I do have a couple of suggestions for changes to the UU's that I would like to see. These are things that are not currently wrong, but I feel could be made a bit better.
Heavy Hussar (Polish UU): I think this would be better off named Winged Hussar. That is what the artwork shows and I think it is a much more evocative name. I also think this would be better if it was a Cuirassier replacement instead of a Mailed Knight replacement, keeping the Charge I promotion. The most famous time period for the Hussars is the 16th-17th century, which is the Renaissance Era and should be a Renaissance unit.
I think a very good proposal. The Winged Hussars were called so for differentiated from the other similar troops of other empires, especially Hungary. I've always loved miniatures of the Winged Hussars of some board wargames, those wings are very cool on the back.
It seems very logical change the unit to Cuirassier, for reasons of historical dates (although the typical Winged Husar until century XVIII always carrying a heavy spear and not a firearm), but I have to remind you a previous comment of yours:
[*]Guard Hussar (Denmark UU): I think you went too far with reducing its strength, and it is actually supposed to be +2 strength over the standard Cuirassier. The original was Strength 23 compared to 21 for the Cuirassier. I don't think +25% attack vs. Cannon is enough to make a UU.
Therefore, I think it's logical give an extra promotion to Winged Husar besides the Charge I promotion, Shock I, because the continous charges this unit were brutal against infantry until the appearance of the infantry with firearms. Do you agree?
Viet Cong (Vietnamese UU): I almost think this could be a Modern Infantry replacement rather than a Marine replacement. I would drop the Ambush I promotion but keep Guerrilla I and Woodsman I. This doesn't have to happen, but I thought it would be interesting.
I seem fine most of the suggested changes because I do not like too much as a replacement for the Marine unit. But I have a few extra suggestions to what you said .
Vietcong troops are specialized in guerrilla tactics and continuous movement, and always had serious problems facing the United States artillery in Vietnam War, so they trying to avoid the artillery, or created surprise attacks against artillery positions to try eliminate it. But I support the elimination of Promotion Ambush I. Instead is awarded a promotion that show the ability to be always on movement and their ability to retreat.
Proposed changes to VietCong unit:
- It is not a replacement for the Marines, going to be a replacement of Modern Infantry.
- Maintain Guerilla I and Woodsman I promotions.
- Acquires March promotion.
- Acquires an +20% to retreat.
- Lose the +25 % to defense of cities, typical of Modern Infantry. (They were a specialized guerrillas, were not good defending cities) You like the idea?
Galeass (Venetian UU): I think this should be a Galleass replacement rather than a Caravel. The regular Galleass was one of my earliest additions to the mod (so it came after the Megapack), and we could call the Venetian version a Great Galleass or War Galleass, keeping the Coastal Assault and Coastal Guard promotions.
I think a wonderful proposal. It is more historically correct, and besides, the description of the unit fully supports this change. Thank you very much!
Boer Commando (South African UU) and Huszar Cavalry (Hungarian UU) are currently the same unit: a Cavalry replacement with Commando. Do you think we can fnd something different to do with one of them?
I agree. I think it must be the Boer Commando which retains the promotion, as they were historically used as a unit of fast guerrilla tactics against their enemies, quickly advancing through British territory during the Boer wars.
The Huszar Cavalry unit was used more as a light support unit, flanking the enemy, trying to capture or destroy their artillery. I think it would be more appropriate remove the Commando promotion, and assign them two promotions, Flanking I and Charge I.
One more thing: South Africa's game text is misspelled as South Arfica. That needs fixing.
And also fix TXT_KEY_CITY_NAME_OOS_LONDON. The GameText file has a dash where the CivilizationInfos has an underscore. And the GameText also has Londen (one o, one e) where the Info file has London (two o's).
On top of that, Welkom is also misspelled everywhere in the GameText file.
I'll fix it, thanks.
I have a few suggestions about two units:
Iraqi Republican Guard: It makes little sense to be a replacement of Marine, which specializes in landings and attacks through rivers.
The Republican Guard was trained to operate in deserts (Iran-Iraq War and Iraq-Kuwait War), in open field and especially to attack rebels and prevent internal rebellions in own cities or newly conquered cities.
Perhaps it would be more appropriate as a Modern Infantry replacement, instead a Marine replacement. They should have a good bonus defending in cities, ability to prevent rebellions and a light capability when attacking cities.
Proposed changes in the Iraqi Republican Guard:
- It is not a replacement for the Marines, going to be a replacement of Modern Infantry.
- +20% when defending cities.
- +15% when attacking cities.
- Acquires Patrol I promotion.
The same applies to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, but with a few changes:
- Continuing to be a replacement for the Modern Infantry.
- +30% when defending cities.
- Acquires Patrol I promotion.
- They cost -10 production.
These two units were formed to protect the own territory, as preeminently defensive troops and to prevent the insurgency, although later the Iraqi army use these units as assault troops and urban combat.
The differences between the two units are scarce (as in the real world), except that the Iraqi Republican Guard has been more trained and used to attack cities, and the Revolutionary Guards are better defended cities and more numerous and fast to recruit.
You like these ideas?
