Ranged vs. Melee

[Luven]

Hey there!

Has there already been a Discussion about this ??
It looks like the Ranged Units are a lot weaker in terms of normal Combat Strenght.

Ranger (Ranged Infantry Level 1)
Moves: 2; Strength: 3; Ranged Strength: 8; Range: 2; Cost: 60 production

Soldier (Infantry Level 1)
Move: 2; Strength: 10; Cost: 50 production

How do you think will this affect their use ? I think ranged will get one shot by melee units pretty quick. Therefore you have to put some melee in front to protect them. Could end up very interesting. Maybe they overdid it a bit and we will only see melee ?

 

[aguliondew]

Range unit were OP against the Ai in civ 5. The Ai tended to ignore terrain and slowly move into a trap. The early range unit has 2 less strength in comparison to civ 5. Easy enough to snip off of a hill or inside a city.

 

[The Dark Knight]

Ranged units are still strong, they are now weak against melee attacks (if u do a ranged attack against them their ranged combat strength counts).

An example: In Civ V the crossbowmen: 18 ranged strength and 13 melee strength.
A pikemen has 16 strength. A crossbowmen can take a beating from a pikemen ( 3 - 4 attacks) before he dies and the pikemen will be very weak (20 - 30 HP left).

If u build an army of 6 crossbowmen and only 2 pikemen u had no real problem against melee opponents because the crossbowmen can hold himself in a melee fight.

In Civ Beyond earth: Ranger: 8 ranged strength and 3 melee strength, it upgrades to gunner: 18 ranged strength and 6 melee strength.
If u do the same tactics from Civ V in Civ Beyond earth against melee opponents and they get near ur ranged units u loose the fight.

 

[OldEarthRelic]

I noticed this also. Ranged gets more increase from upgrades than melee.

Siege looks better than ranged, even against units.

And Naval looks OP. But I don't see any Naval Melee, so I don't know how you take the city - maybe bring a melee around also (or something on the carrier)?

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I noticed this also. Ranged gets more increase from upgrades than melee.

Siege looks better than ranged, even against units.

And Naval looks OP. But I don't see any Naval Melee, so I don't know how you take the city - maybe bring a melee around also (or something on the carrier)?

I think it is just.. use an embarked unit.

 

[cazaderon]

It's a good thing if they balanced range vs melee.

In Civ 5, i build one melee for 3 to 5 ranged units depending on my goal.

Range with lvl 5 > all.

 

[OldEarthRelic]

I couldn't see anything with Lvl 5 with anything. Can tell me about the lvl 5 stuff (or give a link if that's easier?)

Thanks,

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I couldn't see anything with Lvl 5 with anything. Can tell me about the lvl 5 stuff (or give a link if that's easier?)

Thanks,

There is no level 5

Generic units only promote 3 times
Unique units look like they only promote once

 

[Lord Shadow]

Sounds like a pretty good change, and in theory should be easy enough to implement on Civ5 as well.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Yeah.. seems like they might have balanced it

Melee Strength : Ranged Strength for most units (except ANGEL and Lev units) is 25-35%

and comparing 'artillery' (which upgrade at 4, 9, and 14) and Cavalry (upgrade at 3, 8, and 13)
Melee str of ranged unit: Melee strength of attacker is
3:12 (25%)
5:22 (22%)
8:40 (20%)
14:60 (23%)

similar to an archer being str 2, a composite str3, and a crossbowman being str 4-5, (and artillery being str 8-9)

 

[joncnunn]

Hey there!

Has there already been a Discussion about this ??
It looks like the Ranged Units are a lot weaker in terms of normal Combat Strenght.

Ranger (Ranged Infantry Level 1)
Moves: 2; Strength: 3; Ranged Strength: 8; Range: 2; Cost: 60 production

Soldier (Infantry Level 1)
Move: 2; Strength: 10; Cost: 50 production

How do you think will this affect their use ? I think ranged will get one shot by melee units pretty quick. Therefore you have to put some melee in front to protect them. Could end up very interesting. Maybe they overdid it a bit and we will only see melee ?

Against 1 Solider,
human builds wall of 3 Rangers, each move and shoot which kills the Solider before it responds

Against 2 Soldiers,
That human wall is centered on their cities so that the city bombard also weakens the other solider. (Assuming that cities in BE have city bombardment)

Against 3 - 5 Soldiers,
Human builds 3 Soldiers & 3 Rangers, soldiers placed as a screening element in front of the Rangers, only attacking with the rangers while the soldiers absorb enemy blows. Again, human going for complete kills.

It's still a step forward from Civ V but the bottom line is that ranged combat is superior at range of 2 when in the hands of a human. If they really wanted to bring it into balance, most units would only have a range of 1. (Like Civ V Gatling Guns), and range 2 reserved for later game siege units. City bombard would also only be 1 hex.

 

[OldEarthRelic]

OK, but now you're using combined arms. In CivV for defense you could just build ranged.

 

[Erindel]

well, arent ranged units supposed to be strong against melee ? then you have cavalry to own them, while cavalry is weak against melee... now you have to get the AI to understand that...

 

[Acken]

ranged units advantage is the range, they should be weak in melee.

I'm glad for changes in the right direction. Now we'll see if siege is good and if overall changes truly give melee a better chance than in civ5.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

well, arent ranged units supposed to be strong against melee ? then you have cavalry to own them, while cavalry is weak against melee... now you have to get the AI to understand that...

Ranged units are strong If they can move and shoot... Artillery (the stronger ranged) can't do that. And terrain may also interfere.

And if your melee moves faster.. then you need something to slow the melee down

 

[OldEarthRelic]

Does anyone else think Naval is OP?

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Does anyone else think Naval is OP?

Just to point out, naval doesn't get level 2 until Affinity level 5.. and it is limited in where it goes. (and the aliens there are scarier) 18 & 70 v. 8, 12, 12, 15,and 60

 

[Acken]

Naval would be OP compared to what ? Melee units that they don't fight ? Or do you mean they'd be good for taking cities.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Naval would be OP compared to what ? Melee units that they don't fight ? Or do you mean they'd be good for taking cities.

probably melee units that can't fire back or land ranged units that can (including cities)

 

[OldEarthRelic]

In Civ 5, the Naval Unit was comparable in strength to the comparable land unit in that era. In BE, they seem much stronger.