Let's make iron relevant again

[killmeplease]

upper branch gives many good things beside pikes (which come much earlier than longswords anyways)

 

[Rhavanna]

I agree that iron isn't useful enough right now, or at least not important enough.

I briefly considered changing my opinion during my most recent game as Carthage, but in the end I still think iron, or the units that require it, need some tweaks. I am going for a wide empire and somehow despite having 9 cities on the mainland, I only had 2 iron! Oh well, no biggie! I have a fantastic mountain range between myself and Greece, and with only 3 gaps in the mountain, I can fend him off all day no problem.

I immediately ran into trouble though when I remembered that frigates cost iron too... So much for a navy! Suddenly my lack of iron went from being "w/e no biggie I'll just turtle with pikes until gunpowder" to "ohcrap I can't build more than 2 frigates"

Anyway I do agree with pikemen being just a bit too strong, at least compared to swordsmen. It feels like they come quickly enough after swords and are simply better in every way. Would be nice to see pikemen get nerfed, (their 100% vs mounted will still easily let them fulfill their job), but I was also thinking: What if we went back to the civ4 version of copper-> iron? Unlock copper upon reaching bronze working, and have it let you build spearmen, (since axes don't exist anymore), and then unlock iron at iron working to allow swordsmen. So if you don't have iron, you can still manage with spears/pikes, but if you do have iron you can plop out the stronger swords/longswords.

On a related note, longswordsmen should get some sort of incentive to use them instead of simply waiting another (what feels like 5 turns) before muskets.

 

[Matthew.]

The entire warrior line should get re-worked. Between the luck roll for iron, the quickly obsolete swords, the quick jump to muskets from longswords, and the quick jump to infantry from great war infantry...

I like the idea of copper. What happens if the game doesn't give you copper or iron? Or would at least one be available near the capital?

 

[kaspergm]

I like the idea of copper. What happens if the game doesn't give you copper or iron? Or would at least one be available near the capital?

This is exactly why we don't need a Copper/Bronze (strategic) resource: If Copper is supposed to be the fallback if you don't get Iron, Copper has to be very common, otherwise it will not fulfill its purpose. But if Copper is very common (so common that we make sure everybody get it) we might as well have no Copper at all (which is how it is now). That is why Spears and Pikes don't take any strategics, whereas Swords and Longswords do. That is also why Spears and Pikes are weaker than their respective counterparts (Spears << Swords and Pikes << Longswords) - so again, that's not the problem.

The problem comes from the fact that the two couples don't appear approximately simultaneously - in fact, Pikes appear generally very shortly after Swords and a long time before Longswords, and since Pikes > Swords, we suddenly have a huge problem. And while this topic is about Iron and not unit balancing, these two topics are inherently linked to each other, because Iron has no importance if the units that need them don't have any importance.

 

[killmeplease]

maybe some recycling center like building should be available to provide a little of iron
bloomery?
maybe a city should be located next to a marsh to build bloomery as it was possible to get iron from there.
(see bog iron)
though marsh tiles are quite rare too

 

[killmeplease]

btw, historically knights preceded pikemen
so maybe just push them further, to banking?

 

[kaspergm]

btw, historically knights preceded pikemen
so maybe just push them further, to banking?

That would not really work with Lancers coming at Metallurgy already at Renaissance II. One could push back Pikemen one step (although there are no likely places) but I would favor instead giving them a slight nerf and moving forward Longswords by one step instead, so Longswords and Pikes come more at the same time.

 

[steveg700]

Well, the whole upgrade path of spears>pikes>lancers>anti-tank>chopper is pretty absurd anyway.

 

[killmeplease]

agree..
iirc they were upgraded to rifles before the GnK

 

[Deggial]

I am working on some ideas at the moment (as always...).
The changes I proposed earlier in this thread are part of it, but the anit-mounted upgrade path is also covered.

I agree with kaspergm: Pikeman should be nerved slightly. I think -2 should be OK.

steveg700, what exactly do you think is absurd? Is it this unsteady unit development?
If so, what do you think of replacing anti-tank gun with a new unit: the "tank-hunter"? (I don't know the correct english term. In German, it would be "Jagdpanzer".

The stats could be something like this:
- 50 (same as anti-tank gun)
- 5 (and therefore in the middle ground between lancer and chopter, granting a smooth transit)
- gets "Logistics" as starting promotion. (Helicopter gunship should get "can move after attacking"!)
- requires oil

The anti-tank gun could be:
- a range-1 unit (same as mashine gun) with +100% bonus vs armored.
- 40 (80 against armored)
- has no progenitor
- gains melee-promotions (not ranged!)
- placed at another technology: plastics
- blends into helicopter gunship later on

The idea behind this is, that the anti-tank gun requires no strategic resource and is placed in the "peaceful" technology-branch as a purely defensive unit.
The tank-hunter can be used as light hit-and-run unit, too.

