Scouts and Explorers becoming Diplomatic Units

[Enginseer]

By what I've read in these forums, people tend to go 2 scouts at the early game and never an explorer as other units become much better scouts(mounted comes in mind) apparently making their roles feel useless. However, what if they acted as mini-diplomatic units as well? CSD units could act as heavy-hitters to City-State Influence allowing you to solidify city-state alliance and influences while the simple scouts and explorers can conduct some trading and improve relations for a temporary friendship.

Overall, it would promote a Scramble for Africa perspective and puts the scouts to use rather than having to disband them because they met your unit supply cap or they just aren't useful anymore as I have read.

 

[kawyua]

For nearly all my games I've stopped going scout, preferring a warrior instead:

-They need like one less turn of production
-There isn't that much map to be explored after producing the unit! The vicinity of my capital is usually good enough. Standard size maps of course. Bigger maps would be different, but even then...
-With barbarians being so aggressive, I've come to value actually surviving attacks
-Doubles later as a defensive unit or offensive unit for the inevitable early war
-Movement speed is enough for exploring the places I couldn't explore with the first warrior.
-Trying to get scouts for ruins in places like the forest or desert is kind of pointless because scouts from other civs will also be faster in exploring the area. Ai gets scouts from the very beginning so they kind of have priority.
-Early experience is really really valuable - might as well put it on someone useful.
-Recon units aren't that important in early wars, a lot of it is brute strength

Phew. Right now scouts are a very very hard sell to me atm. Any mechanic like what you suggested would surely help! Even if I have no idea what the details are.

 

[randomnub]

Same as above, I usually make a scout only when settling in deep forest/jungle a warrior would have problems travelling through, and only because the chop production lets me create the scout quick enough.

If you ask me, you could give the scout a diplo ability that nets ~20 points toward CS friendship, make them upgrade to envoys, and scrap the scout line altogether. This sort of drastic solutions isn't very welcome usually though :*

 

[tu_79]

I still prefer a unit that can be used as recon, without being so easy to hit.

Just test this. Play as America and raise a scout to level 4, two survival promotions and two sights, and keep it alive for your middle age wars. Use it just for reconnaissance. (avoid roads, knights can surprise you).

It was also suggested that scouts could be allowed to trespass borders, like missionaries do, with a small damage. That would make them useful after closed borders prevents scouts from exploring farther. At the very least they could return home to learn how to sail.

 

[randomnub]

I prefer to give Sight to a mounted unit for reconnaissance, it's always worth its manteinance/force limit. Also, you can surprise the enemy scout

Bypassing border would be alright.

 

[ElliotS]

Here's my solution to scouts sucking. (I don't like this one. I think people still wouldn't use them. Also zeppelins and para troopers are cool.)

Scout:

1. Penalty to attacking non-barbarians, -33%.
   
2. +1 movement at military theory, +1 sight at composite bow tech, +3 CS at bronze working, 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.)
   
3. Earns experience per turn spent in a major civ's territory during war.
   
4. Remove withdraw on melee attack, replace with chance to dodge ranged attacks. (It makes them terrible defenders imo.)
5. Ability to move through other people's territory at trade. (Disguised as merchants, now they can't be trapped. AKA the bane of exploring, and another nail in the current scout's coffin.)

The goal is to give scouts a more important role and keep them relevent, while avoiding them being OP at any point, nor needing to add more units for two reasons. 1- Scouts shouldn't need to constantly come back to upgrade, That would kinda void the point. 2- We don't need to add more units, and more models and such. I think this scaling power is simpler and solves the problems more elegantly.

Explorers could probably get 4 base movement and the ability to move through borders regardless of open borders.

Thoughts?

 

[CrazyG]

I would have to play with the diplomatic option to be sure but I feel like its not going to be great.

I think some version of EliotS's concept is the right idea.

Also zeppelins and para troopers are cool.)

What do you do with Zeppelins?

 

[ashendashin]

I would have to play with the diplomatic option to be sure but I feel like its not going to be great.

I think some version of EliotS's concept is the right idea.


What do you do with Zeppelins?

Hovering can be useful if the conditions are right. If I don't have tanks yet, I often invest in a few zeppelins when I plan on taking on larger civs so I can figure out how long I can keep my units advancing. They do die pretty quick from a lack of promos since I never upgrade to them.

I think most problems can be solved if we find a good model for something between scout/explorer. To me, the best ideas from the scout balancing thread were removing the terrain double movement while adding extra base movement. ElliotS changes wouldn't help the AI all that much without turning scouts into bulwarks, as the idea is to increase overall battle visibility, which should be the most important thing to focus on in order to improve the AI. Simply making scouts stick around after ruins wouldn't stop me from quickly getting rid of enemy scouts.

