Civ 4 BtS had a healthy number of military units to geek around with. However, the game could need a few more:

I miss the regular Flak unit from Civ 3. SAMs are a relatively recent invention, and there should be some kind of basic air defence before that.

More types of aircrafts (compare Hearts of Iron 2):

* Strategic bombers

* Tactical bombers

* Naval bombers

* Transport plane

* Divebomber

* Interceptor

* Fighter

With the new tactical battlefield, a mountaineer-unit would fit well.

An hygro pyr (greek fire) unit :)

How about a sniper unit that is invisible like a spy, but can take out or damage one enemy unit with a ranged attack?

How about a sniper unit that is invisible like a spy, but can take out or damage one enemy unit with a ranged attack?

Given that most likely one unit will represent a division or something like that, snipers doesnt make much sense. Unless there gonna be some special commanding units like in Dawn of War, but I doubt that. Nice idea, but can hardly be implemented in the game like Civilization.


What I would like to see is basically more of the same:

* More different planes,
* More different ships and improved naval combat / ship importance in general

Given that most likely one unit will represent a division or something like that, snipers doesnt make much sense. Unless there gonna be some special commanding units like in Dawn of War, but I doubt that. Nice idea, but can hardly be implemented in the game like Civilization.
While not exactly on topic, perhaps it could be represented as a promotion? One that causes enemy units ending their turn next to the the unit to take a small amount of damage?

An hygro pyr (greek fire) unit :)

You mean like a Fireship? Those were in Rise of Nations, and I would very much like to see them in Civ as well!

I would like to see more animals, if they are even in Civ V anymore..... bears, lions and wolves just aren't enough... I wanna see some tigers in jungles, and crocs in marshes... = )

I would like to see more animals, if they are even in Civ V anymore..... bears, lions and wolves just aren't enough... I wanna see some tigers in jungles, and crocs in marshes... = )

and some sharks, a Kraken and a few sea serpents in the ocean! :deal:

Civ 4 BtS had a healthy number of military units to geek around with. However, the game could need a few more:

I miss the regular Flak unit from Civ 3. SAMs are a relatively recent invention, and there should be some kind of basic air defence before that.

More types of aircrafts (compare Hearts of Iron 2):

* Strategic bombers

* Tactical bombers

* Naval bombers

* Transport plane

* Divebomber

* Interceptor

* Fighter

With the new tactical battlefield, a mountaineer-unit would fit well.

That's way too many air units. Considering air units don't come until very late in the game, I don't think they need to get too specific with them.

That's way too many air units. Considering air units don't come until very late in the game, I don't think they need to get too specific with them.

Bear in mind though that there will be all sorts of scenarios that ship with the game. I'd be willing to bet there is a WW2 game, which could be improved by a greater diversity of units.

Having said that, unless the maps are very large (which they might be given what seems like a move towards more tactical combat) I can't see the need for a huge range of units, in anything except the most epic (read long) games...as the march of time makes them obsolite before they see much use.

Ancient:

- first primitive ships, something more primitive than Galley
- war wagons before chariots
- "praetorian" changed to "legionary"

Medieval:

- mailed knight
- heavy knight

Modern:

- rocket with biological warhead
- rocket with chemical warhead
- invisible units able to detonate nuclear bomb inside oher player's city (like privateer and with 30 or 40% chance of detection)
- terrorists (but I doubt it - 9/11 is still a fresh wound)
- UN diplomats (can be build in city with UN wonder - acts like agent but is visible. He can see what units or buildings are produced and if city work on forbidden unit or building (like WMD) it can cancel this production.

And of course plenty of FUTURE UNITS! :D There is only one thing i hate in Civ games - they end in modern times. That's why I play mod that gives me more future techs, units, buildings and wonders.

While not exactly on topic, perhaps it could be represented as a promotion? One that causes enemy units ending their turn next to the the unit to take a small amount of damage?

Hmm, a "sniperskytt" as we call it in Sweden deals more then "a small amount of damage", or am I wrong? But a promotion which has something to do with sniper rifles and "sniperskyttar" is a really good idea

You wouldn't even have to call it a sniper. If an archer can ranged attack, than anything gunpowder should be able to as well. Even on civ scale, some sniper rifles in the 1860's with a well trained marksman was accurate for up to a mile (something like 1, 1/3km i think). Its only gotten better since, so being able to ranged attack with any gunpowder, and do some small damage seems reasonable to me.

Besides just about everything in civ the scale is bad, so something like that is no different than having a city the same size as a cow pasture, or having a battleship take up the same amount of space as a mountain.

But if there should be a sort-of sniper promotion in next coming Civ it shouldn't be automatic, like at the end of every turn you do extra damage to your marked target, it would be more like some other promotions, like withdrawal, should be invalid (or how do you say) and the units being potentially damaged by the sniper promotion
Well i don't know, but there's a lot of small changes things you can do without ruin the whole game-concept

kinda getting off topic here, but also defender withdrawal and higher withdrawal chances for all units I think would be better, definitely more realistic. With so much decided on luck, it would be nice if at least some of the battles weren't so final... wars would certainly be more engaging.

It just sucks losing like 3 or 4 battles in a row that are 70%+, if a couple units lost, but then retreated, it would take the sting away a bit. Plus that would bring back the importance of the cavalry. In my experience cavalry are just about useless head to head vs riflemen. In civ4 it was SoD vs SoD so riflemen were generally preferred if not for the defensive bonuses, then for the direct bonus vs mounted units.

I get your point, maybe rifles shouldn't have bonuses vs units at all? Or at least not bonuses against the health bar (crappy grammar), but I hope you see what i mean. Oh, I'm tired and we're getting off-topic indeed, let's hope the new battle system surprises us!

<...>, a Kraken and a few sea serpents in the ocean! :deal:

Actually these would make much more sense from realism perspective, than the current species of animals in Civ4. Just show me real life bears/wolves/panthers/lions capable to destroy a group of people large enough to start a new city (=settler) or military unit (=warriors). Its plain silly. Adds nothing to gameplay, too.

I hope they make the cute settler with four kids hanging around him, and that settlers and workers have hitpoints from now on, like Oh :):):):) an archer.. Well I have my spade and my hammer SMACK! :goodjob:

I'd like some light cavalry unit. A basic distinction missing in Civ4 is light/heavy cavalry.

