England the new best Civ?

In this thread we had some discussion about UU's unique abilities and should they or should they not keep those UA's after upgrade. I said that the UA should not pass on after the upgrade because of couple of things, the AI being one of those reasons. Well, how does the G&K handle this "problem"?
im almost 100% positive the +1 range transfers since i've had rifles with +1 range pre-GK
 
Until you face a three times as large Ottoman navy.
Which he dont need to either build or pay gold in upkeep for btw (well, 1/3 tbh). :lol:

Basically he can faceroll the keyboard and your world famous English navy is at the bottom of the sea.

Nice balancing there, Firaxis. :crazyeye:
disagree the british navy with ship of the lines faceroll anything that steps on a blue tile. melee ships (with the exception of privateers) seem 100% outclassed by ranged ships as melee ships dont have the damage to be a serious threat to ranged ships or cities. Ranged ships include the frigate and battleship while the melee versions are a caravel(LOL?) and the destroyer. The ottomans only outperform the british ships pre-Gallass.
 
disagree the british navy with ship of the lines faceroll anything that steps on a blue tile. melee ships (with the exception of privateers) seem 100% outclassed by ranged ships as melee ships dont have the damage to be a serious threat to ranged ships or cities. Ranged ships include the frigate and battleship while the melee versions are a caravel(LOL?) and the destroyer. The ottomans only outperform the british ships pre-Gallass.
I think you miss the fact that a Ship of the Line is in fact not much better (2 measly points in range strenght) at all than a standard frigate. Its just 20 hammers cheaper.

I HOPE this have changed now in G&Ks? But if not, the Ottomans will easily rule the sea with three times bigger navy.
Oh, and did i mention that the Ottomans will have that navy WAY before you and that he dont even have to build them? The ships are for free! :p
Not only are they free, he actually gets gold for getting them...! :crazyeye:

... omg
 
im almost 100% positive the +1 range transfers since i've had rifles with +1 range pre-GK

Yes, the range transfers.

Yes, England is a powerhouse. Gatling + Machine Guns can act as modern archers, mowing down infantry, Ship of the Line + Battleship will completely obliterate coastal cities and units (Battleships have 3 range, FYI), and the extra spy will keep you in the tech race more.
 
I like G + K because England is now more than just navy + longbowman. The extra spy, while not OP, is certainly nice for counter-espionage, and a nice nod to Elizabeth's spymaster, Walsingham.

Longbowmen keeping their +1 range upgrade is really cool. Playing Elizabeth with privateers and Ships of the Line against Korean turtle ships is pretty fun.
 
I think you miss the fact that a Ship of the Line is in fact not much better (2 measly points in range strenght) at all than a standard frigate. Its just 20 hammers cheaper.

I HOPE this have changed now in G&Ks? But if not, the Ottomans will easily rule the sea with three times bigger navy.
Oh, and did i mention that the Ottomans will have that navy WAY before you and that he dont even have to build them? The ships are for free! :p
Not only are they free, he actually gets gold for getting them...! :crazyeye:

... omg
They are free well a -25g cost but still they are bad. Melee ships are terrible when compared to their ranged counter parts. Part of this imo is the fact that the melee ships are the worse ships in the game, I mean the Caravel, destroyer, trieme, and by association with the treime a galley. You honestly have to ask yourself. If you want to take a city are you going to bring caravels over frigates? i mean in vanilla caravels were nothing more then the scout ship that upgraded to a destroyer. It's not like they got a combat upgrade or anything.
 
They are free well a -25g cost but still they are bad. Melee ships are terrible when compared to their ranged counter parts. Part of this imo is the fact that the melee ships are the worse ships in the game, I mean the Caravel, destroyer, trieme, and by association with the treime a galley. You honestly have to ask yourself. If you want to take a city are you going to bring caravels over frigates? i mean in vanilla caravels were nothing more then the scout ship that upgraded to a destroyer. It's not like they got a combat upgrade or anything.

Using melee ships, you can take coastal cities without the need for a land-based attack. This is amazing for continents games where your units are vulnerable when disembarking on enemy land.
 