Furthermore, both units maybe upgraded int a helicopter gunship. But if you decided to use the resource-consuming tank-hunter to upgrade, you will gain the benefit of an inherited promotion.
Not so, if you upgrade from the "poor man's weapon", the anti-tank gun.

 

[steveg700]

steveg700, what exactly do you think is absurd? Is it this unsteady unit development?
If so, what do you think of replacing anti-tank gun with a new unit: the "tank-hunter"? (I don't know the correct english term. In German, it would be "Jagdpanzer".

Personally, I don't feel like we need "kryptonite" units that wind up creating an incomplete game of roshambo. If mounted/armor units were sufficiently powerful that they needed to be held in check, that would be one thing. But they're not really. If anything, they're saddled (hehe) with onerous penalties in exchange for some bonus movement that often doesn't help them. They have to put up with all that, and then some resource-free unit can come along and eat their lunch with some over-the-top +50% or +100% strength bonus? Yeesh. Just let me take those horses and open a glue factory.

Moreover, the upgrade path is simply a bit too eclectic. Spearmen to pikes? OK, that makes sense. A pike suddenly needs to find a horse to become a lancer? Not so much. But don't get too comfy up there. Your next stop is back down to a slow ant-tank gun. Then, look around for some aluminum until ZOOM, you're upgraded to a chopper and con zip around like nobody's business.

The anti-tank gun in particular is kind of unnecessary. I need spearmen and pikemen to be the resource-free melee units. I don't need an anti-tank gun for that. I have perfectly good infantry at that era.

 

[Deggial]

Interesting points!

Part of mentioned ideas is an enhancement for mounted and armored units. I am still undecided between two possibilities:
- The first on is a straight forward strength bonus when fighting on open terrain. But this is a little bit unimaginative.
- What I would prefer is a new ability: Let's call it "Momentum" or something alike. Whenever mounted or armored units move at least one tile before attacking, they will enjoy a +25% (or even +33%) strength bonus.

I have the feeling that, with more powerful mounted and armored units, some "kryptonite" would be quite handy.

 

[kaspergm]

As for the Spear/Lancer/AT/Helicopter discussion, I agree to an extent that it doesn't make sense. I can sort of ignore the weirdness of the unit first being footed, then mounted, then unmounted, and then flying, if this was a natural step in technological advance (for instance, I don't really mind the helicopter suddenly coming in as a flying unit, because the helicopter does seem like a likely candidate for a unit to target enemy tanks and modern armors).

However from a gameplay perspective, it does seem very weird the the unit goes from low movement, then high movement, then back to low movement, and then finally high movement. From this perspective, I would say the Lancer is the dark horse (duh) here, if the upgrade path went Pikeman > something > AT Gun > Helicopter, where "something" also is a movement-2 unit, it would seem like a much more natural progression. The spanish Tercio actually does fill this gap, so perhaps one should simply add a Bayonet unit (Bayoneteer - is there even such a word?) and give it the Tercio model.

As for the purpose of these units, yes I agree they only make sense if the units they counter are stronger than their contemporary unit. So basically we need something like Mounted (Horse/Knight) > Melee (Sword/Longsword) > Melee (Spear/Pike, but stronger than Mounted with bonus). Ironically, this is not really the case, as the Horseman (10) is much weaker than the Swordsman (14) and the Knight (20) is weaker than the Longsword (21) - and the Cavalry is same strength as the Riffle (34 both). I have myself modded my game so Horseman (15) and Knight (23) are stronger than the melee contemporaries, this makes them really deadly for Archers (like they should be, these units are intended to circle around melee defences and target ranged units), which means that it makes sense to have these specific counters.

 

[whyidie]

The problem comes from the fact that the two couples don't appear approximately simultaneously - in fact, Pikes appear generally very shortly after Swords and a long time before Longswords, and since Pikes > Swords, we suddenly have a huge problem.

Exactly. Give the swords a bit of a boost or nerf the spear guys. Just as long as iron stays relatively rare.

Adds a great element to the game. All of a sudden I'm trading with the AI for resources. Bad pickle to be in ? Sure is. Happen every game ? No.

I like the unpredictability of it, adds longevity of the game. Even the ones where I have a UU with an iron dependency and I have no iron.

