[Feature] Additional Unique Units

[Leoreth]

This new feature introduces a second unique unit to many, but deliberately not all civilisations. Given that some civilisations span a lot of the game and have many appropriate candidates for unique units, it is possible to add them while leaving civilisations that are more marginal or only important for a small time period with one unique unit. This also allows to make certain civilisations stronger in specific time periods. I also used the opportunity to remove/replace some problematic unique units and improve the art of others.

You can access the new feature on the uniqueunits branch.

Unit changes:
- Camel Rider (Riding): requires Camel and Copper/Iron, like Horseman but -1 strength, +25% desert strength, +25% against heavy cavalry, starts with Desert Adaptation
- Camel Archer (Nobility): requires Camel, like Horse Archer but -1 strength, +25% desert strength, +25% against heavy cavalry, starts with Desert Adaptation
- Camel Gunner (Firearms): requires Camel, like Pistolier but -1 strength, +25% desert strength, +25% against heavy cavalry, starts with Desert Adaptation
- new Heavy Galley art

Unique Power chages:
- Korea: The Power of Education: double specialist slots in capital

Unique Unit changes:
- Greece: Companion (Horseman): no city strength penalties, starts with March and Blitz
- India: Varu (Lancer): requires Ivory, -1 movement, +2 strength
- Phoenicia: Sacred Band (Spearman): +25% city strength, starts with Amphibious
- Phoenicia: Atlas Elephant: new art
- Persia: Savaran (Lancer): requires Generalship, strength 8, reduced cost
- Persia: Immortal: new art
- Rome: Ballista (Catapult): strength 5 but no city attack bonus
- Tamils: Rocketeer (Grenadier): additional collateral damage, +25% against Musketman
- Ethiopia: removed Askari as unique unit and renamed back to Oromo Warrior
- Ethiopia: Shotelai (Swordsman): requires no resources, starts with Guerilla I
- Korea: Kobukson (Galleass): +2 strength, starts with Drill I and II
- Byzantium: Dromon (Heavy Galley): causes collateral damage
- Japan: Zero (Fighter): reduced cost, +50% against naval units, increased evasion chance
- Vikings: Longship (Heavy Galley): requires Artisanry, +2 movement, 2 cargo
- Arabia: removed Camel Archer
- Arabia: Mobile Guard (Lancer): no city strength penalties, 20% retreat chance
- Arabia: Ghazi (Heavy Swordsman): 2 moves, +20% city attack
- Indonesia: removed Orang Laut
- Indonesia: Djong (Galleass): +50% coast defense, +50% against Privateers
- Spain: Tercio (Arquebusier): starts with Pinch and Formation
- France: removed Heavy Cannon
- France: Gendarme (Cuirassier): starts with Pinch and Leadership
- France: Guard (Dragoon): starts with Pinch and Leadership
- England: Man-of-War (Ship of the Line): +1 move, +3 strength
- Holy Rome: Grenzer (Grenadier): requires Geography, -2 strength, +25% retreat chance
- Mongols: Mangudai (Horse Archer): +1 movement, +2 strength
- Mongols: Keshik: new art
- Italy: removed Bersagliere
- Italy: Balestriere (Crossbowman): +25% city strength, starts with Amphibious
- Italy: Lanternas (Galleass): +2 strength, +1 movement, reduced cost
- Portugal: Bandeirante (Explorer): strength 8, can attack, capturing slaves is guaranteed
- Prussia: Fusilier (Musketman): starts with Drill I and II
- America: Pioneer (Worker): +100% work rate
- Mexico: Rurales renamed to Rural, new art
- Colombia: Llanero (Hussar): +50% against Musketman, Rifleman

Out of the major civilisation that should have a unique unit in my opinion, this leaves the following without one: China, Russia and the Ottomans. This is because I am not sure currently what those units should be.

China: probably some Hand Gunner or Firelance, i.e. an early gunpowder unit? The challenge here is to have a unit that is not too strong to counter the Mongol invasion. Other ideas?
Russia: not sure what to add here and what its effect could be.
Ottomans: I considered Sipahis, but there are a lot of Lancer replacements already, and I don't know what their effect would be. Another possibility is a Great Bombard, but here extra city attack is already taken by the Siege Elephant.

Other ideas or feedback?

 

[trevor]

A T-34 tank with +1 movement or Katyusha artillery with extra collateral for Russia?

 

[soul-breathing]

For China I have several suggestions to choose.

