Axeman/Spearman stat swap?

[VanitysFiend]

Ok, so I've been thinking of changing Axemen to S4 +100% vs melee and Spearmen to S5 +50% vs mounted. Now I know that'd have a knock on effect on unique units, but I can live with that. I'm wondering if you guys think it would change gameplay for the worse, it would basically kill the axe rush stone dead imo. Does that sound like a good thing?

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

Just decrease hammer cost of Spears to 30 and decrease Axes' bonus vs melee to 25%, that should be enough imo.

 

[VanitysFiend]

Just decrease hammer cost of Spears to 30 and decrease Axes' bonus vs melee to 25%, that should be enough imo.

I've tried similar things in the past but they didn't have much impact on gameplay. Cheaper spearmen just mean cheaper spearmen, you don't really build any more, and I think that axeman nerf would just render them obsolete with swordsmen. With my changes I think there'd be better balance between axemen, spearmen, and swordsmen.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

I've tried similar things in the past but they didn't have much impact on gameplay. Cheaper spearmen just mean cheaper spearmen, you don't really build any more, and I think that axeman nerf would just render them obsolete with swordsmen. With my changes I think there'd be better balance between axemen, spearmen, and swordsmen.

They wouldn't be obsolete, they are still a bit cheaper and better vs Melee units, and if anything the fact that Axes are currently overpowered and Swords useless in most cases is a bigger problem. Realistically speaking Swords should be the standard unit of the classical era if you have iron, with spears and axes as guard against mounted and melee.

Alternatively/Additionally Axemen could be a Copper only unit, not trainable if you only have iron. Copper is the superior metal and it only got replaced with iron because that is available pretty much everywhere.

 

[VanitysFiend]

So I made my changes a few days ago and I quite liking the shake up to early game play. Axes still mash other melee units, but suffer more against archers etc, also spearmen in good defensive locations can pull of surprise wins against charging axemen. Swordsmen are still quite niche, but that's more because siege is more important when attacking cities. If I ever hit an enemy without horses swords would be the default unit.

Thing is I needed to tweak some UUs so I'd like to hear others thoughts. Vultures r now classic axemen (S5 +50% vs melee). Impi lost mobility cause now they're S5 +50% vs mounted with 2 moves. Phalanx's r my favourite change, they're spearmen again! S6 +25% vs mounted, can only be built with copper (no iron). Holkans stayed as classic spearmen minus the resource requirements which feels weird cause the Mayans never fought horses, any ideas? Dog soldiers r just resourceless axemen, wouldn't mind an alternative...

 

[traius]

My main issue with this is that I only ever attack in the classical age with jumbos, which while highly effective units, are countered by a much earlier unit in spearmen (they still work of course, because a little unit damage from siege goes a long way generally, but especially goes a long way versus units that require their large % bonuses vs unit types to be effective). Now they wouldn't be countered at all, because even without any damage and some additional bonuses they would be weaker than a jumbo.

 

[Infantry#14]

I agree that Swords should be the common classical era melee units. Axeman doesn't seem to be that common in history compare with Swords. I think putting Axeman in a new dead end tech after Bronze Working should nerf the unit. Also allow Warrior to be able to upgrade directly to Swords.

 

[VanitysFiend]

My main issue with this is that I only ever attack in the classical age with jumbos, which while highly effective units, are countered by a much earlier unit in spearmen (they still work of course, because a little unit damage from siege goes a long way generally, but especially goes a long way versus units that require their large % bonuses vs unit types to be effective). Now they wouldn't be countered at all, because even without any damage and some additional bonuses they would be weaker than a jumbo.

I bumped the price of 'Jumbos' up to 70 a while ago. The way combat works in CIV can be funny, I might be wrong, but I think spears are still good enough vs elephants that players could get by...

I agree that Swords should be the common classical era melee units. Axeman doesn't seem to be that common in history compare with Swords. I think putting Axeman in a new dead end tech after Bronze Working should nerf the unit. Also allow Warrior to be able to upgrade directly to Swords.

Weren't spearmen the most common unit in ancient/classical era armies? I kinda view axemen as 2 handed melee weapon users and swordsmen as sword and boarders. Allowing warriors to upgrade to swordsmen would keep them around a bit longer as a build option which could be a bit gamey. How do you feel about the changes I've actually made?

 

[lindsay40k]

I agree that Swords should be the common classical era melee units. Axeman doesn't seem to be that common in history compare with Swords. I think putting Axeman in a new dead end tech after Bronze Working should nerf the unit. Also allow Warrior to be able to upgrade directly to Swords.

Increasing the tech requirement for axemen makes a lot of sense. Currently, when you get BW, you can immediately make a unit that eats Spearmen and Swordsmen alive, neither of which you know how to make without another tech. It's as if AA missiles preceded aircraft.

Weren't spearmen the most common unit in ancient/classical era armies? I kinda view axemen as 2 handed melee weapon users and swordsmen as sword and boarders. Allowing warriors to upgrade to swordsmen would keep them around a bit longer as a build option which could be a bit gamey. How do you feel about the changes I've actually made?

Axemen also could be Norsemen, like the Berserker, who wielded two axes fast and hard enough to negate the sword's parrying advantage over cheaper polearms. That's how I rationalise the stone-paper-scissors.