I prefer the idea of making them hard to catch. An earned promo for invisibility like Tu proposed and keeping the chance to retreat would be far better than messing with their CS only. A strong role in reconnaissance until zeppelins sounds best to me. Though the retreat promo should be separated from survival or made earlier, since buffing defense and suddenly getting retreat at the end is a terrible mechanic as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Funak]

Here's my solution to scouts sucking. (I don't like this one. I think people still wouldn't use them. Also zeppelins and para troopers are cool.)

Scout:

1. Penalty to attacking non-barbarians, -33%.
   
2. +1 movement at military theory, +1 sight at composite bow tech, +3 CS at bronze working, 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.)
   
3. Earns experience per turn spent in a major civ's territory during war.
   
4. Remove withdraw on melee attack, replace with chance to dodge ranged attacks. (It makes them terrible defenders imo.)
5. Ability to move through other people's territory at trade. (Disguised as merchants, now they can't be trapped. AKA the bane of exploring, and another nail in the current scout's coffin.)

The goal is to give scouts a more important role and keep them relevent, while avoiding them being OP at any point, nor needing to add more units for two reasons. 1- Scouts shouldn't need to constantly come back to upgrade, That would kinda void the point. 2- We don't need to add more units, and more models and such. I think this scaling power is simpler and solves the problems more elegantly.

Explorers could probably get 4 base movement and the ability to move through borders regardless of open borders.

Thoughts?

Obvious problem is that with them upgrading for free, the cost is just way too cheap for their eventual power.
Other than that I really don't like 4 and 5.


I don't really like the idea of turning them into diplounits either however.

 

[tu_79]

Here's my solution to scouts sucking. (I don't like this one. I think people still wouldn't use them. Also zeppelins and para troopers are cool.)

Scout:

1. Penalty to attacking non-barbarians, -33%.
   
2. +1 movement at military theory, +1 sight at composite bow tech, +3 CS at bronze working, 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.)
   
3. Earns experience per turn spent in a major civ's territory during war.
   
4. Remove withdraw on melee attack, replace with chance to dodge ranged attacks. (It makes them terrible defenders imo.)
5. Ability to move through other people's territory at trade. (Disguised as merchants, now they can't be trapped. AKA the bane of exploring, and another nail in the current scout's coffin.)

The goal is to give scouts a more important role and keep them relevent, while avoiding them being OP at any point, nor needing to add more units for two reasons. 1- Scouts shouldn't need to constantly come back to upgrade, That would kinda void the point. 2- We don't need to add more units, and more models and such. I think this scaling power is simpler and solves the problems more elegantly.

Explorers could probably get 4 base movement and the ability to move through borders regardless of open borders.

Thoughts?

1. Ok. I prefer to word it: +33% bonus vs Barbs, while having a lower CS. It's the same actually.
2. Concerned about upgrading to explorer. Otherwise fine, this is more sight more movement and more defense. Perhaps too much defense.
3. Agree. If scouts are tweaked so they can survive.
4. Withdraw on attack is the most scouty thing they can do. Move before they are hit is even better.
5. I like it.

6. And I'd like to add: Explorers -> better sight/movement while embarked.

 

[Aldebaran1997]

I like the idea of scout as mini-diplo unit because I usually couldn't build diplounit when I played a small nation (1-2 city) which has too few paper. But I worried about the motivation of trading paper.
Btw, there is no one who use scouts as medics? I usually do when I build an early scout.

 

[ElliotS]

Ok. I prefer to word it: +33% bonus vs Barbs, while having a lower CS. It's the same actually.

I don't want to be nit-picky, but it's not. The point is that they have the same defense against barbs and civs, but can't attack trained soliders as well. (The point of this is to preserve super-early game balance in how scouts and barbs interact which I think is fine, and allow scouts to become tanky without ever being able to attack well.)

It it was worded like yours either they would defend better against barbs or worse against full civs, which would both be bad imo.

Obvious problem is that with them upgrading for free, the cost is just way too cheap for their eventual power.

I suppose the could potentially become a bit OP if they defended better than a pikeman and cost much less to build. I guess increasing their cost every time their CS gets bumped would be a good idea if it can be done.

Lastly I'm not sure why you're against 5. Scouts getting trapped or cut off is a large part of what makes them bad, and you can still just kill any random scouts you find early on. That's what I do. The AI tends to forget about you killing their scout soon enough.

