Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by joshuas10th, Jul 7, 2012.
Made a new chart showing all the military units and upgrade paths. Very nice and easy to read.
Moderator Action: Moved to G&K.
Screenshot for the lazy people:
Edit: And welcome to the forums .
I was actually thinking of doing a little chart like this for myself, now I don't have to!
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
The upgrade path for spearmen is garbage. Spearmen and Hoplites will eventually become Helicopter Gunships, and worse, Lancers before that
That sucks. Lancers are useless, and it doesn't make any sense. Pikemen should just take a detour to infantry at Riflemen IMO
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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".
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.
Not at all. Sure, it's not as good as being two tiles away, but you don't take any damage when you attack.
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).
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.
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.
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?
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!
Separate names with a comma.