They are free well a -25g cost but still they are bad. Melee ships are terrible when compared to their ranged counter parts. Part of this imo is the fact that the melee ships are the worse ships in the game, I mean the Caravel, destroyer, trieme, and by association with the treime a galley. You honestly have to ask yourself. If you want to take a city are you going to bring caravels over frigates? i mean in vanilla caravels were nothing more then the scout ship that upgraded to a destroyer. It's not like they got a combat upgrade or anything.
Have you played the Ottomans in G&K? If not, ill still trust everyone that actually have, and they do say that they completely faceroll everything on blue tiles with their vastly superior navy.
Not only do they completely obliterate everything with their 3x as large navy, they actually only have to pay only a 1/3 of that navys upkeep. AND they can get free new ships and money to pay for the upkeep from farming a coastal barbcamp or two.

As for your argument that ranged ships > melee. Sure. Its just that little detail that the Ottomans can have three times more ranged ships as well! :)
Nothing stops them from building ranged ships while getting melee ships for free.

Everyone who have played the Ottoman civ says its ludicrously overpowered. It will be very interesting to try it out in G&K in a few hours.
 
you could bring a marine or just have an amphib promoted unit if you wanted all that. Melee ships are honestly useless from start to finish except maybe for selling. I'm a big Ottoman fan because of their land atvantage and the free ships are great for just throwing to their doom. I'll build a caravel to explore that's about it, the privateer is amazing because of it's ability to take enemy ships. It's just that out side of those 2 skills (the high movement and the steal a unit in the water) There isnt much that a melee ship does that other types of units do better

edit: @securion yeah i play ottoman, like i said i love the land advantage that you call a Janissary. It's cool to have a bunch of ships and all but if all they are good for is being sunk and a suicide bomber type of ship it's pretty useless. I will admit that my naval experience with the ottomans leaves much to be desired especially when compared to my england naval experience. But numbers don't mean much when you have ship of the lines that are able to 1 shot caravels while being cheap and easy to make since longswords upgrade to muskets, freeing up iron. I dont have a problem with all melee ships, i think the privateer is all types of broken (infact if the ottoman galley could promote to a privateer instead of a trieme that, to me, would be incredible). I just think they are outclassed 100% and as such kinda useless
 
They are free well a -25g cost but still they are bad. Melee ships are terrible when compared to their ranged counter parts. Part of this imo is the fact that the melee ships are the worse ships in the game, I mean the Caravel, destroyer, trieme, and by association with the treime a galley. You honestly have to ask yourself. If you want to take a city are you going to bring caravels over frigates? i mean in vanilla caravels were nothing more then the scout ship that upgraded to a destroyer. It's not like they got a combat upgrade or anything.

Pretty funny that you completely ignore the (melee) privateers which are available at the same tech as frigates. A few of them with different promotions can capture a whole coast line full of ships and cities. And after that, you have all those enemy frigates fighting on your side. :lol:

Of course, a healthy mix of melee and ranged ships is better but saying that melee ships are useless is just wrong. It seems like you only compare galleassies to triremes and frigates to caravels (with several techs between them in both comparisons). That's not how it works ^^
 
Pretty funny that you completely ignore the (melee) privateers which are available at the same tech as frigates. A few of them with different promotions can capture a whole coast line full of ships and cities. And after that, you have all those enemy frigates fighting on your side. :lol:

Of course, a healthy mix of melee and ranged ships is better but saying that melee ships are useless is just wrong. It seems like you only compare galleassies to triremes and frigates to caravels (with several techs between them in both comparisons). That's not how it works ^^

actually i've said i like the privateers(to make matters worse it's in the post above yours) but i dont believe they are on the galley -> Trieme -> caravel -> destroyer path, so the ottomans can't upgrade to them which is what we were talking about.

and I was comparing melee and ranged ships of the same era, i cant help that one comes at the beginning of an era and another comes at the end. Triemes are the pre-caravel (renaissance era) melee ship and the ranged counter-part being the galleass. should i compare the medieval era galleass to the renaissance era caravel?

even if you think its unfair at that point, when Renaissance hits you have a caravel as the strongest upgradable melee ship in the game compared to the frigate, the strongest upgradable renaissance era ranged ship.

melee ships are too weak compared to their ranged counter parts, the only strength they have is the ability to capture a city, which can be done by an amphibious promoted melee unit and honestly after a ranged barrage you probably dont even need amphibious
 
I belive there isnt a civ wich would be able to hold on to its UU's unique ability after it has been upgraded to something else, and I dont think that England is going to be an exception in this matter.

