Shouldn't swordmen be better than macemen ?

V

valrond

Chieftain
Joined
Nov 9, 2001
Messages
57
Location
Spain
And not only that, once you reach the macemen (public administration, I think), swordsmen and axemen disappear, and you play the middle ages only with macemen. Very nice indeed, and realistic.

I think Swordsmen (I mean the Middle ages broadswords, not the Roman Gladius and previous swords) like they are depicted in the game should be the top hand to hand combat units of the game till renaissance (well, there are no more hand to hand, so the best), and still keep axemen and macemen.

What about this ?

Axeman: same as it is.
Maceman: developed sooner, 6 power, +20% attacking cities
Swordsman: developed later, possibly with feudalism besides the tech already requiered. 8 power, +10% attacking cities, +25% vs hand to hand.

What do you think ?
 
I think you should mod it, then.
 
I agree they should be better but they should also take longer to make since swords were so expensive.
 
You can parry a sword, you cant really parry a mace onyl evade it :/ Also it's a game give it a rest.
 
A mace deals crushing damage while a sword slashing or impaling. A mace does inflict more damage but is clumsier to use.
 
Why would a swordsman be developed with feudalism?
They were around a long time before feudalism was invented.
I think if anything the macemen should be better than the swordsman.
 
DeathReborn said:
A mace deals crushing damage while a sword slashing or impaling. A mace does inflict more damage but is clumsier to use.
Click to expand...
Well, that depends. You can't easily chop off limbs and heads with a mace.
 
valrond said:
And not only that, once you reach the macemen (public administration, I think), swordsmen and axemen disappear, and you play the middle ages only with macemen. Very nice indeed, and realistic.
Click to expand...

The maces were not better or worse than swords, maces were often used against heavily armoured units, but it was never a general weapon, not even during the middle ages. Also, the mace was invented long time ago, before feudalism.

(I mean the Middle ages broadswords, not the Roman Gladius and previous swords)
Click to expand...

Well, gladius has proven often to be better than longswords and maces.:p
 
The Last Conformist said:
Well, that depends. You can't easily chop off limbs and heads with a mace.
Click to expand...

Swords lose a lot of their effectiveness when Plate Armor come sinto play, a Mace does not. Can a sword crush a Plate Helmet and the head inside said helmet? No they can't. I take part in a battle re-enactment not far from me (Battle of Bosworth Field, 1485) and given the choice between a sword or a Flanged Mace i'd pick the mace every time. More effective against armored opponents.
 
One thing I have wanted to see for a long time is unit stats that change by discovering new technologies. This way the initial swordsman could be rather weak: Imagine a strength 4 swordsman available with Bronze Working. Iron Working makes all your swordsmen strength 6, without upgrading or so. Monarchy or Theology gives it the city attack bonus, and Feudalism gives a strength upgrade again.
 
I like that idea, good one Junuxx! The game just came out and i cant wait for an expansion.
 
Junuxx said:
One thing I have wanted to see for a long time is unit stats that change by discovering new technologies. This way the initial swordsman could be rather weak: Imagine a strength 4 swordsman available with Bronze Working. Iron Working makes all your swordsmen strength 6, without upgrading or so. Monarchy or Theology gives it the city attack bonus, and Feudalism gives a strength upgrade again.
Click to expand...

Precisely. There were swords made of copper, and maces made even before than swords, made of a stick of wood. Then, swords became better with iron and then with steel, as did maces in the middle ages with full metal maces and flanged maces.

In fact, the most common weapon types were already available in ancient times: swords, axes, maces, knives, bows and arrows, lances, spears. They only developed and were better though the improvements on technology and the combat experience, but the weapon types were the same, for the most part.

And about flanged weapons, yes, they are better than swords against plate mail, so they should have a bonus against plate mail units. All of this will have to be included in a mod such as the old DyP/RaR of Civ3, but meanwhile, I think it's too boring and unrealistic to have just the maceman as the sole unit for the middle ages.
 
