Civ of the Week: Russians

Up now at civ3.com...

http://www.civ3.com/civoftheweek.cfm

6/4/3? That's a bit disappointing, as the total stat increas is only 8.3%, as opposed to 25% for the Babylonian Bowman or 22% for the Chinese Rider.

Also, increased defence seems a bit odd - the Cossacks were hardly known for manning the walls. Increased movement, or perhaps the ability to ignore ZOCs, or even increased attack, would've, in my mind, been more in keeping with Cossack image.

It seems like kind of a drag on the Russians for having them have such a late specific unit.

I wonder what the American unit would be...

Bruce Willis?

Now we know that Chinese Rider(4/4/3) is really good. I hope they won't change it.

I guess the reason they increase defense is because in CIV3, which bring in the army concept, good defense is more valuable that offensive ability. Look at Rome and Persia special units, 3/3/1 legion is better than 4/2/1 immortal. When legion attack a fortred(?) immortal, it's 3 verse 2*1.5=3. Chance are even. But Legion will have a better chance of survival verse vice: 4 vs 3*1.5=4.5.

I agree! The Cossack is somewhat dissapointing. They should have given it 2 points or an additional ability but that is simply bad

Well, I'm not too impressed with the Cossacks, at least on paper. Once we get to play the game, maybe the differences will be more dramatic.

All this talk of extra movement for some units reminds me ...
Remember in SMAC - Wasn't one of the advantages of becoming an Elite unit that you got +1 movement? That was pretty significant... Or am I misremembering?
Anyway, I wonder if there are going to be any really cool benefits for having an Elite unit. And what happens when it's promoted to a Great Leader? Might GL units in and of themselves be valuable on the front lines?

- Stravaig

Originally posted by stravaig
Well, I'm not too impressed with the Cossacks, at least on paper. Once we get to play the game, maybe the differences will be more dramatic.

All this talk of extra movement for some units reminds me ...
Remember in SMAC - Wasn't one of the advantages of becoming an Elite unit that you got +1 movement? That was pretty significant... Or am I misremembering?
Anyway, I wonder if there are going to be any really cool benefits for having an Elite unit. And what happens when it's promoted to a Great Leader? Might GL units in and of themselves be valuable on the front lines?

- Stravaig

Click to expand...

Elite units get a benefit: they have 5 hit points, as opposed to 4 for vets and 3 for regulars. That's pretty much it. Well, that and the fact that they can spawn Great Leaders.

Great Leaders aren't designed to be combat units -- they have attack and defense of 0, but movement of 3. Hint: use those 3 movement points to get the leader out of battle quick and into a city, otherwise he's a sitting duck.

Of course if you so desired you could go into the editor and give the leader an attack and defense value, that's up to you.


Dan

Thanks for the clarification, Dan!

I forsee a time when I've an absolutely critical Elite unit on the front lines, and it gets promoted into a tactically /useless/ GL, thereby hosing my battle plans and setting me /way/ back in my current campaign.
Interesting little problem, that will be.

- Stravaig

Damn those cossacks!
I want MiGs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He said "spawn" a GL, not "get promoted into" a GL. I think that means the elite unit is still there and a second unit appears.

So Dan, what's it like to have your every word parsed and analyzed like a religious text?

MIGs!

But Cossacks are good too I guess...

With Leonardo's Workshop, upgrading my elite hordes of horsemen and knights into Cossacks strategy seem promising.

That is, unless we can upgrade stuff into tanks and jets...

I think that in Civ3 a units defense value depends more on its discipline, the ability to react to a tactical offensive- so when the tanks come rolling in, the unit must be able to rally quicky. Since Cossacs were proffessional soldiers like the legions I think its fine they get a defensive point... but is that it?? 8% increase? They barely have an edge over the chineese rider, and cavalry is like two units ahead of knights! BOOOO!

