crossbow man overpowed?

[apocalypse105]

Is it jsut me or are crosbowman overpowered?

I mean previouslt patch it had 6 strenght and 12 range strenght

WIch is balanced

But now its 15 range and 10 strenght(melee strenght)


I don' t mind the extra range strenght it was a little bit on the weak side especially against longswordsman however 10 melee strenght really?


Pikeman can't compete against these units, longswordsman are stronger in melee but with proper flanking or terain modifiers they as worse as pikeman in close combat...

And even on open terain massive crosbowman beat swordsman because the longswordsman gets seriously damaged when atacking a crosbowman in melee combat..

ANd knights well they actually are usefull against crosbowman however they come pretty late an you usally will have horsemen at the time you're opponent will have crosbowman ...
and having a single flanking bonus or a terain bonus let you do enough dammage on mellee to kill him


Anybody else thinx crosbowman are way overpowered especially on multiplayer.

BUt not to mention against the AI I have won so much wars with only crosbowman

[Gucumatz]

On multiplayer I have noticed people have more and more been rushing crossbows. In a team game of mine my partner barely had units but had a high production capital/high pop capital. Anyways opponent rushed him with longswords/muskets only to be crushed my him spamming crossbows and holding forested ground. A couple of well placed crossbows took out the sneak attack easily. Its amazing how good they are in a good player on multi.

[CivilizedPlayer]

Yeah the 10 defense is really high. Genghis Khan charged my undefended line of crossbowman with horsemen, and got unceremoniously slaughtered. Every horseman attacked a crossbowman, and not a single crossbowman died. And the next turn I finished them off.
With Cho ku nos, you can conquer half the map in a single era using them. I used 3 of them with a single swordsman, and conquered 3 or 4 cities in a single turn each (with a slight tech advantage). I think the main problem is that 10 defense. You hardly have to protect them, and it's frustrating when I charge an undefended crossbowman but somehow take more damage than it does. Ranged units are supposed to lose (badly!) in melee combat.

[snarzberry]

They're good units but I think they need to be this good as they are one of the alternate paths to take if you get screwed with iron access. Also the AI likes to build them so a nerf will work against them more than the human player. The more common units to use on attack in that era are the sword/longsword path, which is better and favoured by players unless they can't get any iron. Overall, yeah crossbows can be nasty but I'm pretty happy with their strength.

[Silverfuturist]

[QUOTE=CivilizedPlayer;11322224]Yeah the 10 defense is really high. Genghis Khan charged my undefended line of crossbowman with horsemen, and got unceremoniously slaughtered. Every horseman attacked a crossbowman, and not a single crossbowman died. And the next turn I finished them off.

THIS!

Crossbowman on the open plains surviving an attack by the Mongol Terror, only to turn around and wipe out the entire golden horde by shooting back at them?

What does a crossbowman have in hand-to-hand combat that is so deadly? A swordsman takes a swing at a guy holding a crossbow, and the guy with the sword ends up getting hurt more than the guy holding a piece of wood with a string?

[apocalypse105]

[QUOTE=Silverfuturist;11323142]

Originally Posted by CivilizedPlayer

Yeah the 10 defense is really high. Genghis Khan charged my undefended line of crossbowman with horsemen, and got unceremoniously slaughtered. Every horseman attacked a crossbowman, and not a single crossbowman died. And the next turn I finished them off.

THIS!

Crossbowman on the open plains surviving an attack by the Mongol Terror, only to turn around and wipe out the entire golden horde by shooting back at them?

What does a crossbowman have in hand-to-hand combat that is so deadly? A swordsman takes a swing at a guy holding a crossbow, and the guy with the sword ends up getting hurt more than the guy holding a piece of wood with a string?

Crosbowman usally have a extra sword or axe with them a crosbowm is easy to carry so they just put it somewhere else and take the sword to fight

However this isn't about reality but about gameplay I really see a broken unit here


Because range units are so powerfull its pretty balanced to give them a low melee strenght it balance it out however the crosbowman doesn't seem to fallow the rule

[Silverfuturist]

[QUOTE=apocalypse105;11323218]

Originally Posted by Silverfuturist

Crosbowman usally have a extra sword or axe with them a crosbowm is easy to carry so they just put it somewhere else and take the sword to fight

However this isn't about reality but about gameplay I really see a broken unit here


Because range units are so powerfull its pretty balanced to give them a low melee strenght it balance it out however the crosbowman doesn't seem to fallow the rule

I agree with you on the gameplay!