I'd also like a Conquistador unit for terra type maps. Instead of an explorer (pretty useless unit in Civ4), a medieval strength light cavalry unit with +100% versus barbarians. These guys should be explorers with teeth. Explorers in Civ4, even in terra maps, get eaten for breakfast by barbs and thus can do nothing.

A light cavalry unit, sort of a hussar like in age of empires 3?? That would be cool

I hope paratroopers are included with Vanilla. By the endgame in BTS they are my primary infantry unit.

suicide bombers? kamikaze fighters? sappers? tunnel rats? field engineers?

Many wars have been won or lost under ground. Being able to dig trenches for defence or tunnels for shelter from bombs and sneak attacks. I'm not exactly sure how a game mechanic like that would work or even if it would, but I think it's something to consider.

Partisans and Fundies from civ2. Or call them militia, or irregulars. whatever.

In general, a game of civ's scope needs to have some unit of irregulars available for every era. This would help very much the introduction of peasant revolts and revolutions.

edit: I second the light cavalry proposal.

How about a sniper unit that is invisible like a spy, but can take out or damage one enemy unit with a ranged attack?

Given that most likely one unit will represent a division or something like that, snipers doesnt make much sense. Unless there gonna be some special commanding units like in Dawn of War, but I doubt that. Nice idea, but can hardly be implemented in the game like Civilization.

i was thinking about this idea, what if a unit targeted by snipers didn't necessarily take damage, but suffered a penalty to its combat effectiveness, or even movement speed due to the sniper taking out the leadership.

could lead to interesting strategies. send snipers in ahead of your main force to scout and when your main force is in range have them take out the enemy leadership so your grunts have a better chance of winning.

Maybe a sniper could be a strictly defensive unit. Leave them in cities or in forests to pick off anything that gets too close. Any enemy that stands within 2 tiles of the sniper automatically takes X damage per turn. Damage could be on a % basis like bombard damage. However, once a unit closes on the sniper the sniper must flee or be easily killed. Therefore, the longer the enemy stays in range of your snipers the more damage he takes. Having snipers covering your rear lines during long battles could really help. Also, snipers could be used in a hit and run style, by just keeping the enemy in range but constantly moving every turn, forcing the enemy to either close quickly or flee. I don't know - I'm just brain storming here.

I'd like some light cavalry unit. A basic distinction missing in Civ4 is light/heavy cavalry.

Yeah. Light cavalry can have a higher withdraw chance, while Heavy Cavalry has higher base strength.

A light cavalry unit, sort of a hussar like in age of empires 3?? That would be cool

Aren't Hussars typically classed as heavy cavalry? :confused:

EDIT: I was thinking of Polish-Lithuanian hussars. Hussars are typically light cavalry.

Just please flesh out the Age of Sail. Very fertile ground for some amazing wars.

An APC unit like oh say the BTM7 of Striker that actually carries infantry... hmm, hmm?!?!

- Different sailing units

- Differentiation between light and heavy cavalry

- Maybe some types of skirmishing units in the early and middle eras (like javelineers or slingers)

1. Jaguar warriors who are not completely useless.

2. Submarines that have ranged torpedo attacks (like how archers can fire from a few hexes away). This could make naval battle more exciting, as maybe you'll need some destroyers around (instead of just having a stack of battleships) to prevent these attacks.

3. Really just any fix to submarines to make them suck less.

4. Civ 3 pirates. Ones that have a chance to take the enemy ship.

Armored land infantry carriers.

Submarines that have ranged torpedo attacks (like how archers can fire from a few hexes away)

My guess is that in civ5 all gunpowder and later sea units will have ranged attack.

Longboats and uh...

Civ-specific skins for all units!

Patrol airplanes (P-3 Orion, P-8, Embraer P-99): Could see submarines and stealth naval units.

AEW/AWACS airplanes (E-3 Sentry, E-2 for carrier, Embraer E-99): Could give % chance of interceptation against enemys fighter and/or % chace of evade enemys fighters and sam.

Refueling airplanes: Could give +1 or +2 range.

It's too boring have just one or two kind of tanks, ships or airplanes. In this game and in all ages could be a lot of diferent units for each age, like some civ 4 mods.

Here are some of the new units I'd like to see:

*Curragh (from C3C)
*Caravan (rename "Merchant"?)
*Diplomat (rename "Ambassador")
*Hunter? (couldn't think of a name, like CIV's Warrior, but with Strength 1)
*Anthrax Bomb (damages city population significantly)
*Fast Archer (Movement 2, not 1)

More to come soon.

I would like to see infantry vehicles separated from the infantry line.

Infantry have always upgraded into Humvees (II) or Bradleys (III & IV), and from a purely aesthetic perspective, I don't like the modern era being cluttered with vehicles and no people.

So upgrade the current "infantry" unit into something akin to the "marine" as your final unit in the infantry line (barring any future-tech units) and have the mechanised infantry as a lighter alternative to modern armour with the capacity to carry infantry.

I would like to see infantry vehicles separated from the infantry line.

Infantry have always upgraded into Humvees (II) or Bradleys (III & IV), and from a purely aesthetic perspective, I don't like the modern era being cluttered with vehicles and no people.

So upgrade the current "infantry" unit into something akin to the "marine" as your final unit in the infantry line (barring any future-tech units) and have the mechanised infantry as a lighter alternative to modern armour with the capacity to carry infantry.

i agree completely, it never really seemed to quite fit to me that in the modern era there were no "boots on the ground". the modern warfighting foot soldier is pretty impressive when you think about it, with all the modern tech, gear and armor. they should deffinatly have a place in ciV.

I think the game could need:

* Super-battleship: like the Japanese Yamato. Very expensive, oil-consuming and slow, but with awesome firepower and durability.

* Super-carrier: like the modern US carriers. Huge cost, but with ability to transport a full airforce.

It seems that many people want to see more tanks, ships and planes. I think adding more of those type of units would be almost redundant. You can already customize your units by gaining experience and upgrading them to fit your strategy. If they added another tier of the same units it would make any previous upgrades obsolete, and it wouldn't change the gameplay at all. I think if they add units, they should fulfill a completely different role in combat, not just a bigger, badder version of an existing unit.

