Scouts and Explorers becoming Diplomatic Units

[Funak]

There's a lot of over-complication. The units are not so horribly out of touch that they need entirely new promotion/stat/development lines. Just some tweaks. Let's reel it in and be light with our touch.

G

I agree that this is over-complicated, but adding a few new scout only promotions wouldn't be a bad idea. The existing ones are fairly boring.

 

[Gazebo]

Well the only full agreement so far is that the scout lacks real use beyond exploring. I think full sight for scouting 3, replacing the double terrain with movement, and earlier evasion would be the best start for a simple recon role to try out.

Exploring is so very important, though. And when it is over, yeah, scout utility goes down. But that's just a 'civ' thing ultimately. Small worlds explore easily, and there aren't many impediments. Most of the changes here would actually make the exploration phase end even more quickly. Not good.

I agree that this is over-complicated, but adding a few new scout only promotions wouldn't be a bad idea. The existing ones are fairly boring.

Perhaps, but I guess I don't see that as a reflection on the scout as a 'failed' or bad unit line, as many seem to believe.

 

[ashendashin]

Exploring is so very important, though. And when it is over, yeah, scout utility goes down. But that's just a 'civ' thing ultimately. Small worlds explore easily, and there aren't many impediments. Most of the changes here would actually make the exploration phase end even more quickly. Not good.



Perhaps, but I guess I don't see that as a reflection on the scout as a 'failed' or bad unit line, as many seem to believe.

Then I guess we'll have to figure out something else for the AI? Like more cheats? War is good enough right now that if ilteroi didn't so often mention the issue of visibility, I probably wouldn't have ever considered scouts as such an issue. Scout improvements seem like a nice way to solve some problems, but there needs to be some player incentive to make it used by both them and the AI. If we stick to how they are now then I don't see anything else that could be viewed as normal to the player for AI visibility.

 

[Gazebo]

Then I guess we'll have to figure out something else for the AI? Like more cheats? War is good enough right now that if ilteroi didn't so often mention the issue of visibility, I probably wouldn't have ever considered scouts as such an issue. Scout improvements seem like a nice way to solve some problems, but there needs to be some player incentive to make it used by both them and the AI. If we stick to how they are now then I don't see anything else that could be viewed as normal to the player for AI visibility.

Ilteroi's concerns are worst-case-scenario, not average scenario.

G

 

[ashendashin]

Ilteroi's concerns are worst-case-scenario, not average scenario.

G

Many of these changes sounds like a hell of a lot of fun though. For a "worst-case-scenario", I see the AI fail pretty often to recognize that pushing my flanks isn't so easy. I don't see any issue with the proposed changes besides the fact that all the work would be allotted to you for a unit that isn't necessarily broken.

I guess this can be viewed as adding to VP even though it's in polishing stage, but I'd say these changes would only have positive outcomes for both gameplay and the AI.

 

[ElliotS]

There's a lot of over-complication. The units are not so horribly out of touch that they need entirely new promotion/stat/development lines. Just some tweaks. Let's reel it in and be light with our touch.

If you want what I think the lightest touch is that will produce a useful scout:

Reconnaissance (old): Gains XP from revealing Tiles, up to 100 XP.
Reconnaissance (New proposed): Gains XP from revealing tiles, +1 for ending the turn for every enemy in sight (max 5xp), in enemy lands and 5 from pillaging tiles. No max.

Unit changes:
Scout:

1. Penalty to attacking non-barbarians, -33%.
2. 3 sight base
   
3. +4 CS at iron working and steel working. (They'll never attack well, but they can actually defend this way. This also keeps them useful without being OP at any point, or requiring more units. Explorer doesn't get these bonuses, but could be looked at if it's weak.
4. If possible, production/gold cost increases at iron and steel.

Explorer:

1. Sight 3 base
2. Embark Oceans immediately.

---

The purposes are the following:

Reconnaissance changes are needed to allow building more than 2 scouts. You just can't level them up otherwise.

CS scaling to avoid being OP or UP at any point.

Penalty attacking non-barbs to avoid messing with early game barb balance (good as is) and avoid being potentially too good in wars.

I'd like to see the promotion tree reworked, but it doesn't NEED to be.

I'd also like to see them able to move through closed borders, but they don't NEED to.

