[Beyond the Sword] History In The Making

[Anthropoid]

killmeplease, should the effect of the earliest hand-held gunpowder weapons (whatever comes with Firearms Tech) be to provide a unit with a bonus against _only_ knights, or against mounted units in general?

At present, the musketman is just a plain 9 strength unit, which is fine to represent actual muskets I think. But it does not represent the earliest hand-held gunpowder weapons, arquibusier (etc. ?).

If the battlefield effect of the first hand-held gunpowder weapons was as a counter to mounted units in general, then the easy solution would be that the Firearms Tech else the Gunpowder Tech opened up eligibility for the Formation promotions for pikemen-spearmen.

If the effectiveness of the Arquebus was specifically against knights then it might be more complicated to give all pike units an automatic 25% bonus against knights?

 

[killmeplease]

Anthropoid,
of course they have use not against knight, but their main purpose was to hit heavily armoured troops.
i have an idea of a special building - "Gunsmith", that gives "firearms" promonion to meelee units (+1 first strike, +25 vs knights) and is a prereq for gunpowder units production (or gives production discount for building them).

here is nice overall article about renaissance warfare:
http://www.lepg.org/warfare.htm

as you can see, there should not be any stupid "macemen" unit at all.
knights ruled battlefield in medieval, and then pikes do that in renaissance. there were no battle-worthy infantry able to counter knights in feudal time.

 

[Arian]

Is Grave still around??

 

[Anthropoid]

Great link killme. I had wondered about the "maceman" unit. The "swordsman" for that matter seems a bit of a simplification . . . Great article

. . . Wounds from lead shot are another story. They cause a great deal more trauma with their percussive force (one of the common field injuries was being hit by flying pieces of bone and teeth from the guy next to or in front of you), and are more likely to become infected. Maimed soldiers had no Veterans Administrations . . .

i have an idea of a special building - "Gunsmith", that gives "firearms" promonion to meelee units (+1 first strike, +25 vs knights) and is a prereq for gunpowder units production (or gives production discount for building them).

In terms of Civ4 promotions, it seems to me that what the first hand-held arms achieved was the equivalent of giving the unit in which the arquebus or muskets were mixed some combination of Shock (+25% vs melee), Formation (+25% vs mounted), and one if not two First Strikes. Maybe also an auto Combat I?

What if the shock and formation promotions were not available in the early game? Except perhaps to some special units like perhaps the Praetorian could get shock, and perhaps the phalanx could get formation.

Guilds could allow pikemen, but still no formation. Firearms could then allow melee units to get shock and melee. A "Gunsmith" building could automatically give these promotions to any melee unit built in the town?

Lotsa big changes I'm talking about here . . . maybe too much

 

[killmeplease]

i think shock and formation must be available from the beginning. Or maybe from "Military Training" tech or something like this. Maybe solution is to make a new promotion type, because "formation" and "shock" have their certain meanings that do not correspond to what using of firearms effect is.

Lotsa big changes I'm talking about here . . . maybe too much

Civilization game have much of inaccuracy, so if we want to mod it in the way of historical correctness, we have to mod it hard

 

[Rusty Edge]

Is Grave still around??

Since he moved, I think #1739 has been his only post.


"Hi guys.


I have been EXTREMELY busy since I was last on here, and it looks like real life isn't letting up yet. So unfortunately, I do not have an update for HiTM at the moment.

In fact, I haven't even touched BtS in a couple months! I did notice that there was a "hacker" attack on the site while I was away, so I went ahead and re-linked everything I could.

I did however removed all my stand-alone mods. Too much work to maintain these days, so now all my work can be only be found in History in the Making. Sorta makes it exclusive.

So there you have it... no update for now. When I have time to sit down and play catch up on all that is Civ4 and BtS, I'll update HiTM at that time."
__________________

 

[Arian]

@Rusty Edge:

Thanks for the info.

 

[Rusty Edge]

So we've raised two issues: (a) the late Renaissance-early Industrial siege homgenization; and (b) the "musket gap." I cannot help but wonder if the easiest way to address both would be to simply change what promotions what units could gain based on what Techs were known?

Musketman, Str 9, Mv 1 cost 160 requires Firearms Tech. Initially eligible for Combat I, Formation I, Fieldsman I, Garrison I-IV, Drill I & II, and Defence I & II. Upgrades to Infantry with Assembly Line and Rifling.
Made eligible for Combat II & III, Shock I-III and Cover I-III and Formation II & III, and City Raider I & II by Military Tradition Tech. (early mistakes in gun design, and tactical deployment improving, potential effectivenss of massed gun formations against the push of pikes coming to fruition)
Made eligible for Combat IV, Pinch, Fieldsman II,and City Raider III by Military Science Tech (Flint locks with bayonets combined with better training and tactics)
Made eligible for Drill III & IV and City Raider IV by Chemistry Tech. (smokeless powder, lighter stocks minie ball compound bullet types of developments)
Made eligible for Defence III and IV by Replaceable Parts (better equipment repair and maintenance)
Made eligible for March and Medic I & II by Railroads (better logistics = quicker replenishment of effectives where they are needed)
Never eligible for Desert, Arctic, or Amphibious or Ambush.

