Lack of Later Era Units??

[Battlehelm043]

So with three months remaining, there is still so much more the devs will likely add to the game. I unfortunately could not resist asking this question though. Based on the full tech tree that was released so far, I have noticed a lack of later era units particularly in the industrial era. (ie Riflemen). While I recognize there will probably be more added in the coming months, I put it to the community to speculate. Do you think they deep six'd the riflemen in favor of a Civ Rev simplicity of unit progression? I only have this concern because of the retooling of the diplo systems which seems to have made diplomacy more immersive. I would hate to see progress in diplomacy at the cost of over simplification of units.

 

[zwei833]

simplification is unacceptable.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

This has been discussed somewhat. The suspected logic is that they are trying to make Musketman more important by stretching out the time before they are replaced.

 

[Haig]

I think there's still waaay more unts than in CivRev for example, also units that normally have been introduced in Expansions of Civ4 and Civ5, like machinegun unit and privateer and biplane.

Also besides field cannon there is mortar on the same era.

I miss the WW1 tank from BNW though.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Based on the full tech tree that was released so far, I have noticed a lack of later era units particularly in the industrial era. (ie Riflemen).

It's not lack of late units, it's just less amount of unit tiers overall, since there's no medieval infantry other than pikes as well.

simplification is unacceptable.

It's not simplification too.

As I wrote already, in Civ5 (especially BNW) there were too many unit tiers if you play on standard and faster speeds. Unit just obsolete too quickly.

With the things I see in the tech tree, on one hand units live quite long time, which is good. On the other hand, you don't live too long without unit upgrades. In Civ5 you had upgrades for each unit on nearly each tier, in Civ6 unit upgrades are not sync - you get Swordsmen in Classic era, Pikes, Knights and Crossbowmen in Medieval and so on.

 

[Battlehelm043]

This has been discussed somewhat. The suspected logic is that they are trying to make Musketman more important by stretching out the time before they are replaced.

Yes but the musketman model is a harquebus style, with the exception of France and England at this point in time. Which kinda blows hard, and makes the mid game less appealing visually if you ask me. I would say the musketman unit would look much better if it was the fusilier style of infantry. A little more ornate which might make it more visually pleasing. I did remember reading an article where they did mention riflemen units and the tech to make them into corps and armies, so hopefully they add them in when they reveal the late game more. Although they could have simply changed the infantry name to rifleman which would be very disappointing...

 

[Battlehelm043]

It's not lack of late units, it's just less amount of unit tiers overall, since there's no medieval infantry other than pikes as well.



It's not simplification too.

As I wrote already, in Civ5 (especially BNW) there were too many unit tiers if you play on standard and faster speeds. Unit just obsolete too quickly.

With the things I see in the tech tree, on one hand units live quite long time, which is good. On the other hand, you don't live too long without unit upgrades. In Civ5 you had upgrades for each unit on nearly each tier, in Civ6 unit upgrades are not sync - you get Swordsmen in Classic era, Pikes, Knights and Crossbowmen in Medieval and so on.

I agree with you that CiV BNW had way too many units per era. I feel that they may have dropped too many unit tiers as it stands from what we see now. They may have cut a good deal out which were not needed but my worry as it stands right now is that they cut too much and decided to stretch a unit far more than it should be stretched.

 

[zwei833]

It's not lack of late units, it's just less amount of unit tiers overall, since there's no medieval infantry other than pikes as well.




With the things I see in the tech tree, on one hand units live quite long time, which is good. On the other hand, you don't live too long without unit upgrades. In Civ5 you had upgrades for each unit on nearly each tier, in Civ6 unit upgrades are not sync - you get Swordsmen in Classic era, Pikes, Knights and Crossbowmen in Medieval and so on.

So that is very bad.

I don't know why some people would think it is a good idea to lengthen the unit available time by remove some unit tiers.

 

[Battlehelm043]

I think there's still waaay more unts than in CivRev for example, also units that normally have been introduced in Expansions of Civ4 and Civ5, like machinegun unit and privateer and biplane.

Also besides field cannon there is mortar on the same era.

I miss the WW1 tank from BNW though.

The mortar is the Chinese unique from what I have seen. They did the same for the Samurai. I too miss the WWI tank.

 

[moysturfurmer]

Gotta save some content for the expansions I guess...

 

[stealth_nsk]

I agree with you that CiV BNW had way too many units per era. I feel that they may have dropped too many unit tiers as it stands from what we see now. They may have cut a good deal out which were not needed but my worry as it stands right now is that they cut too much and decided to stretch a unit far more than it should be stretched.

