Defensive fire from archery units - Page 2

vee4473 · November 30, 2003, 19:46

I rather enjoy the extra point damage that, as others have stated, could make the difference in some cases.

vmxa1 · November 30, 2003, 21:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Algernon Pondlife

I don't understand. I've been using this for months in PTW. Or am I dreaming? - no I can't be; I've only had C3C since Saturday morning.

News to me, I never saw an archer have bombardment in PTW single player games, unless it was a mod.

If you look at the status for PTW archer it does not have BR numbers, but it does in C3C.

Dis · November 30, 2003, 22:36

how can anyone not like this? I like it- though it doesn't add that much to strategy. In fact, I still never use archers

Though I did build the bowmen in the Sengoku scenario- but I built them mainly for their attack of 6, not for their bombarding feature.

As for having this in PTW, I don't think so. But I barely played PTW. I did not like that expansion pack at all. I did play the demo games (though I admit I'm bored of them) for a while.

pauli · December 1, 2003, 03:01

even without archers, guerillas have 0 range bombard, so if you happen to upgrade those med inf (and musketmen, but that's kinda obvious), you'll suddenly have a handy escort force for all that artillery - guerillas to soften up attackers, and infantry to bear the brunt of whatever remains. sounds good to me!

(now if only the mongols would attack me so i could try this out... cowardly bastards! curse the carthaginians for signing mpp's with BOTH of us!)

Algernon Pondlife · December 1, 2003, 04:06

Quote:

News to me, I never saw an archer have bombardment in PTW single player games, unless it was a mod.

Apologies. Yes I have been playing TAM for ages. Almost forgot it wasn't the "real" game. All credit to Thamis for his design; it's totally addictive.

Cookie Monster · December 1, 2003, 11:46

I really don't understand why this feature is not liked by some. Many times in my games I've felt their effects on my attacking troops. It's not pleasant to lose a battle because you were one hitpoint short on beating the ai. Conversely it is a joy to have you single pikeman hold out in a city because his accompanying longbowman saved the day!

This 0 range bombard is a wonderfull addition that makes combat in C3C more exciting. Kind of makes you think that it is now important to bring more bombard units (i.e. catapults, trebuchets, etc.) when attacking an enemy.

Algernon Pondlife · December 1, 2003, 14:19

The irony of this discussion is that in fact it is the longer range bombardment that is so nonsensical in Civ. It makes it seem more like toy soldiers than the grand sweep of history.

RobC · December 1, 2003, 15:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Fried-Psitalon

Bombardment runs on different rules in multiplayer.

Thanks for the explanation, Fried...I never knew that. So you know the reason for the different defensive bombard behavior in MP?

steven8r · December 1, 2003, 16:11

I'm glad to see it in C3C. It just makes more sense for any 'ranged attack' unit to be able to take potshots at an enemy. Sure, it usually doesn't mortally wound them, but I must confess to a smidgeon of satisfaction that I gain when an enemy attacker suffers some damage before he even gets to hit his intended target

.

I have always modded 'ranged' units so that they had 0-range bombard. I'm glad to see it in the unmodded game now. It just makes sense to me (at least in my sick and twisted mind)

chequita guevara · December 2, 2003, 01:00

I think it's kinda cool. When not vulnerable to attack, archer's were devastating. I'm not sure you could repeat Crecy or Agincourt though.

I've had several attacks fail because of defensive ai archers and longbowmen and I was saved by my catapults once.

Tripledoc · December 2, 2003, 07:08

Do the mongolian Keshick or the hittite chariot get this defensive bonus too?