There's a lot to digest here.

Maybe your new approach is better, but I don't know if it's simpler to do...
It seems like a complex reworking of the promotion system from experience -based to tech-based

I've been giving it some thought as I play through this era... BTS has a musketman that looks like he served with Cortez or Captain John Smith, but in Grave's Mod, he's basically a button... and the flavor units with tricorn hats and bayonets appear in the game. So visually, it's not as bad as it seemed in my mind.

But if it's a flintlock with bayonet, shouldn't it be a little stronger? Easy enough to do, raise the base strength +/or add a promotion.

Or maybe our hypothetical musketman starts as a matchlock , but gets a flintlock/bayonet with Replaceble Parts and a promotion to reflect that? If we do that, do we give Pikes a promotion ( shock?)with FireArms? It's a simplified tech- based fix.

 

[Anthropoid]

Mostly I was just trying to provide ideas. Other than the little bit I've done based on what I read in this thread (limit SF to 15 units; change air ship to require Physics, SteamPower, Railroad) I have not messed with the code that controls unit characteristics. I guess if I don't wanna be a hypocrite I should learn to do that as well as I can spout ideas

The basic idea I had in mind was to (a) not introduce any new units or techs; (b) make the existing units behave a bit more like real history; and (c) make each of the salient Renaissance/early Industrial Tech _ALLOW_ existing units to take on additional characteristics, and/or allow subsequent units built to be given those characteristics if they start out with enough XP.

I had not really imagined that getting the Tech would automatically bestow the new promotions, but that it would make them eligible for them, _IF_ they have the experience points.

So for example

Musketman, Str 9, Mv 1 cost 160 requires Firearms Tech. Initially eligible for Combat I, Formation I, Fieldsman I, Garrison I-IV, Drill I & II, and Defence I & II. Upgrades to Infantry with Assembly Line and Rifling.
Made eligible for Combat II & III, Shock I-III and Cover I-III and Formation II & III, and City Raider I & II by Military Tradition Tech. (early mistakes in gun design, and tactical deployment improving, potential effectivenss of massed gun formations against the push of pikes coming to fruition) . . .

Lets say as soon as you get Firearms, you built 3 or 4 Muskets in a city that gave them 9 XP (enough for three promotions right?). The would not be eligible to get Combat I+II+III. Nor would they be eligible for City Raider I+II+III. Nor Defence I+II+III. This is meant to make them _LESS_ able to be specialized--in the face of brand-new way of doing things special applications take time to even be realized, let alone effectively manifested.

So, instead of being able to build one musket unit with City Raider III, one with Defence III, and one with Combat III, you'd have to either save up the XP until you later got the Techs to allow them to build with those promotions at start, or build them with different starting promotions.

So lets say what you decide to do is build a couple that are focused on city/defence they get:
Combat I + Garrison I + Defence I

You also build a couple that you intend to send out with stacks to engage mounted units, they get:
Combat I + Defence I + Formation I

And a couple that you intend to use to attack cities/other units:
Combat I + City Raider I + Drill I

Whenever you then discover Military Tradition, whichever one of these guys survived and had enough XP could then get Combat II, or Shock or Cover I, etc. Or, new one's being built in the city providing 9XP could instead start as:

Combat I + Combat II + City Raider I or
Combat I + Formation I + Formation II etc.

I tried to make it so that whatever promotions were made eligible by a particular Tech would not overlap with an earlier model unit that could upgrade to the new unit the Tech provided but which COULD already have that promotion, though there may be errors in that respect.

In an Odyssey or Marathon speed game, the effect of this might be that, some of the oldest units are running around for some time with excess XP that they cannot use. I dunno if that is a bad thing or not. It would also place a high premium on building new units so that you could "organize/accessorize" them to suit modern-day needs.

In a faster game, this whole thing might work for crap though. Indeed, even in a slow game it might be too cumbersome, and of course if it is too complex from a coding standpoint then it is just wasted breath. Anyway, just ideas!

 

[Rusty Edge]

The basic idea I had in mind was to (a) not introduce any new units or techs; (b) make the existing units behave a bit more like real history; and (c) make each of the salient Renaissance/early Industrial Tech _ALLOW_ existing units to take on additional characteristics, and/or allow subsequent units built to be given those characteristics if they start out with enough XP.