 

[Gazebo]

Many of these changes sounds like a hell of a lot of fun though. For a "worst-case-scenario", I see the AI fail pretty often to recognize that pushing my flanks isn't so easy. I don't see any issue with the proposed changes besides the fact that all the work would be allotted to you for a unit that isn't necessarily broken.

I guess this can be viewed as adding to VP even though it's in polishing stage, but I'd say these changes would only have positive outcomes for both gameplay and the AI.

Just remember this: every fun idea takes hours and hours to code, and dozens more if the AI needs to know what's up. So I'm not going to jump on an idea if it doesn't present itself as elegantly and simply as possible.

G

 

[kawyua]

Exploring is so very important, though. And when it is over, yeah, scout utility goes down. But that's just a 'civ' thing ultimately. Small worlds explore easily, and there aren't many impediments. Most of the changes here would actually make the exploration phase end even more quickly. Not good.

Perhaps, but I guess I don't see that as a reflection on the scout as a 'failed' or bad unit line, as many seem to believe.

It might just be too specialized for the scope of this game. With things being 1 UPT and everyone basically starting with a power deficiency - I don't think there is enough to support this style of play. There also aren't many benefits to exploring out much further than the vicinity of the capital. This issue is definitely being exacerbated because this is a player vs an ai with an advantage, but its a matter of the lack of possible ways to encourage using a unit only for scouting. I think scouts deserve a little bit more than just being scouts in the end and a little crossover as a combat unit isn't unhealthy.

But yeah anything would help I guess!

elegance ultimately can be too time consuming for what its worth

 

[ashendashin]

Just remember this: every fun idea takes hours and hours to code, and dozens more if the AI needs to know what's up. So I'm not going to jump on an idea if it doesn't present itself as elegantly and simply as possible.

G

Heheh, don't worry I've explored the github a bit. Can't say I know how you've managed everything for so long, but there's enough examples like this that the amount of work you have to do won't always stop me from suggesting even more.

 

[Gazebo]

If you want what I think the lightest touch is that will produce a useful scout:

Reconnaissance (old): Gains XP from revealing Tiles, up to 100 XP.
Reconnaissance (New proposed): Gains XP from revealing tiles, +1 for ending the turn for every enemy in sight (max 5xp), in enemy lands and 5 from pillaging tiles. No max.

Unit changes:
Scout:

1. Penalty to attacking non-barbarians, -33%.
2. 3 sight base
   
3. +4 CS at iron working and steel working. (They'll never attack well, but they can actually defend this way. This also keeps them useful without being OP at any point, or requiring more units. Explorer doesn't get these bonuses, but could be looked at if it's weak.
4. If possible, production/gold cost increases at iron and steel.

Explorer:

1. Sight 3 base
2. Embark Oceans immediately.

---

The purposes are the following:

Reconnaissance changes are needed to allow building more than 2 scouts. You just can't level them up otherwise.

CS scaling to avoid being OP or UP at any point.

Penalty attacking non-barbs to avoid messing with early game barb balance (good as is) and avoid being potentially too good in wars.

I'd like to see the promotion tree reworked, but it doesn't NEED to be.

I'd also like to see them able to move through closed borders, but they don't NEED to.

This is a pretty elegant solution. Only part that feels...janky is the CS increase.

G

 

[ElliotS]

This is a pretty elegant solution. Only part that feels...janky is the CS increase.

G

I know, but I honestly don't think a better solution to their CS exists. Besides, Engiseer DID say:

Well, there is that table Unit_EraCombatStrength that I've always wanted to try out...

 

[HalfEmptyMug]

Just remember this: every fun idea takes hours and hours to code, and dozens more if the AI needs to know what's up. So I'm not going to jump on an idea if it doesn't present itself as elegantly and simply as possible.

If it's not too difficult for the AI, giving scouts and explorers the "is invisible" promotion alone would increase their utility dramatically. If used with @ElliotS's proposal, CS shouldn't need to be increased.

 

[Funak]

This is a pretty elegant solution. Only part that feels...janky is the CS increase.

Yeah I don't really see why you'd introduce a unit that grows stronger with techs, no other unit works that way and it just seems overly complicated.
Definitely prefer the non-attacking scouts with decent CS from the start instead. Yeah Shoshone would probably need a tweak, either letting their pathfinder attack, giving it a ranged attack or something.

