Please discuss your ideas about Mounted Units.

Can the conquistador be changed back to not be such a pansy unit? Granted they were murderous skum filled with avarice, but they were good at what they did.

Also this idea. Make them as per a normal knight. But add the exceptional or hero trait, BUT make them very very expensive. So a few can seriously endanged cities as happened, but so only a few can really be built.

Can the conquistador be changed back to not be such a pansy unit? Granted they were murderous skum filled with avarice, but they were good at what they did.

Also this idea. Make them as per a normal knight. But add the exceptional or hero trait, BUT make them very very expensive. So a few can seriously endanged cities as happened, but so only a few can really be built.

Los Tirano,

That's quite a good idea to make conquistadors a very expensive unit but with awesome powers. I like this idea.
When you look at spanish conquest of America, it's incredible to see so few guys conquering so huge empire....
I agree. What do you suggest ? Give us a description (cost, free promo, combat value, tech needed,...) of what could be a "good" conquistador for you, please ....

The Frog.

Los Tirano,

That's quite a good idea to make conquistadors a very expensive unit but with awesome powers. I like this idea.
When you look at spanish conquest of America, it's incredible to see so few guys conquering so huge empire....
I agree. What do you suggest ? Give us a description (cost, free promo, combat value, tech needed,...) of what could be a "good" conquistador for you, please ....

The Frog.

yea but their allies were many other american tribes. they had better technology, canons and muskets, not to mention horses. I wonder though how much more would a conquistador do that another elite groups of soldiers from europe couldnt. and how much more superior were those conquistadors if facing another europe power.

so i dont think they were all super powerful.

Its funny when people mention the horses the conquistadors had. Because they only had a few. And by a few i do mean a few only.

As for their allies they had one main and very strong ally that they used to bring down the Aztecs. This ally provided the centre and bulk of troops in further battles. But they only gained these allies by defeating them. The conquistadors dug into a hill and could not be removed, waves upon waves failed.

The people who made up the conquistadors were hard mercenaries seeking wealth and a chance to move up in status. Given their accomplishments, their leader, and that they were hard mercenaries with most having battle experience before the americas, we can assume they would have done well against european opponents.

Keep the tech needed the same, give them knight stats, so raise the bonus vs melee from what it is now (how many aztec footsoldiers did they kill?)

Bonuses
-Allow them defensive bonuses, the conquistadors at times fought defensively and were adept at it.
-Give them the 'hero' promotion or the 'extraordinary promotion
OR give them the fanatic promotion. The fanatic seems more appropriate to me. They werent religious fanatics but their lust for gold was legendary. Gives them a slightly better movement (to get through that damn jungle) and doesnt make them unbelievably strong, as the hero promotion risks. Also gives a slight bonus to city attack, which makes sense for the conquerors of an empire. If they could be given a special 'gold fanatic promotion' that would be hillarious. ;)
OR both exceptional and fanatic, in light of the penalties below.

Penalties, got to have them
-Can only build three (or 3-5). If these are hard mercs, talented but restless individuals, and meant to signify exceptional groups of adventurers, then you cant very well spawn fifty of them, no matter what your production.
-Double cost knight. 180 production each. Its a serious hit so use them wisely. This means no more entire conquistador armies, which are lethal but a bit off. Means the great tercios will be used as the real army with the conquistadors embarking on separate conquests, or being elite troops. Realism realism realism. huzzah!

Well thats my ideas gentlemen, good night.

actually i was taught the reason why some of these tribes helped the spanish was because they hated aztecs alot since spanish wre going to fight them they would help against the aztec. i did not know that the reason these tribes helped the spanish was because the spanish defeaated them in battle?:confused:

the classic cliche,"enemy of my enemy is my friend."

i mean look the aztec use obsidian swords(very sharp but lose "sharpness" really quick) and archers. Spanish had importantly CANONS, muskets, superior military strategies and although they had a few horses(there were only a few spanish soliders) Having horses in that age if battle was very important even if a few.

they stood their ground with musket fire and canons. when i think of conquistadors i think a combination of musketmen(who have bonus against melee), canons, and a guy on horse with a gun(not exactly a knight)

other global powers would have had similar successes against the tribes.

but i think is important is how much more dominant would they have been against other european and global powers. not even close to that level of dominanace. so i thnk having a hero promotion on them is extreme even if making only 3 or 5 of them. If you can make 3 or 5 ofthem, maybe this hould go for other UU's as well. like janisaries or something,

are siphai going to the ottomans in warlords version? I am sort of sure those were the ottomans soldiers.:confused: after janissaries.

are siphai going to the ottomans in warlords version? I am sort of sure those were the ottomans soldiers.:confused: after janissaries.

