1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

list of units neding buff

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by The A.K.T, Aug 31, 2011.

  1. The A.K.T

    The A.K.T Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    237
    I think that specialy Cavalry needs a buff becouse then lancers would be more used.
    My list of buff neding units

    Lancer
    Cavalry
    ironclad
     
  2. sstger

    sstger Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Messages:
    22
    List of unit needed to be buff

    1. boat in general (boat are suppose to be powerfull for siege)
    2. Lancer : I dont understand where is the utility of this unit
    3. Archer/crossbowmen vs canon : am I the only one who think that its strange to see an archer able to shoot as far as a canon or that the english longbowmen shoot as far as an art?
    4. knight and cavalry : IMO they arent ruling battlefield as they did historically
     
  3. Ex.plode

    Ex.plode Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    138
    Mounted units seem to have a hard time, alot of +% vs cavalry units, and terrain costs make them pretty weak.
     
  4. qemist

    qemist Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2011
    Messages:
    562
    Run around fast and kill stuff. Can also be used as scouts.

    True there's a considerable suspension of belief required there. Why can bows shoot further than rifles? Removing that peculiarity would require completely changing the game.

    Not really, no. Do you have any evidence for your assertion?

    I don't think any of your suggestions would improve the game play.
     
  5. sstger

    sstger Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Messages:
    22
    The fact that you get both knight and cavalry at the end of the era (knight come at the end of dark age and cavalry at the end of ren) make them not very useful (and a 3 mvt point for knight and caval isnt so fast if you considerer that the basic movement for every unit is 2)
     
  6. Rinnero

    Rinnero Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    89
    Overall, all mounted units/tanks are worse than melees. They are harder to get, they all require strat res, they are weaker against cities, and the worst is that they do not recieve rough terrain bonus and cant be fortified. What we get in exchange? +1-2 move and ability to move after attack... Not that cool actually, compared to +75%CS of fortified in hills melee... Sophisticated combat plans are harder in MP because of double turn and click fest (you need to click fast to retreat after attack, and you need to be careful watching over your mounts, because they are less reliable in defence)

    EDIT: I forgot that melees also dont have a counter unit...
     
  7. dexters

    dexters Gods & Emperors Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2003
    Messages:
    4,116
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    This is in part due to the strength of tanks/cavalry in previous Civs, handing human players decisive advantage.
    Give a unit with strong attack potential , give it a lot of movement, throw in ranged superiority and you have an unbeatable combination.

    There are still elements of this left behind in the apache unit, but essentially for most of the game, city siege is a set piece maneuver of moving your melee into position supported by ranged/fodder units/defensive melee units to take out enemy defenders outside the city, then taking the city.
     
  8. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    26,573
    Location:
    Sydney
    I think Paratroopers could do with a buff. Of course, you don't want them to end up being the most important unit, but it would be nice if they were a little more usable.
     
  9. wobuffet

    wobuffet Barbarian

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,033
    What do you guys mean by the Apache unit? If you mean the helicopter gunship, I've always found it a bit underwhelming.
     
  10. MadDjinn

    MadDjinn Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    4,502
    it's underwhelming until you get to logistics for the ability to hit twice and move after attacking. Then it's deadly.

    Lancers in MP work just fine. (don't stop beside people though) Hit and runs on the flanks are a great way to remove the front melee units and get to the softer seige units.

    Of course, sometimes you trade one lancer to kill 2 rifles (if they follow it back to your ranged units) but that's a good trade.
     
  11. apocalypse105

    apocalypse105 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    2,704
    A good strategy game should allways use the rock paper scissor system that makes game balanced and fun to play Especially in turn based strategy games!!!

    Turn based strategy games who dont have this system have a bad gameplay ..

    I didn't see this system in civ 5


    Infantry doesn't have real counter mechanised infantry can beat tanks and tanks have have a counter unit?
    The balance should be: mechanised can't beat tanks but can beat anti tank weapons tanks can't beat anti tanks units balanced...

    Cavalry gets bonus against infantry but penalty against mounted lancer gets bonus against mounted.


    I can found much more unblanced items in civ 5....
     
