Calvary...is there any point to melee units?

[Stalker0]

So ranged units are getting all of the glory right now....and I agree, they are generally OP compared to other types just as they were in Civ 5.

That said, another key imbalance I am seeing is between calvary and melee units. So far, I have had zero trouble finding 2 horses in my starting areas, and horseman with that 100% production policy seem to trounce any melee unit....and have better mobility to go against ranged ones. They are as strong as swordsman, with the same strength, and better mobility. What's not to love?

 

[Zenstrive]

Their point is when we see no horses around.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Spears...that is the pointvof melee

 

[TapewormLondon24]

If your enemy has any type of spear or halbeard you will have a really bad day.

Otherwise, yeah, knights for the win.

 

[lamaros]

Yep, if you've got not horses, then...

They also get munched up by pikemen, and (not as sure on this) aren't so great at taking cities.

Also they're more expensive.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

Theoretically, spearmen are supposed to be the balancing factor here. But really Horsemen do OK against Spearmen (pikes are another matter, but it's a while before you see those.) Horsemen are definitely a much better bet than Swordsmen as currently balanced. That extra mobility is so important. Swordsmen could use a bonus against cities or something.

 

[lamaros]

Hmm, I thought Swordsmen did have a bonus against cities compared to them. Will have to look at that again...

 

[rpgalon]

I see 2 problems:

-The 100% bonus production cavalry card should be 50%.

-Horseman should have a higher production cost or only 30 str.


Just compare:
Horseman (2 horses):
35 str / move 4
Cost 80
Cost with discount card 40

Swordsman (2 iron):
35 str / move 2
Cost 90
Cost with discount card 60

Spearman:
25 str +10 vs Cavalry / move 2
Cost 65 /
Cost with discount card 43.33

So Horseman with discount card is cheaper to produce, same 35 str and move twice as much....

I think that if you change the 100% bonus production card to 50%, the other cavalry units are fine, only horseman needs a nerf.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

It just doesn't make sense to me that unpromoted horsemen and swordsmen should do equally well against spearmen. That's not right.

EDIT: they don't, my bad

 

[KrikkitTwo]

They d

It just doesn't make sense to me that unpromoted horsemen and swordsmen should do equally well against spearmen. That's not right.

They don't
Horse v spear
35 v 25+10
Equal strength

Sword v spear
35+10(sword bonus v spear) v 25
45 v 25
Spears are slaughtered

 

[Lupine]

Swordsmen chew up spear men with the +10 combat bonus

 

[CaiusDrewart]

They d
They don't
Horse v spear
35 v 25+10
Equal strength

Sword v spear
35+10(sword bonus v spear) v 25
45 v 25
Spears are slaughtered

Ah yes, sorry, forgot about that swordsmen anti-spear bonus. So that part's fine. But why do horsemen and spearmen fight to a draw? They certainly never did in past Civ games.

 

[Galbias]

Yep, Horsemen are pretty overpowered at the moment (and it's ridiculous that Barbarians can spawn them from the start of the game). Spearmen get a large penalty against regular melee so they're kind of awkward already, but even so they're not amazing against Horsemen.

 

[Nefelia]

Agreed with some of the previous analysis.

Increase the strength of Spearmen by 5 (to 30), and nerf the policy card to increase production of horse units by 50%, rather than 100%. Should be an easy balance fix.

 

[steveg700]

It just doesn't make sense to me that unpromoted horsemen and swordsmen should do equally well against spearmen. That's not right.

EDIT: they don't, my bad

Not right? Well, historically, the notion of horsemen being doomed in a lemming-like fashion to impalement when faced with pole arms is rather reductive. I mean, pole-arm formations are a problem for units charging in swings swords and maces, but it's a problem for charging footmen as well if they lack reach.

Spearmen should be effective at digging in and fortifying. Mounted units should have their mobility and maybe a defensive bonus against ranged attacks, but lack the ability to fortify. Then swordsmen can be your all-purpose balanced units.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

Not right? Well, historically, the notion of horsemen being doomed in a lemming-like fashion to impalement when faced with pole arms is rather reductive. I mean, pole-arm formations are a problem for units charging in swings swords and maces, but it's a problem for charging footmen as well if they lack reach.

