Austria Unique Ability Discussion

[Sun Pope]

Seconded for Comanche.

For the Cossack, perhaps they could have a bonus when there are additional cossacks, sort if like a buffed flanking when the specific unit doing the flanking is another cossack. It would make sense historically, as cossacks were known for being many and surrounding enemies after they won battles. Another way we can show this is to buff their movement speed and keep the bonus vs wounded, to help them run down wounded enemies better.

Hussars I know almost nothing about historically. I get the impression that they are a sort of "heavy cavalry" however. Anyone who played AoE3 knows how scary french gendarmes could be, perhaps we could make the hussar similar. Make it cost more but be a sort of super cav, with beefy stats. The problem with this, as always, is that pure stats wont carry over after upgrading. Just an idea.

Another route we could take is to give them that musketeer replacement, or even like a double movement on hills (Austria is all hills, right?)

 

[mavol6]

hussar
4 movement
same cs as before
lightning warfare.

removing the 1 movement seems neccesary, having 6 movement on a unit seems really powerful. I dont know if it should keep the 1 extra sight.

im not entirely sure about cossack

 

[Gazebo]

10% increased ranged cs for each spent movement point

Can't do that. It's not AI friendly.

G

 

[Funak]

hussar
4 movement
same cs as before
lightning warfare.

removing the 1 movement seems neccesary, having 6 movement on a unit seems really powerful. I dont know if it should keep the 1 extra sight.

im not entirely sure about cossack

Removing the extra sight would probably make sense, but otherwise it's pretty much exactly what I suggested? And yeah, they should probably lose their base 5 movespeed if they get lightning warfare.


As for the Cossack, yes the bonus versus wounded should probably stay unless someone has a way better idea, but they probably need more work on top of that, as stated earlier, they come into the game pretty late and earlier unique units already have bigger bonuses versus wounded.

 

[mavol6]

Removing the extra sight would probably make sense, but otherwise it's pretty much exactly what I suggested? And yeah, they should probably lose their base 5 movespeed if they get lightning warfare.


As for the Cossack, yes the bonus versus wounded should probably stay unless someone has a way better idea, but they probably need more work on top of that, as stated earlier, they come into the game pretty late and earlier unique units already have bigger bonuses versus wounded.

maybe the ranged musketeer promotion for the cossack, could be fun on a mounted ranged unit.

or maybe just a bonus when near other cossacks, russia has double strategic resources so it would be easy to pull off.

 

[Funak]

maybe the ranged musketeer promotion for the cossack, could be fun on a mounted ranged unit.

People don't like the winged hussar promotion (guessing that's what you meant ). It would certainly make more sense on a horse than it did on the musketeer however.

or maybe just a bonus when near other cossacks, russia has double strategic resources so it would be easy to pull off.

In that case probably only a bonus for any nearby unit, forcing the AI to stack up units for flanking seems hard enough without it being specific units.


I guess I'd be up for the winged hussar promotion for them, seems fair.

To sum it up. (compared to normal cavalry)

Hussar:
Lightning warfare, +sight, minor CS/RCS increase(compared to normal cavalry).

Cossack:
+33% bonus vs wounded, Heavy Charge (or whatever it was called when it was on the musketeer), minor CS/RCS increase(compared to normal cavalry).

Comanche:
+1 Movement, +1 Sight, Free pillage, chance to retreat when attacked by melee, medium CS/RCS increase(compared to normal cavalry).

Berber:
Ignores Terrain Cost, Homeland Guardian, Desert warrior(maybe remove this?), Minor(maybe medium?) CS/RCS increase(compared to normal cavalry).


For CS/RCS.

Normal Cavalry:
30/45

Minor Increase:
35/50?

Medium Increase:
40/55?

Could use suggestions on these, just added 5s because they're easy to add, probably added too much.

 

[mavol6]

People don't like the winged hussar promotion (guessing that's what you meant ). It would certainly make more sense on a horse than it did on the musketeer however.


In that case probably only a bonus for any nearby unit, forcing the AI to stack up units for flanking seems hard enough without it being specific units.


I guess I'd be up for the winged hussar promotion for them, seems fair.

To sum it up. (compared to normal cavalry)

Hussar:
Lightning warfare, +sight, minor CS/RCS increase(compared to normal cavalry).

Cossack:
+33% bonus vs wounded, Heavy Charge (or whatever it was called when it was on the musketeer), minor CS/RCS increase(compared to normal cavalry).

Comanche:
+1 Movement, +1 Sight, Free pillage, chance to retreat when attacked by melee, medium CS/RCS increase(compared to normal cavalry).

Berber:
Ignores Terrain Cost, Homeland Guardian, Desert warrior(maybe remove this?), Minor(maybe medium?) CS/RCS increase(compared to normal cavalry).


For CS/RCS.

Normal Cavalry:
30/45

Minor Increase:
35/50?

Medium Increase:
40/55?

Could use suggestions on these, just added 5s because they're easy to add, probably added too much.

i say comanche riders should have the normal calvary cs/rcs or a minor. being able to dodge, having 5 movement and having a buffed cs is going to make them really hard to counter.