Allowing Warriors to upgrade to Swords and keeping them around longer would break Inca even more! It'd effectively add AGG to Huayna's pseudo-CRE, with plenty of failgold to upgrade Quecha - who get to efficiently farm XP off of Barbarian archers for a poundshop CHA as well. Easy access to an army of CRIII with a CIII Shock and CIII Formation escort to boot :-o

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

Increasing the tech requirement for axemen makes a lot of sense. Currently, when you get BW, you can immediately make a unit that eats Spearmen and Swordsmen alive, neither of which you know how to make without another tech. It's as if AA missiles preceded aircraft.

To be fair, Anti Tank precedes Tanks.

Imo Axemen should be buildable with Copper, but not Iron, to simulate how technically bronze weapons were superior to iron weapons in antiquity but only became obsolete because Iron was much more widely available.

 

[lindsay40k]

I'm really not sure about the Spears having to sacrifice a regiment to kill Elephants. Seems to me like you'd have to pay a lot of upkeep to recruit an army that can counter a neighbour with Nellies. Border cities would need substantial standing garrisons, one spearman and one more whipped out wouldn't be enough to deal with a small invasion (this point isn't a criticism per se). What are a Formation Spearman's odds of surviving a Shock Elephant?

Historically, war elephants mainly got nerfed by gunpowder weapons that killed them and inspired tactics that neutralised them (see Scipio at Zama). So if you're going to nerf their contemporary counter, maybe think about ways to represent the way disciplined infantry and brave skirmishers took them out of the equation?

 

[Pangaea]

Ok, so I've been thinking of changing Axemen to S4 +100% vs melee and Spearmen to S5 +50% vs mounted. Now I know that'd have a knock on effect on unique units, but I can live with that. I'm wondering if you guys think it would change gameplay for the worse, it would basically kill the axe rush stone dead imo. Does that sound like a good thing?

Main thought is that, as you write, we can basically forget about an Axe rush with only 4 . It's tricky enough with 5 against archers, so 4 would be a no-go. Against Swordsmen, these Axes would actually be even stronger, though, so wouldn't this make the Swordsman even more useless/niche than it already is?

I'm also a little concerned about the Spear against mounted. In BtS a single spearman can be a huge obstacle, even Elephants can easily lose against them. Weakening the spear against mounted may worsen the rock-scissors-paper aspect of the game, and make everything a little more bland. But you have played with these units, so will have a better feel for it than 'outsiders'.

 

[VanitysFiend]

Main thought is that, as you write, we can basically forget about an Axe rush with only 4 . It's tricky enough with 5 against archers, so 4 would be a no-go. Against Swordsmen, these Axes would actually be even stronger, though, so wouldn't this make the Swordsman even more useless/niche than it already is?

Part of why I like the change is because axes are no longer better than spears when fighting archers (plus axes are no longer 'good enough' when attacking chariots). In BTS the only effective axemen counters in the ancient and classical eras were elephants and attacking chariots. With my changes axes are more vulnerable to every non melee unit in the game, but they're a bit better at hammering (or should it be chopping?) the unit type they were already good at hammering. To answer your question about swordsmen, I'm finding that I'm not building as many axemen, and neither is the AI, if I don't need spearmen to fend of horsearchers, then a stack with a core of swords and axes becomes the most sensible alternative to a stack of axes in BTS don't you think?

I'm also a little concerned about the Spear against mounted. In BtS a single spearman can be a huge obstacle, even Elephants can easily lose against them. Weakening the spear against mounted may worsen the rock-scissors-paper aspect of the game, and make everything a little more bland. But you have played with these units, so will have a better feel for it than 'outsiders'.

Spears still pound chariots and horsearchers into the dirt (base spears go from being 8 vs mounted to 7.5, but they gain more from promotions and terrain etc) and because you can viably build more because they're better vs archers you're likely to have more at your disposal than in normal BTS. If anything I'm worried that it might make mounted units weaker because spears r more versatile now, and axes more specialised. To give an example from BTS, in my experience, most people rate the Vulture higher than the Dogsoldier, even though the Dog soldier has a bigger modifier, the Vulture is more flexible, and that matters when you're looking for something to spam.

 

[rah]

I'm not building as many axemen, and neither is the AI

How did you modify they AI to not build as many?

 

[need my speed]

How did you modify they AI to not build as many?

That would happen automatically, depending on the judgement of the AI.

 

[VanitysFiend]

How did you modify they AI to not build as many?

I didn't, tweaking a units and combat mods is something the AI can handle mostly...

 

[rah]

Considering that the AI in vanilla BTS never learned that siege couldn't kill units anymore, I am still suspect.

 

[Pangaea]

That may be, but from my experience they get out more spears when I'm assaulting them with horses, so there is some semi-intelligent decision making going on. It's not random.

 

[rah]

Not to be picky, but is it assaulting them with or their knowledge of your army composition which would be much easier to program.

 

[plasmacannon]

In the Realism Invictus mod, they gave Spearmen +25% vs Archers (Like a Spear and Shield kind of unit) and gave a penalty for mounted attacking cities. They are more maneuverable out in the open (especially Horse Archers) and limited when trying to attack a city. This would apply to Elephants too of course reducing their overpoweredness (if that's a word).

Axemen could be reduced to +25% vs Melee and +15% City Attack. This would make them less overwhelming to the Spearman and Swordsmen directly, but better at attacking them while defending in cities.