Wow's new unit countering ideas

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Here's my suggested unit balancing/countering paradigm revamp

 

Terminology:

Line Unit

• The base unit for this type (Melee Infantry, Ranged Infantry, Cavalry)
• Will counter one of the other types in a simple rock-paper-scissors

Counter Unit

• This unit counters other units of its own type.

Specialized Unit

• Breaks the counter methodology in some specialized way.

 

Infantry Spear

• Line Unit
• Attack: Medium
• Armor: Medium
• Speed: Medium
• Bonus vs. Cavalry
• Countered by: Infantry Sword, Infantry Archer

Infantry Pike

• Line Unit
• Attack: Medium
• Armor: Medium
• Speed: Medium
• Bonus vs. Cavalry
• "Snare" status effect which very briefly reduces the speed of hit enemy units
• Countered by: Infantry Sword, Infantry Archer

Infantry Sword

• Counter Unit
• Attack: High
• Armor: Low
• Speed: High
• Bonus vs. Melee Infantry
• Countered by: Infantry Archer, Infantry Sword

 

Infantry Archer

• Line Unit
• Attack: Medium
• Armor: Medium
• Speed: Medium
• Bonus vs. Infantry

Infantry Slinger

• Counter Unit
• Attack: Medium
• Armor: Low
• Speed: High
• Bonus vs. Ranged Infantry
• Countered by: Cavalry Spear

Infantry Javelineer

• Specialized Unit
• Attack: High
• Armor: Low
• Speed: Medium
• Bonus vs. Ranged Cavalry (incl. Chariots) and War Elephants
• Countered by: Cavalry Spear

 

Cavalry Spearman

• Line Unit
• Attack: Medium
• Armor: Medium
• Speed: Medium
• Bonus vs. Ranged Infantry
• Countered by: Infantry Spear, Infantry Pike, Cavalry Sword

Cavalry Swordsman

• Counter Unit
• Attack: Medium
• Armor: Medium
• Speed: High
• Bonus vs. Cavalry
• Countered by: Infantry Spear, Infantry Pike, Cavalry Sword

Cavalry Archer

• Specialized Unit
• Attack: Medium
• Armor: Low
• Speed: High
• No bonus, but has a "kiting" effect which frustrates melee units
• Countered by: Infantry Javelineer, Cavalry Swordsman

Cavalry Javelineer

• Specialized Unit
• Attack: Medium
• Armor: Low
• Speed: High
• Bonus vs. Support Units (Female Citizens, Traders, Healers)
• Countered by: Infantry Javelineer, Cavalry Swordsman

 

War Elephant

• Specialized Unit
• Attack: High
• Armor: High
• Speed: Medium-Low
• Bonus vs. Cavalry, Gates
• Splash Hack damage
• Countered by: Infantry Javelineer, Bolt Shooter
• "Fear" aura

 

Chariot Mixin for Cavalry

• Adds +100% health
• +75% resource cost, +1 pop cost, -10% speed
• Greater accuracy for the Bowman/Javelineer
• Bowman/Javelineer can independently target nearby enemies
• Trample Damage aura

Cataphract Mixin for Cavalry

• Adds +2 hack and +2 pierce armor
• +50% metal cost, -10% speed
• Extra attack range, since they use the longer cavalry lance
• Trample Damage aura

Camel Mixin for Cavalry

• +10% health
• -10% speed
• "Stench" aura vs. Horse Cavalry (Reduces Horse Cavalry effectiveness)

Axe/Mace Mixin for Sword units

• +25% metal cost
• Small Bonus vs. Structures

Champions

• +25% health
• +25% attack
• +50% cost

Heroes

• +500% health
• +200% attack
• +400% cost
• Specialized Auras

 

Catapult

• Buildable in the field by soldiers after constructing an Arsenal, build limit 5 per Arsenal
• Capturable
• Attack: High
• Armor: Medium
• Speed: Low
• Bonus vs. Structures, extra bonus vs. Fortress
• Countered by: Melee Units, Bolt Shooter

Battering Ram

• Trained at the Arsenal; Buildable by soldiers in the field after researching a tech 
• Not Capturable
• Attack: High
• Armor: High
• Speed: Low
• Bonus vs. Structures, extra bonus vs. Walls and Gates
• Countered by: Melee Units, Bolt Shooter

Bolt Shooter

• Counter Unit
• Trained at the Arsenal
• Capturable
• Attack: Medium
• Armor: Low
• Speed: Low
• Bonus vs. Siege Engines, Good against Infantry due to having Pierce attack
• Countered by: Melee Cavalry, other Bolt Shooters

Siege Tower

• Buildable in the field by soldiers after constructing an Arsenal, build limit 1 per Arsenal
• Not Capturable
• Attack: Medium
• Armor: High
• Speed: Low
• Capture Bonus vs. Structures, increases for each unit Garrisoned
• Countered by: Melee Units, Bolt Shooter

 

Edited April 17, 2022 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Lion.Kanzen]

clubs and Axeman(shield) would be missing.