 

[tu_79]

You know? That over-complicated promotions were just to show that both movement types could coexist. Obviously, it would be much more simple, and elegant, if only one of them is allowed. And it would be a pity to keep movement as it is now.

But the rework shows other thing. Every other promotion tree, from any unit type, has a fully functional side. Melee can choose between more punch in combat with extra healing or more punch taking cities with extra hits, but in the end they have same strengths. It's the same with every other unit but scouts.
Going Survival scouts can help in a fight, covering archers at least, but they are too slow to go for remote goody huts. Going trailblazer you can get some extra goodies and maybe reach far lands before cities get in the way, but this unit has little use once it can't advance further, if it is not destroyed in the way. Like a Kleenex.

In my rework I imagined one role more agile and other sturdier, but both with good chances for survival, same sight, and better healing. This even could be good for the AI as it doesn't need to know which tree would perform better at different times.

 

[Txurce]

Exploring is so very important, though. And when it is over, yeah, scout utility goes down. But that's just a 'civ' thing ultimately. Small worlds explore easily, and there aren't many impediments. Most of the changes here would actually make the exploration phase end even more quickly. Not good.



Perhaps, but I guess I don't see that as a reflection on the scout as a 'failed' or bad unit line, as many seem to believe.

These threads remind me of what led me to quit working on the Communitas mod: Thal "solving" the scout-to-explorer issue by eventually creating an entire line of light infantry, that of course then led to balance changes to everything else.

Scouts are 90% about exploring -- there's nothing wrong with them becoming obsolete, or having to wait a bit to become the new, improved Explorer. Your proposals are simple and modest and make the game a little better. I really hope it doesn't go much further than that.

 

[ElliotS]

Yeah I don't really see why you'd introduce a unit that grows stronger with techs, no other unit works that way and it just seems overly complicated.
Definitely prefer the non-attacking scouts with decent CS from the start instead. Yeah Shoshone would probably need a tweak, either letting their pathfinder attack, giving it a ranged attack or something.

If you give them 12 CS a scout and archer setup would be unstoppable early, with a single warrior to take the city when it's at 0.

If you give them less then they're going to suck HARD past spearmen.

I just don't see a CS value that wouldn't leave them OP or pointless at various points. Just because they can't attack doesn't mean they're not possibly insane war assets.

 

[ElliotS]

You know? That over-complicated promotions were just to show that both movement types could coexist. Obviously, it would be much more simple, and elegant, if only one of them is allowed. And it would be a pity to keep movement as it is now.

But the rework shows other thing. Every other promotion tree, from any unit type, has a fully functional side. Melee can choose between more punch in combat with extra healing or more punch taking cities with extra hits, but in the end they have same strengths. It's the same with every other unit but scouts.
Going Survival scouts can help in a fight, covering archers at least, but they are too slow to go for remote goody huts. Going trailblazer you can get some extra goodies and maybe reach far lands before cities get in the way, but this unit has little use once it can't advance further, if it is not destroyed in the way. Like a Kleenex.

In my rework I imagined one role more agile and other sturdier, but both with good chances for survival, same sight, and better healing. This even could be good for the AI as it doesn't need to know which tree would perform better at different times.

This is actually a good point. Since G wants a rework that doesn't touch promotions right now I'd rather see how we feel about promotions later though.

 

[Funak]

If you give them 12 CS a scout and archer setup would be unstoppable early, with a single warrior to take the city when it's at 0.

If you give them less then they're going to suck HARD past spearmen.

I just don't see a CS value that wouldn't leave them OP or pointless at various points. Just because they can't attack doesn't mean they're not possibly insane war assets.

Ehm, I don't really see how the scout would change anything, unless you're planning on completely surrounding the archer in scouts. Also not entirely sure how you're planning on actually taking a city down with just one archer.

 

[ElliotS]

4 scouts and 4 archers would be an INSANE early rush if the scouts had 12 CS. It would be insanely broken.

 

[Gazebo]

4 scouts and 4 archers would be an INSANE early rush if the scouts had 12 CS. It would be insanely broken.

Except that, if we gave them the cannot attack + withdraw from melee promotions, they would not be appreciable as a frontline for your archers.

G