rework of movement promotions

Seems like an indierect nerf to the Iroquois and Songhai when the scout can get just get their promotion changed.
 
Totally agree - leave it as it is.

\Skodkim
See? This is what happened last time. Those who prefered "x2 movement" (but not with ignore terrain) could not agree with those who prefered "ignore terrain" (but not with x2 movement), even if they both agreed on that combining those promotions was a bad idea.
So G ended up doing nothing.

Is it gamebreaking? No. Is this a good system? Either. Now, some players even say it is 'iconic' (was it you, @Txurce?): That it represents what happens in democracy. We end up with a weird system that contents nobody, but nobody hates strongly, so it's ok.
 
See? This is what happened last time. Those who prefered "x2 movement" (but not with ignore terrain) could not agree with those who prefered "ignore terrain" (but not with x2 movement), even if they both agreed on that combining those promotions was a bad idea.
So G ended up doing nothing.

Is it gamebreaking? No. Is this a good system? Either. Now, some players even say it is 'iconic' (was it you, @Txurce?): That it represents what happens in democracy. We end up with a weird system that contents nobody, but nobody hates strongly, so it's ok.

No, I argued against the use of the word "iconic" as a reason for or against anything. I'm in favor of your last proposal, but don't feel strongly about the need for change here.
 
My bad memory... But I'm sure some people were saying that scouts movement was iconic to VP, and that pretty much settled the question.

You probably mean this, which is a paraphrase of what you're bringing up:

Seems like an uneccessary change. There are easier ways to stop scouts - simply don't give them the promotion! Or we suddenly have issues with basic promotion that's been here for years?
The whole idea of any promotion is that it gives some new abilities. There are 200+ of them and each one can be asked "why do I have this effect, maybe it should look different"? Then ok - use a different promotion. Double movements are basic promos, rooted in vanilla game. If we don't like them - just don't use them. But not change, these are like basic fundamental things.
Or if we want to change those movement patterns, then create a new promotion, and attach to whoever we want to.
 
I agree that the no penalty on rough terrain + double movement on scouts is a weird combination. IMO, a flat +1 movement promotion instead of those double movement ones would be more consistent and realistically appropriate, so to say. I mean, intentionally avoiding clear terrain to gain those 4 tiles per turn of movement can be fun, but it feels sort of cheesy.
 
To compensate for the loss of 2 mobility promotions we could have the bandeirantes one thrown in somewhere down the line. The one with movement through foreign borders.
 
I really like the current system. +1 movement would be a much less interesting promotion in my opinion
 
I really like the current system. +1 movement would be a much less interesting promotion in my opinion
All land units, except scout line, use this boring method. The only ignore cost promotion in melee is 'amphibious', and it just lets you cross rivers without penalty. You can't combine woodsman with amphibious because they apply to different terrains.

So it goes back to how scouts move. Ignore cost of ALL terrain types, double movement on SOME terrain types with a trailblazer promotion. Trailblazer you may like in Deity, but I fail to see how it appeals at King or lower, with so many barbs blocking the way.
 
So it goes back to how scouts move. Ignore cost of ALL terrain types, double movement on SOME terrain types with a trailblazer promotion. Trailblazer you may like in Deity, but I fail to see how it appeals at King or lower, with so many barbs blocking the way.
Really? Seems to me that trailblazer 1 should be worthwhile in most situations. Its a lot of extra speed, if it nets you one ruin its worthwhile in my opinion.

Lets look at what this halved movement does. It gives you +1 movement if you cross at least one forest or jungle. Occasionally you get +2 movement, if you cross 3 forests or jungles. I enjoy the mechanic this creates, where you have to plan your movements ahead. I would enjoy +1 movement less myself. If the current trailblazer has no appeal to you, I'm not sure if +1 movement would either.

Also, we don't need both lines to be useful in all situations, this is why we have 2 paths.
 
See? This is what happened last time. Those who prefered "x2 movement" (but not with ignore terrain) could not agree with those who prefered "ignore terrain" (but not with x2 movement), even if they both agreed on that combining those promotions was a bad idea.
So G ended up doing nothing.

