Armored Fighting Vehicles (Tanks) evolution path

Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
4,801
Location
north of Steilacoom, WA
1. Even the earlier dragoons are sometimes shown with the 'floppy' tailed cap. The major consideration is that the graphic should be Distinctive and as close to unmistakable as we can make it. The French dragoons, unlike many others, were distinctive - no confusing tricorns or helmets that could get them mistaken for ordinary cavalry or cuirassiers later.
2. Dragoons were always armed with some kind of carbine or short musket and were supposed to be able to fight on foot (even if they became less likely to do so as time went on) so none of the Anti-Cavalry bonuses apply when facing them. Since for much of their existence they were on inferior horses and not trained or expected to charge, their 'firepower' somewhat compensates for what would otherwise be ridiculously low combat factors compared to other contemporary 'real' Cavalry.

Exceptions to these general rules, like the British Heavy Dragoons, Frederick II's Prussian Dragoons or the US Army's early cavalry which did charge effectively, are best shown as UUs or as variations on the Heavy Cavalry (which is what Fred's dragoons and the Heavy Dragoons really were in use and function).
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
1,590
1. Even the earlier dragoons are sometimes shown with the 'floppy' tailed cap. The major consideration is that the graphic should be Distinctive and as close to unmistakable as we can make it. The French dragoons, unlike many others, were distinctive - no confusing tricorns or helmets that could get them mistaken for ordinary cavalry or cuirassiers later.
2. Dragoons were always armed with some kind of carbine or short musket and were supposed to be able to fight on foot (even if they became less likely to do so as time went on) so none of the Anti-Cavalry bonuses apply when facing them. Since for much of their existence they were on inferior horses and not trained or expected to charge, their 'firepower' somewhat compensates for what would otherwise be ridiculously low combat factors compared to other contemporary 'real' Cavalry.

Exceptions to these general rules, like the British Heavy Dragoons, Frederick II's Prussian Dragoons or the US Army's early cavalry which did charge effectively, are best shown as UUs or as variations on the Heavy Cavalry (which is what Fred's dragoons and the Heavy Dragoons really were in use and function).

1. Ain't that the same caps as French Grenadiers of the same time? And about carbines Dragoons carry. should it be flintlocks or matchlocks particularly this is Earlymodern Unit
2. And Dragoon enabling tech please. Same as ones that activates Pike and Shotte? (Firearms. I don't really agree with Metal Castings being enabling tech)
3. Did US Army of early days have heavy chargers cavalry comparabe to Cuirassiers? What are they? the same Lightdragoons or militia cavalry of some sort?
(Historically US Army cavalrymen are gunny. they were even the first to adopt repeating pistols--Walker Colt Revolver)

4.

And regarding to Dragoons as Light cav evolution path. What to do with Standard Civ6 'Cavalry' of Industrial Era if you cited that Cuirassiers of Earlymodern has no successor in Industrial Era but will become Medium Tanks in Modern Era.

Particularly vulnerability VS Anticavalry. Should it resume? and how to balance out if so?
And what to do with Cossacks in Civ6? (Since they did NOT replace any standard cavs in Imperial Russian Army since Peter I recruited them. Russian Army did also field generic cavalry force in addition to Cossacks).
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
4,801
Location
north of Steilacoom, WA
1. Ain't that the same caps as French Grenadiers of the same time? And about carbines Dragoons carry. should it be flintlocks or matchlocks particularly this is Earlymodern Unit
2. And Dragoon enabling tech please. Same as ones that activates Pike and Shotte? (Firearms. I don't really agree with Metal Castings being enabling tech)
3. Did US Army of early days have heavy chargers cavalry comparabe to Cuirassiers? What are they? the same Lightdragoons or militia cavalry of some sort?
(Historically US Army cavalrymen are gunny. they were even the first to adopt repeating pistols--Walker Colt Revolver)

4.

And regarding to Dragoons as Light cav evolution path. What to do with Standard Civ6 'Cavalry' of Industrial Era if you cited that Cuirassiers of Earlymodern has no successor in Industrial Era but will become Medium Tanks in Modern Era.