Junuxx said:
One thing I have wanted to see for a long time is unit stats that change by discovering new technologies. This way the initial swordsman could be rather weak: Imagine a strength 4 swordsman available with Bronze Working. Iron Working makes all your swordsmen strength 6, without upgrading or so. Monarchy or Theology gives it the city attack bonus, and Feudalism gives a strength upgrade again.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it cost money, though, to retool the swordsmen with the new equipment? Also, it's not like Swordsmen in enemy territory will magically grow iron swords once iron working is discovered, so I think requiring an upgrade makes sense (parhaps the upgrade cost could be significantly reduced through the XML files). Then, you could simply represent those extra abilities as several series of upgrades, simply by having five kinds of swordsmen all on an upgrade path.:)
 
In my experience (and I am NOT claiming to be 100% correct), the term mace is often used as a generic term meaning "bludgeoning weapon with spikes/flanges". A flail is a slightly less generic term which incorporates a chain into the mix. If I am recalling the unit graphic correctly, what the Macemen carry is what I would call a "morning star", or as my friends and I jokingly called it many years ago, "spikes on a ball on a chain on a stick". However, it would still be a "mace" (generic) as well.

Again, this is all just what I remember from doing the research into medieval weaponry when I was a kid (yeah, I was a D&D geek who often frequented the library).

Bob
 
The problem is that Swordsman was named after the weapon. The core types of weapons have remained basically the same: spears, swords, and clubs. What has changed was secondary design elements, the type of metal, the size, the quality of manufacture, etc. In addition, the organizational structure of military units evolved a lot, not to mention tactics and armor. I don't think you can express all of those changes over time in simple, succinct names for units, though; what's a word for "spear-wielding horse rider with stirrups and light armor?" Hence less good names like Swordsman or Maceman that aren't realistic.
 
rbird said:
In my experience (and I am NOT claiming to be 100% correct), the term mace is often used as a generic term meaning "bludgeoning weapon with spikes/flanges". A flail is a slightly less generic term which incorporates a chain into the mix. If I am recalling the unit graphic correctly, what the Macemen carry is what I would call a "morning star", or as my friends and I jokingly called it many years ago, "spikes on a ball on a chain on a stick". However, it would still be a "mace" (generic) as well.

Again, this is all just what I remember from doing the research into medieval weaponry when I was a kid (yeah, I was a D&D geek who often frequented the library).

Bob
Click to expand...

Lots of people use "mace" to refer to any bludgeoning weapon, but they're wrong.:p

Also, a morning star is a mace with spikes, not a spiked flail. ;)

(I'm still a D&D geek)

apatheist said:
The problem is that Swordsman was named after the weapon. The core types of weapons have remained basically the same: spears, swords, and clubs. What has changed was secondary design elements, the type of metal, the size, the quality of manufacture, etc. In addition, the organizational structure of military units evolved a lot, not to mention tactics and armor. I don't think you can express all of those changes over time in simple, succinct names for units, though; what's a word for "spear-wielding horse rider with stirrups and light armor?" Hence less good names like Swordsman or Maceman that aren't realistic. [emphasis mine]
Click to expand...

Level 3 Horseman. :p ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lonecat Nekophrodite
Civ7 units that can be fixed.
Replies
4
Views
627
MutilationWave
MutilationWave
Lonecat Nekophrodite
[Mod Potential] 4 Age systems: Add Medieval Between Antiquity and Exploration Age.
Replies
12
Views
840
Lonecat Nekophrodite
Lonecat Nekophrodite
Eddie Verdde
MORE TYPES OF GOVERNMENT FOR ANTIQUITY – A NON EUROCENTRIC APPROACH
Replies
0
Views
133
Eddie Verdde
Eddie Verdde
E
Some thoughts after the game play
Replies
1
Views
533
Zaarin
Zaarin
T
A Conversation About Population Size
Replies
11
Views
1K
tman2000
T
Back
Top Bottom