I do agree however, that the naval combat in 4 could have been better. I'm not sure adding units is the answer, but revamping the current unit list would be a start.

As far as air force goes, there's fighters and there's bombers. I'm not sure you can add much to that. Some want planes for scouting purposes, but a fighter could serve the same purpose. All they can do is add super fighters and super bombers. Then super duper fighters and super duper bombers. Then it becomes redundant again.

Navies in regular Civ IV has some problems, you go from ancient ships to industrial frigrates to modern destroyers with no middle ground. There needs to be an age of sail with at least something between galleys and frigrates, age of steam to middle gap between frigrates and destroyers, and age of oil ships with somethings to flesh out the naval scene.

It seems that many people want to see more tanks, ships and planes. I think adding more of those type of units would be almost redundant. You can already customize your units by gaining experience and upgrading them to fit your strategy. If they added another tier of the same units it would make any previous upgrades obsolete, and it wouldn't change the gameplay at all. I think if they add units, they should fulfill a completely different role in combat, not just a bigger, badder version of an existing unit.
I agree that a lot of these suggestions are redundant and would just clutter the game. Plus, isn't that what promotions are for, to further specialise your units without introducing an entirely different unit type?

For example, why would the game need a "super battleship" when that is easily represented by a regular battleship with several combat promotions?

Same goes for aircraft. The game doesn't need an in-air refueling plane, but there can be promotions to extend range. It also doesn't need special strike aircraft/naval bomb ers/etc. That can be accomplished with promotions that give existing aircraft a bonus against armour or ships, etc.

I would love to see a guerilla/insurgent type unit that could be invisible in forests and jungles unless a scout is nearby or something. This game could probably use more steathy, ambush type units, especially with the 1 unit per tile rule. I like the idea of having snipers, a fire-team of snipers would probaly pretty effective against an infantry platoon wandering around a jungle.

I agree that a lot of these suggestions are redundant and would just clutter the game. Plus, isn't that what promotions are for, to further specialise your units without introducing an entirely different unit type?


There are ways around the redundancy... It doesn't have to be a completely new tier for new units. If a Panzer tank is dmg 20 the Tiger could be 23. The next tier would be like the Russian T-80. Promotions are to show skill of the units (or some specialization like flight refueling) not the upgrades of technology and production. And there are other things specialized units like a tiger tank could be based on (eg. number of factories and/or number of oil resources and/or iron resources).

I agree that a lot of these suggestions are redundant and would just clutter the game. Plus, isn't that what promotions are for, to further specialise your units without introducing an entirely different unit type?

For example, why would the game need a "super battleship" when that is easily represented by a regular battleship with several combat promotions?

Same goes for aircraft. The game doesn't need an in-air refueling plane, but there can be promotions to extend range. It also doesn't need special strike aircraft/naval bomb ers/etc. That can be accomplished with promotions that give existing aircraft a bonus against armour or ships, etc.

YES! Exactly.

There are ways around the redundancy... It doesn't have to be a completely new tier for new units. If a Panzer tank is dmg 20 the Tiger could be 23. The next tier would be like the Russian T-80. Promotions are to show skill of the units (or some specialization like flight refueling) not the upgrades of technology and production. And there are other things specialized units like a tiger tank could be based on (eg. number of factories and/or number of oil resources and/or iron resources).

Yes but if I already have 10 Panzer tanks at 20 dmg. Then I upgrade their strength through promotions they will be at 22-23 dmg. So, by the time I am able to build Tiger Tanks, my Panzers will be just as good. Also, the way you use tanks remains the same whether you have 20 or 23 dmg. And once you make another more powerful tank, then you have to make another more powerful anti-tank unit. It just keeps going and going.

So, by the time I am able to build Tiger Tanks, my Panzers will be just as good.

That is true if units eg Tiger tanks were treated the same way as being a next Tier unit.

For example, say the tech that allows WWII style tanks opened up that tier (multiple WWII style tanks)... then other factors could also play into which units of that tier are available. So essentially, if other conditions are met (eg multiple resources, factories, ect. ect.) then you could start building Tigers from the start, while other ciVs not meeting those conditions were stuck with Sherman tanks. - That is just one example of the way around it... there are others.

The other reason for multiple units in one tier is that promotions may be handled differently in ciV than in cIV. - where Tiger tanks would be represented in cIV as a promoted tank .

so let's fill in the blanks

type\era primitive ancient medieval rennaisance industrial 20th cen modern
light inf warriors javeliners xxxxxx musketmen riflemen infantry mech.inf
heavy inf axemen swordsmen macemen xxxxxx grenadiers marines xxxxxx
anti-shock xxxxxx spearmen pikemen xxxxxx machine gun anti-tank SAM.inf
light mobile horsemen xxxxxx xxxxxx hussars cavalry light armor gunship
heavy mobile chariot anc.cavalry knights lancers xxxxxx heavy armor modern armor
ranged archers xxxxxx longbowmen xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx
siege xxxxxx catapult trebuchet cannon artillery howitzer missile arty

I would simply like them to bring back some of the CivII units - in particular, dragoons, guerillas, Aegis cruisers, and cruisers.

Guerrillas are unneeded as its own unit. Just make a new promotion urban warfare to make a modern city raider and boom, done. Cruisers would be fine, and a sonar promotion makes it an AEGIS class ship. Dragoons are what? A gunpowder mounted unit before Calvary? Isn't there already one?

Guerrillas are unneeded as its own unit. Just make a new promotion urban warfare to make a modern city raider and boom, done. Cruisers would be fine, and a sonar promotion makes it an AEGIS class ship. Dragoons are what? A gunpowder mounted unit before Calvary? Isn't there already one?

- Guerrilas need to be represented on there own there are many instances when they are distinct from traditional infantry.

- That would be fine for Cruisers to that, a promotion is all thats needed in that case.

- I do not think there is a gunpowder based unit before Calvary. I cannot remember. Playing civIV, Vanilla, I seem to remember jumping from knights straight to Calvary.

That is true if units eg Tiger tanks were treated the same way as being a next Tier unit.