Which has happened in my last two rolls as Japan and England. In one case I had to blow up a good tall culture play to get Iron and chase domination/science VC. Still not sure which route I'm going, but Ship of the Line on islands is worth having 6 cities.

As Japan, I was going wide but still didn't have iron in any of my 7 cities. Relied on trading with the AI while I could establish iron settlements of my own. In the end the empire collapsed, but it was a fun game, made even more memorable by the iron shortage.

...and yes, the transition to gunpowder happens too quickly at times.

 

[killmeplease]

about longswords, muskets and pikes

i thought about it and my idea is to swap guilds with machinery

machinery requires currency and leads to physics and guilds, guilds enables pikemen; late medieval tech now and lays closer to the bottom of the tree so no secured education/astronomy beeline anymore as you have no unit tech among education prereqs. has historical sence as pikemen were town militias and guilds are assotiations of town craftsmen. physics requiring machinery is very natural as well.

this also adds another two techs between longswords and musekts as well (currency and machinery)
crossbows come earlier and can be nerfed a bit (should be nerfed anyways)

i also have an idea of line infantry unit at metallurgy for the more smooth transition between muskets and rifles.

whats wrong in upgrading pikes to rifles and knights to lansers and then to tanks?

 

[Bechhold]

Except nobody, if they have the chance, would pick Pikeman over going straight to what Steel provides, again if they had the opportunity. Pikeman/Lancer is considered a dead upgrade because of the huge gap leftover, nobody should be using Lancer/Pikeman after Chemistry and/or Industrialization.

I mean who wouldn't/doesn't tech hard to Steel to Gunpowder if given the chance.

 

[killmeplease]

I mean who wouldn't/doesn't tech hard to Steel to Gunpowder if given the chance.

i think 'teching hard' to education and then astronomy (if you have mountains) is much more viable.
after you've built universities and observatories you get all the crap bottom techs very fast and get to muskets. while learning science techs you can defend yourself with pikes/knights

 

[kaspergm]

about longswords, muskets and pikes

i thought about it and my idea is to swap guilds with machinery

machinery requires currency and leads to physics and guilds, guilds enables pikemen; late medieval tech now and lays closer to the bottom of the tree so no secured education/astronomy beeline anymore as you have no unit tech among education prereqs. has historical sence as pikemen were town militias and guilds are assotiations of town craftsmen. physics requiring machinery is very natural as well.

this also adds another two techs between longswords and musekts as well (currency and machinery)
crossbows come earlier and can be nerfed a bit (should be nerfed anyways)

i also have an idea of line infantry unit at metallurgy for the more smooth transition between muskets and rifles.

whats wrong in upgrading pikes to rifles and knights to lansers and then to tanks?

Can you explain this a little bit more? Moving Machinery will also move Crosbows - any thoughts on that? - and Pikes sit in Civil Service - so would you move Pikes to Guild once you move Guilds forwards? And won't that make Civil Service very empty?

 

[killmeplease]

Can you explain this a little bit more? Moving Machinery will also move Crosbows - any thoughts on that? - and Pikes sit in Civil Service - so would you move Pikes to Guild once you move Guilds forwards? And won't that make Civil Service very empty?

about crosbows, i think its ok, just nerf them a little. they will be still 3 techs away from composite archers. iron requirement could be added to them also?

yeah i suggest to move pikes to guilds. civil service is still very strong as it gives additional food from fresh water farms (besides open borders and chichen itza).

ps trading post could be moved to currency or civil service

 

[kaspergm]

I've already moved Trading Posts to Currency myself, as they come too late. Perhaps you are right about Civil Service being strong enough as it is, it's a thought worth looking into; I'm not sure I would actually move Guilds, because I think that Pikemen coming in the tech level before Knights is fine, but moving Pikemen to Guilds instead of Civil Service would have the benefit of decoupling them from Education, plus it makes them sit closer to the military line where Spearmen sit (we'll still have the problem that Spearmen and Pikemen sit in different lines, but I have yet to find a likeable solution to that).

I wouldn't add Iron to Crossbows, that just seems random to me. I wouldn't move them down either, there is currently 3 tech levels between Composites and Crossbows, and then another 3 levels up to Gatlings - making that 2/4 would not be very good. However, if one put in a slower unit than Lancer as a Cavalry counter, I would move the Lancer to Chivalry and make it a faster but weaker upgrade of Horse that requires only Horse, and add Iron to Knight requirement (and make him stronger). That might potentially mess with the upgrade paths, however.