Bring the Scout to the Battlefield!

[Duke Valennius]

1) Increasing scout speed: Many people seem to be against it. Having a unit that is faster than all others seems to be strange as far as most RTS games are concerned.

Maybe my english is very poor and I don't get it, but are you suggesting that having the fastest unit is strange in most RTS games? Then only explanation would be that those games suck! All the RTS games I like have fastest unit, as well as strongest, etc. Anyway, in KaM, even if it would be the fastest unit, it can always be built by enemy too. It's not like there were any factions/nations/whatever... (in reaction to some comment it would be difficult to chase them. It is only a good reason to have few scouts of your own).

Anyway, although I like idea of increasing speed very much (it also makes it more realistic), I don't think it would be of much use. It seems to me that 99% of maps are full of choke points and fight in open field is almost non-existent. Therefore no flanking - no use of higher speed. (again, my lack of experience may have caused I missed some super-awesome map that actually encourages fights in open fields)

I also like idea of far higher view range, if fog of war would be there. But again, since camping is most viable strategy, you don't even need to know if enemy is moving towards you, you will just sit behind your towers and smile.

[Looseminded]

But what about, instead, giving them a toggle (maybe located where melee units have their Start Attack command) that would allow them to run past enemies without attacking them?
After all, they're supposed to be Scouts, not Warriors...

This makes sense, to a degree. However, like everyone is saying, by the time many people can even produce a scout, the game is already decided based on economical moves everybody else is making. Say for example player 1 rushes a scout (If we rush, build order would have to be School, Inn, Quarry, Woodcutter, Sawmill, Farm, Swine/Weapons Workshop/Barracks/Stables, Tannery, Armory Workshop. The rushing player would be FAR behind on Gold, Coal, Stone, Wood, Food (Corn is included in this), and possibly Iron.) so they have map awareness and knowledge of player 2, but player 2 is focusing purely on getting their own economy set so that they can be prepared for whatever player 1 is doing. Because player 2 did not rush to scout, player 2 will have a massive economical advantage over player 1, thus being able to produce a better military. Typically, unless using a chokepoint, the larger military is almost always going to win against a smaller one, so I don't see this being used very often, honestly.

Even when I'm playing in singleplayer I don't typically even bother with scouts, let alone horses. I'd rather have axes/lancers/bowmen and their iron counterparts than a unit that can move twice as fast with +1 defense while maintaining a better economy doing so.

[sado1]

I don't care about scouts. They can stay irrelevant.

[dicsoupcan]

I don't care about scouts. They can stay irrelevant.

this will come back to haunt you someday..

anyway i do not think thatthe solution for scouts is easy, their costs just do not justify their weak performanc,e while bufifng them too much might make knights irrelevant..

[Ben]

Maybe my english is very poor and I don't get it, but are you suggesting that having the fastest unit is strange in most RTS games? Then only explanation would be that those games suck! All the RTS games I like have fastest unit, as well as strongest, etc. Anyway, in KaM, even if it would be the fastest unit, it can always be built by enemy too. It's not like there were any factions/nations/whatever... (in reaction to some comment it would be difficult to chase them. It is only a good reason to have few scouts of your own)..

There are plenty of games where there is no "fastest unit." AoK is my usual go-to example and it works here. Does that game suck? Believe me it doesn't.
As said before, it would be very annoying to catch scouts if they were made even faster. That is why I think increasing the speed is not a good idea.

[RandomLyrics]

Hmm making scout faster than knights is reasonable solution, they are light units not heavy like knight, so the horses can move faster ( so bow, xbow can miss more often ). Dmg/def same as axe fighter , but more healty.

[Killer!!]

I agree Randomlyrics, BUT on an other way. We could make them faster at attacking against iron troops.
Like 2 hits by scout and then 1 hit by for example swordman

[Duke Valennius]

There are plenty of games where there is no "fastest unit." AoK is my usual go-to example and it works here. Does that game suck? Believe me it doesn't.
As said before, it would be very annoying to catch scouts if they were made even faster. That is why I think increasing the speed is not a good idea.