Suggested.

Camel (spear)

Crossbow

Chariot (Spear) [Chinese]

And keep in mind Asian(China, Japan, Korean), Eurasian(Nomadic style), Mesoamerican and African factions(Saharan Sub Saharan).

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

2 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

clubs and Axeman(shield) would be missing.

 

IMHO, clubs/axes would be the same class as Swordsmen, but with a bonus vs. Structures

 

2 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Camel (spear)

 

It would be Cavalry Spearman + Camel Mixin 

 

3 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Crossbow

Right, I need suggestions here. They could just double up archers like how pikemen double up spearmen. So, essentially archers plus some tweaks, as pikemen are spearmen plus tweaks. Seems difficult to sneak them in as a completely separate role, but I'm open to alternatives.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

8 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Chariot (Spear) [Chinese]

 

Take the Cavalry Spearman and add the Chariot mixin. It's what mixins are for, to mix and match traits with different classes of units.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Also thinking about population costs. I was thinking something like:

 

Support Units

• 1 pop

Infantry

• 2 pop

Cavalry

• 3 pop

Elephants, Rams, Chariots

• 4 pop

Catapults, Siege Towers

• 5 pop

 

 

Small House

• 100 wood
• +10 pop cap

 

Large House

• 150 wood
• +15 pop cap

Edited April 17, 2022 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Lion.Kanzen]

2 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Infantry

• 2 pop

No. this would be exaggerating a lot.

I mean Many would not like it. maybe champions.

Maybe some champions.

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

36 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

IMHO, clubs/axes would be the same class as Swordsmen, but with a bonus vs. Structures

Perhaps, this is the best way to do those "anti building" units. Since you gave swordsmen a speed boost in your run-down, perhaps clubs/axes would not get that speed and instead be the same speed as other melee inf.

I like these ideas and would be happy to participate in testing for them if it were a mod. Although I am a bit concerned about the extensive use of counters. Counters are great for particular unit roles, but I am not sure about creating particular roles out of originally multipurpose units, few civs get all of those basic units, so the problems of not having a counter would be very frequent. 

I also like the idea of champions not being massively powerful but closer to the skiritai cost/power proportion.

Not sure how I feel about the population amounts, if it were implemented we would probably want to adjust house occupancy size and start using a bigger pop size in games. I do think pop capacity is an under-utilized balancing tool though. I also think a 1 population size for women and traders compared to 2 for inf would cause them to dominate eco in all games, turning matches into raid-offs.

51 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

No bonus, but has a "kiting" effect which frustrates melee units

kiting effect sounds OP and/or artificial. I think people cause enough frustration with manual control of those.

Edited April 17, 2022 by BreakfastBurrito_007

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

9 minutes ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

kiting effect sounds OP and/or artificial. I think people cause enough frustration with manual control of those.

Possibly. But they do have 2 hard counters. Every civ has at least a javelineer or sword cav.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

some of this is good. I would say the roles for inf spears, archers, swords and javelins are good (and somewhat similar to their current roles)

Im not sure about slingers, and the number of auras involved in these changes.

Also, why do swordcav counter cavalry? I would have thought spearcav would fulfill this role, with swordcav being strong against infantry.

I would say the pop costs for most units should be left alone.

Overall, I think the rock-paper-scissors approach seems kind of forced.

Currently, the different characteristics of the units differentiate without the need for rock-paper-scissors style counters. For example: archers have less dps than skirms, but their range is a strength, that can be utilized differently. In the case where the archers are far away from the skirms, they do in fact counter skirms. Conversely, when skirms are able to close the gap, they counter archers with higher DPS. I am fine with this. Essentially, what we need to steer clear of is if a skirm does 20 percent more damage just because it is attacking an archer.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

In other words, the innate properties of the units (armor, speed, dps, cost, range) should be enough for unit differentiation.

I like the idea of adding some bonuses/debuffs to the current matchup between units, like cav debuff for palisades, or catapult buff to fortress, but I dislike rock-paper-scissors balance.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

I also like the cataphract and chariot mixins, but maybe without the auras.

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

8 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Possibly. But they do have 2 hard counters. Every civ has at least a javelineer or sword cav.

The thing is, javelineers usually never range the horse archers. Javelineer inf are already highly effective at beating horse archers without the counter if the horse archers don't run away. This is a good example of a situation where counters don't provide a benefit to gameplay.

An example of where counters would be a fantastic change:

catapult bonus versus fort.

ram bonus versus walls.

both still do good dmg versus houses, production buildings, ccs ect.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

maybe the chariot units could get an accuracy reduction if in motion.

[Lion.Kanzen]

23 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

javelineer or sword cav.

this mean 80% of the list will have these units.