Is it gamebreaking? No. Is this a good system? Either. Now, some players even say it is 'iconic' (was it you, @Txurce?): That it represents what happens in democracy. We end up with a weird system that contents nobody, but nobody hates strongly, so it's ok.
@tu_79 Using my post directly as an example of why nothing gets done strikes me as rather rude.

I've been a Civ player since CivI, have been a part of the community for 14 years, have helped Thal develop CEP and have also helped Gazebo with what I could (bug testing, even fixes when I could) in earlier days. I just don't have that possibility anymore with two kids, a wife and a full time job. But I have a voice.

ilteroi asked (and I quote): "what is the general opinion on this". I Agree that we should leave it be. IMHO it works as it is.

\Skodkim
 
@tu_79 Using my post directly as an example of why nothing gets done strikes me as rather rude.

I've been a Civ player since CivI, have been a part of the community for 14 years, have helped Thal develop CEP and have also helped Gazebo with what I could (bug testing, even fixes when I could) in earlier days. I just don't have that possibility anymore with two kids, a wife and a full time job. But I have a voice.

ilteroi asked (and I quote): "what is the general opinion on this". I Agree that we should leave it be. IMHO it works as it is.

\Skodkim

Sorry if you felt personally attacked. Not my intention. I was exposing my point of view on this issue, and immediatly there are voices saying:
a) I like how it is now.
b) I'd prefer it other way, but it's not worth it to change.
c) I really want to change it, but we can't agree on which is the best alternative.
Yours was just one of these voices.

I was never saying, nor I've ever thought, that the mod progress is threatened by people who don't agree with my opinion. I like democratic values and it has its lights and shadows.

All of them are valid opinions (though some are more educated opinions than others). But because we are so divided in this question, we're stuck with current mechanic (that some players even like it, so good for them). I just want to note that many newcomers find scout movement weird, and that we may have accostumed to it, but that doesn't make it a good mechanic. (Side note: I like the way Stalker looks at things, analyzing from an outsider perspective, makes us question if we are doing it really in the best possible way)

Really, this is a minor quibble, not worth the fight. I can live with it. The fact that we are just discussing on how the scout moves, shows that we've come to a big agreement on the rest of the game. I'd prefer it more rationale, though.
 
The mobility on recon is such a key part of their value.. I agree, though, that it always feels silly to be seeking out hills and forests as "scout highways". The various UA's (Iroquois etc.) would be diminished too. These mechanisms feel very abstract as currently implemented, for better or worse.

There's strong potential for improvement by reworking these promo; I can support the OP proposal, but maybe on condition that the recon units and affected UA's are broadly rebalanced at once. Worst case the change is treated as a failed experiment for an iteration or two of VP... G's still iterating often enough, I see no reason not to try
 
@Gazebo. I'm not so sure.
ok guys, i've been considering a change to the movement promotions (woodsman, desert walker etc). the current effect is "double movement in x", but why on earth should you be moving faster in bad plots than in good plots?

so the proposal is to change this to:
  • start the turn with an extra move on feature x (ie woodsman spears on forest will start with 3 moves)
  • ignore feature x costs (but not terrain costs - hills will still cost 2 moves)
what is the general opinion on this?

give the split verdict and that i discovered that the code more or less assumes a unit's base moves to be the same everywhere, i won't change anything. the potential for bugs is too high. and the potential for discussions as well :)


The code assumes a horseman to move the same as a spearsman? The code is ignoring +1 movement promotions (poor Musketeer)? I don't think he meant that this can't be changed, but that the ideas he brought up won't work (mixing movement in features with movement in terrain type). And that he doesn't want to get involved in an issue where there's no community agreement.

So yes, dead topic. :dunno:
 
@Gazebo. I'm not so sure.





The code assumes a horseman to move the same as a spearsman? The code is ignoring +1 movement promotions (poor Musketeer)? I don't think he meant that this can't be changed, but that the ideas he brought up won't work (mixing movement in features with movement in terrain type). And that he doesn't want to get involved in an issue where there's no community agreement.

So yes, dead topic. :dunno:

Eh? Not so sure about...what, exactly? Ilteroi said he wasn't going to mess with the code (is spaghetti). So the discussion about changing the promotions is moot.

G
 
Top Bottom