Getting back to hypothetical world, if crossbowman can have extra swords tucked away, then my swordsman will have a few javelins tucked away (like Romans/Greeks did) and get a ranged attack

[rkelle7]

Crossbowman are overpowered...nuff said. J/k. Seriously though I think realism is important to think about in civ to make it fun. Let's say for instance a crossbowman does have a sword and we bar what Silverfurist said...swordsman practice with swords. Crossbowman would have to practice with both. I don't mind the ranged strength as much as I mind the combat. Maybe 14-16 ranged strength and 6-8 combat strength would be reasonable.

-AwesoMe

[Hammer Rabbi]

6 combat str would make them exceedingly weak. 8 combat strength (from the 10 they have now) would be the only middle ground i could agree on. they could be 1-shot by knights more often.

(just came off a frustrating reload when my conquistadors couldn't 1-shot a crossbow to save their lives, literally).

i dont know about the mp OP (dont play much mp yet), but for the most part crossbows save my keister in the right terrain with the right promos. so i definitely like them as they are.

[vonbach]

They are overpowered. I've stopped every assault I've seen
with 2 crossbows and a city.

[Tabarnak]

Agree for 8

[The_Quasar]

Certainly no lower than 8, but noting that snarzberry has a very valid point with the alternative for iron.

[antoca]

Crossbowmen lose all promotions when you upgrade them into the melee (gunpowder) unit. So they are not overpowered, but underpowered.

[Silverfuturist]

Originally Posted by antoca

Crossbowmen lose all promotions when you upgrade them into the melee (gunpowder) unit. So they are not overpowered, but underpowered.

Crossbowman keep promotions not related to ranged attack. For crossbow units I plan on upgrading, I select siege, cover, etc which will carry over to rifles.

I have used longbows and chu-ko-nus to finish off mech infantry... something with 1 HP will die to any ranged attack. Chu-ko-nus can finish off any unit with 2 hp left, and if they have the extra range promotion they never go out of style.

The argument... that they are underpowered because they don't carry over all promotions... wouldn't that mean that keshiks are underpowered because they don't keep promotions when upgrading to cavalry?

[apocalypse105]

Originally Posted by Silverfuturist

Crossbowman keep promotions not related to ranged attack. For crossbow units I plan on upgrading, I select siege, cover, etc which will carry over to rifles.

I have used longbows and chu-ko-nus to finish off mech infantry... something with 1 HP will die to any ranged attack. Chu-ko-nus can finish off any unit with 2 hp left, and if they have the extra range promotion they never go out of style.

The argument... that they are underpowered because they don't carry over all promotions... wouldn't that mean that keshiks are underpowered because they don't keep promotions when upgrading to cavalry?

Yes and not to mention that in the expansion pack they are going to get a other path of upgrade they are going to upgrade to a other range unit.


A melee unit should have a negatif thing because range units are so powerfull with 1 unit per tile having low melee srenght balance everything perfectly.

[apocalypse105]

Originally Posted by The_Quasar

Certainly no lower than 8, but noting that snarzberry has a very valid point with the alternative for iron.

IF you don't have iron you have plenty of alternatives for devence.

Knights are amazing on defence they can atack and hide back in the city or move away on rouds they have 18 combat strenght so they easy beat the longswordsman.


Pikeman fortified on a hill can hold off some longswordsman with crosbowman behind them.


But crosbowman by them self just spamming them out shouldn't be able to handle a atack of swordsman units


Do you see the balance here? A no resource unit that is stronger then a unit with a resoucre.

Instead you need to use alternative ways to defend you'reself wich is possible

[_hero_]

Originally Posted by apocalypse105

Yes and not to mention that in the expansion pack they are going to get a other path of upgrade they are going to upgrade to a other range unit.


A melee unit should have a negatif thing because range units are so powerfull with 1 unit per tile having low melee srenght balance everything perfectly.

The expansion pack is probably going to rebalance combat values.

[joncnunn]

I guess if the Crossbow is considered the best normal unit for its time frame, then that would make the Chinese UU the best one in the game. (2 attacks per turn).

[bhavv]

Why only propose a strength decrease of 2?

How about 9 strength and 14 ranged? And also buff swordsmen to 12 strength, and reduce pikes to 9.

In Civ 4 you were mostly screwed without strategic resources. In Civ V they are meaningless when you can dominate far too easily with pikes and crossbows.

[vonbach]

Or you could not lower the combat strength and give
the crossbows a set up time. That would balance them.