That said I think they should propably change the longbows ability.

Why? Because England obviously cannot promote the +1 extra range to its longbow unit because it allready has that promotion. England also cannot maintain its UU's unique ability after upgrading because neither cant anyone else, so that wouldnt be fair. If this is the case, then all the other civs actually can upgrade their crosbowman (longbowman) to get the +1 extra range and still maintain that promotion after the upgrade, but England would not be able to do that.

Or they might just remove the extra range promotion from all the units after upgrading to gatling/MG. Anyway, I still belive that England cannot maintain its UU's unique ability after upgrading, because neither cant anyone else.

America's minutemen when upgrades keep their "no terrain cost" benefit. I made sure to pump a few out despite not being in war so I could take advantage of this when they are upgraded.
 
I agree that melee ships need some love and some possible rethinking.

Ignoring UUs, the Trireme is fine (maybe a little weak), the same with the galleass. The renaissance/medieval is when it starts becoming odd and it is mainly the caravel I think is bit odd.

I'm fine with it not being very strong as it is more of a scout but then why is it melee? Either it needs to be something like a glass cannon where it is fast and has good offensive, or it needs to be ranged in my opinion. I imagine navies where the ranged ships are lighter and provide support and some weakening barrages as the melee ships which are stronger roll in and finish the job but I guess that is just my own opinion. Some people (and reality) probably favors the fact that the "big guns" are ranged while the weaker ones are fast and get in close.

The frigate is fine in my opinion although if you refer to my previous paragraph I'm thinking maybe it should become the new melee ship instead of caravels. I don't remember where privateers come into play, but if they are about the same time as frigates that opens an interesting scenario.

I think then than caravels could be scouts with weak range, frigates your main range, and privateers your melee. However privateers are supposed to be somewhat glass cannon like and sneaky as far as I am able to tell with the capturing units and whatnot, so this may make them lose their flavor.

I love the ironclad but I honestly think it doesn't fit in very well with the progression. Perhaps it should be an upgrade for the privateer? Basically we have a unit that is supposed to be very tough for its tech level. I am quite ok with with it being melee and I love the coastal bonus/ocean penalty it has. The problem is where it does it fit in? The caravel which is melee logically upgrades into the iron clad, but even if we ignore my earlier points, the caravel is basically a light scout that does melee, while the ironclad is a slow (outside of coast) tanky unit. It just seems odd. You can have the frigate upgrade into the iron clad, but then it turns into a melee unit (which may be ok if we changed the caravel to range and the frigate to melee) but then you are left without a deep sea tank except the privateer, which isn't really a tank.

The problem basically isn't too much different in the modern era with battleships, submarines, carriers, and destroyers. Refer to my comment about big guns to see how I feel about ranged and melee. The problem here is that we basically have battleships as ranged, destroyers as melee/scout/support (interception) hybrids, submarines as ranged glass cannons, and carriers as support (depending on the aircraft obviously). Before we even discuss the individual units I think most of us can agree we need a ranged, a melee, and a support. The others are fun and important, but they aren't essential and this era is tricky. Let's start with the battleship:

I think the battleship works pretty well as it is being ranged. The problem arises when if we try to change other units like the destroyer, we are left without a melee and then I would say this unit makes the most logical melee choice, but then again the big guns are begging to be use for bombardment.

I like destroyers, but once again I think it is a bit odd they are melee. I think their role of submarine hunter and interception support is great, but aren't support units usually either scouting or in the back, not going into melee?

I LOVE submarines! I think they are implemented quite well and there really isn't much I would change about them except perhaps making them a bit weaker. Their ranged attack is ok, but I think if you find a submarine you should be able to kill it pretty easily. That being said, I sometimes think 3 range for a sub is too much but taking it to 2 might be overkill. Either keep it 3 and nerf the ranged just a hair and the strength a little, or make it 2 and keep the sub the way it is.