 

[Funak]

i say comanche riders should have the normal calvary cs/rcs or a minor. being able to dodge, having 5 movement and having a buffed cs is going to make them really hard to counter.

Well, they are city-state gifts only, so that's not really much of a problem. I thought the fact that their bonuses were almost purely defensive warranted more base stats.

Could actually have all of them at 35/50 for consistency I guess.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Are any of these mounted unit changes going to be applied or were we just shooting the breeze?

 

[Funak]

Are any of these mounted unit changes going to be applied or were we just shooting the breeze?

I guess no one bothered requesting them

 

[Gazebo]

Are any of these mounted unit changes going to be applied or were we just shooting the breeze?

I don't just wander around looking for things to change. You need to make a detailed write-up of your ideas.

G

 

[Funak]

I don't just wander around looking for things to change. You need to make a detailed write-up of your ideas.

To sum it up. (compared to normal cavalry)

Hussar:
Lightning warfare, +sight, minor CS/RCS increase(compared to normal cavalry).

Cossack:
+33% bonus vs wounded, Heavy Charge (or whatever it was called when it was on the musketeer), minor CS/RCS increase(compared to normal cavalry).

Comanche:
+1 Movement, +1 Sight, Free pillage, chance to retreat when attacked by melee, medium CS/RCS increase(compared to normal cavalry).

Berber:
Ignores Terrain Cost, Homeland Guardian, Desert warrior(maybe remove this?), Minor(maybe medium?) CS/RCS increase(compared to normal cavalry).


For CS/RCS.

Normal Cavalry:
30/45

Minor Increase:
35/50?

Medium Increase:
40/55?

Could use suggestions on these, just added 5s because they're easy to add, probably added too much.

Detailed enough or do you want more?

 

[Gazebo]

Detailed enough or do you want more?

I'll give it a look, thanks.


G

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Thanks, Funak and Gazebo.

 

[mavol6]

so are the new units tested?, i just think comanche might be on the strong side but that just me.

 

[Funak]

so are the new units tested?, i just think comanche might be on the strong side but that just me.

Comanche is a city-state only unit, even if it is slightly on the strong side it's not exactly going to be that exploitable.

That being said you're definitely welcome to your opinion, and suggestions are always welcome.


Think the real issue is that I couldn't come up with good CS/RCS numbers, the Comanche's abilities are clearly worse than the Cossack's and the Hussar's so it needs higher CS/RCS, but +5/+5 is probably too much, just as +5/+5 is probably too much for a Hussar/Cossack compared to a normal Cavalry.

Maybe something along these lines would be better?


Normal Cavalry:
30/45

Minor Increase:
36/48?

Medium Increase:
38/52


Honestly I'm not even sure why I'm giving suggestions on this, Gazebo is the master of the CS/RCS table, I assume he is going to fix it if I just give him vague words like minor and medium increase.

 

[ExpiredReign]

I just had an interesting situation in my current game that has Austria struggling against the mighty juggernauts of Babylon(AI), China(AI) and Germany(me).
Maria is just about wiped from the map and is just managing to avoid destruction because the remaining 'big guns' are currently all battling one another.
However since ideologies are in play Austria has been in an almost constant state of unrest and one of her CS allies was in total revolt for the last 5 or so turns when this happened:

Austria has married Buenos Aires!!

Now I now the criteria for marriage is being at peace for at least 5 turns and having enough money but perhaps this should also be considered as an impossible case scenario.

Think about it the CS is revolting against the civ because they are suffering from civil unrest but because enough money was offered they have a diplomatic marriage?! Just didn't sit well with me when I saw it happen.

 

[Funak]

I just had an interesting situation in my current game that has Austria struggling against the mighty juggernauts of Babylon(AI), China(AI) and Germany(me).
Maria is just about wiped from the map and is just managing to avoid destruction because the remaining 'big guns' are currently all battling one another.
However since ideologies are in play Austria has been in an almost constant state of unrest and one of her CS allies was in total revolt for the last 5 or so turns when this happened:

Austria has married Buenos Aires!!

Now I now the criteria for marriage is being at peace for at least 5 turns and having enough money but perhaps this should also be considered as an impossible case scenario.

Think about it the CS is revolting against the civ because they are suffering from civil unrest but because enough money was offered they have a diplomatic marriage?! Just didn't sit well with me when I saw it happen.

The UA is really weak enough already, I don't think you want even more restrictions on it.

 

[ExpiredReign]

The UA is really weak enough already, I don't think you want even more restrictions on it.

True, it is pretty weak but I don't view this as a restriction per se, more as a logical condition.

Perhaps a buff to it along with this conditional change would ease it somewhat.
What about an extra vote or two for each marriage?

 

[Funak]

True, it is pretty weak but I don't view this as a restriction per se, more as a logical condition.

Perhaps a buff to it along with this conditional change would ease it somewhat.
What about an extra vote or two for each marriage?

I was thinking more in the lines of reducing the number of turns you need to be allied to marry, think it is 20 now, which is rather unreasonable.