmetrical - it will always be for a game like this. As long as the bonuses the player gets doesn't make it easily stronger than the ai, anything really works. I get that this kind of promotion lessens the disparity between the capability of elite ai troops and player's elite troops, but why not just lower the numbers? There is more room for flavor than just using health as the variable.

Terrain specific bonuses can work as long as this isn't a tool that can beat the ai everywhere. There will be places where the ai is just stronger and some places where the player's troops are geared to be stronger. But that's okay because the ai works.

I think the ai has gotten good enough to do one thing - react. The ai isn't just smashing troops on the player. They patrol, defend and move to safety when they are low. What this entails is that the player needs to have an army that not only have the damage to beat enemy troops , they need to be able to: seige against any terrain, defend vs calvary, be mobile enough to defend surprise attacks, and all the while fast enough to beat the ai before they become too advanced to win. Attacking the ai means that the ai can choose their battlefield, and when defending we can choose the terrain. I think its a testament to how far the community patch has come that it isn't enough to just have as much damage as possible and set up a trap. They can tell an obvious death trap and will retreat when they are losing. Terrain specific bonuses are only as effective as the ai puts themselves into a position to die from it. It isn't bad and I think its fine to place some trust in the ai to give players some more mechanics to work with.

I suggested this on the previous thread of this patch in a little more detail, but:

1) barrage: more damage on enemies with 50% or more health - its good
(e.g. +10% RCS, +5% against high health)
2) accuracy: more damage on enemies on open ground - this is vanilla, but it works.
(e.g. +10% RCS, +10% against open ground)

Why not do something like this? Maybe the numbers need to be lowered some more, but this kind of mechanic is already in the game with the defense on rough ground.

I still like the more damage on enemy health with >50% hp as it is pretty good first 3 promotions for the ai that keeps in pace with the player.

ah whatever works - I find archers interesting as a damage dealer, so I think keeping theme is what matters. Yeah I don't like hardened as a baseline promotion path. Then, ashendashin ai doesn't understand forced retreat, so I think that it will be abusive. that ability is not be given so easily.

 

[ElliotS]

Per ElliotS request, I'll bring this up here. I'm not sure if it's been brought up in this thread, but how about a promotion line focused on forced retreat? It would have a clear difference for whether or not you want to pick off units or break enemy lines, and also give the AI better defense against aggressors, since ranged units would have a heavier role in pushing back attackers. Any way this would heavily favor the player or not be used properly by the AI?

I would HATE this. A % chance to force retreat would be terrible. You push an enemy away and allow him to go heal, or force your melee units to charge into the enemy lines to kill the unit and destroy your line.

Not to mention that the AI would suck even worse with it.

Strong no from me on that idea.

 

[Gazebo]

I don't feel that we need to bathwaterbaby this. Let's let it simmer a bit.

G

 

[CrazyG]

I don't feel that we need to bathwaterbaby this. Let's let it simmer a bit.

G

Agreed overall

But, I'm modifying my XML to swap the damage amounts of barrage and accuracy. I feel confident that change should happen. Also I do think that siege weapons could do with their own paths

 

[Gazebo]

Agreed overall

But, I'm modifying my XML to swap the damage amounts of barrage and accuracy. I feel confident that change should happen. Also I do think that siege weapons could do with their own paths

The RCS or the % bonus attack damage v HP?

 

[CrazyG]

The RCS or the % bonus attack damage v HP?

I'm changing to
Accuracy +10% RCS, +5% against high health
Barrage +10% RCS, +10% against low health

And I'll try to play civs with ranged UUs. Will post results of my science

 

[tu_79]

I'm changing to
Accuracy +10% RCS, +5% against high health
Barrage +10% RCS, +10% against low health

And I'll try to play civs with ranged UUs. Will post results of my science

You could as well try with changing the definition of high and low health.
The problem seems to be that units die faster the lower its health. Change Barrage so it can do extra damage to units under 75% health. There's a small overlap, but I think it's fine.
Your solution would work too, but it's trickier to balance it right.

