Defensive fire from archery units

[dworkin]

What are other peoples' reactions to this?

I find it to be a nice flavour thing but it doesn't really impress me all that much.

[Gibsie]

Well I don't think it's meant to be a feature that makes people wet themselves, it's just for more flavour, as you say. At least it's a form of bombardment that the AI uses.

[mimi]

Originally posted by Gibsie
Well I don't think it's meant to be a feature that makes people wet themselves...

Oh, well, tell that to my chair!

[vmxa1]

I was not a big fan of it in AU mod and I still feel the same. It is not so big a deal that I would complain either. I am not fond of these types of changes in games. I guess it does not matter if you never play PTW or CivIII after getting C3C.

[mimi]

Seems sorta pointless... all it does is make my unit 1hp lower before I destroy the archer. They would never do enough damage to *stop* my assault.

[CerberusIV]

It has a point if you are attacking a pikeman stacked with a longbowman and using a knight or med inf. If it doesn't go well that 1HP might well make a difference.

[Snotty]

Zero range bombard is fantastic, and Im glad they included it as standard in C3C. This way it can be included in all MP games, and promotes more varied, and more interesting, armies.

Vmxa, why don't you like it?

[realpolitic]

It gives great value on defense, and makes archers a viable alternative to swordsman. I like it.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Snotty
Zero range bombard is fantastic, and Im glad they included it as standard in C3C. This way it can be included in all MP games, and promotes more varied, and more interesting, armies.

Vmxa, why don't you like it?

I only care about it in that I wanted to the game to not change units behavior that much over time. IOW if the archer had it on the day Civ III was released, I would be fine with it.

It is not that I don't like it, I just don't like introducing the change.
Well that and I do not want to build archers, unless I am going to do a rush with them. I rarely build them in the past, now I have to.

[DrSpike]

Ooh no you have to build a more varied army......bloody Firaxis.

[Rasputin]

anything that makes some of the more less built units like archers and longbowmen more useful has to be a good change. IMHO...

[alva]

Seems sorta pointless... all it does is make my unit 1hp lower before I destroy the archer. They would never do enough damage to *stop* my assault.

Wich means, that, it will have to rest a turn before it's at full health again, thus slowing you down a little. You might even need another unit to protect it etc...

Taking an archer with a sword on a mountain (even hill) is not straightforward now as it used to be.

[DrSpike]

Yes, it's certainly an improvement, and amazingly the AI seems to use it quite often.

[Kuciwalker]

Didn't the AI use it even before? I remember killing Archers and Longbowmen in my assaults on AI cities.

[Dominae]

I wish Archers, Longbowmen, et al. got their full Attack rating in zero-range bombard. This gives them a decent chance of taking a HP off a unit on defense. As it is now, it's more or less a fluke when it happens, and does not really justify putting Archers and such in your stacks (I'm sad to say).

In the AU mod we've always used the full Attack value of the unit. Although this made Archer rushes that much more powerful for the human player, the AI would benefit from it in the long run (especially with Guerillas).

In C3C defensive bombard adds flavor, but is really not all that great strategically.


Dominae