I don't remember AoK that well, but if I remember correctly, units have different speeds there, right? At least siege equipment is slower than troops, they are slower than cavalry (I don't remember if different cavalry types have different speeds, like horses, camels, elephants (were there elephants?)). Does that make cavalry annoying to catch? They are fastest, or if you are mathematician, they have maximum speed .

Would scouts be annoying to catch in KaM if they were faster? Certainly! But they would be at least good for something, and you can always counter them by your own scouts, or by placing some pikemen on your flanks. Few might be enough, just to engage them, and survive until reinforcements come to finish them. Since they cannot retreat once engaged, this would work. My example here is Total War (pick your favorite). There are these annoying fastest units like missile cavalry or chariots, but it only encourages you to have some light cavalry to pursue them, increasing your army diversity.

Of course I am not talking about some tremendous increase in speed, just enough to escape knights without significant problem. This would also make them more effective at chasing routing units, which would seem as more intuitive solution than giving them some special bonuses (in my opinion counter-intuitive) like you have proposed in 2) and 3).

[Ben]

Yeah but in AoK, there was no single unit that was the fastest (i.e., there are scouts, knights, and cavalry archers with same speed), and that is the problem we are trying to avoid (scouts alone having max speed). At least I view that as a problem.

[pawel95]

There is totaly no possibility to give one single unit faster speed, and no other unit can catch this horses -.- Just imagine, scouting the whole map, enemy has some knights, but he can´t catch you because Formula 1 Horse aka Scout is running away, that´s in my opinion a not possible implementation, if you want to have some balance.

[Duke Valennius]

We seem to think of this quite differently. You seem to look at this like "give players reason to mass/spam scouts", while I think of it "make both knights and scouts". I may be wrong here of course...

My point is that you can try to catch enemy scouts by few of your own scouts, then finish them with knights. Anyway, if scouts aren't used (is this motivation for this thread?), aren't knights fastest units? . My main motivation being increasing diversity of your own army. It always bothered me in some games, that most effective strategy is always to spam one or two unit types, instead of mixed armies, which I don't like. You of course may like it

As I see scouts now, they are inferior or equal in every way to knights, so the question is, why should anyone even bother to make inferior units? (except in case where there is no iron, but then of course this thread would be pointless). If increased speed is so big problem, what are other possibilities? Increasing attack rate? Only makes sense if you increase it for axemen too. Give them bonus for being cavalry? Only makes sense if you give the same bonus to knights, which of course is pointless, because knight will still be superior in every way. Giving them real scouting functions is pointless, because there is no fog of war. Making them cheaper to produce could solve it, but that seems impossible with KaM resource system. So, what are remaining options?

[Menszu]

Anyway, if scouts aren't used (is this motivation for this thread?), aren't knights fastest units?

touché
I like Duke's arguments. And as far this debate goes I think increasing speed is best and easiest solution.
Furthermore to give another idea into consideration - I remember this subject was already discussed once, and I proposed very unpopular solution of dividing horses into two types - horses and warhorses.
The problem of scouts is that the most expensive part of both Knights and Scouts are horses. End the Player will always choose to spent his horses on recruiting Knights.
- Adding new resource - Warhorses.
- Quite easy to reskin the serf walking with a horse - Warhorse would be white as Knights are riding on white ones.
- It requires change of UI in Storehouse and Fortress to make place for new resource.
- Adding checkbox in Stable - or let it work on demand like weapon workshops.
- The Warhorse would cost the same as current horsies (4 corn?) and a normal horsie would be cheaper by 1.
Still the speed increase seems smarter.

[The Dark Lord]

So if the scout can be faster than the knight because he is only lightly armoured, should the militia be faster than the axe fighter and way faster than the sword fighter? Shouldn't all leather units be faster than iron units?
I don't even think that increasing the scout's speed will resolve this problem. Sure, it's great to scout with, so you might want one or two scouts; but they are still useless in battle if you face a good player. Even if they would be three times as fast: a defended flank is a defended flank. And even if you manage to flank some bowmen, the scouts are so pathetic that you can still shoot them if you just turn around or split them up.
Then there is something else: the animation. Just speeding up the animation might look pretty weird...

[Ben]

The Dark Lord speaks with wisdom.

Anyway, we already have discussed the speed method. Let's discuss/come up with other ideas now

[thunder]

Is the knight hitting faster than swordman?