Except Japanese and Mesoamericans.( No cav)

And

Mostly of Asians(Far Asian) don't use javs(skirmisher).

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

1 minute ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Except Japanese and Mesoamericans.( No cav)

 

They'll have javelineers

 

1 minute ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Mostly of Asians(Far Asian) don't use javs(skirmisher).

They have sword cav.

[Lion.Kanzen]

2 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

They'll have javelineers

 

They have sword cav.

Skirmisher.

Because they don't need use javelins.

with how useful the compound bow is not and the Chinese with the crossbow I don't see that they will use slingers and javalineers.

[AIEND]

1 小时前，wowgetoffyourcellphone 说：

支持单位

• 1 流行音乐

步兵

• 2 流行音乐

Infantry should only need 1 population, and traders should need 2 population.

[AIEND]

38 分钟前，wowgetoffyourcellphone 说：

可能。 但他们确实有 2 个硬计数器。 每个文明至少有一个标枪骑士或剑骑士。

Most ethnic groups do not have swords cavalry. In fact, the cavalry of almost all countries only use the sword as a backup weapon for the spear cavalry.
And the javelin cavalry is rare outside the Mediterranean.

[AIEND]

30 分钟前，BreakfastBurrito_007 说：

问题是，标枪手通常从不射马射手。 如果骑马弓箭手不逃跑，Javelineer inf 在没有反击的情况下击败骑马弓箭手已经非常有效。 这是一个很好的例子，说明计数器不能为游戏带来好处。

If the horse archer has the Parthian tactics, the javelinman cannot threaten the horse archer because the range is too short. At this time, the player can only use the archer or slinger with a longer range to fight back.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

7 minutes ago, AIEND said:

Most ethnic groups do not have swords cavalry. In fact, the cavalry of almost all countries only use the sword as a backup weapon for the spear cavalry.
And the javelin cavalry is rare outside the Mediterranean.

Indeed. My other idea is to just have a distinction between "Light" and "Heavy."

[AIEND]

Bolt Shooter shouldn't have bonus damage to battering rams or siege towers, because what it fires is actually a javelin, and this kind of projectile is very difficult to cause damage to these solid armored machines, which is different from melee units, melee combat Troops destroy siege weapons by killing operators.

[AIEND]

3 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

确实。 我的另一个想法是区分“轻”和“重”。

I don't recommend this, because whether a cavalry uses a melee weapon or a throwing weapon has nothing to do with its level of armor protection, especially considering the fact that Asian cavalry might use both bows and spears.
It's better to distinguish between melee cavalry and ranged cavalry, of course, you can define Cataphract as shock cavalry.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

3 minutes ago, AIEND said:

I don't recommend this, because whether a cavalry uses a melee weapon or a throwing weapon has nothing to do with its level of armor protection, especially considering the fact that Asian cavalry might use both bows and spears.
It's better to distinguish between melee cavalry and ranged cavalry, of course, you can define Cataphract as shock cavalry.

Indeed, in Western military tradition, "Light" and "Heavy" had less to do with armor than with the unit's role. Light = ranged/skirmishing, Heavy = melee.

[AIEND]

20 分钟前，wowgetoffyourcellphone 说：

事实上，在西方军事传统中，“轻型”和“重型”与装甲的关系不如与单位的作用有关。 轻型 = 远程/散兵，重型 = 近战。

I came across these concepts in the book "The Art of War in the Western World" by Archer Jones. The division of light and heavy soldiers in this book is related to armor. For example, the Persian cavalry has armor and Throwing javelins, classified as general cavalry（通用骑兵） rather than light cavalry（轻骑兵）.

In Archer Jones's view, a soldier's armor is related to its function. He believes that soldiers with heavy armor generally do not use shooting weapons, and soldiers without armor are not suitable for hand-to-hand combat.
But in fact, for example, the Chinese, their armor is very standardized, sometimes whether it is a melee soldier or an archer, a cavalry or an infantry, they all wear the same armor.

Edited April 18, 2022 by AIEND

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

10 minutes ago, AIEND said:

I came across these concepts in the book "The Art of War in the Western World" by Archer Jones. The division of light and heavy soldiers in this book is related to armor. For example, the Persian cavalry has armor and Throwing javelins, classified as general cavalry（通用骑兵） rather than light cavalry（轻骑兵）.

In Archer Jones's view, a soldier's armor is related to its function. He believes that soldiers with heavy armor generally do not use shooting weapons, and soldiers without armor are not suitable for hand-to-hand combat.
But in fact, for example, the Chinese, their armor is very standardized, sometimes whether it is a melee soldier or an archer, a cavalry or an infantry, they all wear the same armor.

His view is the minority, I believe. But there are also units that some would call "Medium" who perform both melee and skirmishing roles, example: Thureophoros.