1. Sheng, replaces chariot, causes collateral damage, +10% retreat chance.
Sheng is an important war unit in Chinese history. In Zhou Dynasty, China divided into many small duchies. The number of Sheng is an important index to count the power of a duchy. A duchy with 1000 Shengs means there're 100,000 soldiers in this duchy. It's a very strong military power. It had been obsoleted after Qin Dynasty.
It looks like this:

Spoiler :

2. Modao Infantry, replaces Heavy Swordman, +1 strength, start with march.
Modao is a kind of sabre in Tang Dynasty. An Infantry with a Modao is the principle force in Tang Dynasty, and still be used after Tang Dynasty, even in Ming and Qing Dynasty.
It looks like this:

Spoiler :

3. PLA, replaces Infantry, -1 strength, start with march and commando, can improve tiles like worker.
PLA is the army of PRC. After PRC founded in 1949ad, the PLA has not lost any war. The strong motility is its characteristic. Not only an army for war, PLA also takes an important role in providing disaster relief, land reclamation and Industrial construction.

 

[MechatronicJazz]

Korea: Kobukson (Galleass): +2 strength, starts with Guerilla I and II

Guerilla is a hill bonus, right? Is that a typo?

 

[Steb]

What is a "guard" for France? It sounds very generic, which is ironic considering "dragoon" is originally a French word.

 

[hnrysml]

If Phoenicia is always to become Carthage (and there are no plans to split the civs) I would love to see a return of the Numidian Cavalry, as they were the tactical edge (other than good generalship) that Carthage had against Rome in battles, and the most iconic of their military-other armies had elephants, which, despite what the Wikipedia page on war elephants says, the Romans had learnt how to effectively handle them during the Pyrrhic War- and I believe there is doubt about whether Hannibal actually used his elephants effectively other than for shock and awe, in Italy.
If the civs are to remain joined, I would propose the removal of the Atlas Elephant as a UU. It is only classical accounts by Roman and Greek historians that place the elephants in a position of tactical importance in any battles, and these historians said other demonstrably false things about Hannibal's elephants. It is likely that many of the claims of Hannibal's usage of war elephants were made exaggerated (or were completely fictitious) by pro-Roman historians.
Furthermore, I see on Wikipedia that it says they used North African Elephants as war elephants in Carthage and Ptolemaic Dynasty Egypt, but with no citations or proper sources other than very vague references to Livy or Polybius. In any case the North African Elephant was smaller and less effective than the Asian Elephant according to these sources.
Overall my conclusion is that the "Atlas Elephant" as a war elephant probably didn't exist, or if it did it was inferior in battle to the Indian Elephant, or even Syrian Elephant. Hannibal's most important tactical achievements were facilitated by the Numidian Cavalry manoeuvres, and he had less elephants and used them less often than contemporary pro-Roman accounts say. Finally, after the extensive use of elephants by Pyrrhus, the Romans had already developed special techniques for countering an elephant charge.
Thank for you listening to my war elephant rant, I am considering spending some time in the future giving a properly researched and cited version of it.

On the other hand, the Atlas Elephant is a really cool UU, it's just no Numidian Cavalry.

(edit: out of interest, I can't view the new art for the atlas elephant right now, but if it is going to stay as I suspect it will, it would be more appropriate for the new art to show a noticeably smaller elephant with no howdah)

(editedit: I did find another source other than biased contemporary historians saying that it was indeed North African Elephants that Hannibal used, except for his personal elephant, which despite being named The Syrian, was likely an Indian Elephant.)

 

[Temujin8k]

• Russia: I agree with the T-34 and/or Katyusha suggestion. T-34 has +1/+2 strength and maybe a bonus against Armored Vehicles? Then Katyusha has increased collateral damage and bonus against infantry, but significantly weaker (-2?).
• Ottomans: The Spahi would be great, too, although I agree that there are a lot of Lancer replacements already. Would still be interesting, though. If we have the Great Bombard instead, I think it's better to change the bonus of the Siege Elephant. Or double the bombard damage of the Great Bombard, but make it significantly more expensive.
• France: So, what happens to the Heavy Cannon now? Are there gonna be 3 French UU's or is it getting removed?
• China: In RFCA, the Tang unique unit is the Shenwu Guard (Pikeman), with additional city defense. The Song UU is the Firelance, a Cannonier replacement which was available earlier, but was 2x more expensive (2x production speed with sulfur). (EDIT) What would the Firelance replace, though? China also adopted arquebuses and they were important there, so I don't think the Firelance should replace Arquebusiers.
• Korea: The Hwacha is a Joseon invention. It's weird to have it replace Catapults, which are Classical Era units. However, if the Hwacha replaces the Trebuchet, it would hamper Korea's ability to siege between Fortification and Gunpowder since the Hwacha is not meant to take down walls. I think the best alternative is for the Hwacha to remain a Catapult replacement, but should upgrade to Artillery (or Cannon?) instead.

