It seems many UUs dont replace any other unit

[m15a]

I think the reason some UUs replace units while others don't (if that's the case), is because those units that are replaced would never be used anyway. Like, no one would build a knight if they have a UU that is stronger than the knight, costs the same, and comes at the same tech. Obvious, I know, but that means that not replacing a unit by itself can be worth as little as nothing.

So, it makes more sense to compare UUs based on their specific benefits rather than assuming the ones that don't replace units are automatically better. Having a non-replacing UU come a tech earlier or having an early unit with strange penalty (like Korea's UUs in Civ V) might be very situational whereas a UU that replaces a unit but has a very good promotion (like the English bow in Civ V) would be very valuable in more cases.

 

[SJSerio]

I'm sorry! I just don't believe your arguments as to why some civilizations' UUs replace units and others don't. If that is the case, then so be it. I don't believe that it will be a deal breaker for me, it just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[King Jason]

Well in fairness, it's an odd argument. If, for example, the Garde Imperiale is infinitely better than the musketman, such that you would never build musketman - then why wouldn't the Gardes simply obsolete and replace muskets? However, I could even counter that by saying that in civ5, the Swordsman replaced the Warrior and you still had the option to build both even if you had access to iron. But the resource requirement complicate things.

But more to the point I can see some UUs not replacing existing units based on their uniqueness - for example, the Crouching Tiger is described as a "short ranged unit with a powerful attack". It doesn't not take the spot of the catapult (or bombard) as, mechanically, it will be stronger than the other unit but will have a shorter range.

There's a trade-off. You might have access to Tigers but you may still want some of the longer ranged units too.


My best guess for the Garde Imperiale and Redcoats, though the first look tool-tip of Gardes makes this questionable (even though it did appear to be bugged) would be the suggestion that they had similar base strengths as muskets. This doesn't appear to be the case but if it were - you would have to consider that muskets could be a potentially cheaper option for offense for France, since invading other continents would make them lose their bonus, and for england, muskets would be a cheaper option for defense, as Redcoats would only have higher strength in foreign lands. That also assumes the UU costs more than the musket.


But the point is that there could certainly be ways to implement UUs as powerful and interesting additions to your units without needing them to be replacements for them.

 

[Siptah]

But doesn't it make sense if some later UU come at a point when no fresh normal units appear?
With war being more fashionable in the early and mid game, later UUs are a bit weaker imho. If you get Redcoats at a point were others still have Muskets you have a large advantage for some time, but maybe you already lost some cities in prior wars against Eagle Warriors or something?

 

[King Jason]

But doesn't it make sense if some later UU come at a point when no fresh normal units appear?
With war being more fashionable in the early and mid game, later UUs are a bit weaker imho. If you get Redcoats at a point were others still have Muskets you have a large advantage for some time, but maybe you already lost some cities in prior wars against Eagle Warriors or something?

That absolutely makes sense - it still wouldn't explain why the musket wouldn't obsolete once you acquire the redcoat, which happens later than the musket but earlier than infantry. Then again, perhaps it does explain it - the tooltip isn't required to tell us that. If you scroll over Rifleman in the civ5 tech tree, the tooltip doesn't say that it replaces or obsoletes the Musketman, it just tells you what a Rifleman is.

As the graphic I posted is a similar form of menu tool-tip. It's reasonable to suggest that France and Englands UU do, in effect, replace the musket. However, it's still likely that certain units like the Crouching Tiger don't replace anything - or maybe they all function this way, perhaps the Tiger comes between Catapults and Bombards. Entirely possible.

 

[Siptah]

Maybe because the Musket is older and thus cheaper to produce in an emergency?

edit: I didn't look it up, but production costs are probably visible at some point.

 

[qwerty25]

I'm sorry! I just don't believe your arguments as to why some civilizations' UUs replace units and others don't. If that is the case, then so be it. I don't believe that it will be a deal breaker for me, it just doesn't make any sense to me.