 

[ashendashin]

I would HATE this. A % chance to force retreat would be terrible. You push an enemy away and allow him to go heal, or force your melee units to charge into the enemy lines to kill the unit and destroy your line.

Not to mention that the AI would suck even worse with it.

Strong no from me on that idea.

You miss the point. Its entire purpose is to detract from killing units and allow two distinct lines. Either you want to kill units or push them back. The use I'm seeing is that it would allow you to decide between quickly moving enemy melee units and moving up to their ranged, or focusing on picking off more dangerous melee units. The use in city defense could be nice as well, though a bit more situational. I can understand hating forced retreat for melee units since those are the ones you want to keep consistent, but ranged allows more control over it. It's not like you HAVE to spam your entire army with it. A mix of promos would be nice for once.

The AI already focuses on picking off units with groups of ranged, so what I imagine is that the AI can already maximize the chance of pushing our own units back. What with all of their movement, I'm sure the AI can move in for the kill on our vulnerable units. We're better at picking exactly which unit to move obviously, but keep the chance low enough and it could be fine. The AI could do with something to keep their ranged alive anyhow.
I feel that ranged deserves forced retreat somewhere. My siege trains always feel too safe with the front line so easily reliable.

 

[tu_79]

You miss the point. Its entire purpose is to detract from killing units and allow two distinct lines. Either you want to kill units or push them back. The use I'm seeing is that it would allow you to decide between quickly moving enemy melee units and moving up to their ranged, or focusing on picking off more dangerous melee units. The use in city defense could be nice as well, though a bit more situational. I can understand hating forced retreat for melee units since those are the ones you want to keep consistent, but ranged allows more control over it. It's not like you HAVE to spam your entire army with it. A mix of promos would be nice for once.

The AI already focuses on picking off units with groups of ranged, so what I imagine is that the AI can already maximize the chance of pushing our own units back. What with all of their movement, I'm sure the AI can move in for the kill on our vulnerable units. We're better at picking exactly which unit to move obviously, but keep the chance low enough and it could be fine. The AI could do with something to keep their ranged alive anyhow.
I feel that ranged deserves forced retreat somewhere. My siege trains always feel too safe with the front line so easily reliable.

I don't think it's that bad an idea. I'm uncertain how it would affect AI. It's kind of a moral test. There's an unique unit that does something alike, if this is approved, then that unit won't be so unique (same as sweden grenadier). But let's hear more ideas, if posible.

 

[CrazyG]

You miss the point. Its entire purpose is to detract from killing units and allow two distinct lines. Either you want to kill units or push them back. The use I'm seeing is that it would allow you to decide between quickly moving enemy melee units and moving up to their ranged, or focusing on picking off more dangerous melee units. The use in city defense could be nice as well, though a bit more situational. I can understand hating forced retreat for melee units since those are the ones you want to keep consistent, but ranged allows more control over it. It's not like you HAVE to spam your entire army with it. A mix of promos would be nice for once.

Under the current system mixing promotions is the way to go, in my opinion. Much more accuracy than barrage but the numbers just need adjusting

The problem with this retreating is you only get a small % chance to force the retreat which is just so random. There is no way for me to know if it will activate or not so I cannot plan around it. How many times will I be able to kill something only for it to retreat, saving its life? How many times will I actually want the forced retreat and it not happen? The value of the forced retreat is highly debated even when its guaranteed, making it random makes its drastically worse. Especially when its just a 10% chance its seem really bad, I would avoid this promotion as much as possible

 

[CrazyG]

I suggested this on the previous thread of this patch in a little more detail, but:

1) barrage: more damage on enemies with 50% or more health - its good
(e.g. +10% RCS, +5% against high health)
2) accuracy: more damage on enemies on open ground - this is vanilla, but it works.
(e.g. +10% RCS, +10% against open ground)

This isn't a bad suggestion but like the current system more. The terrain thing was something that never appealed to me