1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Gods & Kings Unit Upgrade Chart

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by joshuas10th, Jul 7, 2012.

  1. joshuas10th

    joshuas10th Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Made a new chart showing all the military units and upgrade paths. Very nice and easy to read.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. The_J

    The_J Say No 2 Net Validations Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2008
    Messages:
    32,927
    Location:
    DE/NL/FR
    Moderator Action: Moved to G&K.

    Nice :) :thumbsup:.

    Screenshot for the lazy people:



    Edit: And welcome to the forums :).
     

    Attached Files:

  3. northtexan95

    northtexan95 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Messages:
    19
  4. Ciek

    Ciek Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    119
    I was actually thinking of doing a little chart like this for myself, now I don't have to!:thumbsup:
     
  5. Infantry#14

    Infantry#14 Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,599
    Very nice. Looks like there is still room for more units to fill the gaps.

    1. Crossbow -> Gatling Gun
    2. Knight -> Cavalry
    3. Spearman -> Pikeman (maybe not)
    4. Lancer -> Anti-Tank Gun
    5. Either Destroyer or Battleship -> Missile Cruiser
     
  6. SonnyBowler

    SonnyBowler Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2010
    Messages:
    22
    The upgrade path for spearmen is garbage. Spearmen and Hoplites will eventually become Helicopter Gunships, :dunno: and worse, Lancers before that :confused:

    That sucks. Lancers are useless, and it doesn't make any sense. Pikemen should just take a detour to infantry at Riflemen IMO
     
  7. civ54lyfe

    civ54lyfe Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2012
    Messages:
    563
    Or, at least re-balance the freaking lancers to have a less-pronounced vulnerability while the Knight only had a "Vs. Cities" vulnerability. Just make lancers a Knight +1 or something.


    -oops and ofc the spear/ish vuln, but I sort of took this as implied their sharing the "Mounted" status.
     
  8. SonnyBowler

    SonnyBowler Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2010
    Messages:
    22
    Yeah they suck, and that gap between Lancers and Anti Tank Guns means they're going to suck for a long time- while Musketmen become Riflemen
     
  9. Gort

    Gort Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,518
    It's really stupid that they went to the trouble of making an entire line of upgrades for archers, and screwed it up at the LAST UNIT.

    Also, horse archer types of all kinds are screwed up.
     
  10. civ54lyfe

    civ54lyfe Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2012
    Messages:
    563
    Maybe these blatant disconnects in some unit pathways have been the only stable configuration during game testing? Like, if the most successful warmonger-er (or let's say the top 2 in a game) had all logical unit upgrades, all their advanced promotions would start to steamroll too crazy hard.
     
  11. Matthew.

    Matthew. Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,179
    Nah, the Medieval ~> Renaissance gap isn't a full transition. LongS to muskets is only a change from 21 combat to 24. Pikes get bumped up to 25 through the lancer. It seems to be a buffer zone to bring everything on an equal level before heading into Industrial. If you didn't get any iron earlier, this is the chance to get some infantry on the board. Pikes get an upgrade, too, but an obvious push out of the role of fill-in infantry into a more specialized role.

    Crossbows/knights are OK, too. The archer line is strong already and the gap isn't noticeable (although pre-G&K the archer to Xbow was way too long, so Cbows were a welcomed change). I think another mounted unit after the knight would be overkill as well. If anything, it would be a further [indirect] hit against the lancer making their specialized role non-existent.

    The lancer ~> anti-gun is a bit long. It is odd, too, because spears come before horsemen and pikes before knights, yet anti-tank comes on the same tech as WW2 tanks, and nothing for WW1 tanks. And as I've seen mentioned before, once you get anti-tank guns it is only 2 more techs until helicopters. Really no reason not to move it earlier in the tech tree and probably an oversight from vanilla when all the WW1 units weren't in the game.

    Frigate ~> battleship seems too long as well. The gap is most noticeable when one player gets battleships before another. Frigates can have tons of promotions thrown on them and battleships will still plow right through them forcing you to avoid naval battle until you get battleships as well.
     