Tbh im a bit confused what this thread is arguing about. Isnt it already confirmed that Samurai dont replace swordsman in an earlier video and eagle warrior replaces warrior. Thus its already proven some unique units replace base units and others dont.

 

[SJSerio]

Has it been confirmed? I heard in a video about the eagle warrior, but I did not hear anything about the samurai. Maybe I overlooked it. All that I am saying is that the idea makes no sense to me. It is a small thing, to be sure. My whole point at the beginning was that before assuming that out outs the case that these were just early (and incomplete) builds and we should wait before talking in absolutes.

Sent from my LG-H345 using Tapatalk

 

[King Jason]

I haven't seen it confirmed anywhere that the samurai doesn't, at the very least, obsolete a unit like my previous suggestion.

The first look videos, at least, are very inconsistent in this area when it comes to UUs - in fact I believe only two have ever been said to replace other units in those videos; The Eagle Warrior and the Mustang. Yet we know the Maryannu Chariot replaces the War Chariot and we know the replace other units.

So going off of a first look video not mentioning a replacement isn't sufficient evidence.

 

[WiseGreen]

Do we know already how upgrading units will work? I was wondering if and how UUs that don't replace regular units would fit in an upgrade system that's at least similar to what we have now.

 

[Dragonflow]

Do we know already how upgrading units will work? I was wondering if and how UUs that don't replace regular units would fit in an upgrade system that's at least similar to what we have now.

Probably just integrated somewhere within the upgrade path. I'd imagine something like that:
Catapult -> Crouching Tiger -> Cannon
Musketman -> Redcoat -> Infantry

 

[Atlas627]

Probably just integrated somewhere within the upgrade path. I'd imagine something like that:
Catapult -> Crouching Tiger -> Cannon
Musketman -> Redcoat -> Infantry

Some of the Techs are dead ends, and at least one UU converts what is normally unlocked with a Tech to a Civic.

I'm guessing it'd be more like:

Catapult -> Cannon
Crouching Tiger -> Cannon

and

Musketman -> Infantry
Redcoat -> Infantry

or have more upgrade paths just in case you never unlock something

Musketman -> Redcoat -> Infantry
Musketman -> Infantry

 

[Babri]

or have more upgrade paths just in case you never unlock something

Musketman -> Redcoat -> Infantry
Musketman -> Infantry

That would make more sense.



Sent from my HTC Desire 820s dual sim using Tapatalk

 

[qwerty25]

I haven't seen it confirmed anywhere that the samurai doesn't, at the very least, obsolete a unit like my previous suggestion.

The first look videos, at least, are very inconsistent in this area when it comes to UUs - in fact I believe only two have ever been said to replace other units in those videos; The Eagle Warrior and the Mustang. Yet we know the Maryannu Chariot replaces the War Chariot and we know the replace other units.

So going off of a first look video not mentioning a replacement isn't sufficient evidence.

I doubled checked and yes you're right they don't outright say its not a replacement specifically. However theres a lot of sufficient evidence in favor of it not being a replacement than assuming it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHgVlRdO72U

The first look video specifies that "Japan can build samurai in addition to other military units ... " while in other videos it usually says "replacing etc..." (50 sec).

There's a couple units Samurai might replace:

• Swordsman - There's evidence of Japanese swordsman earlier at 30 seconds, so Samurai don't replace swordsman.
• Spearman - The tech required for the Samurai "military tactics", is the same as pikeman so it can't replace spearman. Or rather it'd be really weird.
• Pikeman - In "Japan gameplay & impressions" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S3ZGlvfabk around the 3 minutes mark there's Japanese pikeman shown as well, so it can't replace pikeman either.
• Longswordsman - There's no longswordsman in the medieval era, so Samurai can't replace that either.
• Musketman - I find it hard to believe Samurai would replace musketman, the other melee unit in the Renaissance.

