Scouts and Explorers becoming Diplomatic Units

[ashendashin]

So they'll be the only unit in the game that can't fortify?

We both know this is never going to happen.

Huh? Mounted, siege, naval units...scouts don't have to be regular melee units.

You act like G himself didn't support something as drastic as removing attack.

 

[Txurce]

Huh? Mounted, siege, naval units...scouts don't have to be regular melee units.

You act like G himself didn't support something as drastic as removing attack.

Yes, I neglected to say "melee," which is what it is.

And I'm not acting like anything other than thinking it's a ridiculous idea.

 

[ashendashin]

Yes, I neglected to say "melee," which is what it is.

And I'm not acting like anything other than thinking it's a ridiculous idea.

Well, they don't have to remain as they are. Horsemen are melee and fill their role well without fortification. Kinda pointless for this thread to exist if we're drawing so many hard lines on what a scout can do.

And between the two parties, one believes it can happen. I think it can, too. Crazier things have been suggested. Just expand their use after removing the oh so important scout bastions.

 

[CrazyG]

The no fortifying is a weird idea. I don't understand this desire to give scouts too much CS but "balance" it by taking other abilities

 

[ashendashin]

The no fortifying is a weird idea. I don't understand this desire to give scouts too much CS but "balance" it by taking other abilities

Well I don't support balancing scouts around CS only. It would work with some of the other proposals in this thread though, such as upfront movement in trailblazer and earlier retreat chance. I just don't understand being so strongly against it if it can open to something else.

 

[CrazyG]

Well I don't support balancing scouts around CS only. It would work with some of the other proposals in this thread though, such as upfront movement in trailblazer and earlier retreat chance. I just don't understand being so strongly against it if it can open to something else.

I'm not strongly against it I just don't understand the argument. What good comes from making a scout an 8 CS unit which can't fortify? It just seems awkward to me. Maybe it opens up other stuff but you would have to post a full plan. If there is a full alternative plan lets see it.

I don't see any major issues with the concept we have now, though a few promotion adjustments could be good

 

[ashendashin]

I'm not strongly against it I just don't understand the argument. What good comes from making a scout an 8 CS unit which can't fortify? It just seems awkward to me. Maybe it opens up other stuff but you would have to post a full plan. If there is a full alternative plan lets see it.

I don't see any major issues with the concept we have now, though a few promotion adjustments could be good

I don't think 8 CS is a good idea either. Removing fortification isn't all that bad though, depending on what changes are made, if any.

I still think scouts would do well with +1 movement in trailblazer and moving the retreat away from Survivalist III. Chance to retreat at the end with fortifying being so strong is a terrible combo.

 

[CrazyG]

I still think scouts would do well with +1 movement in trailblazer and moving the retreat away from Survivalist III. Chance to retreat at the end with fortifying being so strong is a terrible combo.

Survive III lets you heal every turn, right? I don't fortify very often after I get it, keep moving instead. Gotta go fast

 

[ashendashin]

Survive III lets you heal every turn, right? I don't fortify very often after I get it, keep moving instead. Gotta go fast

Well yeah that's the problem. A line that promotes a strong defense suddenly gets a promo better suited to movement. It doesn't make any sense to me and negates the previous promos a bit since there's nothing for movement on the whole line.

 

[CrazyG]

Well yeah that's the problem. A line that promotes a strong defense suddenly gets a promo better suited to movement. It doesn't make any sense to me and negates the previous promos a bit since there's nothing for movement on the whole line.

Now that you pointed it out, I agree. Survivalism III is very strong, while trailblazer III is pretty lackluster. Changing some of those effects would probably be a good move

 

[Gazebo]

Now that you pointed it out, I agree. Survivalism III is very strong, while trailblazer III is pretty lackluster. Changing some of those effects would probably be a good move

I agree. I'm also going to make the treasure hunters promotion a free promotion for recon units. Give them a more defined role.

G

 

[Legen]

Caught up with the discussion, overall like the changes so far for their elegance.

My opinion about the usefulness of pathfinder/scout/explorer is that they suffer from standard military units already being decent at reconnaissance with radius 2 sight for the latter. You can move your military units with relatively safety with this radius, without much risk for falling into more enemy units than you can handle. You can even just leave isolated units fortified around your empire to keep yourself informed of enemy incursions. That's a lot of recon being done already without the use of dedicated recon units.

The way I can see recon units having the intended use in military operations (a.k.a. more than exploring) is by reducing the sight of non-recon military units to 1, while having the base sight of recon units as 3. That alone would increase the usefulness of keeping recon units around. Watching foreign movements outside your borders, avoid accidentally bumping into units you had no intention to, finding enemy compositions and movement, as well as exposed flanks. A radius 1 sight unit can't perform such tasks, but even radius 2 sight units are doing right now.

It also applies to naval units in many ways, given that they can have their sight radius increased by the Great Lighthouse and Imperialism's opener. Allowing Explorers to have non-reduced sight when embarked would already increase their use greatly in a scenario where naval units aren't so good at spotting enemy fleet.

This would probably be an impactful change, since we are so used to having a 2-sight standard even for mounted units. But I think this is the most elegant way to have the three early recon units being relevant, and withotu need for a massive overhaul on the promotion lines.

Note: Before any confusion, I approve the Pathfinder - Scout - Explorer implementation, very elegant and I want it to remain.

 

[tu_79]

Caught up with the discussion, overall like the changes so far for their elegance.

My opinion about the usefulness of pathfinder/scout/explorer is that they suffer from standard military units already being decent at reconnaissance with radius 2 sight for the latter. You can move your military units with relatively safety with this radius, without much risk for falling into more enemy units than you can handle. You can even just leave isolated units fortified around your empire to keep yourself informed of enemy incursions. That's a lot of recon being done already without the use of dedicated recon units.

The way I can see recon units having the intended use in military operations (a.k.a. more than exploring) is by reducing the sight of non-recon military units to 1, while having the base sight of recon units as 3. That alone would increase the usefulness of keeping recon units around. Watching foreign movements outside your borders, avoid accidentally bumping into units you had no intention to, finding enemy compositions and movement, as well as exposed flanks. A radius 1 sight unit can't perform such tasks, but even radius 2 sight units are doing right now.

It also applies to naval units in many ways, given that they can have their sight radius increased by the Great Lighthouse and Imperialism's opener. Allowing Explorers to have non-reduced sight when embarked would already increase their use greatly in a scenario where naval units aren't so good at spotting enemy fleet.

This would probably be an impactful change, since we are so used to having a 2-sight standard even for mounted units. But I think this is the most elegant way to have the three early recon units being relevant, and withotu need for a massive overhaul on the promotion lines.

Note: Before any confusion, I approve the Pathfinder - Scout - Explorer implementation, very elegant and I want it to remain.

I believe Pathfinder is going to stay no matter what. It solved early scout upgrading, not only missing some strength in medieval.

Your proposal is really radical. It would make scouting a must, even if they don't fight well, for certain.

About the fortifying thing, I'm thinking on horsemen. It moves fast, it can stand a hit or two, but it's not a unit for holding the place. Scout units can be the same, but instead of being a unit for dealing damage, they recon and explore. Scouts better make use of terrain because of their low strength, and survivalism still can help it.
My reasoning for this is that when pathfinders are trapped, the best thing I can do now is fortifying and wait for help, because if I try to escape the unit is destroyed that same turn. With higher strength it could still try to escape instead of entrench itself,thus allowing better survivability. But higher strength has the risk of making pathfinders better than warriors for every role, unless scout units can't fortify.