Terrain CS Modifiers

[Eirikr]

I've always figured spears and pilums, maybe shortbows for longer range MI.

And javelins. Good call there.

[Indirik]

Ranged combat modifiers for terrain should apply equally to all ranged combat, regardless of unit type. It doesn't matter if the crossbow is being wielded by an archer, an MI, or an SF. It's still a crossbow.

[Sacha]

There's a wide variety of short-ranged weapons. Javelins, darts, throwing axes, throwing knives, slings, ...

[Eirikr]

Ranged combat modifiers for terrain should apply equally to all ranged combat, regardless of unit type. It doesn't matter if the crossbow is being wielded by an archer, an MI, or an SF. It's still a crossbow.

Except MI is actively closing range. (Ignoring SF for now because they tend to throw "rules" in the trash can anyway.) Would it sit better with you if it were a gradual bonus depending on advancement or range instead? (For range, it might even make sense to boost all ranged combat as the range narrows rather than make it dependent upon terrain at all.)

To clarify my distinction: Advancement is only forward movement, and I'd even suggest the bonus start with advancement past the Front line, for the sake of balance and preventing ridiculous bonuses from deploying as rearguard. Range would be the number of lines between the shooter and the target.

[Vita`]

Ranged combat does increase as range narrows. While it'd be just as easy to do it by unit type, its easy enough to do it by ranged vs melee as well, and in case of the archer/MI/SF situations makes more sense.

To summarize: I'm all for modifiers by terrain and unit type; I just think that the archer modifiers should be extended to all ranged units, not just archers.

[Zakilevo]

I actually left SF out because I didn't want them to be affected by terrain modifiers. It would be nice to have at least one unit type unaffected by the modifiers I think. But if people disagree then I guess we can change things like these:

Mountains: (Benefactor) (+/- CS bonus)

Both +5~15% Archer / MI / Ranged SF
Both -10~15% Cavalry
Attacker -5~15% Infantry

P.S: Also, I think it is good that modifiers don't give bonuses higher than 25%. It would be nice to have the modifiers that can impact the battles but they shouldn't make you win the battles you shouldn't be able to win.

[Indirik]

Except MI is actively closing range.

Except they don't. They sit there and shoot, just like everyone else. And, really, who cares if they're closing range? They're still at range when they shoot, just like archers are.

If it makes you feel better, make the penalty range-dependent.

Although, damage already scales with range.

[trying]

Special Forces shouldn't have terrain modifiers since they ought to be trained to fight in all terrain hence the 'special' in the name.

[Eirikr]

Except they don't. They sit there and shoot, just like everyone else. And, really, who cares if they're closing range? They're still at range when they shoot, just like archers are.

Except most battle reports I see with MI not on defensive say otherwise. (I used to be a major MI user, and studied my battle reports pretty intensely.) Every round, MI shoot and move. If they move into melee combat, they hit twice. Of course, if this isn't intended behavior, then I concede the point. I've pointed it out in the past and I don't believe anything's been done about it (nor have I ever had it confirmed that it's a bug.).

As for the argument that they're both at range, I'd still argue that one is firing a volley and one is firing directly, even if they were to stay put while firing. In the case of a full-on woodland, a volley is going to be pretty ineffective.

I realize at this point I'm alternately using the realism argument and then the game mechanics argument as it seems to suit me and for that I apologize. MI are going to be a quirk either way. You can't give them blanket bonuses with Archers or you'd have to give them blanket bonuses with Infantry... But maybe that's the solution?

Ranged combat does increase as range narrows. While it'd be just as easy to do it by unit type, its easy enough to do it by ranged vs melee as well, and in case of the archer/MI/SF situations makes more sense.

To summarize: I'm all for modifiers by terrain and unit type; I just think that the archer modifiers should be extended to all ranged units, not just archers.

Although, damage already scales with range.

Oh, I didn't know this. Cool. Effectiveness decreases with farther range? (Guess my suggestion is pointless, then. Ah, well.)

[Penchant]

I've always figured spears and pilums, maybe shortbows for longer range MI.

Those are my thoughts as well.

[egamma]

Except most battle reports I see with MI not on defensive say otherwise. (I used to be a major MI user, and studied my battle reports pretty intensely.) Every round, MI shoot and move. If they move into melee combat, they hit twice. Of course, if this isn't intended behavior, then I concede the point. I've pointed it out in the past and I don't believe anything's been done about it (nor have I ever had it confirmed that it's a bug.).

A year or two ago there was a "berzerker MI" fix that went in, that as long as they have a target within range, they will attempt to shoot, the same as archers. It's only when they don't have a ranged target (due to infantry occupying the enemy) that they will charge into melee.

[Azerax]

I really like this idea, it adds some 'simple' strategy

[Eirikr]

A year or two ago there was a "berzerker MI" fix that went in, that as long as they have a target within range, they will attempt to shoot, the same as archers. It's only when they don't have a ranged target (due to infantry occupying the enemy) that they will charge into melee.

Aha! Point conceded, then.

[Poliorketes]

I've always figured spears and pilums, maybe shortbows for longer range MI.

I think of them as Peltasts, usually light infantry armed with ranged weapons (javelins mostly), but able to fight in melee combat if needed.