I'll type fast since I've already advertized this thread in another and its not even in existance yet... here goes!


Ranged have been questionably challanged as too powerful... I don't know if I agree, but there is something that hasn't made sense about them from the begining of my playing here.... they can be surrounded on all sides by enemy melee units, and still they can fire at troops with there full range capacity without taking retal.

I think this should not be the case... there could be many different penalties ranging from light to severe, but I don't think range should be able to ignore HC breathing down there backs, and fire at some other stuff they shouldn't even see.

So: how about when an enemy melee unit is touching, ranged units loose there ranged power. to harsh? comes direct from Heroes of might and magic 2... well, then how bout there range is halved? or maybe there attack strenth is halved? or both? hmmmm.... what about commanders effect? to make it interesting, maybe there could be a leadership tech, that makes 10% of the ranged units attacking power come back to him for every 10 coms within 3 spaces? Should there be more of a penalty when the stack is larger/more advanced/ both play a factor, or would that be to darn complicated? something less complicated, could the penalty increase for every stack the enemy has touching? (example, 1 stack touching and your range and attack is halved, two stacks touching, and you have no range, attack still halved... three stacks touching, and you loose your retaliation!)


food for thought, I've been thinking a lot lately, and the suggestion box is fun, so even if Req doesn't use them, I'll be tossing ideas in here a lot more again.

OK, first...I don't agree that ranged are too powerful, a few months ago their damage was reduced either 40-50%...don't remember the exact number, but it was a huge change.

As far as changing the retal for attacking a unit AWAY from the ranged...just because another enemy unit IS within one space...don't think that should be changed either. The ranged are attacking a melee unit that ISN'T within striking distance so no retal should be incurred. The ranged will pay the price from the attacking melee unit...remember the bonus that the melee unit receives.

I think if you want to restrict a ranged unit's 'range' for attacking because a melee unit is next to it...then the melee attack bonus against ranged would have to be removed.

SOS

fair enough... remember that ranged attack is pretty weak to start with, and there hp is weak to... if they were surrounded by big strong hc and couldn't attack anything else, or any of the penalties I mentioned, the current penalties we have would probably be too much. Then, maybe the arbs special could be ignoring the melee touching rule... Which I think would be WAY cooler than what it does now.

the bigest thing I hate is having ranged troops completely surrounded, but fearing to move my coms in because they could still decide to ignore whats next to them and use there dying shot to fire at my weak coms. that shouldn't be alowed IMO, but right now we have to deal with that...

How realistic is that??

"remember that ranged attack is pretty weak to start with, and there hp is weak to"

And so now you want to nerf their abilities even further? I don't get it...

Although I also don't agree with you that ranged attack is pretty weak - not sure what ranged units you play the game with, but marks or ballis both do well. But I do not feel they currently need any nerfing (the rate and ease with which towers can be built though... that does need some tweaking imo).

I'm not saying the game doesnt play well as is; what I am saying is that its really wierd that ranged units should be able to fire with no penalty at far away units when enemy units are ontop of them and should be cutting them down. that is when they put down there bows and run, or pick up there short swords and fight for there lives. nobody is going to be surrounded by enemies and keep shooting at something farther away....

Maybe it wouldn't make sense if there was a stack of 5 spears and we were talkin about 30 or more marks, but hey, that is why campains have % bp unlike battles (where one attack and your bp is competely drained), and they could be used again once the 5 spear were gone. (note also that the 5 spear would be erraticated more easily with this type of system, since the ranged vs. melee disadvangage we have now wouldn't really be nessisary with the touching penalty.
It's just a different, and I think more realistic penalty, and it wouldn't weaken ranged units at all unless your line broke.

Last Edited : Thursday, 8 July 2004 - 14:57

@sugar: -40%

balls should be able to attack all troops within their range (even comms).
But you could reduce their battle points per 5-people stack of a melee troop next to them.


I thought about an other suggestion.
Why can ballistas fire at melee troops who are only 2 spaces away?
Balls can shoot 9 hexes with full damage and the same effect two hexes away?

They shouldnīt be able to attack melee troops 2 spaces away like in the reality.It isnīt possible.
To weaken marksmen(in relation to the balls):range 7 instead of 8.


arbs have the skill to fight like a melee troop but they have a small range.
archers are cheap.medium range.
No need to change them.

hummm... this ranged thread got shot down (tee hee) a long time ago... but its time for me to bump it, because I had another idea to modify this one.

perhaps, when a ranged unit is surrounded by melee units, it can STILL fire without any penalties unless the melee units spacifically WANT to stop them from ranged attacking. in which case, one or more of the stacks would have to "rush" the archers. a new attack type like defend, or the proposed march from other threads, rush would be something you'd have to think about using, because it would also have disadvantages.

Rush could (when used against archers) have the effect of stopping the archers from getting off any shots, and unless that archer could flee to another hex, it would be limited to 1 range.
now if rush is this powerful, it would need severe penalties too. perhaps, it would leave the the melee stack that rushed tired? it would:

a)
give negative mp... if the stack attacked and WOULD have had no mp left, well, now it has -5 and will have to wait a half a turn before it starts to gain the ability to move again.

b)
be vulnerable to attack ( from melee only? ) ? The move requires your troops to ignore everything else in the battle and rush to there goal. this would be a bad thing if another army attacked while yours was still in rush mode. perhaps the rush move is tactically sound for one stack, but do it too much and your army will be slaughtered.

c) uhh... both a and b


well, thats about all I've got for this new modifying idea to this old idea... I think it would make tactics more fun, with more modes of attack, and more cosiquences for just leaving ranged about without protection.