For example, say the tech that allows WWII style tanks opened up that tier (multiple WWII style tanks)... then other factors could also play into which units of that tier are available. So essentially, if other conditions are met (eg multiple resources, factories, ect. ect.) then you could start building Tigers from the start, while other ciVs not meeting those conditions were stuck with Sherman tanks. - That is just one example of the way around it... there are others.

The other reason for multiple units in one tier is that promotions may be handled differently in ciV than in cIV. - where Tiger tanks would be represented in cIV as a promoted tank .

I see what you're saying. And I might even agree with you provided that each tank type provides a very different function. If you had a light tank that was fast and great for scouting, and a heavy tank that is slow but destructive. Or a defensive tank vs. an offensive one. Maybe one tank has a long range attack, while the other relies more on short range attacks. I think they have to fill different roles within the battle.

Mar 07, 2010 08:19 PM
axi so let's fill in the blanks
Code:
type\era primitive ancient medieval rennaisance industrial 20th cen modern
line inf warriors swordsmen xxxxxx musketmen riflemen infantry mech.inf
heavy inf xxxxxx axemen macemen halberdiers? grenadiers marines modern marines
anti-shock millitia spearmen pikemen xxxxxx machine gun anti-tank SAM.inf
light mobile horsemen horse archer xxxxxx hussars cavalry light armor gunship
heavy mobile chariot anc.cavalry knights lancers currasiers heavy armor modern armor
ranged skirmisher archer longbowmen xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx
siege xxxxxx catapult trebuchet cannon artillery howitzer missile arty
Mar 07, 2010 08:18 PM
great idea, to format it! though line infantry would be a better catagory then light with maybe light infantry/skirmish as an addition. Anyways that should help the thread I added and changed a few in those classes...

I would like to see military generations in the later eras.
i.e: Biplane-Fighter-Early Jet-Cold War Jet- Modern Jet-Stealth Fighter

For the modern era I'd like to see more transport options for troops, especially land based units. Things like an APC for getting infantry to the front quicker, quick flanking maneuvers etc. A helicopter in this role would also be great, possibly allowing quick raids against resources.

Id also like to see a few more air based units, a dedicated radar / recon plane perhaps. I really wonder what air combat is going to look like in Civ V.

In my classification, I distinguished units by role and era. There seem to be blanks where previous era units cover the same role in later times and where two roles are covered by the same unit. Medieval and rennaissance seem to be the eras needing most additions. The role of light inf/ light cav is too crucial in military history to be overlooked, so I feel civ5 should make a conscious effort to add all the missing counterparts, since the more realistic tactics of the 1UPT rule will demand it.

The problem in civ is that eras are not strictly defined technology-wise, unlike in RTS games where each military unit role has it's own tech tree.

Different levels of infantry, cavalry, and siege weapons between the renaissance age and industrial age (based of civ4).
I always thought it weird how musketmen upgraded to riflemen.
more ships of this same period would also be nice!
I doubt they'll do this, however.

I want to see:

B-52 Jet Bomber and it's Soviet Equivalent. Upgradable to the B-1 Bomber or Soviet eqivalent.

F-4 Phantom as an mid-era fighter upgradable to F-15

A-6 Intruder as a mid-era ground attack plane upgradable to F/A-18 Hornet Fighter/Ground Attack plane

A-10 Thunderbolt II ground attack plane.

C-130 Cargo Plane

F-35 Lightning (Joint Strike Fighter) as a later-era stealth fighter

I want to see:

B-52 Jet Bomber and it's Soviet Equivalent. Upgradable to the B-1 Bomber or Soviet eqivalent.

F-4 Phantom as an mid-era fighter upgradable to F-15

A-6 Intruder as a mid-era ground attack plane upgradable to F/A-18 Hornet Fighter/Ground Attack plane

A-10 Thunderbolt II ground attack plane.

C-130 Cargo Plane

F-35 Lightning (Joint Strike Fighter) as a later-era stealth fighter

This isn´t Civ US Airforce 5... :rolleyes:

I want to see:

B-52 Jet Bomber and it's Soviet Equivalent. Upgradable to the B-1 Bomber or Soviet eqivalent.

F-4 Phantom as an mid-era fighter upgradable to F-15

A-6 Intruder as a mid-era ground attack plane upgradable to F/A-18 Hornet Fighter/Ground Attack plane

A-10 Thunderbolt II ground attack plane.

C-130 Cargo Plane

F-35 Lightning (Joint Strike Fighter) as a later-era stealth fighter


what about this special name :):):):):):):):)
who cares if this is a f-4 Phantom or a C-130 or whatever... this is no commercial for weapon manufactors!!
there´s the maceman, the rifleman, the tank, the infantry, the jet fighter... keep it global, clean out the brands

I want focus on the sea.

I would like to see a terrorist killing special forces group... so you can take out the garbage.

I would like to see a terrorist killing special forces group... so you can take out the garbage.

You call human beings garbage? Or you mean that the terrorist killing special forces group should come home to you and empty your trashcans?

You know, before the Talibans attacked USA and instead messen with the Russians, they were called "freedom fighters"...

This isn´t Civ US Airforce 5... :rolleyes:

The OP asked and I answered his question. I happen to like many unique air units and it looks like a lot of other players do too if you look at some of the more popular mods. If you don't then that's fine but don't get snarky because I answered the question.

I'm going to play devil's advocate here, but if Civ V crams even more unit types into the 4000BC-2050AD time frame, their lifespans will become even shorter than they already are. I think Civ IV has just the right amount for marathon speed, but at faster speeds units seem to go obsolete before you can build a reasonable number of them (mileage varies with research sequence). This wouldn't be so frustrating were it not for the 10XP ceiling for upgrade carry-over.

Now what I would like to see, as a few others have said, is futuristic units. Let history keep going and include 3 or 4 more generations of units. I'd love to see Hovertanks, AT-AT's, Mecha and cyborg/clone armies. If there's a trick Civ V could pull from an older title, it's Call-to-Power's Genetic & Diamond Ages. InB4 "but, that was Activision!". I know it was, but it did tie me over until Civ III.

