1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Longbows crush rifles

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Toulouse, Sep 24, 2010.

  1. Yfelsung

    Yfelsung Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    28
    It should be mentioned that, factually, the longbow was superior to firearms until roughly the civil war.

    Longbows could fire further with accuracy, faster and were generally more deadly.

    The only reason why firearms were adopted early was that ANYONE can fire a gun, it takes a very strong person to fire a longbow.

    Longbows taking out ironclads is a bit much, but longbows taking out early riflemen is historically accurate.
     
  2. duxup

    duxup Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2001
    Messages:
    385
    I think the issue is that they can from three spaces wipe out riflemen to a man without the rifleman getting off a shot. Historically :p
     
  3. Falcan

    Falcan Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    44
    History is not turn based.
     
  4. duxup

    duxup Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2001
    Messages:
    385
    Or if it is in anyway, when your turn in history is over... it is really over. ;)
     
  5. jrockman13

    jrockman13 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    5
    Found this on a site dedicated to some middle-age culture...rather interesting!

     
  6. AlexandrosV

    AlexandrosV Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    I think something must be done here. Iif an archer can fire from 2 (3??) hexs also a rifleman should, BUT he can't because the cannon should fire at more distance.

    SO 4 ideas:
    1) Archers obsolete with Guns discovered
    2) Archers no more ranged with " "
    3) Riflemen can shoot from 2 hex and cannons from 3 (gameplay?)
    4) (think this one it's the more plausible) The modern units would have far more strenght than now, so it's nearly impossbile for old eras units to kill them.
     
  7. ytswy

    ytswy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    60
    Assuming you mean the America Civil War, I agree. But I've always assumed that the Riflemen unit was meant to represent this exact tech level: breech loading rifles, capable of a quick rate of fire and accurate at range.

    However from a gameplay perspective I don't have any problems with it (although I've not played around with longbows specifically yet). You don't want a somewhat higher tech level to turn every battle into a walkover.
     
  8. duxup

    duxup Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2001
    Messages:
    385
    I don't have a problem obsoleting archers, or adjusting their range down to 2 / not allowing them to obliterate modern ships.

    #3 I wouldn't want to turn riflemen into both a range, and close combat tool. That would be crazy powerful, and range units are already pretty powerful.

    #4 You don't want too much difference between units of different generations or simply being slightly more advanced would be a huge advantage and all we'd be doing is rushing for military units in the tech tree.
     
  9. Aussie_Lurker

    Aussie_Lurker Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Messages:
    7,714
    Location:
    Adelaide, South Australia
    I concur, there should be limits to how far certain land-based units can fire into coastal or ocean hexes. This is just sounding ludicrous-it borders on the diplomat destroying a battle-ship insanity of Civ2 ;)!

    Aussie.
     
  10. Zaimejs

    Zaimejs Emperor

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,014
    Location:
    Nebraska
    I'm not sure what history you're all reading, but I don't remember any longbows in the Revolutionary War or Civil War. I'm pretty sure that the people in charge realized that guns were better... or else they would have had crews of longbowmen.

    1. Range... guns shoot further more accurately.

    2. Accessibility... you no longer need experts who are well trained. This should be taken into account. Musket men should actually take less time than archers. "Here is your gun! Go! Shoot!"

    3. Fatality... guns kill people more easily than arrows. You can get shot a lot with arrows before they hit a critical area... but hitting someone with a gun will immobilize them if not kill them outright.

    Just saying. And archers killing a destroyer is ridiculous. But I remember my first Civ IV game where I was losing tanks to archers and thinking WTF? Helicopter getting shot down by an archer? Really?
     
  11. teeman11

    teeman11 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    10
    Something is definitely wrong here.

    longbow vs muskets = longbows

    longbows vs rifled muskets = rifled muskets

    Longbow range was between 180 to 250yds, the musket was accurate to between 50 to 70 yds but the rilfed musket was accurate to up to 500yds.

    FYI, in this game I don't think rifles are considered breech loaders, but just rifle bored muskets (ie civil war.) Rifleman are the breech loaders. Even still rifled muskets have about double the range.
     
  12. adam_grif

    adam_grif Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    78
    The problem here is that arrows are ranged units according to the game's rules, but gunpowder units are not. So long as everybody maintains technological parity and obeys the progression that happened in real life you won't notice anything unusual here, because arrows out-ranging melee units is normal. HOWEVER, when you get mixed eras (and you always do) it comes apart at the seams, because rifles cannot even shoot back at the archers! Even normal, non-longbows with their 2 range can hit riflemen with impunity.
     
  13. AlexandrosV

    AlexandrosV Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    31

    Yes, but there should be an huge difference between an archer and a rifleman, the other units can be then adjusted each other. I.E. you increase strenght of all modern infantry and post modern too. Gunpowder was an incredible discovery in the history of weapons... despite of the initial problems (like slow and difficult reload) muskets had
     
  14. NBAfan

    NBAfan boss

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2007
    Messages:
    3,351
    Location:
    Dallas TX,United States
    The longbow's power is very historically inaccurate. The longbow was never better then the crossbow. The crossbow was more accurate with less training, more powerful and had farther range then the longbow. The Church even wanted to outlaw the crossbow because it was so deadly. The reason crossbow is not as famous is because they came around when firearms started coming around which were easier to use.
     
  15. generalwar

    generalwar Philosopher

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Messages:
    407
    Location:
    Croatia
    Have you ever seen men equipped with rifles and shooting in air to hit other army:rolleyes:? I never heard that. I agree that archer's range should be 1 hex if we want reality, but it would be useless for combat. They should made cannons fire 4 tiles and artillery 5 and mobile SAMs or rcket launchers, whatever, should have 6 tiles, but then there should be more hexes and units should move 3 tiles and everything would be ruined, so...:p
     
  16. Yfelsung

    Yfelsung Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    28
    At the range a longbow can fire accurately and deadly, it would be completely possible for a squad of longbows to absolutely destroy early firearm users without taking so much as a single bullet.

    Early firearms were AMAZINGLY bad weapons. The bayonet on the tip did more killing than the bullets did most of the time.

    This even transfers into videogames. Go play Empire:Total war, get to bayonets and just melee charge every unit you face... you'll win almost every encounter.

    This tactic was actually used by several generals during that time period and it was a good one.
     
  17. Dizzy75

    Dizzy75 Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    245
    ...which was when rifles came into common use!

    I agree that something should probably be done about this mechanic. It just isn't quite right that bows can out-range rifles, either.
     
  18. duxup

    duxup Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2001
    Messages:
    385
    Riflemen sir. No chance historically longbows dominate riflemen as regularly they do in Civ V.
     
  19. Dizzy75

    Dizzy75 Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    245
    But rifles aren't early firearms - muskets are, and they did pretty much suck.

    If I remember my college Civil War course correctly, rifles basically kicked off "modern" infantry tactics, because of their range and accuracy. Instead of a long line of muskets in the middle of a battlefield, you could hide behind a bush or tree and pick off officers from very far away. Supposedly this presaged the trench warfare in WWI...
     
  20. Thoras

    Thoras Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    45
    And having mountains taking several tiles. This would be much better indeed
     

Share This Page