Particularly vulnerability VS Anticavalry. Should it resume? and how to balance out if so?
And what to do with Cossacks in Civ6? (Since they did NOT replace any standard cavs in Imperial Russian Army since Peter I recruited them. Russian Army did also field generic cavalry force in addition to Cossacks).
1. No. French grenadiers of the 17th century wore Fur caps with a smaller trailing 'bag' of cloth. Dragoon caps were all cloth. Grenadiers in general wore either fur hats of increasing size until they became the fur 'busbys' of the French Garde Imperiale at the end of the 18th century, or metal-fronted cloth or fur caps with elaborate designs on the metal front, even gilding.
2. I don't do Tech since I think any Tech Tree that I will ever play again has to be drastically revised from Civ VI's abomination.
3. US Army always used smaller horses than the big Cuirassier horses, but they also didn't weigh their men down with armor. Also, not only did they adopt the repeating pistol, they also were among the first to issue a rifled carbine or rifle to their mounted troops, the Hawken version of the Harper's Ferry Model 03 (1803), originally flintlock, later converted to percussion cap.
4. I suggest that any unit that carries over to the next Era with no other change should be subject to a Graphic-Only change: replace Cuirassiers with a Cavalry-like model, or replace an early 'Lobster' helmetted English Civil War-era Cuirassier with a late Napoleonic Cuirassier (similar to the model in the game now) for the Industrial Era.
5. I suggest that any Anti-Cavalry Bonus becomes redundant when everybody has rifled firearms - the old mechanic of something to keep enemy horses from running over you (spears, pikes, bayonets) is of no consequence when you can shoot the horses before they get within 200 meters of you. Anti-Armor bonuses against later armored vehicles should be the new Bonus applied from the Modern Era on, and having nothing to do with the earlier 'Anti-Cav Bonus', since it represents entirely different weapons against entirely different targets.
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
1,590
^ That's modding direction to have Melee and Anticav merged into one category in Earlymodern Era. and that successors shouldn't have to fear charging horses particularly if you cited that 'Black powder riflemen of 1850s could easily hold their ground against cavalry charge of any kind as long as they didn't lose too much men against enemy cannon barrages (200 meters at maximum range is the range of 1850s Rifled musket used by riflemen of that era). Still what Unit_Cavalry of Industrial Era tries to represent IRL? Medium 'Line' Cavalry of the 1700-1840s or cavalry armed with rifled carbines of 1830s-1840s (and Napoleonic Uniforms were also worn by that time as well particularly on Mexican side-the US Army at that time chose Germanic style uniforms (Either Prussian, Austrian, or Bavarian, or combination of both) until 1850s when they switched to French Second Empire ones). and if Dragoons are not vulnerable to Pike and Shotte of 1500s or even Fusiliers of the 1680s and YET requires no RESOURCE_HORSE, what about its successor in Industrial era? (or Napoleonic graphic representation isn't appropriate but instead this CAVALRY (as successor to Dragoons) should look more Wildwest like in Civ5 so to reflect tactical shifts towards dismounted combats, which means the same invulnerability against such infantry can be saftly inherited)
And about differences between Horse cavalry and Mechanized cavs. it has alot to do with coding which in theory should not be big problem (in coding sense it has to do with Tag class that Horse cavalry and Mechanized iterations now use separate receptor class which Old anticavalry malus and New Antitank vulnerability are no longer shared). Should the same difference applies to Tankbuster promotion for Fighters as well that it shouldn't affect Pre-tank Heavycavalry much? Is it still easy to target Cuirassiers on fighter cockpit like targeting medium tanks from the same spot?
Just finished 17th-18th Century Dragoon floppycap. Is this what Dragoon looks like when mounted isn't it?
1674583674462.png

Dragoon Floppycap.jpg


Below is preview (Photo only)

Dragoon Floppycap_previewgreen.jpg

DragoonPortrait_1.jpg
DragoonPortrait_2.jpg
 
Last edited:

MeganovaStella

Chieftain
Joined
Jan 13, 2022
Messages
88
i would say that there could be an alternate evolution of tanks depending on the player's choices and the world they live in. suppose most of the world consisted of hilly or mountainous terrain. in that case, treads and wheels would be cast aside for legged machines- spider tanks, not japanese mecha. the drivetrain for a vehicle would change many things about it: the armor it can carry, the gun it can carry, its movement speed, where it can move best, and what terrain it gets an advantage on.

for instance, a spider legged tank would have less armor and the same attack as a treaded tank, as well as move slower- but it gets no movement speed decrease over hills. a hovertank has very fast speed but low armor and attack. and so on.
 
Top Bottom