My shortlist of wanted units

Shaman
Canoe
Militia
Hovercraft
Space shuttle

I am for more units, but to fill voids, not to just add more units. Some current units could be true specialist promotions of other units, just with graphic upgrades. There needs to be no difference between Anti-Armor, SAM, Machine Gun, and Ground Infantry as a base unit. All could be built from the same base unit.

However, there needs to be a ship between Frigate(8) and destroyer(30) as that is too big of a gap not to have anything in the middle. There needs to be an infantry unit that has the same movement as tanks because something needs to keep up with the lightning units of modern warfare. There needs to be a battering ram because there was siege before the catapult. The cannon needs to come at gunpowder and another built around rifling because its silly to use catapults with riflemen.

You call human beings garbage? Or you mean that the terrorist killing special forces group should come home to you and empty your trashcans?

You know, before the Talibans attacked USA and instead messen with the Russians, they were called "freedom fighters"...

1st is Correct... 'garbage', and the 2nd is propaganda, or a spin on words to make them seem like great people.

If you see the 2004 Spain Madrid bombings as freedom fighters who are great people at heart; full of love and compassion towards innocent civilians, I'm sure Spain saw them as garbage who needed to be taken out. They declare war against civilians, military is not usually the target, but is if they are able to strike a blow. Taliban kills and rapes it's own people to put fear into them, so that is the unit I'd like to see. They won't add it, but I will.

A lot of the units being suggested here seem great for a cold war mod, but they don't make sense for a normal game. First they are too specific, using American and Russian units makes them feel like UU's not generic units that can be used by the other 16 civs. In addtion as already said, unless you expand the industrial and modern eras by a ton you're not going to have any time with them before there's a better unit to replace them.

We should be looking for unique ideas for unit niches rather than redundant flavor units. I love the idea of transport helicopters and APCs. I think they'd be hugely useful in the the new one unit per tile system. I remember building an APC unit with the modding tools in Civ 3 and while it wasn't super useful it was plenty of fun.

I would like to see paratroopers be more usefull so you can recreate another Operation Varsity.

I would also like some sort of land transport and a transport plane.

I'd like to see some merchant ships in the game.

I want Skirmishers from Fantasy General (melee units don't respond to their attack, recieves half damage from enemies that aren't faster than Skirmishers).

Also, i hope this time horse archers will actually be archers.

SLBMs

Man-o-War

Ninjas :lol: ok maybe not

I would like to see paratroopers be more usefull so you can recreate another Operation Varsity.

I would also like some sort of land transport and a transport plane.

Were there paratroopers in Civ IV?

SMAC concepts of upgrading to a newer unit with each new tech would be great. For example you have a jet plane Mig21 - you discover radars, you upgrade it to Mig21B and add some points to areas relative to its new upgrade (visibility or initiative).
So combining core units with tech upgrades you end up with hunderds of fine scaled types of units.

I want to see all units from Civ 4... + Stealth Fighter (like in Civ 3) which can focus on destroying buildings from cities. The paratrooper should be much more useful now, because you can send it behind enemy lines to destroy artillery, etc...

Were there paratroopers in Civ IV?

Sure there were, but in civ3 they were almost completly useless and ive heard from people there that some civ4 players still dont think that they could be as usefull as they were in real life or even for gameplays sake.

1st is Correct... 'garbage', and the 2nd is propaganda, or a spin on words to make them seem like great people.

If you see the 2004 Spain Madrid bombings as freedom fighters who are great people at heart; full of love and compassion towards innocent civilians, I'm sure Spain saw them as garbage who needed to be taken out. They declare war against civilians, military is not usually the target, but is if they are able to strike a blow. Taliban kills and rapes it's own people to put fear into them, so that is the unit I'd like to see. They won't add it, but I will.

This is a complicated topic. I think he was referring to the Mujahideen. When they fought the Soviets, they were called freedom fighters. After the Soviet withdrawal, the various mujahideen groups began fighting each other. A group known as the Taliban rose to prominence and managed to defeat the various mujahideen factions. Whether the Taliban was composed of mujahideen, i'm not sure, but I think (don't quote me on this) they weren't.

Really, its all a matter of cold war politics. If they fought the other side, they're good. If they fought our side, they're bad. No matter how wrong those descriptions were.

transport copter-helicopter unit---
this would be a slightly weak (15-20 strength) helicopter that could carry 3 gunpowder, melee, recon, and archery units up to six tiles per turn. has a 20% bonus vs melee and is able to fly over coast. would look like a generic twin-rotor helicopter http://www.warbirdphotos.net/aviapix...rs/CHINOOK.JPG.

armored transport copter-helicopter unit---
a 30 strength transport copter, capable of carrying just one unit of any type 6 tiles per turn. +10% vs armored, +20 vs helicopter, +40 vs armor. would have a slightly smaller twin-rotor copter (see above), flanked by 2 apache gunships (1 on either side).

Satellite Unit---
A new category of unit would be satellite units. when built, you would choose the satellite's path of orbit, and after that the satellite would do the rest. some would have features that you can control. to control satellites, view orbits, etc, you would use the satellite screen (this would be added along with the different advisor screens in the top right of civ4. satellites can be traded with other civs through the diplo screen.

Imagery satellite-satellite unit-these satellites would have cameras.---
these satellites would take pictures of terrain with their cameras, constantly updating your view of the area near their orbit. angle of cameras is adjustable through satellite screen.

close-up imagery satellite-satellite unit-see what's there.---
these satellites would allow you to see units on tiles, not just the tiles. and you can see what units and wonders are in a city, if its a holy city, etc; not just that the city is there. seeing close-up means taking a picture with a high-power zoom lens, so the area that you are seeing is much smaller. angle of cameras is adjustable through satellite screen.

anti-missile satellites:-satellite unit-intercept missiles as they come.---
but would only have a 50% chance of doing so.

anti-ground satellites:-satellite unit-blast the ground from way up!---
would have a 50% chance of hitting the target tile, a 40% chance of hitting one of the 8 surrounding tiles (5% per tile), and a 10% chance of not hitting at all. choose target from satellite screen

anti-satellite satellites:-satellite unit-destroy satellites from satellites.---
50% chance of missile hitting the target satellite. choose target from satellite screen.