  12. Montov

    Montov Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    Messages:
    707
    Lancer and Cavalry could use a 25% bonus versus ranged units, to make sure they can onekill those units.
    Musketman needs a 10% bonus against melee units, so it really is an improvement over the Longswordsman, but stay the same against other unittypes.
    Ships need to be able to do more damage to land units and cities.
     
  13. Becomedeath

    Becomedeath The Destroyer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2011
    Messages:
    423
    Location:
    Channel Islands
    Balance balance balance...what is the obsession with things being balanced? I like the disbalance in unit ability as you're forced to think how to deal with something. I play Civ to give my brain a work out and chill, not to follow cookie cutter processes.

    If you "balance" the game then it becomes a simple case of A+B=C.

    What you'd end up with are borders smothered in anti-tank guns with artillery camped out behind them. Standard, solid, boring.

    When people talk of balance, what they mean is "I want an 'I win they loose' button" in my view.
     
  14. fmlizard2

    fmlizard2 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    424
    To me, musketmen should be stronger. I agree with the OP's take, especially on Ironclads and Lancers (both relatively useless), but musketmen stand out to me as mediocre. It was particularly egregious pre-patch.

    Muskets were the evolution of eons of melee combat. Crude, sure, but up until very recently they were actually worse (16 vs. 18) than the earlier tech longswords. They still are no better, and you almost always are better off building Knights or Crossbows. This is one of the aspects that makes my home Civ (America) arguably the game's worst. I want to like Washington, but any type of musket unit except the Janissary or Musketeer is just too weak. The stock version is totally uncompelling.
     
  15. turtlefang

    turtlefang Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Messages:
    155
    I haven't found a real use for ironclads so I would agree that they need something just to encourage building a few.

    Lancers - I always build three or four to upgrade to helis - the move - attack - move combo a real killer and lancers keep it without waiting for logistics. And MadJinn has the lancer tactic down pad - eat around the edges and they can cause a lot of pain by slash and run. Use them like a tank and they die.

    Cavalry - Again, I find them fairly useful for rapid response and potential upgrades to tanks. I like to build a half a dozen or so to start building promotions. Cavalry never really dominated the battlefield, especially after the invention of the bayonet and infantry square. It could help win battles but didn't just overrun things. As it is, it will overrun art or missile units. And it provides that extra bit of killing power on the flanks or to finish off a wounded enemy so you don't see him again. Which was its role for much of history in battle (beyond scouting & raiding).

    Boats - naval war in general is just underwhelming. Overall, it could use a major boost. Its gotten better but it really doesn't have much of a naval feel or, usually, much impact on the game.
     
  16. apocalypse105

    apocalypse105 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    2,704
    Knight have a hard time atacking city's and can be killed by pikeman
    crosbowman can only perform range and is weak in melee

    So they have there uses those musketman
     
  17. apocalypse105

    apocalypse105 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    2,704

    Cavalry Where support units But a army could not stand without it..


    Without cavalry, battles are without result"
    - Napoleon Bonaparte

    You can't win a war without cavalry in the time of renaissance and industrial...


    But in civilization 5 I dont feel the same I can win wars without them There is someting that is missing...
     
  18. KrikkitTwo

    KrikkitTwo Immortal

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    12,295
    Ironclad should have their "can't travel in Ocean" replaced with a "requires 2 movement points to cross Ocean", and +1 movement. So they are still better on the Coast, but are viable ships.
     
  19. jbevermore

    jbevermore Warmongering Menace

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2010
    Messages:
    145
    Location:
    Southeastern US
    The problem in no small part is that there wasn't this moment of brilliance where people stopped using swords and halberds and started using rifles. Transitional formations like the tercio are completely neglected in the Civ series despite being dominant on European battlefields in their time.

    So in terms of historical accuracy Civ is getting it right, early firearms were not that dominant over melee weapons. But in a mixed formation they were a terror, and that's not really represented. I'm not totally sure how to fix Musketmen in that light, but a bonus against melee might be the best way to go about it.
     
  20. Babri

    Babri Emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,441
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Units getting varied bonus from adjacent units perhaps. Muskets will get both melee & mounted bonus for nearby pikes. :think:
     

Share This Page