The only feasible way Samurai could still replace a standard unit is if it replaces a ranged unit (which again in the video it doesn't seem like it when checking the city build menu) or if it replaces Longswordsman which supposedly will be put into the game later? I find it hard to believe that Longswordsman are being delayed this late into production, especially a mid game unit.

I really don't see how the Samurai is replaces any standard unit. While technically isn't "proven directly", I think its safe to say there's more than sufficient evidence, until the existence of a longswordsman that is replaced by swordsman.

 

[Nares]

Le garde Imperiale also does not replace anything. Unless there's an inconsistency, the UUs have all specified when they replace a unit in the civ-selection tooltips. The following units are independently unique as of the latest footage we saw;

French - Garde Imperiale
Japan - Samurai
China - Crouching Tiger
America - Rough Rider
England - Redcoat
Scythia - Saka Horse Archer

UUs that replace other units:

Egypt - Maryannu Chariot Archer (Heavy Chariot)
Aztec - Eagle Warrior (Warrior)
Brazil - Minais Geraes (Battleship)
America - Mustang (Fighter)
England - Sea Dog (Privateer)

Up to three UUs that we know of so far are unlocked with a civic instead of a technology

Sounds imba.

Willing to put money (figuratively) on the likelihood they do nothing to balance replaceable UUs against irreplaceable UUs.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Sounds imba.

Willing to put money (figuratively) on the likelihood they do nothing to balance replaceable UUs against irreplaceable UUs.

You don't need to balance unit vs. unit, you need to balance civilization vs. civilization.

 

[m15a]

Can someone explain why they think non-replacing UUs will be imbalanced or particularly powerful? I can see how something like the Saka Horse Archer might be very powerful if it comes very early (although that could be the case even if it replaced a chariot or something), but why is having a Samurai not replace a Swordman particularly powerful?

 

[stealth_nsk]

Can someone explain why they think non-replacing UUs will be imbalanced or particularly powerful? I can see how something like the Saka Horse Archer might be very powerful if it comes very early (although that could be the case even if it replaced a chariot or something), but why is having a Samurai not replace a Swordman particularly powerful?

The idea is - standard units fill some niches. If UU don't replacing anything, they are likely take role of other units. For Saka Horse Archers that's surely not the case as there are no early game fast ranged unit (or fast ranged units in the game at all, as far as we know). But Samurais or Redcoats are different thing, because they are similar to existing units and thus somehow affect their niche.

If they are just intermediate upgrades (Swordman -> Samurai -> Musketman), this means much shorter lifespan than usual for both Swordsmen and Samurais, as nearly all other units in the game are valid for 2 eras. Reducing effective lifespan of Swordsmen doesn't look like a problem, but short effective lifespan for UU surely does.

It's possible those unique units actually have some really specific niche we don't see. But only wild guesses here as info in first look video don't make these units look like they are that unique.

EDIT: Just to clarify, I don't think UU not replacing anything are particularly powerful, but they look like a bit of the mess and I'm eager to know how developers are going to deal with that.

 

[GauntZero]

I could imagine that the units that are not replacing an existing unit could also be replacing one that'll come later (DLC, Expansion).

Like the Samurai could indeed replace a Longswordman-like unit that just is not existing in vanilla. But when it later on will be added to the game, Japan wont get it, and instead just keeps the Samurai unit.
Same could go for Redcoats that could later on replace a rifleman unit thats not in vanilla.

I dont think so, but it could even be that the builds that were played so far, were yet incomplete, and they still will add units to the rooster that we didnt see so far (especially in later eras that we wasnt supposed to see so far).

 

[stealth_nsk]

I could imagine that the units that are not replacing an existing unit could also be replacing one that'll come later (DLC, Expansion).

1. Surely not DLC. Any gameplay-changing DLC create a hell of game variants.

2. Anything could be added with expansions, but vanilla game should be designed without them in mind.