Lancers

[Delekhan]

They're basically not very useful except in a small window, especially when you consider that their upgrade unit is the Helicopter Gunship, 5 tech columns away in Robotics.

Any lancers that City-States send my way get thrown into the meatgrinder to get slaughtered, since I know they'll be obselete soon and no upgrade will be available.

I say either make a new skirmish unit or two between lancers and helicopters, or remove lancers altogether. Maybe bring back the AT Gun, make it more mobile at 3 MP and give it the skirmish ability (just an idea).

 

[Ahriman]

I dunno, I find the lancer fairly useful, especially if you get them early.

3 movement points AT guns just seems bizarre, so I don't think that would be a good solution.

I think the simplest thing is to have the lancer merge into the tank line, and have gunships as just a new buildable unit by themselves.

 

[Hawawaa]

2nd Ahriman. I love lancers, great speed, move in take pot shot and move out. Also excellent pillager unit to boot too, even if I'm the underdog in the war your country side will be burned down nicely.

Ya part of me misses my old Poland Lancers (oh they were so fun and enjoyed spamming them) but after on trying out these new lancers love em.

 

[Spheniscine]

Maybe Lancer -> Airship (from Smoky Skies scenario) -> Helicopter Gunship? (speaking of which it would be nice if Helicopter Gunships can hover and attack over water without embarking; airships prove that it is possible)

I dunno... too steampunk? Airships were used in real life, even in warfare, but quickly fell out of fashion because early models used hydrogen, which tended to explode (see Hindenburg). They also exist in Civ4, though the model there is more realistic and less steampunk.

 

[WileyNg]

They're basically not very useful except in a small window, especially when you consider that their upgrade unit is the Helicopter Gunship, 5 tech columns away in Robotics.

Any lancers that City-States send my way get thrown into the meatgrinder to get slaughtered, since I know they'll be obselete soon and no upgrade will be available.

I say either make a new skirmish unit or two between lancers and helicopters, or remove lancers altogether. Maybe bring back the AT Gun, make it more mobile at 3 MP and give it the skirmish ability (just an idea).

AT gun means Anti-Tank gun right?

I second this. I notice that AI also love to build lancers. maybe upgrading it to an anti-tank gun can give them some edges over a battle against player's overwhelming tanks.

But I am not so sure about having lancers as a ranged unit upgrading to a melee unit. I think there should be a balance between melee and ranged units on the map for the sake of unit diversity.

 

[Spheniscine]

I think airships fit better, at least from a gameplay perspective. Keeps mobility (scouting/pillaging), anti-tank, and ranged roles through the upgrade line. Unlocking at Flight would make it a nice intermediate too...

 

[Ahriman]

I think lancer -> gunship has too long a time when they're useful, and I think putting the airships in is too steam-punk and unrealistic. Airships were never important bombardment weapons.

 

[Spheniscine]

They were used to some extent in World War I, and Civ IV BtS does include them (although they looked more realistic, and acted as an early air unit rather than a hovering unit). Though I suppose having entire fleets battle it out might be a tad unrealistic. Too bad though; as I don't think there is really anything else that would fill the gap quite as well.

 

[Ahriman]

They were used to some extent in World War I

They were used, but had no significant tactical or strategic impact. World War I was about infantry, machine guns, and artillery, and then kindasorta landships at the very end.

 

[Dunkah]

I think it would be cool to have an early Air unit Bomber with an extended range called Zeplin. Which could avoid intercepting until AA is invented.

 

[Spheniscine]

Hmm... how about an Armored Car or Tank Destroyer unit then? Also mobile, anti-tank, and ranged. Would need new graphics though... or we could steal the Land Ironclad graphics, at least temporarily...

edit: Also if we could think of one or two units for the Classical/Medieval Eras, we could possibly merge the Chariot Archer into the line as well instead of having them turn into Horsemen/Knights. So for example:
Chariot Archer -> (Horse Archer?*) -> (Horse Javelineer?**) -> Lancer -> (Armored Car) -> Helicopter Gunship
* Would have to think about what to do about the Hun UU though
** Companion Cavalry or Sipahi graphics possibly? Also not too fond of the name. Could possibly rename to Lancer, while Lancer renamed to "Elite Lancer" or something.

