Tweet
Ranged Unit Mod
Back on Civ3 General, the suggestion was made to make units that have bows and guns into bombard unit. The thread itself degenerated into a pissing contest about who knows the most military history, so I thought I'd grab the ideas I liked best, list them here, and talk about some positive game effects I think they'd have.
The best idea, in my opinion, was to give such units a zero range bombard ability with the strength of its attack value. This may not satisfy the historical realists (who want to use archers as they were "historically used"), but it does give them some realistic defense ability. I would think that an archer would be capable of getting off at least one free shot before the swordsmen came in and cut them down. Same with the musketmen, which are already nice defenders, but with a two strength single shot defensive bombard, it makes them even better. This would address the problem of those that think the added production cost over pikemen isn't worthwhile: it would make them slightly better defensive units than their defense value would indicate.
Just to make sure there's no confusion, this does not mean I get rid of their regular attack value. They are still attackers, but they just get the one free shot on defense.
I'm not sure if I'd go so far as to extend this analogy beyond the medieval units. From the industrial age onward, EVERYONE has guns, so it might be overkill... or it might be a way of preventing a warrior from accidentally defeating a tank. So yes, I just may do this.
The main effect this would have is to make certain units more useful. Both archers and longbowmen would now have some value in defense, making the AI's love affair with them more sensible (particularly those pesky longbowmen). However, then there's the unique unit effects.
Consider the Babylonian bowman. In the ancient age, there is the question: should I build bowmen, or should I build spearmen? Bowmen have that added attack value... but I'm never going to actually use it, and spearmen have the upgrade path. Bowmen become used chiefly, in my game, as barbarian hunting units (and they are very good at this). However, with that one shot bombard, the bowman becomes the best defensive units in the ancient era (next to the Greek hoplite). Babylonian bowmen suddenly become useful.
Consider the Egyptian war chariot. If you look at the graphic, these guys are shooting arrows from their chariot... an excuse to give them a two strength, one shot, zero range bombard. As is, they are one of the most useless UUs in the game. With this addition, it gives them just a bit of added defensive punch, and becomes more of the mobile archer it should be than a stronger chariot.
Consider the French musketeer. Yea, a highly defensive unit gains an attack of three. Whoo-****ing-hoo. However, if you give them a zero range three strength bombard along with that three attack, they gain a slightly better chance of damaging an attacker with that free shot. The effect isn't as dramatic as with the Babylonians, but it is similar, and, once again, makes an otherwise useless UU slightly more useful.
This, combined with the disabling of trading "contact with" other civs, may make my first foray into rules editing. Once I've won my existing game (on Monarch, as the Chinese: I'm in the middle of a medieval free-for-all involving Riders, Samurai, and Elephants), I'll test these out, and let you guys know how the changes work.
The best idea, in my opinion, was to give such units a zero range bombard ability with the strength of its attack value. This may not satisfy the historical realists (who want to use archers as they were "historically used"), but it does give them some realistic defense ability. I would think that an archer would be capable of getting off at least one free shot before the swordsmen came in and cut them down. Same with the musketmen, which are already nice defenders, but with a two strength single shot defensive bombard, it makes them even better. This would address the problem of those that think the added production cost over pikemen isn't worthwhile: it would make them slightly better defensive units than their defense value would indicate.
Just to make sure there's no confusion, this does not mean I get rid of their regular attack value. They are still attackers, but they just get the one free shot on defense.
I'm not sure if I'd go so far as to extend this analogy beyond the medieval units. From the industrial age onward, EVERYONE has guns, so it might be overkill... or it might be a way of preventing a warrior from accidentally defeating a tank. So yes, I just may do this.
The main effect this would have is to make certain units more useful. Both archers and longbowmen would now have some value in defense, making the AI's love affair with them more sensible (particularly those pesky longbowmen). However, then there's the unique unit effects.
Consider the Babylonian bowman. In the ancient age, there is the question: should I build bowmen, or should I build spearmen? Bowmen have that added attack value... but I'm never going to actually use it, and spearmen have the upgrade path. Bowmen become used chiefly, in my game, as barbarian hunting units (and they are very good at this). However, with that one shot bombard, the bowman becomes the best defensive units in the ancient era (next to the Greek hoplite). Babylonian bowmen suddenly become useful.
Consider the Egyptian war chariot. If you look at the graphic, these guys are shooting arrows from their chariot... an excuse to give them a two strength, one shot, zero range bombard. As is, they are one of the most useless UUs in the game. With this addition, it gives them just a bit of added defensive punch, and becomes more of the mobile archer it should be than a stronger chariot.
Consider the French musketeer. Yea, a highly defensive unit gains an attack of three. Whoo-****ing-hoo. However, if you give them a zero range three strength bombard along with that three attack, they gain a slightly better chance of damaging an attacker with that free shot. The effect isn't as dramatic as with the Babylonians, but it is similar, and, once again, makes an otherwise useless UU slightly more useful.
This, combined with the disabling of trading "contact with" other civs, may make my first foray into rules editing. Once I've won my existing game (on Monarch, as the Chinese: I'm in the middle of a medieval free-for-all involving Riders, Samurai, and Elephants), I'll test these out, and let you guys know how the changes work.
).
Comment