The carrier really doesn't need much explaining in my opinion. Obviously you make it what you want it to be, depending on your aircraft and I can't think of anything to add to this. I think it might be interesting to give them interception (most carriers are equipped with that sort of weaponry) but then a fleet with a destroyer, a carrier, and a just 1 fighter not to mention 3, is pretty much untouchable from air (assuming fairly equal numbers). So while the idea might fit, if we were to do that the destroyer would need to lose its interception. I personally think that would work well and better define the roles. The carrier could become more of a support, destroyer a melee sub hunter/scout, battleship your general range. and subs your anti-naval units.

Once you reach the atomic (I think?) age you add some more units to the mix and it almost gets convoluted. With all the previous units, you now have missile cruisers and nuclear subs. The problem is that units overlap, and while that isn't necessarily a bad thing, it does make things a bit confusing.

The missile cruiser as an indirect ranged unit carrying missiles makes perfect sense. I think the interception almost makes it a little too strong, but I can see why it has it considering I imagine it carries SAMs. As a suggestion, I think maybe we should increase the missile count (5 perhaps?), maybe even you can buy missiles on the cruiser, but take away the ranged attack. It might make the unit a little underwhelming but I'm just trying to give each unit a defined role.

As for the nuclear sub, I don't really know what to do. Obviously it is much like the regular submarine and that is fine. That it carries missiles makes it overlap with the cruiser, but I at least see logically why it happens. Perhaps make it only carry ICBMs so you can stack your cruise missiles with the cruiser? Another problem is that is overlaps with the regular submarine. Obviously it is a bit stronger and can carry missiles, and the bonus against other subs is odd to me, but not a big deal, but then why do we have this as a separate unit instead of an upgrade? I propose making the regular submarine upgrade into this unit and I think that fixes this issue. (To be honest, this might already be the case and I just forgot!).

Bottom line: Even if nothing else changed, melee ships should receive a slight buff. My other suggestions I think make sense and would make the game have more direction, but there are also more pressing issues (such as the religion UI!).

So there you go, if you made it this far, congratulations on having an above average attention span and I hope we all can get some good discussion stemming from this!
 
i think a big hit to the ottomans was the trieme being melee over ranged. and Zerrigan i read everything you wrote, twice over actually lol.

I think pre-renaissance ships are underwelming, the trieme more underwhelming then the galleass at least the galleass could just pick off ranged on the coast. I think the problem with the melee ships is three-fold. 1)that they were changed to melee instead of adding in melee ships. 2) they didn't recieve a damage bonus. 3) Ranged ships aren't 1 shot so they can be sort of tanky while doing massive damage to melee ships.
 
America's minutemen when upgrades keep their "no terrain cost" benefit. I made sure to pump a few out despite not being in war so I could take advantage of this when they are upgraded.

You're replying to a post made in April, a very uninformed post.


The English Longbowman do keep their +1 range benefit when upgrading. Gatling Guns and Machineguns upgraded from Longbowman have 2 range.

There shouldn't be anything more that needs to be said. Unit promotions are kept when upgrading, unit abilities (stuff like ignores terrain cost, etc.) are not kept. <--- that last bolded stuff is all IIRC.
 
As far as the new ranged units (land), is anyone else still sort of confused as to what to do with them? They are weaker than melee, but basically have to move into melee range to hit enemies which leaves them open to attacks that a melee unit could better handle. Why not use a melee? Of course you if you can surround with the range that is fine, but that is an ideal situation. The only big use I can find for them is helping in taking cities as they can help wear it down without being attacked. Just bring 1 or 2 infantry along and let your arty and guns wear the city down. Unfortunately the guns are so weak (compared to infantry) that they get killed pretty easily.

I don't know how much this would change the game, but I think gatling guns and machine guns should keep the 2 range. If this happened and the british range upgrade still transferred we might have problems, but that is easily correctable. Thought on this, or am I just using these units in the wrong way?

Edit: I guess I should note the weakness mainly applies to the gatling gun. The gatling works ok with riflemen, but once the great war infantry are out, it started to get outperformed. The machine gun is more balanced with the infantry in my opinion.
 