That explains it. You took another path. That's cool.

I'm always looking for extra techs, promotions, civics, wonders or units,etc. to plug in and add a new option to the decision making, tweak the gameplay, make the game fun to watch, or add historical realism. I 'm reluctant to suggest changes that affect the general way things work, or cause people to learn more than an additional strategy.

My guess is that most don't care about musketmen unless they like to play civs which have them as UUs, or they play Odysey or Marathon. The forums read like many players don't bother building them.. They defend with archers-longbows-rifles, and attack with maces and grenadiers.

 

[Hyronymus]

That certainly goes for me. You can't attack well with Musketman, defending is somewhat more their cup of tea. I usually wait (in anticipation) for grenadiers or rifleman to become available rather than spending precious shields on Musketman. They are most likely the most "redundant" unit in Civ4.

 

[Anthropoid]

. . . They are most likely the most "redundant" unit in Civ4.

And see, THAT is the problem. The early firearm units in the game should not be "redundant."

In real history, the first handheld gunpowder weapons altered the nature of warfare from quite early in their introduction, even before muskets. It did not take "rifling" for firearms weapons to become good for something besides defending!

Moreover, from the 1400s through the present, there has been an ongoing evolutionary process of gradual changes and improvements in firearms. While admittedly the game cannot represent every little improvement, at present it skips over a huge amount of change in two steps Musket-Rifle-Infantry. There should be MORE steps! and maybe Rusty Edges' inclination for their to be more units and Techs is the real solution.

At minimum, I'd think something like this:

(1) First arquebus matchlocks ~1450
(note "True rifling dates from the mid-15th century, although the precision required for its effective manufacture kept it out of the hands of infantrymen for another three and a half centuries"; so instead of having a "Rifling" Tech, it should be something like "Inexpensive Mass Produced Metals" Tech! )

(2) Replacement of arquebus by musket ~1550
(skip various improvements in musket: wheel-locks, snaplocks, snapchance, etc.)

(3) Replacement of musket by flintlock ~1650

(4) Replacement of standard muzzle-loader ammo by minie-ball technology ~1840

(5) First "Rifles" (better seals, cartridge bullets, breech-loading, better rifling, etc.) ~1860

(6) Efficient and cost-effective "machine guns" ~1900

(7) "Modern" rifle (long-range, high-reliability, high-durability, high-accuracy, bolt-action rifles, telescopic sights) ~1900

(8) Assault rifle ~1935??

(9) Mech Infantry . . .

Why there is a need for an entirely separate "unit" called "Grenadiers" in this game, which retains its effectiveness for not just a short span of the 18th century as a counter to early muskets, but as a counter to RIFLES! all the way until infantry I have never understood. It is in total contrast to my understanding of the actual history of warfare. I tend to think Firaxis did not make sufficient use of military historical consulting in their formulation of the late Renaissance to early industrial Techs. Indeed, even the Infantryman is too simplifed IMHO.

Again, I'm no expert, so I defer to the perhaps more precise knowledge of other folks, but my understanding is that firearms had made "the push of pikes" an obsolete way to wage war by about 1600? Thus, "redundant" is the LAST thing that muskets should be.

The first breech loaders did not gain real dominance until the 1860s, and by end of ACW, most muskets had been replaced by breech-loaders, i.e., what is referred to in the game by the "rifling" tech. That is roughly 250 years during which the unit "Musket" _should_ be playing the increasingly dominant role in the game. Grenadiers should be a counter to Muskets, and only on the attack, and ONLY up until some new Tech that makes them less effective.

I think that the basic way the musket fits in the game, being only a strength 9 versus a strength 8 "maceman/man-at-arms" is the real problem.

 

[Hyronymus]

This all sounds very comprehensive to me, Anthropoid. I hope it can be incorporated in the game .

 

[Arian]

Does anybody know if Grave released the SDK-files for the latest patch??

 

[Rusty Edge]

And see, THAT is the problem. The early firearm units in the game should not be "redundant."

In real history, the first handheld gunpowder weapons altered the nature of warfare from quite early in their introduction, even before muskets. It did not take "rifling" for firearms weapons to become good for something besides defending!

Moreover, from the 1400s through the present, there has been an ongoing evolutionary process of gradual changes and improvements in firearms. While admittedly the game cannot represent every little improvement, at present it skips over a huge amount of change in two steps Musket-Rifle-Infantry. There should be MORE steps! and maybe Rusty Edges' inclination for their to be more units and Techs is the real solution.

