Speculation ~ BNW New Units (For All Civs)

[PerceeP927]

I want to start a discussion about possible new military units for BNW that will be usable by all civs (not unique). I don't mean caravans or archeologists etc., just new military units.

We have a tip about a possible Bazooka unit (any one have a source?)
as well as some speculation about the axe/tomahawk unit
anyone else have any other ideas/units they want to be included?

Some ideas I have:

• U-Boat
• Canoe (pre-trireme naval unit)
• A late game commando/spec-ops sort of unit (probably be an independent unit, like marines doesn't upgrade into/from anything)
• Flamethrowers (if we're adding bazookas as a squad, why not. could precede gatling gun)
• A transport helicopter, like a chinook, that can move units a certain distance (can act like a bomber, based in a city, but it drops off units instead of bombs - or pick them up - and head back; why should modern units have walk to the battlefield? when does that ever happen?)
• Snipers? slow moving, murder to infantry but severely weak to anything else
• A destroyer upgrade: destroyer is in the game for 3-4 eras I think, cities get too powerful for them to work unless you lower the health to 0 before, need another late game naval melee unit (ideas?)
• Possible future units: I know some people aren't fans of these, but they can be more realistic than XCOM and GD Robot: like rail driver cruisers, single human mechs, stealth infantry squads...

 

[AriochIV]

How would a U-Boat be different from the current Submarine?

 

[PerceeP927]

How would a U-Boat be different from the current Submarine?

upon review I suppose the ingame submarine is supposed to be a "u-boat", while the nuclear submarine is its upgrade. any thoughts on the other suggestions?

 

[Haig]

I like the flamethrower and commando ideas.
In some other threads I've been advocating an assault line of units, starting from javelin men and grenadiers and ending into, for example, flame throwers and commandos.

But what I belive we will see in Brave New World, is a unit for the ideology lines of Order and Autocracy. Freedom gets Foreign legion units, so maybe those other two will get special units like guerillas, stormtroopers or whatever. The civ-clone Call to Power 2 had an actual fascist unit for Fascist goverments.

The flame throwers are a good possibility too maybe

I feel that an explorer unit might be one new too, maybe even unique to the Exploration Social policy tree.

I think new units will fill empty spots, kind of like gatling guns and machine guns, and the World War I era units in G&K. Usually people think that the pikeman-lancer-antitank path is kind of funky.
Still there might not be a HUGE number of new stuff.

 

[Calouste]

What's the point of the canoe? It's not like Sailing is far down the tech tree.
Which flamethrowers were available in the mid 19th century?
Modern units indeed do not walk to the battlefield, that's why you have mechanized infantry.
Don't think there is a need for a destroyer replacement for city attack. Just bomb the city to zero with planes and battleships, then take it with marines.

 

[g3istbot]

I personally enjoy the idea of future units and future stuff, and don't understand why others aren't. I mean, on one hand it's cool to see an ancient civilization which has vanished in our time still kicking around, but on the other for some countries we already know and have come to accept that. So I like to see how they fair into the unknown future.

Beyond that, I'd like to see a greater emphasis on naval warfare some how. It was a huge part of past and current military advancement, but in the Civ world you can pretty much ignore Naval warfare completely.

 

[Haig]

I personally enjoy the idea of future units and future stuff, and don't understand why others aren't. I mean, on one hand it's cool to see an ancient civilization which has vanished in our time still kicking around, but on the other for some countries we already know and have come to accept that. So I like to see how they fair into the unknown future.

Beyond that, I'd like to see a greater emphasis on naval warfare some how. It was a huge part of past and current military advancement, but in the Civ world you can pretty much ignore Naval warfare completely.

I too would like to see (in 3rd expansion maybe?) and expanded future with a groovy Utopian Era with undersea cities etc. The popular mod "community Call to Power" is going to this direction and has future units.

Personally I think naval combat is fine now, I've experienced mighty AI naval attacks with battleships and carriers.

 

[AriochIV]

any thoughts on the other suggestions?

Units in a game need to fill a role in game terms. You don't just put them in because you can.

Canoes are tiny personal craft that are usually not seaworthy; river travel is not modeled in the game. There were a few canoes that were seaworthy (such as those of the Polynesians), and these are modeled with early embarkation.

What would a commando unit do that can't be done by the Mech Inf? A later paratrooper would be nice, but apparently we're getting that with the XCOM squad.

Flamethrowers were contemporary with the early machine guns in WWI. They would either fill the same role as the machine gun (a 1-hex ranged unit) or they'd be the same as regular infantry or marines.

Since unit stacking is problematic (in not impossible), units that transport other units don't have much of a purpose in Civ V. I do miss transports, but that's the cost of 1UPT.

Sniper teams are kind of like covert agents; too small to really be modeled as military units.

I'm not sure that a late-game melee naval unit makes much sense, as the primary armaments of modern naval vessels are missiles (even for your hypothetical railgun cruiser). The missile cruiser fills that role reasonably well.