Spearmen should be effective at digging in and fortifying. Mounted units should have their mobility and maybe a defensive bonus against ranged attacks, but lack the ability to fortify. Then swordsmen can be your all-purpose balanced units.

Oh, you're totally right that spearmen and pikemen did not fulfill some anti-cavalry niche historically. A pointy stick can be effective at keeping a horse away (if the guy holding it is brave enough to keep still), but it has plenty of utility against infantrymen, too. But Civ games have always pigeonholed spears as anti-cavalry units. That was clearly the intent this time around, too... they're just not quite good enough.

 

[steveg700]

So ranged units are getting all of the glory right now....and I agree, they are generally OP compared to other types just as they were in Civ 5.

That said, another key imbalance I am seeing is between calvary and melee units. So far, I have had zero trouble finding 2 horses in my starting areas, and horseman with that 100% production policy seem to trounce any melee unit....and have better mobility to go against ranged ones. They are as strong as swordsman, with the same strength, and better mobility. What's not to love?

Note that at the complaining and subsequent nerfing of both iron and horse melee is one of the reasons why people kind of gave up on them in Civ V. Personally, I find the idea that an elite, resource-dependent unit should be hands-down countered by a ubiquitous unit to not be all that desirable, design-wise. If all you need to do against a cav-heavy army is make spears,, then sticking a guy on a horse will become pretty unattractive. The fix some propose here of just making spearmen stronger is pretty much Civ V's undermining of strategic resource units all over again.

If a base horseman is 50/50 against a base spearman, I fail to see how that's a problem or a sign that something needs fixing.

Masses of ranged units are bound to be powerful in a turn-based game, because they get to focus their fire on a single target until its dead. In Civ V, folks would make suggestions like have bowmen only be able to attack 2 tiles away, not adjacent. Another suggestion was to remove their ability to deal reciprocal damage against melee units.

Of course, one effective counter against archers should be these "overpowered" mounted units running in from out of bowshot and smashing into them.

 

[Promethian]

I get the impression looking at the unit promotion upgrades that they did some of their balance based on the promotions. For instance anti-cav gets an upgrade for double power when sharing a tile with a support unit. So spearmen are unimpressive right up until you get them two level ups and a battering ram.

 

[lamaros]

Note that at the complaining and subsequent nerfing of both iron and horse melee is one of the reasons why people kind of gave up on them in Civ V. Personally, I find the idea that an elite, resource-dependent unit should be hands-down countered by a ubiquitous unit to not be all that desirable, design-wise. If all you need to do against a cav-heavy army is make spears,, then sticking a guy on a horse will become pretty unattractive. The proposed "fix" of just making spearmen stronger is pretty much Civ V's undermining of strategic resource units all over again.

Masses of ranged units are bound to be powerful in a turn-based game, because they get to focus their fire on a single target until its dead. In Civ V, folks would make suggestions like have bowmen only be able to attack 2 tiles away, not adjacent. Another suggestion was to remove their ability to deal reciprocal damage against melee units.

Of course, one effective counter against archers should be these "overpowered" mounted units running in from out of bowshot and smashing into them.

I've actually had this play out like this in my current game, so it's working to some extent (for me, the AI needs some lessons).

The other weakness of Archers is of course the movement and visibility rules, which seems to weaken them a fair bit in certain situations in Civ 6 so far. (it would be even better if city defenses and catapults could shoot over hills and archers can't, TBH - not sure if this is actually the case, though).

 

[steveg700]

I get the impression looking at the unit promotion upgrades that they did some of their balance based on the promotions. For instance anti-cav gets an upgrade for double power when sharing a tile with a support unit. So spearmen are unimpressive right up until you get them two level ups and a battering ram.

And that, to me, is a pretty good way of fixing things. If you want to be good at anti-cav tactics, steer your spearmen to those promotions.