  12. grandgeneralbob

    grandgeneralbob Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    34
    I like how there's a future era, but the only new unit is the GDR. I also disagree with all of the units paths, and imo i think we need another one. In civ4, every era had a decent rock papaer scissors system. I think that ciV needs it as well. i say have a path of "main units" that starts out with something like swordsmen, but sooner by 1 era, and ends with a future era mechaniced infantry. These units should only be able to attack adjacent tiles. The other kind of unit should be something like a MG, or GG that can attack one tile away, the only difference is, start it sooner, and have something after the MG, like a mini gunner or something. Finally, have a ranged unit that sucks at melee, but has an attack range of 2. With those 3 types of land units we could have a rock paper scissors, and give one a bonus vs. one other type. As for horsies, they're ok imo, but I dont like the way they feel, and they're missing something i just cant put my finger on it, maybe it'll be satiated in the "new xpac".
     
  13. Bex

    Bex Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    73
    I was not thrilled with ranged units that upgrade to a shorter range (crossbowman->gatling gun) Hate range=1, period. If you have to be adjacent to something for a ranged attack the range becomes rather pointless.
     
  14. Aaron90495

    Aaron90495 King

    Joined:
    May 17, 2012
    Messages:
    926
    Location:
    'Murica
    Not at all. Sure, it's not as good as being two tiles away, but you don't take any damage when you attack.
     
  15. krc

    krc King

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2010
    Messages:
    890
    And you don't have to advance from your strong defensive position (say on a wooded hill) into an exposed, advanced position (say, in plains where you can be flanked).
     
  16. Eagle Pursuit

    Eagle Pursuit Scir-Gerefa

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    15,919
    I don't think they need a new unit between Frigates and Battleships. They just need to have Battleships unlock at an earlier Tech. Carriers obsoleted Battleships, so they shouldn't be unlocked at the same Tech.

    Plus, now that Ironclads can transverse the oceans, they act as a sort of crossover between early Ironclads and Dreadnaughts.

    I also think the Anti-Tank Gun needs to be available a little sooner than the Tank.

    I would like to see something between Xbows and Gats, but I can't really think of a good transitional unit. Range 1 Grenadiers?

    I suppose that Marines exist because Destroyers are on the opposite side of the tech tree and unavailable if you are beelining towards the UN. I think it would be nice if there were a Renassiance predecessor to the Marines.
     
  17. Unresolved

    Unresolved King

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2012
    Messages:
    956
    I agree. Once I get to that stage in the game, I'd rather make an army of Great War Infantry, Artillery, and planes. I never make any more units from the archer line once I reach Industrialization.
     
  18. Battlehelm043

    Battlehelm043 Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2012
    Messages:
    228
    Location:
    California
    I think that the rock paper scissor idea is a bit old... I mean real war wasn't well I have tanks which beat his infantry. Dont get me wrong tanks usually roll over infantry any day, but sometimes units held their own against tough odds. I think they way it was meant with this new system was so that you have a chance, just like in real war. Now one thing I would suggest is that they give a choice for pikes to stay infantry or move to anti-cav units. This would make hoplites and immortals more useful later on depending on what the player is facing. In all I think the paths are pretty much right, but there are still places for fill units, and longer eras are always welcome to make units more viable. Also maybe a path for scouts?
     
  19. Matthew.

    Matthew. Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,179
    I don't think the pike upgrade path would be that bad if they just heavily reduced the upgrade cost. 200g is too much for what is essentially a suicide unit not meant to live. If the cost was reduced, I think I could be happy with the upgrade path. Cavalry units suck in straight up combat anyway, and I usually only use them for sniping workers, enemy great people, and wounded/retreating units. So the lack of defense on the lancer doesn't bother me but that 200g...

    And still move the anti-tank gun earlier in the tree! :D
     
  20. civ54lyfe

    civ54lyfe Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2012
    Messages:
    563


    /signed
     

Share This Page