Hi man,

Janissaires were the best Ottoman soldiers. In fact, they were young christian enslaved by the Ottoman and trained from their youth to be soldier. Of course, they had to convert. At first, they were an awesome force. Many battles were won by these elite troops (13th to end of 15th century). At the beginning of the 16th century, they became a political force. They spent more time struggling inside the Palace (named Topkapi) than on the battlefield. They began to marry (that was forbidden before), they had children (also forbidden), they made money (again forbidden),..... It was the beginning of the decay, no more no less. The real decay was their love for tradition and power. They refused military changes. As weaponry changed, they didn't. They began to outclassed. In the middle of the 17th century, they were no more a real force, an elite one, but just good troops.

Sipahi. These guys were real horsemen. Ottoman empire was divided in provinces, ruled by a Bey (if i'm right, not sure ;) ). In times of war, Beys had to raise troops and sent them to the front line army. Most of these troops were in fact "Levies on horse": the Sipahi. So, sipahis are light cavalry, mainly use to surround ennemies, to pillaging, to attack logistic trains,... They were also dismounted in case of siege and used as "flesh" to attack cities. I let you imagine that at his height of power, Ottoman Empire can raise 100,000 to 200,000 of this guys !!! Sipahis were numerous, not easy to control, bad tactician and even more poor strategist, deeply violent,....but very usefull for the Empire. After a military reform in the 19th century, Sipahis became a real military unit, with its tradition, barracks,.... Sipahis still exist.
In France, we have a some regiments of Sipahis. They came from the Egyptian Mamluk army (under the rule of the Ottoman Empire) defeated by Napoleon in 1798 in Egypt which chose to follow the French Army instead of beeing punished by the Calif. They were so good mounted units that they were included in Napoleon's Guards. From that time to now, our Spahis ( a " i " was lost in French ;) ) made all of our wars (from the Napoleonic to Desert Storm). Today (in 2006), only one Regiment is still active. But what a Regiment ! It's one of our few Elite. They are trained as para-cavalry with special Tanks, cargo planes,....

The Frog.

PS: i know that "more poor" is grammaticaly wrong. How do you say ? poorrer, poorest ? F---- language :joke: , why don't everybody speak and write French. It would be easier. :D ;)

@ Los Tirano:

Have you seen the Warlords conquistadors ? It nearly looks like what you want. A knight with +50% against melee ..... Awesome if well used !

Your idea is quite good. A knight with a bonus against melee, twice cost, a def promo and/or movement bonus and a limited number (why not one per city ?)
What kind of def promo do you suggest ? something like the same promo as the vanilla explorator would be nice IMO.
About movement bonus, i don't agree. Mounted units are fast enough and the only mounted unit really autorized to received such a bonus is the mongol keshik.
An other idea is to give them the ability to bombard walls. This bonus should be low (it's not a siege unit !) but don't forget that only a few bombards/canons were needed to destroy the Aztec and Incan Empires. Any comments about that idea ?

The Frog

Well the movement bonus is only added because it is a part of the fanatic trait. The ability to bombard is original. I wasnt suggesting a defensive promotion, just the ability to defend without penalties. If they are fanatic and exceptional or heroic they dont need a defensive bonus. You are right, one unit per city sounds very appropriate. If the spanish empire of the player is huge, they deserve more of these guys.

Well the movement bonus is only added because it is a part of the fanatic trait. The ability to bombard is original. I wasnt suggesting a defensive promotion, just the ability to defend without penalties. If they are fanatic and exceptional or heroic they dont need a defensive bonus. You are right, one unit per city sounds very appropriate. If the spanish empire of the player is huge, they deserve more of these guys.