Were there paratroopers in Civ IV?
only in BtS

more privateer-like units. land and sea. barbarians are fine for ancient and classical. maybe viking UU is a privateer-like ship. renaissance has privateers for water, needs something for land. industrial & modern needs a land and sea.

Infantry should upgrade to Modern Infantry. Which could be transported by Transport Copter Unit or APC unit.

Sattelites should be maually controlled units that have hidden nationality and cn explore rival territory.

yes cavalry and cavalry archers are completely downplayed in the Civ franchise. The 1upt should totally help them from being underplayed though

civ in my opinion should end in 2400. that way you could have future units and if you were playing on standard map it would not be that bogged down.

i would lsit future units now but its 1 in the morning and im tired, so i am going to post my completed list later today, when normal people get up.

Honestly, I really want to see hoplites and such replaced by peltasts as the greek unique unit.

Ancient Age

Warrior
Archer
Horseman

Classical Age
Swordsman
Axeman
Spearman
Horse Archer
Catapault
Spy
Inquisitor/Missionary

[B]Medeival Age
Pikeman
Knight
Musketman
Trebuchet
Militia
Crossbowman
Longbowman
Man-At-Arms

Renaissance Age
Rifleman
Grenadier
Dragoon
Cannon
Hussar

Industrial Age
Infantry
Cavalry
Tank
Partisan
AT-Gun
AA-Gun
Zepplin
Fighter
Bomber
Fighter Bomber
Artillery
Nuclear Bomber

Modern Era
Modern Infantry
APC
Humvee
Modern Armour
Modern Artillery
SAM
Transport Chopper
Gunship
Attack Heli
Jet Fighter
Stealth Bomber
Spy Sattelite
Biological Warfare Missile
ICBM
Cruise Missile


Future Age 1 (BTW idk what to call it)
These are only some of the possible units

Net Modern Infantry
Clone Soldier
Cyborg
Hovercraft Gunship
Robotic Soldier
Automaton
Automated Tank
Sub-Orbital Cannon

Any others you would like to add

Greek medieval flamethrowers. The rest is nothing next to them imo :D

Dragoons and medieval mounted infantry [strategic mobility, but fight as infantry]. Particularly with limited numbers of horses available, this then becomes a nice strategic unit choice; mount your infantry for extra mobility, but then have one less horse available for heavy cavalry.

Skirmisher units and later irregulars, like javelin (velites, peltasts), sling, early rifles (18th century), modern special forces.

Dreadnoughts; it'd be good to see an extra naval layer between 1860s ironclads and WW2 destroyers/cruisers/battleships.

Bombards. Something between trebuchets and napoleonic field cannon.

Civilian Units like Village Leader, Mayor, Governor.

They should work like specialist inside city and provide small bonuses to the city, but should be to move from city to city.

As a former navy guy, I'd like to see more naval units. I realize that too many units is more cumbersome and more micromanagement, but I feel it spices up the modern age. You don't want to go too far as the game is more than just the modern age. But...

Civ4 had submarines but not modern ballistic submarines (they had attack submarines). I'd like to see both. They need to beef up submarines to make them more viable. I feel submarines in every single civ game have been largely useless. The exception being able to carry missiles such as tactical nukes. That's important. If it were civ4 I'd say give them the ability to choose their target in a stack. But since civ5 doesn't have stacks, I'm not sure. But I feel even the existence of a submarine in an area around an enemy city should reduce 1 trade route. Note: this should be a passive ability the submarine still should be able to fight regular units and block a trade route at the same time. Submarines should be able to withdraw from combat without taking any damage whatsoever (say 15% chance depending on the type of ship attacking it)

destroyers. The upgrade path seems to be fubar'd in BTS. Iirc stealth destroyers can't see subs. In fact, stealth destroyers seemed useless to me in BTS. Have these upgrade to modern destroyers or fast frigates. Basically this would be a cheaper version of missile cruisers. Have them be able to carry one cruise missile, see subs, have small chance to intercept aircraft.

modern transports similar to LHA's etc. These should have some air defense capability and not be completely vulnerable to air attacks. Don't give them as much defense as aegis cruisers of course.

mines and minesweeper ships. Mine seem largely abscent from both water and land in civ games. Poorer nations should be able to mine their harbors to damage ships. This could allow civs with less tech to wound the better ships enough to allow their lesser ships to finish off the wounded ships. Minesweepers of course would spot and disable mines.

battleships need major reworking. They are too powerful. These should have a vulnerability to air attack. I feel civ5 is screwing up by making these things be able to bombard 5 squares. I'm tired of battleships dominating civ games... Bombardment should be made largely useless after the advent of cruise missiles. The best way to fix that I suppose is to really buff up cruise missiles.

carriers: I mentioned this before. But carriers should be able to "see" at least 6 hexes away, preferrably 10 hexes away without specifically having to do a recon mission. This would help carriers overcome the battleship problem (battleships hanging around after the year 2000 etc.) This would allow ample time for your planes to sink the battleships. Yes planes should be able to sink ships. I'd have 2 classes of carriers. Early carriers and supercarriers. Early ones would carry 2 air units, super carriers would carry 3.

Aegis/missile cruiser: High aircraft intercept chance, spot submarines carries 4 missiles. Can intercept any air mission conducted within 2 or 3 hexes of the cruiser (depending on map size).

There should be nuclear versions of every ship listed above. Higher shield cost in exchange for more movement (say 2 hexes). I doubt they want to make the game more Alpha Centauri-ish, but I'd like to see it. Nuclear reactor technology necessary of course (this tech should come after nuclear fission tech)

I'd l like to second the post above. Dreadnaughts to bridge the gap between mid/late 1800's tech and ww2 tech.

I won't go into future units too much. It is a historical game afterall ;)

Humvee and panzer would have been great to see, but I think someone on another topic mentioned that the panzer were out

A humvee is too specific; its a part of a Mechanized Infantry division.

A panzer is just a German tank.

So, I think everything I want has already been said, but...

Modern APC
Modern Infantry
Future Stuff
Age of Sail Navies

As Ahriman said - more coal/steam based naval units. In Civ IV the jump to oil provided a much too significant advantage.