 

[CrazyG]

I like the idea of scout as mini-diplo unit because I usually couldn't build diplounit when I played a small nation (1-2 city) which has too few paper. But I worried about the motivation of trading paper.
Btw, there is no one who use scouts as medics? I usually do when I build an early scout.

I've done the medic thing but I'm not going to keep the scout around forever just as a medic. I'd love if he got some kind of upgrade before explorer so I could let him take a hit

To me, the best ideas from the scout balancing thread were removing the terrain double movement while adding extra base movement.

I really don't like this idea. I think the problem that compelled this thread is scouts commonly lacking usefulness. And this change would make them much less useful IMO

 

[ashendashin]

I really don't like this idea. I think the problem that compelled this thread is scouts commonly lacking usefulness. And this change would make them much less useful IMO

Really? I'd take an extra 1 or 2 movement over doubled terrain any day. It's a tad too gamey and it could even lower their usefulness on some maps. Especially if we want the AI to scout our armies. There should be some constant aspects to rely on if we want them to be relevant in wars.

 

[CrazyG]

Really? I'd take an extra 1 or 2 movement over doubled terrain any day. It's a tad too gamey and it could even lower their usefulness on some maps. Especially if we want the AI to scout our armies. There should be some constant aspects to rely on if we want them to be relevant in wars.

The only thing that really distinguishes scouts from high movement units like horsemen is the terrain advantages. I think if you made them a 3 move unit you just solidify how outclassed they are.

 

[Funak]

The only thing that really distinguishes scouts from high movement units like horsemen is the terrain advantages. I think if you made them a 3 move unit you just solidify how outclassed they are.

Well, horse-units can attack. And scout-units have access to scout-promotions. Think that's a fair distinction.

 

[ashendashin]

The only thing that really distinguishes scouts from high movement units like horsemen is the terrain advantages. I think if you made them a 3 move unit you just solidify how outclassed they are.

They still ignore terrain, unlike mounted units. That's a pretty solid difference. If we remove the terrain line then obviously something would have to replace it and there have been good suggestions for that in the balance thread, such as Pathfinding (not a fan of ignoring closed borders so easily though). So long as ignoring terrain remains, I see no reason whatsoever to keep an entire line dedicated to being faster in rough terrain than open. Must we continue our rigorous monkey bar training course?

 

[CrazyG]

I don't see trailblazer as a problem. Improving or replacing it won't address the issue raised that people delete scouts and rarely use explorers. Messing with these terrain movements seems like a solution looking for a problem. You guys have good points but I just see any reason to mess with this part of it

On the note of turning them into diplomatic units, why not just let us gift scouts to CS like a normal military unit?

 

[Funak]

I don't see trailblazer as a problem. Improving or replacing it won't address the issue raised that people delete scouts and rarely use explorers. Messing with these terrain movements seems like a solution looking for a problem. You guys have good points but I just see any reason to mess with this part of it

On the note of turning them into diplomatic units, why not just let us gift scouts to CS like a normal military unit?

Trailblazer by itself isn't really a problem, just like 'ignores terrain cost' by itself isn't a problem. But having both of them available to the same unit just makes the entire thing weird. I mean there's no good reason why a scout should ever move faster through a jungle than he does through an open field.
Yeah this does not solve the problem with scouts being deleted, but it is a problem all by itself.

And no, letting you gift scouts to CS would just be silly, what would the CS need a bunch of scouts for? They're not exploring anyways.

 

[ElliotS]

Trailblazer by itself isn't really a problem, just like 'ignores terrain cost' by itself isn't a problem. But having both of them available to the same unit just makes the entire thing weird. I mean there's no good reason why a scout should ever move faster through a jungle than he does through an open field.
Yeah this does not solve the problem with scouts being deleted, but it is a problem all by itself.

I disagree. I think you're letting 'realism' get in the way of gameplay. Trailblazer is fun and iconic, and I enjoy it as it currently is.

What do you do with Zeppelins?

They can attack from lakes, coasts, mountains and provide good vision. They're pretty sweet, especially if you've managed to keep a scout alive that long and they have extra sight.

Once I managed to take out an insanely hard to take city by parking some artillary on the other side of a mountain range it was on and using a zeppelin to get vision every turn. (Meaning I killed a ton of units and brought it to 1 HP, making it super easy to finish when my troops rounded the range.)

I think most problems can be solved if we find a good model for something between scout/explorer.

I really don't like the idea of a new unit. Scouts are supposed to be out, scouting. So forcing them to come back to upgrade reduces their usefulness. That's part of why I suggested what I did.