 

[merijn_v1]

I guess you used some of my 2nd UU modcomp for inspiration/art?

I gave the Ottoman Bombard extra collateral damage. (More units, more %, higher limit) I originally wanted to give them a city attack boost, but that was already given to the Mughal Siege Elephant and I didn't want to change that. Maybe it is a good idea to give the collateral damage bonus to the Siege Elephant and give the Great Bombard the city attack bonus.

 

[Leoreth]

A T-34 tank with +1 movement or Katyusha artillery with extra collateral for Russia?

Both of that would be cool, but I'm concerned that it's another rather late UU for Russia.

For China I have several suggestions to choose.

1. Sheng, replaces chariot, causes collateral damage, +10% retreat chance.
Sheng is an important war unit in Chinese history. In Zhou Dynasty, China divided into many small duchies. The number of Sheng is an important index to count the power of a duchy. A duchy with 1000 Shengs means there're 100,000 soldiers in this duchy. It's a very strong military power. It had been obsoleted after Qin Dynasty.
It looks like this:

Spoiler :

View attachment 506632

I like this in concept, but it's very early where China is mostly isolated, especially when the spawn is moved.

2. Modao Infantry, replaces Heavy Swordman, +1 strength, start with march.
Modao is a kind of sabre in Tang Dynasty. An Infantry with a Modao is the principle force in Tang Dynasty, and still be used after Tang Dynasty, even in Ming and Qing Dynasty.
It looks like this:

Spoiler :

This could work, units from the medieval era would fit best again.

3. PLA, replaces Infantry, -1 strength, start with march and commando, can improve tiles like worker.
PLA is the army of PRC. After PRC founded in 1949ad, the PLA has not lost any war. The strong motility is its characteristic. Not only an army for war, PLA also takes an important role in providing disaster relief, land reclamation and Industrial construction.

Here again it comes rather late in the game in my opinion.

What do you think about the Firelance?

Guerilla is a hill bonus, right? Is that a typo?

Yes, it's Drill, corrected.

What is a "guard" for France? It sounds very generic, which is ironic considering "dragoon" is originally a French word.

It's the Imperial/Napoleonic Guard, I dropped the qualifier because it changed its name over the course of history (early on it was the Consular Guard) and because I do not want to tie it to specific civics.

If Phoenicia is always to become Carthage (and there are no plans to split the civs) I would love to see a return of the Numidian Cavalry, as they were the tactical edge (other than good generalship) that Carthage had against Rome in battles, and the most iconic of their military-other armies had elephants, which, despite what the Wikipedia page on war elephants says, the Romans had learnt how to effectively handle them during the Pyrrhic War- and I believe there is doubt about whether Hannibal actually used his elephants effectively other than for shock and awe, in Italy.
If the civs are to remain joined, I would propose the removal of the Atlas Elephant as a UU. It is only classical accounts by Roman and Greek historians that place the elephants in a position of tactical importance in any battles, and these historians said other demonstrably false things about Hannibal's elephants. It is likely that many of the claims of Hannibal's usage of war elephants were made exaggerated (or were completely fictitious) by pro-Roman historians.
Furthermore, I see on Wikipedia that it says they used North African Elephants as war elephants in Carthage and Ptolemaic Dynasty Egypt, but with no citations or proper sources other than very vague references to Livy or Polybius. In any case the North African Elephant was smaller and less effective than the Asian Elephant according to these sources.
Overall my conclusion is that the "Atlas Elephant" as a war elephant probably didn't exist, or if it did it was inferior in battle to the Indian Elephant, or even Syrian Elephant. Hannibal's most important tactical achievements were facilitated by the Numidian Cavalry manoeuvres, and he had less elephants and used them less often than contemporary pro-Roman accounts say. Finally, after the extensive use of elephants by Pyrrhus, the Romans had already developed special techniques for countering an elephant charge.
Thank for you listening to my war elephant rant, I am considering spending some time in the future giving a properly researched and cited version of it.

On the other hand, the Atlas Elephant is a really cool UU, it's just no Numidian Cavalry.

(edit: out of interest, I can't view the new art for the atlas elephant right now, but if it is going to stay as I suspect it will, it would be more appropriate for the new art to show a noticeably smaller elephant with no howdah)

(editedit: I did find another source other than biased contemporary historians saying that it was indeed North African Elephants that Hannibal used, except for his personal elephant, which despite being named The Syrian, was likely an Indian Elephant.)