More naval units. Civ 4 upped the number of units on land giving us more strategic options and counter units. But naval combat is still basically just a "sheer number of units" zerg.

some sort of tactical missile that can target and destroy buildings in a city (not just the city itself). they would not affect units.

Trade carts, AoE III style

Privateers (Like Civ 3 with a chance to capture unit, but make it so it ACTUALLY captures it. Not make a new Privateer)
Rebels (Acted Like Privateers but on land, but chance to make captured workers)

Of course, people would think that (the Rebels) would be too abused in a land fight, but honestly if you see them in your territory, you should have the resources to deal with them (even if a peaceful civ).

Also, make them update with the time period with a chance of discovering their true identity upon destruction. So, you kill some rebels and find out they were sponsored by so and so. Which, could lead to some diplomatic unpleasantries or even break out into war.

Personally, I'd like to see these units because of the realism. Rebellions funded by one nation to help fight another etc.

I would like to see arquebusiers/gunpowder as the first gunpowder infantry used for ranged attack. 'Pike and Shot' was the dominant form of infantry warfare from 1520-1648. Musketmen/fusiliers/musketeers should be the successor unit outdating both pike and the early gunpowder units.

All gunpowder units have ranged attack? I'm thinking this would make modern combat somewhat boring. Variety is the spice of life and all units with ranged attackes makes for less interesting differences between units. I think the invention and adoption of the bayonet marks when firearm equipped units replace melee units. To smooth this admittedly awkward transition the new bayonet units can have high ranged defenses making the old ranged units unable to hurt them (or only scratch them) and horse artillery or field artillery will be the new ranged units.

Speaking of which, I'd like siege artillery differentiated from field artillery. Catapults and such should be useful in sieges (defense and attack) but not as useful as archers in the field. For gunpowder artillery the distinction should carry until maybe WWII times as siege artillery played an important part in some WWI battles.

Bear cavalry. So awesome. Bear troops. Genetically engineered bear super-commandos.

so awesome.

Also Ostrich troops.

I would like to see arquebusiers/gunpowder as the first gunpowder infantry used for ranged attack. 'Pike and Shot' was the dominant form of infantry warfare from 1520-1648. Musketmen/fusiliers/musketeers should be the successor unit outdating both pike and the early gunpowder units.

Some more Renaissance depth is definitely needed. This is the biggest hole in Civ4. You move from medieval pikemen and knights and trebuchets straight to late 17th century muskets and then to 18th/19th century cannon and grenadiers and 19th century riflemen.
Even Curaissers were only an afterthought in BTS.

It would be nice to enjoy each era longer and the use of the era's units longer.

We are already past the modern era and into the "genetic" era. We are already cloning; replacing human organs and tissue; and experimenting with robotic/machine replacements.

Satalites would be a unique twist. Being able to "see" (yours at first and then the AI's with the right tech research and the ability to use rockets to take them out) them as you zoomed out for a "global" view.

My vote for future units is orbital marines. They can attack anywhere in the world. From SPAAACE. Preferably equipped with powered armor, and preceded by tactical nukes to soften up the opposition. :)

Satellites would be tricky to implement. I read the other day that Eisenhower deliberately let the USSR launch the first satellite so the sovereignty issue of overflying other countries could be broken by them and the USA could claim the moral high ground.

I read the other day that Eisenhower deliberately let the USSR launch the first satellite so the sovereignty issue of overflying other countries could be broken by them and the USA could claim the moral high ground.

Sounds like revisionism to me. The Russians launched the first satellites (Sputnik) because they were technologically more advanced. Its not like the US had the technology and just decided not to use it for some political reason.

You know, before the Talibans attacked USA and instead messen with the Russians, they were called "freedom fighters"...

In addition the US supplied them with Stinger Missiles to fight the Russians with.

Something as to why I suggested a land based version of the Privateer. Foreign funded insurgency or rebellions to further your own political goals. Even if it's to harass another Civ to slow down it's progress or hinder it's war efforts against a friendly Civ.

well wea re alpretty much clear on what we want.

we all just keep repeating the same things. well in the Modern and pre modern eras.

Now we need to talk about the More futuristic eras.

teh future eras in my opinion should be Atomic Era, Synthetic Era and Genetic Era

Not neccesarily in that order

Could be fun seeing more unique units for each Civ. Like if you play as the Native Indians, you would have indian archers, indian spearmen and so on...

Some more variety in animals would also be a nice addition. Like polar bears on snow terrain, lions on savannah and bears in forests. Could also be cool with attacking whales/sharks when transporting troops over sea. Although this might ruin the whole concept of transporting units over sea.

Unique units for barbarians could also be nice feature. I hate seeing barbarians having exactly the same type of troops as your own Civ. Sometimes i get confused whether they are barbarins or not, because some Civs have the same colour as them.

Could be fun seeing more unique units for each Civ.

Personally, I would love that. I'd even go as far as to ask for units to look different for every civ, but that might be a bit too much. Anyhoo, a more diverse look of units among factions would be an enormous plus.


As for future eras and corresponding units, i'm against it. I don't know how it will be if included in vanilla civ, but the mods that had them tended to get a bit science-fiction-y.

I know that history has little to do with civ-like games, though it's the base of those game, so I will give my point about it :

1 - Bombers should have much less impact on the field. If we look back WWII, there were almost useless but on bridges and civil population. (For exemple LeHavre was fully destroy by bombers, though not a single division of nazi was really armed).

2 - In civ1/2/4 : how did Gengis Khan, Cyrus and so on (arabs, turks,... ) conquired their empire without any decent horse archer?

3 - Why chivalery is unable to take a city? To be accurate, knight were the second and decisive assault wave.

4 - pikewall was the main force of many civilizations (grecs of course, but also germans, mesopotamian city states, gauls, scots, switzerland, medieval militia...). Only roman legion and some light units were sometimes shortly better (and more for logistics reason than for tactics reason btw).


5 - between 17th and late 19th, hand weapons didn't changed that much (except for sweden and prussia). Only the way to use them changed a lot (line infantry for instance). I advice to keep those steps : arquebusiers (rifle without bayonnette) to rifleman (american civil war, prussia/french war 1870).

6 - there is no sapper! Historicaly plainly false. They should be replaced with catapults later in the game, when catapults add the ability to bombard units.