 

[Bakspatel]

Beyond that, I'd like to see a greater emphasis on naval warfare some how. It was a huge part of past and current military advancement, but in the Civ world you can pretty much ignore Naval warfare completely.

It does not always seem to be the AI's focus but since G&K naval warfare has had a major positive boost. While before G&K I just ignored the navy and simply used it for exploring, now I always build up a navy and always try to use it for assaults.

 

[meowschwitz]

I hope we get a speed ranged line so the UU replacing speed units can keep their upgrades. I'd also be okay with filling in the anti speed line and adding an explorer.

 

[Deggial]

Units in a game need to fill a role in game terms. You don't just put them in because you can.
...
Flamethrowers were contemporary with the early machine guns in WWI. They would either fill the same role as the machine gun (a 1-hex ranged unit) or they'd be the same as regular infantry or marines.

I totally agree on your first statement.

Flamethrowers however could fulfill a useful role in Civ5:
They could get the "siege"-promotion from start along with a bonus against fortified units. Additionally, the "terrifying unit"-bonus (like the carthagian forrest elephant) is thinkable.
The would be melee, not range-1 units in my thinking.

While there seems to be evidence that already the ancient Romans used flame throwers, I would love to see them as special autocracy units, too. The main reason for this is, that they don't need a fully fleshed out upgrade-path then.

 

[Matthew.]

Still need a unit to bridge the gap between lancers and anti-tank guns. It would also tremendously help the AI. AI spams pikes, but by the time the game gets to modern era, the AI is forced to try and throw lancers at units twice their combat strength.

 

[Arachnofiend]

While there seems to be evidence that already the ancient Romans used flame throwers, I would love to see them as special autocracy units, too. The main reason for this is, that they don't need a fully fleshed out upgrade-path then.

I'd see the Autocracies getting more of a Secret Police unit. Garrisoning one in a city would reduce spy effectiveness (there'd need to be another bonus since that one's kind of weak but the only thing that's coming to mind is increased strength in friendly territory which seems counter-intuitive for the ideology).

On the other hand, flamethrowers are cool.

 

[g3istbot]

I totally agree on your first statement.

Flamethrowers however could fulfill a useful role in Civ5:
They could get the "siege"-promotion from start along with a bonus against fortified units. Additionally, the "terrifying unit"-bonus (like the carthagian forrest elephant) is thinkable.
The would be melee, not range-1 units in my thinking.

While there seems to be evidence that already the ancient Romans used flame throwers, I would love to see them as special autocracy units, too. The main reason for this is, that they don't need a fully fleshed out upgrade-path then.

They could also give a stronger pillage (takes twice amount of time to restore pillaged area by a flamethrower unit), and could possibly clear jungle tiles (which I believe units move slower through, right?).

 

[PerceeP927]

so correct me if I'm wrong, but the line is currently

pikemen > lancer > anti-tank gun > helicopter gunship

correct? I think the transitions are all fine with everybody except lancer to anti-tank gun...
well lancer may seem antiquated in comparison, but they were in fact widely used well through the first world war. there isn't much you can do between the eras of anti-cavalry and anti-tank warfare.

 

[PerceeP927]

They could also give a stronger pillage (takes twice amount of time to restore pillaged area by a flamethrower unit), and could possibly clear jungle tiles (which I believe units move slower through, right?).

I have always wanted a unit that could pillage/clear tiles better than a worker. having to send workers to the front lines to clear a pesky jungle tile is tedious. perhaps flamethrowers could serve this purpose, or an explorer unit as suggested above could machete his way through

edit: in addition, perhaps a bomber with a napalm payload could be used to burn down forest/jungle tiles. this would be very welcome

 

[Marquis Cyborg]

Maybe the late game naval melee ship could be the LCS (Littoral combat ship).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littoral_combat_ship

 

[Matthew.]

They were also used 700AD and earlier. The issue is more from a gameplay perspective. 25 combat strength lancer and no upgrade through Industrial/Modern. Leaves the lancer in an awkward position--do you leave them sitting on the map taking up maintenance cost? Delete them? What if they are highly promoted? The AI doesn't even have a choice--all the pikes he spammed earlier end up sitting as lancers while the rest of the world is cruising by with 50 combat strength infantry, 50 combat strength bombers flying overhead.

And 9 out of 10 times even the AI will have 70 strength infantry before getting combined arms. Massive hole in the tech tree. No reason to have 25 strength units on the field that late in the game.

 

[Deggial]

And 9 out of 10 times even the AI will have 70 strength infantry before getting combined arms. Massive hole in the tech tree. No reason to have 25 strength units on the field that late in the game.

That's why I moved the AT-gun to "Plastics" and replaced it with a 5 "Tank Hunter"-unit in my concept. (see Sig.)

 

[Willowmound]

upon review I suppose the ingame submarine is supposed to be a "u-boat", while the nuclear submarine is its upgrade.

U-boat is just an anglicised form of the German word U-Boot, which is short for Unterseeboot (literally undersea-boat). In English it simply means German WWI and WWII submarines specifically.