As far as the new ranged units (land), is anyone else still sort of confused as to what to do with them? They are weaker than melee, but basically have to move into melee range to hit enemies which leaves them open to attacks that a melee unit could better handle. Why not use a melee? Of course you if you can surround with the range that is fine, but that is an ideal situation. The only big use I can find for them is helping in taking cities as they can help wear it down without being attacked. Just bring 1 or 2 infantry along and let your arty and guns wear the city down. Unfortunately the guns are so weak (compared to infantry) that they get killed pretty easily.

I don't know how much this would change the game, but I think gatling guns and machine guns should keep the 2 range. If this happened and the british range upgrade still transferred we might have problems, but that is easily correctable. Thought on this, or am I just using these units in the wrong way?

I think ranged units have gone back to their traditional role as city/chokepoint defenders. The changes to garrisons help support this, the gattling/machine gun units mean that you have defenders through out all eras. I guess the -25% to cities is to help with pre-mathmatics sieges but idk.

I think the range of machine guns should indeed be 2 tiles it does defeat the purpose of being ranged if you can only attack 1 tile unless you are extremely effective against units that melee
 
actually i've said i like the privateers(to make matters worse it's in the post above yours) but i dont believe they are on the galley -> Trieme -> caravel -> destroyer path, so the ottomans can't upgrade to them which is what we were talking about.

and I was comparing melee and ranged ships of the same era, i cant help that one comes at the beginning of an era and another comes at the end. Triemes are the pre-caravel (renaissance era) melee ship and the ranged counter-part being the galleass. should i compare the medieval era galleass to the renaissance era caravel?

even if you think its unfair at that point, when Renaissance hits you have a caravel as the strongest upgradable melee ship in the game compared to the frigate, the strongest upgradable renaissance era ranged ship.

melee ships are too weak compared to their ranged counter parts, the only strength they have is the ability to capture a city, which can be done by an amphibious promoted melee unit and honestly after a ranged barrage you probably dont even need amphibious

Ok, if this is true, the upgrade path for triremes is a bit odd and the gap between caravels and destroyers is too big.

So if anything, the caravel is the weak spot here, not melee ships in general (you said melee ships are useless from start to finish and again, that's plain wrong).
Privateer has many uses and the iron-clad is extremely strong now (can cross the ocean, double movement in coastal tiles and +33% attack against cities + two siege promotions available).

Edit: By the way, doesn't the caravel upgrade to the iron-clad?
 
Gatling guns are fine you are forgetting they also have combat strength equal to their range so they can stand in the frontline without getting annhilated.

Man Ships of the line got buffed in G and K. They now have 5 or 20% more combat strength and 7, 25%, ranged, and Englands extra movement. Add in 15 less hammers and thats a pretty decent unit especially with navies being more useful.

Melee ships do need some love. the problem is their job is to hit cities which have been so massively buffed its hard to make melee strong enough to really threaten them without breaking naval combat. They should allow melee ships to move after attack so you can avoid return fire and gang up on cities. That would increase their power significantly.

Yes the caravel upgrades to the Ironclad, which can now enter ocean tiles though it only has 3 movement there. It gets double movement in coastal regions though and an extra 33% bonus against cities which means Ironclads may ACTUALLY be useful for once.
 
Gatling guns are fine you are forgetting they also have combat strength equal to their range so they can stand in the frontline without getting annhilated.

Man Ships of the line got buffed in G and K. They now have 5 or 20% more combat strength and 7, 25%, ranged, and Englands extra movement. Add in 15 less hammers and thats a pretty decent unit especially with navies being more useful.

Melee ships do need some love. the problem is their job is to hit cities which have been so massively buffed its hard to make melee strong enough to really threaten them without breaking naval combat. They should allow melee ships to move after attack so you can avoid return fire and gang up on cities. That would increase their power significantly.

Yes the caravel upgrades to the Ironclad, which can now enter ocean tiles though it only has 3 movement there. It gets double movement in coastal regions though and an extra 33% bonus against cities which means Ironclads may ACTUALLY be useful for once.

Trust me, two iron clads with two frigates as support cut through cities like butter if your tech rate was decent enough.
 
Top Bottom