7 - If we look at rennaissance european nations or mediteranean antic nations, navy has not only a huge war role, it has a huge financial role.

8 - Terrorism has no role to play (casus belly at most). Resitance has : wwII european resistance, afghanistan resistance (against both english, russian and american imperialism), colonial resistances against mother nations, last years libanon, etc.

Now from a game point of view I agree that it would reduce fun as only 3 or 4 kinds of units were heavely used in historical time, with huge used of cheap militias and various pikewalls...

- "praetorian" changed to "legionary"


Seconded. That still bothers me every single time.

delete

so let's fill in the blanks

type\era primitive ancient medieval rennaisance industrial 20th cen modern
light inf warriors Swordsmen macemen musketmen riflemen infantry mech.inf
heavy inf StoneAxemen BrnzAxemen 2H Swd/Axemen Pistolmen grenadiers marines modern marines
anti-shock StoneSpearmen spearmen pikemen halberdiers GATLING GUN machine gun 50 Cal M.Gun
light mobile SpearHorsemen HORSE ARCHERS YUMI ARCHERS hussars cavalryPistol light Helos Hvy Attack Helos
heavy mobile chariot anc.cavalry knights lancers xxxxxx heavy armor modern armor
ranged ATL-ATL archers longbowmen Rep X-Bowmen Compnd Bowman Sniper Modern Sniper
siege SAPPERS catapult trebuchet cannon artillery howitzer Missle Batteries
Missing Citizens BALLISTA CrossBowmen Bombards anti-tank SAM.inf
FlameThrower

"Submarines that have ranged torpedo attacks (like how archers can fire from a few hexes away). This could make naval battle more exciting, as maybe you'll need some destroyers around (instead of just having a stack of battleships) to prevent these attacks."
I like this.
Also, Modern submarines (And get the image right this time).

Uh that would be way too many units for game play.

It makes up for the GAPs in the research tree.
For example, why is it that as soon as we research horseback riding we get a Horse Archer unit?
If we don't have the Wheel, shouldn't we have a Horse rider with a spear?

Sappers are no where to be found in Civ1-4, yet are used throughout history to bring down walls.
Alexander the Great and Rome used Ballistas.
Bombards are basically cannons that ignore walls, normal cannons should have to destroy them first.
Where is the guy with the 2 Handed Sword? That Claymore came from somewhere.
There are no pistol men, only one type of helicopter? Geesh, there is a difference between a Huey used in the 1960s and an Apache attack helicopter.
Machine Guns did evolve. In Civ4, we use the only one created. There is a difference in the Gatling gun used in the civil war, and a WW2 machine Gun, and a Modern 50 Cal LMG.
And FlameThrowers were used.
Now, Repeating CrossBowmen and Compound Bowman were just used to fill in the blanks.
The cavalryPistol could be "CowBoys" for the American Unique Unit. :)

I forgot to add Towers! Back in Civ 2, I created a speed 0 unit, 2 attack, 3 def, Guard Tower in the Bridge building catagory.
I also had to add Arrows. I modded the version of the cruise missle with to range of 1 with a low attack value.

Aircraft and Naval units, more types and roles, and make it actually matter! I want to be relying on my strategic bombers to disrupt enemy production, and I want my tactical bombers to disrupt enemy supply lines, I want my fighters to scramble at the first sign of an enemy bomb run. and my Close air support to take out enemy tanks. I want 2 kinds of Helis, attack and transport, I want my Air Calvary! Unarmed Spy planes that have an almost unlimited range, AWACs and sub-hunters are also major parts of a successful campaign. During Cold war era I want Strategic Nuclear bombers that are in the air at all hours of the day, Let me use Fueling aircraft to extend the range or duration of flights. I want WW2 era aircraft to fly circles around WW1 era craft, and likewise for cold war era and modern aircraft.

As for Navy, I want Trireme warfare to make sense, and more opportunity to use it. During the age of sail there should be more styles of ships, I want fast and light ships, slow but strong ships, and supply convoys. I want to make backroom deals with privateers(you shouldn't have to build privateers, they should just exist, waiting for a sack of money). I want Ironclads to actually have some kind of use. During modern times, the specific roles of each type of ship needs to be pronounced and the loss of a battleship or an Aircraft carrier needs to be a huge blow to your navy, not just 1 or 2 in a stack of 10.

I want modern land warfare to be completely different from traditional warfare, special forces and tactical strike teams need to be implemented, nobody lines an army up on the borders anymore, countries are torn apart from the inside out. I want artillery strikes that hit from a dozen hexs away and engineers building bridges behind enemy lines while infantry defends them, I want those same engineers to blow up the bridge when we are forced to retreat to slow our pursuers. Speaking of bridges, I want them to be essential to warfare, armored units shouldn't be able to cross a river with no bridge.

It sounds like I want a wargame I know, I also want the peaceful diplomacy game, but there are many less units that would apply to that style, most non-military units fall under just a few basic types; workers, settlers, spys, and maybe 1 or 2 others, anything more just becomes tedious. Besides, You can get more with a kind word and a gun than you can with just a kind word, Spock taught me that.

BB gun warrior :)

I'm not too fussed about adding more new units, but I would like to see more balance in the units you get from military-oriented techs. At the moment, the medieval/renassaince period is dominated by economic techs and the race to liberalism, where you can get away with just using the stock-standard troops of the time (muskets and then rifles). It's too expensive to get techs that enable knights, curassiers, cavalry etc.

Would like to see either the military techs cheaper, or the units that they enable to be more powerful. Make it a real game-changer whether you go for economic or military techs. This would also mean that choosing to go down the military tech path would mean units would not become obsolete so quickly.

BB gun warrior :lol::lol::lol:
the oposing unit doenst get killed or wounded, just cant move for two turns because they still cant believe they were atacked with BB guns

Maybe also a paintball gun unit, the atacked enemy changes into very bright green or red colors :cry::cry::mad::cry::mad::mad:

But seriously, I'd like to se the dismounted cavalry, movement points of cavalry and fights like infantry, all the defence bonuses. For swift movement into enemy teritory to claim an undefended hill and then holding it to harras the enemy