Additional plus might be that it'll give those civs with unique medieval mounted archers (like Mongolia and Arabia) something to replace instead of Knight... having a range of 2 instead of 1 would preserve their uniqueness.

 

[Lissindiel]

Also if we could think of one or two units for the Classical/Medieval Eras, we could possibly merge the Chariot Archer into the line as well instead of having them turn into Horsemen/Knights. So for example:
Chariot Archer -> (Horse Archer?*) -> (Horse Javelineer?**) -> Lancer -> (Armored Car) -> Helicopter Gunship

Yeah, I've had this idea too. Expanding chariot-lancer-gunship line and putting vanguard recon promotions into it would be great. Should probably put scouts in there too (and replace their sticks with javelins?), since they have very similar role. Also, lancers not using their lances look kind of silly. Shouldn't they be swapped with dragoons? Those guys have guns, after all.

 

[Spheniscine]

Yeah, I've had this idea too. Expanding chariot-lancer-gunship line and putting vanguard recon promotions into it would be great. Should probably put scouts in there too (and replace their sticks with javelins?) since they have very similar role.

Not fond of scouts being ranged; it'd be ranged attack before Archery, and it's hard enough for scouts to survive barbarians as they are (given that early ranged units have less defending strength). Though upgrading to Chariot Archer seems fine; only downside I see is that you need horses, but we kinda have that problem with warrior -> swordsmen as well. If only we could have a choice of upgrades.

Also, personal note, I'm quite fond of the Chariot Archer just like some here are fond of the Lancer... great for barbarian hunting, especially once you get your road network up. Situational though due to the rough terrain penalty, and gets obsolete way too quickly...

Also, lancers not using their lances look kind of silly. Shouldn't they be swapped with dragoons? Those guys have guns, after all.

If we do swap them, we could possibly have something like a Cranequinier (sort of a mounted crossbowman) for the Medieval unit... but we won't have graphics for that...
Edit: On second thought, swapping them might mess with unique units; too many replace the dragoon. So that might not be such a good idea...

 

[Ahriman]

I think a full line of ranged attack with move-after-attack is not a good idea. The human player is *vastly* more effective with these units than the AI is. Which is part of why the camel archer and keshik are probably the best UUs in the game.

Also, lancers not using their lances look kind of silly. Shouldn't they be swapped with dragoons? Those guys have guns, after all.

*edit*
Actually, this works for lancers but not for Dragoons, which are of course mounted infantry.
Another option would be to rename one or other as Cuirassier. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuirassier
Or switch them completely: we could have Lancer as the melee cavalry unit (replacing vanilla Cavalry) with the Lancer graphic, and Cuirassier or Dragoon as the ranged attack unit with the Cavalry graphic.
But this might be more confusing than it is worth.

 

[Spheniscine]

I think a full line of ranged attack with move-after-attack is not a good idea. The human player is *vastly* more effective with these units than the AI is. Which is part of why the camel archer and keshik are probably the best UUs in the game.

That's just a bit sad... we shouldn't have to break a useful unit line with awkward/nonexistent upgrades just to balance the AI...

 

[Ahriman]

That's just a bit sad... we shouldn't have to break a useful unit line with awkward/nonexistent upgrades just to balance the AI...

Is it sad that the tactical AI isn't good at using move after attack units? Yes. But that's the AI we have, and we have to keep that in mind when adding new features.

And keep in mind that in the vanilla game, lancers aren't ranged, and the only highly mobile ranged units are UU. The game designers didn't have such a unit line. The game designers solution was to have a really weird design for the lancer, as an anti-cavalry unit, and a really weird upgrade path (to AT guns).
I think more sense would be to merge both into the tank line.

 

[Zarggg]

I would agree that Lancers and cavalry-type units should converge into tanks.

 

[ExpiredReign]

As pointed out elsewhere, Lancer's and Dragoon's roles have been swapped in 3.16 onward.
Lancers are now melee with great skirmish abilities and dragoons have a short-range attack and retreat role.

 

[Ahriman]

Even more of an argument for them to both converge into tanks then.