Yeap, no def bonus but only the ability to defend themselves as every melee units seems a good idea.
So, a good conquistador could be:
- a knight with +50% against melee (as in Warlords)
- twice cost (so around 180 shields)
- able to defend without penalties
- limited to one per city
- fanatical free promo
- able to bombard lightly

What more ?
Comments are welcome. I hope we should ask Houman to make changes ASAP.

The Frog.

Sounds good. Ive already asked for something on the main forum today so i dont think it would be right for me to ask for this. Would you kindly ask him?

Sounds good. Ive already asked for something on the main forum today so i dont think it would be right for me to ask for this. Would you kindly ask him?

Ok, no problems. I will send him a PM to ask him to have a look there.

The Frog.

I have a simple request.

Can Japan's samurai knight be renamed Heavy Cavalry.

They are not knights.

Thank You

WarKirby

Or better yet. Samurai horsemen, samurai cavalry.

Well, they were called heavy cavalry in Shogun:Total War (why don't creative assembly make a sequel!) and I kinda got used to that.

Samurai Cavalry seems good though.

WarKirby

- Ottoman will get a Sipahi with Green/Silver Moon on it. (Don;t forget the word Sepahi is actually a Persian one, and the Ottoman coped that unit. The Ottomans had a total respect for the Persian Cavalry at that time (Safavid Dynasty). Have a look at the Chaldaran battle where only 40.000 Persian Cavalry almost defeated a 10 times bigger Ottoman army. The only reason the Ottoman won was shooting with Canons inside own ranks, as the Persians were already inside the ottoman infantry ranks.

- Samurai knights will be changed to Samurai Cavalry

- Spanish Conquistators will be an exceptional army:
Cost increased by 33% (47% more than normal Knight)
Withdrawl from -5% updated to 15%
City Attack from 0 to 15%
Free Promotion: Fanatic and March (heal on move)
And they get as only Knightunit Defense bonus on a tile
(They might have less vs Melee and less protection vs Archers and less Colletral damage due less armor, but they have more combat bonus vs Archers and defense capability and the promotions which makes them the most powerful knight in the game)
To compensate that: 1 extra gold per Unit as maintenance. Like in reality the Conq. and their wars result in inflation and goes heavily on the economy. If you build too many of them you get ruined.

Hooray! Thanks Houman.

Hooray! Thanks Houman.

Yes, Great idea to also increase their maintenance. :D :goodjob:

The Frog.

How about a reentry of the zone of control?
I find it hard to imagine a unit just walking pass an enemy unit without that unit reacting...
This should mainly be the faster units, and maybe just in the later ages...

How about making japanese horses smaller ?
Atleast in WorldMap.

Should be a promotion to ignore zones of control.

Cavalry should have a choice to upgrade to an early tank (armored cav) or gunship (air cav).

No it shdnt. Its like turning tank into airplane.

Cavalry should have a choice to upgrade to an early tank (armored cav) or gunship (air cav).

Zharahk,

Yeap, why not ? Between 1919 and 1939 most of the French Cavalry Divisions were upgraded with Light Tanks. The US 1st Cav. is an Helicopters division if i'm right. I'm a retired soldier from the oldest Heavy Cavalry Regiment of the French Army. My regiment (1st Regiment of Cuirassiers) was raised in 1635 during the Thirty Years War. We not use horses :eek: but the very powerful Leclerc MBT :D (55 tons, 120mm main gun, 20mm secondary gun, speed of 70 km/h).

The Avatar i use (seen on the left under my name) is the badge of my old regiment.

So, i agree with you.

The Frog.

[pissed]

stay :health:

I was a tanker too in the US Army a long, long time ago (M60A3s).

I remember a funny story about when the Soviets first deployed the Hind helicoptor gunship. Both the Soviet Army and Air Force wanted it, but how to decide who got it? The head of their military (I forget who it was) had them place a Hind out on a runway with an airplane on one side and a tank on the other. "It looks more like a tank", he said so the Army got it. :lol:

I was a tanker too in the US Army a long, long time ago (M60A3s).

I remember a funny story about when the Soviets first deployed the Hind helicoptor gunship. Both the Soviet Army and Air Force wanted it, but how to decide who got it? The head of their military (I forget who it was) had them place a Hind out on a runway with an airplane on one side and a tank on the other. "It looks more like a tank", he said so the Army got it. :lol:

Hi Zharahk,

It must be a long long time ago if you were in a M60A3 Patton !!! A good tank inded, only a bit too high/tall: an easy target ! Was it not the MBT used in Vietnam ?

