Phungus's changes:
1) Moved Engineering req to Muskets (added Engineering req to Bombard, Galleon (and unique types)
2) To make gunpowder useful in it's own right, added Fireworks Festival National wonder (+1 happy in all cities)
3) Removed unnessary Musket prereque for Cuirassiers (and all unique types)
4) Chem now requires Education
5) Education now requires literature
6) Changed Hwacha to Bombard (Str 7, 50% city and melee bonus--it says it's a gunpoweder unit in the Civilopedia)
Here's my thoughts of your changes... mind-you, unless it's something I've never heard of or has never been brought-up, if it's something I didn't change, there's usually a reason.
1) You mentioned this before, and I ignored it for a
reason. I have it set in the Wolfshanze Mod (v2.85) that Engineering is a pre-req for Gunpowder, and the two units that come with gunpowder (Bombards and Galleons) don't list Engineering as a pre-req, simply because the tech they do require (gunpowder) itself requires Engineering. If you need Engineering to get Gunpowder, then (naturally) Engineering is required for the units that need gunpowder (Bombards and Galleons). So you moved Engineering as a pre-req to Muskets, but made-sure Galleons and Bombards couldn't be built without Engineering... to me this is useless and pointless... so now you can research and develop gunpowder without engineering, but you get ZERO benefit from having gunpowder, since the only two units that Gunpowder unlocks require engineering anyways... It's like researching Rifling, but not being able to get Riflemen unless you then research something else... well, what's the point in getting Gunpowder then? Simply put... no... this makes as much sense as a 7-foot tall Wookie named Chewbacca living on Endor with a bunch of 2-foot Ewoks. If it doesn't fit, you must acquit...
2) Nope... I think there's already too many "make happy" wonders... and making it a national wonder too? Should at least be a world-wonder so you have to race to get it... but a national wonder makes it too easy. Who needs WW anyways? Personally I like trying to manage people and make them happy... too many "magic wand" happy fixes as-is.
3) Yeah, but I needed that to make room on the F6 tech-tree! Just realized I forgot to update that for the Cuirassier UUs though... drat!
4) But you could be pushing-back Grenadiers like that... too many folks already ignore the short-lived Grens... I'm trying to give them more life!
5) That could make sense... would have to look at that more (new one on me).
6) Nope... I DID make a change on the Hwacha in v2.85... You in-fact mentioned that several times before, and I thought long and hard on it, before deciding with my course of action. There's a LOT of things to consider with the Korean Hwacha... some involve "duh", common sense sort of things... some involve historical use, and still others gameplay balance.
On the "duh" factor... the Hwacha is in-simple-terms, rocket/gunpowder propelled arrows off a multi-barrel launch platform and was one of the earliest "gunpowder" weapons... so on the surface, it's quite stupid that Firaxis made this a Catapult replacement, and can "logically" be made as a "Gunpowder" Siege weapon replacement.
However... (hold that thought)... I have two other issues that (IMHO) trump the first...
The Historical use is where I have my biggest problem... the Hwacha was an
ANTI-PERSONNEL DEVICE... it was NEVER used to bring-down fortifications of anything beyond perhaps a wood/straw wall! Also, while it was a "gunpowder" weapon, it's battlefield use was mostly against sword/axe/pole-arm wielding opponents (melee guys in Civ4 terms).
Simply-put, rocket-propelled ARROWS don't do much damage to fortifications... especially large stone ones. This was very-much an AP device.
With the above real-world use, I had to try and fit that into Civ4 GAMEPLAY terms... this wasn't easy (like fitting a square peg into a round hole).
Gameplay-wise, I could either call this a very-late medieval siege weapon or a very-early gunpowder siege weapon... like I said, the "duh" factor is gunpowder, but between actual use and gameplay, we're talking either a Trebuchet replacement or a Bombard replacement. The Trebuchet's in-game use is on a more limited timespan (kinda like the Hwacha) and the Trebuchet mostly faces opponents/enemies clad in medieval-style armor (like the Hwacha)... the Trebuchet, while a fine SIEGE weapon in the late medieval era, it is quickly eclipsed by the far-more effective bombard... the ULTIMATE siege weapon and death-knell for castles (much UNLIKE the Hwacha)... since the Bombard is far more effective, for a longer period of time at Siege then the Trebuch ever is, and the Bombard quickly becomes used mostly in Renaissance times against musket-opponents, I thought these gameplay roles to be very different from what the Hwacha should/would be used.
There's one other option... you could make it a Bombard replacement and "nerf" the siege capabilities... but I'm not a big fan of UUs that are in any way weaker then the default unit it replaces... and a Bombard UU that can't bring-down walls would be sad (and I'm not for thinking of a Hwacha as the ultimate terror of walls either, which is why I don't like making it a Bombard UU in the first place).
Bottom line, while there's certainly the "duh" factor in that the Hwacha is indeed a gunpowder weapon, it's historical use and gameplay use does not match well at-all with any gunpowder-based siege weapons... it's certainly not a good fill-in for the Bombard's main gameplay role as a destroyer of castles and walls and whose main opponents are Renaissance muskets... the Trebuchet, is a short-lived siege weapon, whose main opponents are more medieval type opponents... and it's a weapon system that was used very briefly before much more effective bombards and cannons appeared on the scene. If one closes their eyes for a second on the gunpowder issue and focuses on historical use against what opponents, and overall gameplay use... I just thought the Hwacha made for a better Trebuchet replacement then a Bombard replacement. Neither is a perfect fit for such a unique weapon... I just went (after long and careful thought) with the BETTER choice of the two IMHO.
There is a method to my madness folks!
