Rekk
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2017
- Messages
- 2,587
1 archer beats 1 warrior, even if the warrior attacks first.Can they though? Seems like you'd be a sitting duck for a retaliatory attack.
1 archer beats 1 warrior, even if the warrior attacks first.Can they though? Seems like you'd be a sitting duck for a retaliatory attack.
How often do you have 1 archer-1 warrior matchups in an actual game? Don't barb camps spawn more barbs once they're attacked? Don't AI civs get fairly large bonuses to unit production?1 archer beats 1 warrior, even if the warrior attacks first.
How often do you have 1 archer-1 warrior matchups in an actual game? Don't barb camps spawn more barbs once they're attacked? Don't AI civs get fairly large bonuses to unit production?
I imagine this concern vanishes completely once Spearmen or Horsemen are on the table. Can 1 archer beat any 1 other unit except a warrior?
Honestly, that's part of my concern. I'm not sure it would be fun to turn archers into a unit that benefits highly from high level tactical play at the expense of lower level enjoyment.If you can station your archer on hills, forest, or across from a river, ranged attacks are much more valuable.
Basically it would make archers much more situational instead of becoming a mandatory early units
Barbs in camps are much more aware of getting damaged by attacking. If you are able to attack first, the chance is high that the unit will not attack afterwards. Even after a first strike of the barb, he will never attack after getting harmed a second time.Honestly, that's part of my concern. I'm not sure it would be fun to turn archers into a unit that benefits highly from high level tactical play at the expense of lower level enjoyment.
How often do you have 1 archer-1 warrior matchups in an actual game? Don't barb camps spawn more barbs once they're attacked? Don't AI civs get fairly large bonuses to unit production?
I imagine this concern vanishes completely once Spearmen or Horsemen are on the table. Can 1 archer beat any 1 other unit except a warrior?
There's another solution to that. Restore 2-range to cities.Maybe not, but a group of them can seemingly bring down a city, which never occurred in any historical context, as they would have been shot down & destroyed by the city. Adds little to the game either.
Another easy solution to this would be, don't do it. I've never seen AI doing such a rush, so it's only the human doing such thing.Or just add -50% malus vs cities.
2 range archers are fine as is except for the recent changes to cities making them easier to take that made it possible to take cities with archers. Before it was technically possible but very difficult.
I think there is not a consensus against 2 range archers except for the issue with taking cities with archers. When I can take out a deity AI with a pathfinder and 4 archers, that's an issue.
This is kinda weird to me 'cause 2 years ago the AI rushed me with warriors and archers all the time on epic Deity games. Always seemed a legit strat to me but then I often did 22 civ epic games.Another easy solution to this would be, don't do it. I've never seen AI doing such a rush, so it's only the human doing such thing.
QFT. If you don't like it, that's a you problem.Another easy solution to this would be, don't do it. I've never seen AI doing such a rush, so it's only the human doing such thing.
These things don't get done because people can't stop talking past classical era. Skirmishers don't need to be tweaked every 2nd patch for 4 months straight, and we sure as hell don't need to start doing the same to archers.
Can we please move on?
Have you ever heard of the author Jared Diamond and his book "Collapse"?Can we please move on?
Have you ever heard of the author Jared Diamond and his book "Collapse"?
Its my number 1 fact book and its about the collapse of former civilizations, the reasons for it and also take a look at the current state of the world. (I really recommend this book for everyone)
Why Iam asking this? A passage of this book take a look about the benefits of complexity and how the benefits change with the increase of the complexity. Complexity/Specialisation creates a lot of efficiancy and benefits, but somewhere, there is a point, where more complexity creates more disadvantages than advantages.
I got the feeling that the balancing aspect of this mod have already crossed that point, leading to such discussions you see here. The amount of different promotions some (a lot) units get, shows this to a great degree. Starting from experience level of 5 or 6, I cant see anymore all the promotions my own units have, cause they get pushed under the picture and cant be looked at.
Another example would be the happiness system. The pleasure was big, after an easy and local happiness system was announced, but do we have this now?
Since 2 years, a lot of (in my eyes) unnecessary stuff was added, like the population modifer, the "save median" mechanic, the "show how many people will be unhappy after growth" mechanic, the happiness gained by archeological digs, the public project, also a weird experiment with national meridan. I dont know when this was introduced, but happiness by vasalls is also a weird addition in my eyes.
I really really dont want to belittle the effort of all the developers, I love what you have done, this is the game and mod I would take to an isolated island, and I can already hear the sarcastic comment from Gazebo incomming like a Stuka in WW2, but Iam simply missing the brutal and objective methodic to balance things out against each other. Adding more extra rules to an already very complex game didnt make it necessarily better, but definitly unfriendlier for new players.
The most simple and understandable solution would be the 2-range-for-city-attack change, cause its the "normal" case and it would help to solve the archer rush problem.
In addition to this, the RCS of archer and Composite Bowman should be lowered by atleast 1, making it a bit less attractive to field 90% archer armies and be successful with it. If the archer have less ranged defence abilities and the city can always retaliate at 2 range, any archer rush would be a lot more difficult to be done. And everything without changin the range of a unit or adding another promotion.
frankly, I think that’s a bad assessment. It’s absurd how archers became the target of scrutinyWe have focused on archers at the moment, if someone has a specific complaint about another ranged unit that think is a bit out of whack, they are welcome to bring it up and we will discuss it.
frankly, I think that’s a bad assessment. It’s absurd how archers became the target of scrutiny
It doesnt have to be major changes. Adding the +hp/cover promotion for higher melee units or the Skirmisher Doctrine are an increase in complexity too.I haven’t added any new major systems in months. Just cleaning up bugs and improving user experiences. Don’t make this about me.
G