The Frog

No. The M60 or M60A1 might have seen action in Vietnam, but I think the M60A3 came out in late 70's. My last unit was 2nd Inf Div in Korea, and when I showed up in 1984 they were just swapping out the M49A5s for M60A3s. I think some US Marine tank units were the last units to use the M60A3s, and now they all use the M1s.

As it is now, cavalry upgrade tree is a bit short compared to infantry. Also, knights' longevity on the battlefield is a bit excessive - introduction of firearms-wielding cavalry in Europe happened in XV century already, almost simultaneously with infantry.

What I offer is an intermediate upgrade between the knight and the cavalry, coming with gunpowder - a cuirassier. 12 :strength:, 2 :move:, 130 :hammers:, +50% vs. melee, +25% attack vs. gunpowder, +50% attack vs. siege units. Requires horse, saltpeter, iron (still armored) and horseback riding, using this model:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=1682

good one
of course if we want aditional units.

I have to agree with Hian and Zharahk on this one.

Anaztazioch may have a point in that tanks don't magically transform into airplanes, but then horses don't magically change into helicopter gunships either do they? Yet they do in the game...

As if we need a third example, my old unit (A Sqn, 10th Light Horse) first REALLY entered modern warfare when they upgraded from the traditional early 20C Mounted Infantry to M3 Grants back in 1943. From there they've used a variety of vehicles including Saracens, Scorpion MRVs, M113AS1's (think the traditional M113 with a fully enclosed Turret and .30/.50 dual mounted weapons and finally back using a LRPV... basically a 6 wheeled landrover.

The point being? Things change doctrinally, but the character of a unit often doesn't. None of the changes a given unit will go through happen without a great deal of refit (if not a complete refit). I think the representation of cavalry units to tank units in the game is fair enough.... although I'm sure there are some equally good arguments not to have cav-tank upgrade, I'm yet to see those arguments rationally put forward. When I see it, I might change my mind or I might not... :)

Anyone wanna play Devil's Advocate? :D

I guess, that would be me, then. I think, cavalry not upgrading to tanks is a gameplay decision. This way, when you discover these magnificent war machines, you always have to BUILD them. In your cities, on your factories. Just giving your horsemen the money and telling them to get those armored contraptions somewhere just looks funny to me. For cavalry division to turn to armored, you first have to have tanks to supply to them.

I guess, that would be me, then. I think, cavalry not upgrading to tanks is a gameplay decision. This way, when you discover these magnificent war machines, you always have to BUILD them. In your cities, on your factories. Just giving your horsemen the money and telling them to get those armored contraptions somewhere just looks funny to me. For cavalry division to turn to armored, you first have to have tanks to supply to them.

Very true. But isn't that cost, ie the "production" of those tanks, as well as the cost of retraining those cavalrymen to drive tanks instead of riding horses represented somewhat in the cost of the unit upgrade?

Maybe make cavalry upgradable to tank, but have the Whippet, Mark V and A7V either upgrade to Tank units at a discount, or charge extra for the upgrade from Cavalry to Tanks?

Guys,

Interesting to read. In France our Cavalry Regiment were upgraded to Light-Medium Tank Regiment in the 30's, just before WW II. It was nearly the same cost for the French Army to have a true Cavalry Regiment and a "modern" (with Tanks, i mean) Cavalry Regiment. But on the battlefield it was very different: these regiments were among the few that made something to resist to the German Army. They were all destroyed after a 3 day battle on the Belgium frontier. Meanwhile, the loss ratio was 1 French vs 0.8 German. Not so bad when you know that these regiment were mostly destroyed because of Stuka and PAK 88.
So yes, a cavalry regiment can upgrade to a tank one.

Hian the Frog.

I have been playing the Spanish and noticed that the cuirassers update into cavalry, but the cavalry unit for the Spanish looks like musketmen on horse. They look more like 15th century mounted units than 19th century ones.

Excellent job on the cuirassers and conquistadors.

Same in Italy, now our cavalry is on tanks, and still is called cavalry.
I find this more "real" than upgrade cavalry to Gunships.

And if i'm not wrong in the USA is the same, the legendary 7th cavalry is a tank division.