At minimum, I'd think something like this:

(1) First arquebus matchlocks ~1450
(note "True rifling dates from the mid-15th century, although the precision required for its effective manufacture kept it out of the hands of infantrymen for another three and a half centuries"; so instead of having a "Rifling" Tech, it should be something like "Inexpensive Mass Produced Metals" Tech! )

(2) Replacement of arquebus by musket ~1550
(skip various improvements in musket: wheel-locks, snaplocks, snapchance, etc.)

(3) Replacement of musket by flintlock ~1650

(4) Replacement of standard muzzle-loader ammo by minie-ball technology ~1840

(5) First "Rifles" (better seals, cartridge bullets, breech-loading, better rifling, etc.) ~1860

(6) Efficient and cost-effective "machine guns" ~1900

(7) "Modern" rifle (long-range, high-reliability, high-durability, high-accuracy, bolt-action rifles, telescopic sights) ~1900

(8) Assault rifle ~1935??

(9) Mech Infantry . . .

Why there is a need for an entirely separate "unit" called "Grenadiers" in this game, which retains its effectiveness for not just a short span of the 18th century as a counter to early muskets, but as a counter to RIFLES! all the way until infantry I have never understood. It is in total contrast to my understanding of the actual history of warfare. I tend to think Firaxis did not make sufficient use of military historical consulting in their formulation of the late Renaissance to early industrial Techs. Indeed, even the Infantryman is too simplifed IMHO.

Again, I'm no expert, so I defer to the perhaps more precise knowledge of other folks, but my understanding is that firearms had made "the push of pikes" an obsolete way to wage war by about 1600? Thus, "redundant" is the LAST thing that muskets should be.

The first breech loaders did not gain real dominance until the 1860s, and by end of ACW, most muskets had been replaced by breech-loaders, i.e., what is referred to in the game by the "rifling" tech. That is roughly 250 years during which the unit "Musket" _should_ be playing the increasingly dominant role in the game. Grenadiers should be a counter to Muskets, and only on the attack, and ONLY up until some new Tech that makes them less effective.

I think that the basic way the musket fits in the game, being only a strength 9 versus a strength 8 "maceman/man-at-arms" is the real problem.

Nice post! It has me thinking. I'm making some inquires on and off of the boards to find out what's involved in with mixing existing graphics to modify or create a unit.... along the lines of could we have musketmen fire a volley and pikemen close the combat graphics?

 

[Hyronymus]

That sounds more like developing a "battle group" that uses different sprites for different stages of the fight. Or do I misunderstand you, Rusty Edge?

 

[dreadknought]

Loving this mod, Im in a monarch game and been at war at least half the time and produced 6 gg so far around 600ad, stuck right in the middle in rankings. Their has been a ton of ai war as well.(large map, agg. ai, no vassels). I think turning off vassels spurs more wars.

Only thing I would love to see added is great stateman (can end wars) from the visa mod. Agree musketmen have always been weak, they need bonuses from the start against non-gun power units.

 

[Rusty Edge]

That sounds more like developing a "battle group" that uses different sprites for different stages of the fight. Or do I misunderstand you, Rusty Edge?

More or less like that. There are a number of possibillities, but at this stage they're all theoretical. ( I just hit another dead end. Aparently CIV IV is more challenging than CIV III in this regard). I'm looking into different aspects of the existing graphics. You know how we're used to seeing a trio of musketmen back to back defending a city? What if we could mix the group?
2 pikes and an early musket, OR 2 flintlock muskets and a grenadier? I thought that it might be a matter of swapping and substituting graphic images between files.

It has implications for other units & eras for that matter ... Wouldn't it be cool to see escorted bombers? Oh well. We shall see.

 

[Healz]

Yes, sounds like a great idea. Or a squadron of fighters with three fighters. Also is there a mission that you need to send your own fighter on before it will engage enemy fighters over a city? I just probably haven't got that far very often and thus most of the time I haven't seen an enemy with fighters over their cities very often...

 

[Hyronymus]

More or less like that. There are a number of possibillities, but at this stage they're all theoretical. ( I just hit another dead end. Aparently CIV IV is more challenging than CIV III in this regard). I'm looking into different aspects of the existing graphics. You know how we're used to seeing a trio of musketmen back to back defending a city? What if we could mix the group?
2 pikes and an early musket, OR 2 flintlock muskets and a grenadier? I thought that it might be a matter of swapping and substituting graphic images between files.

It has implications for other units & eras for that matter ... Wouldn't it be cool to see escorted bombers? Oh well. We shall see.

And for those, like me, that play with single unit graphics . Forgive me for thinking along (/joke) but how about a new unit type. One that also includes Machine Guns i.e., aren't they purely "volley" units too?