I see your point. The main concern for adding the Atlas Elephant was to give them a unit that can challenge a Roman Legion, but with the right abilities that could also be the case for the Numidian Cavalry.

Honestly I have also considered three UUs for some civs, but I don't want to go overboard now, especially since the timeframe for Phoenicia/Carthage is rather short.

• Russia: I agree with the T-34 and/or Katyusha suggestion. T-34 has +1/+2 strength and maybe a bonus against Armored Vehicles? Then Katyusha has increased collateral damage and bonus against infantry, but significantly weaker (-2?).
• Ottomans: The Spahi would be great, too, although I agree that there are a lot of Lancer replacements already. Would still be interesting, though. If we have the Great Bombard instead, I think it's better to change the bonus of the Siege Elephant. Or double the bombard damage of the Great Bombard, but make it significantly more expensive.
• France: So, what happens to the Heavy Cannon now? Are there gonna be 3 French UU's or is it getting removed?

It's removed, I only forgot to mention it.

• China: In RFCA, the Tang unique unit is the Shenwu Guard (Pikeman), with additional city defense. The Song UU is the Firelance, a Cannonier replacement which was available earlier, but was 2x more expensive (2x production speed with sulfur). (EDIT) What would the Firelance replace, though? China also adopted arquebuses and they were important there, so I don't think the Firelance should replace Arquebusiers.

They could maybe replace Longbows?

• Korea: The Hwacha is a Joseon invention. It's weird to have it replace Catapults, which are Classical Era units. However, if the Hwacha replaces the Trebuchet, it would hamper Korea's ability to siege between Fortification and Gunpowder since the Hwacha is not meant to take down walls. I think the best alternative is for the Hwacha to remain a Catapult replacement, but should upgrade to Artillery (or Cannon?) instead.

True, maybe it's more accurate to make it a bombard replacement?

I guess you used some of my 2nd UU modcomp for inspiration/art?

For inspiration, yes. But I worked mostly from HR and RI for art.

I gave the Ottoman Bombard extra collateral damage. (More units, more %, higher limit) I originally wanted to give them a city attack boost, but that was already given to the Mughal Siege Elephant and I didn't want to change that. Maybe it is a good idea to give the collateral damage bonus to the Siege Elephant and give the Great Bombard the city attack bonus.

I agree that city attack is better for the Great Bombard, but I don't know if collateral is actually fitting for Siege Elephants. Something like Shock or Pinch could work better.

 

[merijn_v1]

For inspiration, yes. But I worked mostly from HR and RI for art.

I got a lot of art from those as well. So it is likely some art is shared. I really love those mods for providing good inspiration and art.

 

[soul-breathing]

Here again it comes rather late in the game in my opinion.

Yes, it's a bit too late for China, especially it's aften finish before 1800ad.
If there is a Modern China Civ (as Mexico for Aztec, or Italy for Roma maybe?) in the future, the PLA could be the UU.

What do you think about the Firelance?

I've discussed it with my Chinese friends. To be honest, a Firelance unit is not so famous in Chinese history. There're hardly any famous battle in Ancient China that firelances take an important part in. So it's not so suitable.

 

[KeeperOT7Keys]

- Arabia: Mobile Guard (Lancer): no city strength penalties, 20% retreat chance

Name looks very bland and I'm not sure what does it represent, what about using Ghulam, Mamluk, or Askari. Askari actually means soldier in Arabic (and also in Turkish) and it's not actually an African thing if it sounds confusing. In the Total War mod that SoI is inspired they are the backbone of Arabic heavy cavalry units.

For the Ottomans I'm normally all for Sipahis, since they were the actual backbone of the army. But I think we can also go other way around and replace a unit they don't use, like pikemen. Ottomans had a unit called Başı Bozuk, I believe this unit is very unique and can be given some interesting bonuses.

 

[ozqar]

Honestly I have also considered three UUs for some civs, but I don't want to go overboard now, especially since the timeframe for Phoenicia/Carthage is rather short.

I think 3 UUs could be fair for civs such as China, which span such a long timeline (even if you move them forward). If you ever make a modern China civ, then the units could just be split between the two civs. Can't think from top of my head now if there are any other civs that last so long and could also do with 3UHVs, but perhaps already all the European and other civs that start from medieval times and go to the present could justify that.

But really cool to see already the 2nd UUs, it's a nice feature

 

[Leoreth]

I got a lot of art from those as well. So it is likely some art is shared. I really love those mods for providing good inspiration and art.

True, I don't think I would have started this project without easy access to art and inspiration from those mods. Tracking unit art down in the database is so much work.