Well, medieval swordsmen didn't differ from classical swordsmen significantly. And although there were a lot of iterations of handheld firearms units, the borders could be drawn in different way. Separating on the point of moving from muzzle-loading weapons and fancy uniforms to breech-loading weapons and khaki is the most significant one. If they needed to decrease the number of upgrades, they did it right.

 

[King Jason]

Not including ships, air and siege units, most eras seem to introduce about 2-3 new units. About half of the units seem to enjoy 2 eras of usefulness before being rendered obsolete. So In each era we have about 4-5 units that will comprise our armies. That seems fine, really.

Archers come online in the ancient era, and will be utilized through the classical era until replaced by crossbows. Archers have a ranged strength of 25 making them superior to warriors and equal to pikeman, and about 10 points weaker than classical era units.

By comparison, Crossbows come online in the medieval era and should retain usefulness in the renaissance - Their about equal to pikes, only slightly weaker than knights, and about 15 points weaker than muskets which is similar strengh differences to the Archer's lifespan. Knights too should retain their usefulness into the renaissance era with Cavalry coming online in the industrial, and being only slightly weaker than a musket.

On paper everything seems fine, in my opinion. Though I don't like how certain Unit paths in the tech tree face immediate obsoletion. The fact that you can discover the tech for knights immediately after researching the tech for horsemen, seemingly with no other prerequisites, seems really odd to me.

This happens a few times in the tech tree and would be the only thing I'd hope to see change slightly.

I recognize numbers are not final, but the idea remains the same.

 

[j51]

If they needed to decrease the number of upgrades, they did it right.

Nope. Jumping from a arquebus to a breech loading rifle is absurd. Also, it's super visually boring to skip the age of colorful uniforms.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Nope. Jumping from a arquebus to a breech loading rifle is absurd. Also, it's super visually boring to skip the age of colorful uniforms.

There are no arquebuseers in the game, just Musketmen. You could advocate whether arquebus should be included, but upgrade from muskets to rifles is just right.

 

[j51]

There are no arquebuseers in the game, just Musketmen. You could advocate whether arquebus should be included, but upgrade from muskets to rifles is just right.

Just because Firaxis calls them Musketmen doesn't make them so. Look at those little dudes. They're Arquebusiers. Also, they come online too early to be Musketeers. If they want to minimalize things, and have musket-using soldiers that cover several hundred years of time, maybe pick a design that better fits a larger chunk of the period at least.

Also, if Firaxis awas really trying to minimalize things, they wouldn't have THREE Modern Eras and THREE generations of planes.

 

[King Jason]

Nope. Jumping from a arquebus to a breech loading rifle is absurd. Also, it's super visually boring to skip the age of colorful uniforms.

In civ5 it was 1 tech from muskets to riflemen. In civ6 the two techs are worlds apart. In fact, unless there are missing requirements, similar to civ4's tech tree. It would appear you can get Industrial level infantry without ever inventing the use of the musket.

Also, civ has never cared about these kinds of things. In civ5 you can develop nukes and rockets without ever discovering combustion. So it doesn't really matter at all how many iterations of military upgrades exist between one form of gun to another.

 

[j51]

Also, civ has never cared about these kinds of things. In civ5 you can develop nukes and rockets without ever discovering combustion. So it doesn't really matter at all how many iterations of military upgrades exist between one form of gun to another.

It would be nice if they just tried a little harder with these kinda things and thought them through.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Just because Firaxis calls them Musketmen doesn't make them so. Look at those little dudes. They're Arquebusiers. Also, they come online too early to be Musketeers. If they want to minimalize things, and have musket-using soldiers that cover several hundred years of time, maybe pick a design that better fits a larger chunk of the period at least.

Som the problem is with unit design, not lack of units. And I'm not sure "too early" is the thing here - it's renaissance epoch, which fits the musket.

Also, if Firaxis awas really trying to minimalize things, they wouldn't have THREE Modern Eras and THREE generations of planes.

Yes, it has Modern, Atomic and Informational era, but only 2 generations of planes, which looks totally reasonable to me.

 

[j51]

Som the problem is with unit design, not lack of units. And I'm not sure "too early" is the thing here - it's renaissance epoch, which fits the musket.

Yes, it has Modern, Atomic and Informational era, but only 2 generations of planes, which looks totally reasonable to me.

Look at the tree on Well of Souls: There's clearly three generations of planes. If the differences between a WWI biplane and a WWII prop plane are worth representing, the same could be said for the difference between an arquebus and a musket.

 

[Battlehelm043]

I just feel the gap between musketmen and infantry is just a little too long. Now if the musketmen had what are in effect fancy uniforms over the steel chest plates that accompanied the early musket users it still would feel that the musketmen are stretched too far. Similarly how knights appear one tech away from horsemen. The horsemen get very little time in their respective era.