At least they didnt give the Russians Stalin for a leader. But they shure didnt make Catherine any prettier than she was. Possibly they made her uglyer. BOOO! Ugly leader and a weak unit... sob... I am gonna go do some drugs or something...

Leonardos workshop aint there anymore in that sense: all units can be upgraded now, but only when in cities. Leonardos workshop now makes the upgrade cost cheaper.
It was a bit unfair you have to admit.

The cossack does look like a bit of a dissapointment though. Maybe they could have taken away one of the resource needed to make it: that would have evened it up.
Oh well, dont think ill be playing the russians.

Catherine the great's edition does add some more spice to the hottest leasder debate though

I knew about the Leonardo's workshop thing. But for a warmonger like myself, it's still a must-have wonder.:tank:

The Cossack will make the Russian Army pretty homogenous as with the rider for the Chinese...with large movement, offense and defence why the need to build any other type of military units? The exception being artillery to aim your attacks on fortifications, but apart from that I see homogenity!

Still it is only for a short golden age...so it won't be too bad...I'd have prefered the Russians to have v.cheap infantry that had the random chance of becoming cool like in "Red Front" where some Red Army units became Red Guard units and then rock! The Russian Army does have a historic reputation for being able to take a beating

I'm only a wee bit serious

I still like the "Two UU per civ" idea that has been bouncing around.

I suppose the Cossacks are one of the few distincive military traditions the Russians have (even though they aren't Russian, strictly speaking). The dual UU idea would compensate for the Cossack's relative weakness by providing the Russkies a leg up during the modern era.

If that were to happen (say in an ex pack) I personally would propose the Mi-24 Hind Helicopter Gunship as a suitable alternative to a Mig. Granted, the Russians and the U.S. would probably be viewed as counter civs in the minds of most players, and that would seem to favor a Russian fighter to oppose the F-15. But I can't help but think that from what I've seen so far CivIII would benefit greatly from 1. A larger number of modern UU's and 2. A larger number of non-infantry, non-cavalry UU's. A Hind would be a good place to start, IMHO.

Remember Leonardo's Workshop is still a Major wonder so thier can still be only 1 civ that can upgrade it's unit's.


It's going to be very interesting having 16 civs and only 3 Major wonders per era.

One thing that really bothers me about the cossaks as listed, is that it looks like an elite cavalry unit. Now my views on the unit is coloured by the relative high numbers of the unit, compared to other public unique units, and that "cavalry" has the top mounted unit in Civ 2.
Cossaks were light cavalry units, like hussars or uhlans. While there were Guard Cossak units at least during the napoleon wars, the cossaks were used mainly as raiding forces (and later like in 1905 as police forces), and not battlefield units. The charge of Platov at Borodino was a notable exception, but this attack was done in in support of curaissiers (heavy cavalry) of the 1st cavalry corps.
While the cossaks were extremely skilled riders, they did not keep pace with the technological evolution of cavalry. Even back in the 17th century the cossaks were considered an anachronism by western armies. In the beginning of the 18th century Charles XII of Sweden declined the battlefield use of allied cossak units as he considered their usefulness extremely limited. And while their raiding against french forces during Napoleon's invasion in 1812 did a lot of damage, the picture of these forces brought home by the french was of a bow-wielding anachronism.
Therefore I am surprised by the high numbers on this unit, which seems to indicate an modern elite cavalry unit, which the cossaks were not. It also is not appropiate if you look at what the "golden age" of the russian civilization could be, and that would be (probably 1790-1905).
Someone suggested a cheap infantry unit as more appropiate for the russians. I can only concur and also add the suggestion of cheap artillery unit. It was not without reason that the russians were called "The steamroller" in 1914, and the russian ability to raise forces in the face of adversity is legendary.

I don't like how they decided to do the units at all!!:mutant:

I think the Cossacks are an excellent Russian elite unit, a good example of colorful Slavic culture, and they seem to fit in right in that 1790-1905 period mentioned since that was (roughly) the golden age of cavalry. I wonder how they will do against the French Musketeers.