I've discussed it with my Chinese friends. To be honest, a Firelance unit is not so famous in Chinese history. There're hardly any famous battle in Ancient China that firelances take an important part in. So it's not so suitable.

Alright, what about early hand gunners in general? I am asking mainly because there is already good unit art for that so it would definitely be possible to include.

Name looks very bland and I'm not sure what does it represent, what about using Ghulam, Mamluk, or Askari. Askari actually means soldier in Arabic (and also in Turkish) and it's not actually an African thing if it sounds confusing. In the Total War mod that SoI is inspired they are the backbone of Arabic heavy cavalry units.

See here, the RI civilopedia also mentions that it's an approximation of the Rashidun term for their elite cavalry.

For the Ottomans I'm normally all for Sipahis, since they were the actual backbone of the army. But I think we can also go other way around and replace a unit they don't use, like pikemen. Ottomans had a unit called Başı Bozuk, I believe this unit is very unique and can be given some interesting bonuses.

What bonuses do you think would be fitting for Sipahis?

I think 3 UUs could be fair for civs such as China, which span such a long timeline (even if you move them forward). If you ever make a modern China civ, then the units could just be split between the two civs. Can't think from top of my head now if there are any other civs that last so long and could also do with 3UHVs, but perhaps already all the European and other civs that start from medieval times and go to the present could justify that.

But really cool to see already the 2nd UUs, it's a nice feature

Right, I mainly thought it could work for the main European civs like England and France, and also India and China.

 

[KeeperOT7Keys]

What bonuses do you think would be fitting for Sipahis?

I'm not sure to be honest, Sipahis were unique because of their deployment/production type rather than their military feats AFAIK. Sipahis were given temporary land (it was still the Sultan's officially) to upkeep themselves and had to arm themselves.
Something about their production or upkeep can be unique, like using food even without (vassalage? I forgot the civic), because Ottomans were a very centralized state and feudalism-like civics doesn't really suit them, except the Sipahi branch of the military.
If we want a military bonus then I'm not sure. Maybe some bonus against already wounded units? that could be a really interesting bonus imho.

 

[soul-breathing]

Alright, what about early hand gunners in general? I am asking mainly because there is already good unit art for that so it would definitely be possible to include.

I want to see this unit art. Could you upload a image or give a website link?

 

[Enyavar]

Extra UUs are great news.

I haven't played in the dev versions, so I don't know if China is too weak on land now and really NEED a new land unit in the medieval era. But as far as I know from playing them in 1.15, they can already take care of themselves.
So here's what I think for China: Treasure Ships (Baochuan)! They could replace Caravels, or Galleons.
Possible effects - choose or combine:

• Additional strength against non-coastal ships, or additional strength in ocean tiles?
• (for caravels) No supply payments, earn +1 Gold if they are not in Chinese water, and +2 Gold if they are in foreign civ's water? This would encourage the player to use them to stay in touch with all other nations, if desired.
  
• Start with Navigation I, or Medic I, or both?
• Additional base strength?

For Russia, hm, if it is still intended that they are a weak backwater nation until they have grown their big strong empire, so they don't need earlier units (my opinion). What I can imagine is stuff in the late game, where they need to be competitive to the big powers. That means in my book, a significantly cheaper modern unit, be it infantry (Red Army?), tanks (T-34?) or artillery (Katyusha?). Especially the Soviet infantry is known for Zerg-rushing the Axis in WW II. Also, the large Russian empire could probably need some reliable unit that is cheaper to mass-produce and station in every city - not one that is necessarily stronger in some way.

 

[Steb]

It's the Imperial/Napoleonic Guard, I dropped the qualifier because it changed its name over the course of history (early on it was the Consular Guard) and because I do not want to tie it to specific civics.

Okay, I think this is a good choice to represent Napoleonic armies. However, I would suggest they replace Grenadiers instead. It seems the Imperial Guard was made in large part of Grenadier units. They're in the same column as dragoons, so that's fine for the time period. And it would be better, I think, not to give France two cavalry UUs.

The downside is that there are several Grenadier UUs already. Speaking of which, does the Austrian Grenzer have anything to do with grenades?

 

[Leoreth]

Not really, but considering that it's more of an auxiliary role that is built around skirmishing it seemed wrong to have it replace a mainline infantry unit so that the whole Austrian army is made up of Grenzer units.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

Especially the Soviet infantry is known for Zerg-rushing the Axis in WW II.

As opposed to literally every army in WW I? Hell, the whole "one rifle for two men" myth was a lot more accurate for the Tsarist army in WW I than it was for the later Red Army.

Also Red Army is a bit too specific, what if Russia never becomes communist ingame?

Katyusha or T-34 please!