Cannons and steel - still not fixed...?

[Airefuego]

It always struck me as really odd that Cannons require the tech steel, rather than being available at gunpowder.

I was hoping BTS might change this (I think I like the change to cavalry though) but it doesn't. Nor does the latest patch... perhaps someone with more history on the forums can let me know if i am going over old ground here...

Anyway - two points:

1. Cannons were easily the first gunpowder units in history. A big metal tube for hurling a lump of iron (that's a cannon) is much easier to make than a little metal tube with an intricate flint lock fuse-type thing (that's a musket).

So cannons should come at gunpowder (should need gunpowder and metal casting)

If you also want muskets to be available at gunpowder, they would need gunpowder and machinery I guess.

2. Frigates were good at attacking other ships because they had cannons on board! But Frigates currently come before Steel (and cannons) on the tech tree! Insane. Another reason cannons should be available with gunpowder.

So -

I assume that making cannons available so late was a deliberate strategic decision based on the fact that cannons are quite powerful, and maybe also that cats and trebuchets are fun and maybe shouldn't become obsolete too quickly.

Perhaps part of the solution to the first part is already addressed by the general nerfing of seige units. I wonder if there are some other solutions that might allow cannons to be available at gunpowder without becoming too unbalanced... maybe something like:

- can't upgrade trebs and cats to cannons?
- cannons start a bit weaker at reducing city defenses that at present, but get better after Steel?
- or something?

thoughts and ideas welcome...

 

[Tee Kay]

I assume that making cannons available so late was a deliberate strategic decision based on the fact that cannons are quite powerful, and maybe also that cats and trebuchets are fun and maybe shouldn't become obsolete too quickly.

Yes, probably. It might not be historically accurate but it makes the game more fun.

How about having two units - bombards which can be available at gunpowder and "cannons" that requires steel?

 

[Blaarg]

They need to add a gunpowder seige unit that comes available with gunpowder to bridge Trebuchets and Cannons.

 

[bonafide11]

I don't think so, I think it is fine the way it is...

 

[jackdog]

Canons that early would scew the game as they would be too powerful too early

 

[vilemerchant]

The point is correct that it's really quite silly to be running around with rifleman/cavalry backed up by trebs. They could easily make cannons a bit less powerful and have a better siege unit come in later. Maybe with steel AND chemistry.

 

[classical_hero]

Perhaps we could have a unit called the bombard to come in at gunpowder and it come in at strength 9 and I think that would be a good early gunpowder based siege weapon.

 

[Minor Annoyance]

When someone was commenting on how ships carry cannons before you can build cannons someone else pointed out that cannons were on ships before battlefields because they were too heavy to move around a battlefield, and that's why you need steel before you can build cannons.
Of course what really needs a fix is being able to build the Apollo program without electricity.

 

[classical_hero]

Considering that note, they could have cannons available at that time, but they would need the tech of Steel to make them easier to move. They have done that for many other unit so why not another one?

 

[Elandal]

How would you simulate "easier to move"?

I've added Bombard to Gunpowder for my own games: strength 6, +50% city attack, ignores walls/castles like cannon - basically "a bit better than treb against cities, a bit better than cat outside cities, so better than either in both cases, but not as good as cannon". I think the city attack bonus with lower base strength currently simulates "hard to move and use on field - best used against stationary target in sieges".

 

[Antarion]

i would suggest to bring in a older version of gunpowder siege weapons then the actual cannon. the cannon atm seems like a construct of napoleons age.

to solve this i would make bombards into the game. str 8 siege weapons, ignore castles. the only downside is this makes the beeline to machinery and co. much more obsolete. maybe even trebuchet wouldnt be used either then. atleast this is civ IV and not medival II

 

[Olleus]

Yeah, why not add another unless unit?
Either the bombard or the trebuchet will become a musketman-like unit if you add another siege weapon. There simply isn't enough room in the tech tree to get a chance to use all of these units.

 

[Antarion]

Yeah, why not add another unless unit?
Either the bombard or the trebuchet will become a musketman-like unit if you add another siege weapon. There simply isn't enough room in the tech tree to get a chance to use all of these units.

while i agree its really not necessary to add more units to the game, i cant see why ppl still claim musketmen as useless. especially since grenadiers come so much later the first gunpowder unit kicks ass. especially with protective civs.

 

[antracer]

IIRC there's a rather large difference between cannons and "cannons"... To clarify, "cannons", like the ones on ships and the first ones on the battlefields were big, bulky things that took alot of manpower and alot of time to load/fire etc., while cannons of the cavalry/rifleman era were much more mobile, lighter and more accurate.

I personally think cannons as represented in the game are where they should be, but also agree that a bronze/cast iron field cannon slightly more powerful than the treb/cat with the same movement should be available for use with muskets with metal casting/gunpowder.

Now, I have to go off to the mods forum, cuz it's gunna bug me it's not in there. ?

Tim

 

[Olleus]

Well how about adding a CR4 and CG4 promotion which becomes available with gunpowder?

Surely thats a good enough representation of siege artillery.

 

[Elandal]

Siege weapons don't get promoted highly anymore with BTS - they can't kill, so they get one XP per attack for as long as they survive. Getting trebs to CR3 is a feat in itself, let alone working them to level 5.

 

[Olleus]

I was thinking more about getting CR4 macemen and thinks like that.

 

[Inky]

In my last game, I invaded the Byzantines, who had Cavalry and Infantry. I had Tanks and Infantry myself. It felt very odd to have my tanks attacked by his Catapults, but he didn't yet have steel, therefore no cannons to support his troops.

Infantry supported by Catapults seems ridiculous to me. Can you imagine seeing Catapults in WWI? But even Riflemen, or Grenadiers, wouldn't go into the field with ancient era siege weapons.

 

[Roxlimn]

Cannons actually weren't the first gunpowder weapons. Rockets and shapnel bombs were.

Historically, Cannon came before the invention of small-arms weapons, but there's no reason the reverse couldn't have happened. The earliest cannon were very small bore weapons, comparatively speaking. If the emphasis at the time had been field warfare instead of siege warfare, it might have developed into small-arms first.

 

[Elandal]

First handheld guns were effectively very small cannons mounted on wooden handle. For first two centuries of gunpowder weapons in Europe small-arms and cannons were effectively same in design, only small arms were smaller with usually longer tube as barrel.

Still, my reason for adding Bombard to Gunpowder was only partially historical. I too considered Rifles with catapults to be dumb, but still it was a common occurence because Rifling and Steel are on different sides of the techtree - sometimes Rifling is better, sometimes Steel is better. Either you get maces and knights with cannons or you get rifles and cavalry with cats. I think best fix for this is to introduce early form of siege cannon at Gunpowder to bridge the gap between classical and industrial era siege weapons.