Machineguns upgrade to Mech Infs?

dexters

Gods & Emperors
Supporter
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
4,182
Location
Canada
Just something I want to touch on. This does feel like a missing late game ranged unit that could be added later, but given one of the big things with GnK was giving ranged units an upgrade path, it's a bit ironic that it still ends the upgrade tree in the same unit as in vanilla.

Exploring England and going Longbow > Gatling I think I'll just leave all of them at MG.

Machine guns with 2 tile range is almost like a mini seige machine, and much more survivable!
 
I went all out and upgraded all mine in my current game. I do regret it, since I am missing that small ranged unit other then Rocket Artillery, to cover roads and railroads.
 
Yeah it seems odd they went out their way to make sure the Archery/Range line was filled out with no dead end upgrade only then to place back in to the line a dead end upgrade.

We have Gatlings as the Ranged Rifleman analogy and the Machinegun as the Infantry Range Analogy.

Whats needed is a Mech Inf Analogy some kind of Motorised/Vehicular Mounted Machine Gun.



Also the gap from Xbows to Gatlings is too large.

There is no Renaissance early gunpowder equivalent to the Musket. XBows are the Medival Ranged Equivalent to Longswords and Gattling are Industrial ranged Equivalent to Rifles. Wheres the Gunpowder Equivalent or maybe Chemistry/Metallurgy?

I suggest something like the 17th Cen Grenadiers.
 
The problem is that Construction comes far too quickly after archery. Crossbows are a decent distance away, but I don't think grenadiers would be a good idea.

Crossbows went out of fashion when the gun came in, the problem in civ is that the gun is not a ranged unit.
 
My vote is for them to make Mech Inf into a ranged unit, and make a new info-era "melee" unit that still looks like infantry. I hate that all the infantry are gone in the information era and it's just tanks and tank look-alikes running around everywhere..

Probably too late for a change that big, might upset vanilla players who eventually upgrade to Beyond Gods and Kings ;P

What I've been thinking as a final unit for the ranged upgrade path is the TOW Infantry, which is a made up unit from Civ3 using a real weapon (the TOW missile) and that unit also had features of a ranged unit (first fire when attacked). To be fair Civ5 has madeup units too. Longswordsman is a very general unit which vaguely refers to medieval knights.
 
Why can't a unit have both ranged and melee attack? In case of Mech. Infantry that would make perfect sense... either charge forward with assault rifles blazing or stay back and use that auto-cannon the APC (armored personnel carrier) is equipped with.
 
I'd agree to a sniper, though it seems a little out of place somehow...

As for longswordsmen, it creates the buffer needed between swords and muskets. Given the insane number of variations on 1200-1500AD European (alone) variations of a melee unit that isn't a pikeman.

As for the melee/ranged hybrid. The reason I'd give is a lack of a precedent, and the difficulty of such a unit, how would promotions work efficiently? While players would be smart and upgrade these solely down one route (to get blitz / march / +1 range, whatever) The AI would most probably choose a random selection from each side (ranged/melee) ending up with a considerably weaker unit than the player has at his disposal
 
Hmm well we have the paratroopers so there are some modern "pure" infantry.

Personally I'd say that the mech. infantry should be the ranged infantry.

If feasible I'd like to have modern infantry buildable. A standard unit you then mold (train) into either: Marines (amphibious), Anti tank, paratroopers, special forces (hard to track)... well whatever could be interesting.
 
I think it would work if Mech Infantry was a ranged unit (like a Bradley or BMP), and regular infantry upgraded into paratroopers. Would make for some nice smooth upgrade paths, aside from that wonky anti-cav line.
 
Gatling guns aren't exactly units you should be building. They aren't very cost effective without promotions. So it's only really your leftover crossbows that get a promotion route if you keep them alive... Now if you still have some archers alive when you hit Information age... I'd say good for you, but it's hardly an issue if they hit a Dead End at the point where Air Units and Nukes are in play.
 
Why can't a unit have both ranged and melee attack? In case of Mech. Infantry that would make perfect sense... either charge forward with assault rifles blazing or stay back and use that auto-cannon the APC (armored personnel carrier) is equipped with.

I've actually done that (back when I was trying to fix the range-melee upgrade lines, I've gave all units a Ranged strength and a Range of 0 so it wouldn't be useful unless you had an existing Range promotion); however, it currently creates issues with the combat outcome predictor (it will add melee and range bonuses to the RCS even though melee do NOT apply - I've tested this - and the outcome predictor is ALWAYS based on ranged combat if you possess it, so you can't see a good melee outcome of how much return damage you'll take).
 
In my current game I used crossbowmen as (free) garrison for my cities and later upgraded them to GG and MG. Especially with range promotion they are very nice and in siege they seem to do more damage to cities than normal tanks but do not get damaged.

It is weird that in Civ5 MGs can have a Ranged Attack of 2 hex while tanks with much more powerfull and long-range weapons can only attack in melee.

The combat system should not make such a clear distinction between melee units and ranged units. A generalized combat unit might have attributes for attack range, ranged attack strength, ranged defense, melee attack strength, melee defense strength, ...

- Typical melee units as swords or pikmen would have a ranged attack strength of zero.
- Modern gunpowder units would have the option to either snipe at the enemy from distance (less damage to target, no damage for attacker) or to engage in melee (more damage to target and attacker).
- Typical ranged units as artillery would still have their advantage in ranged attack (as it is already implemented).

Units with melee and ranged attack capability then should also have access to both promotions trees, e.g. leading to specialisation into ranged infantry (skirmisher) and melee infantry (stormtroopers). In consequence the player should also have full options to decide to which new unit type a unit is upgraded, e.g. if a crossbow unit with high range promotion should upgrade tank, artillery, infantry, MG ... to best use its promotions.
 
When I had to up my gatling to mech.inf my only tough was "omg they did it again".
It s not so bad since most of my wars are conducted by airplanes , bomber and stealth bomber , so the mech.inf upgrade is just a place where units goes to die ...basically all those experienced swordsmen from early rush and veteran archers from early turtle all goes to mech.inf to basically stay in a city while the two tanks and the twenty stealth fighters wreak havoc in my opponent lands.
Still ...i d like to have a range end , even a short range end , just for the satisfaction of not having 3 ranged promotion go to waste ..again.
 
In my current game I used crossbowmen as (free) garrison for my cities and later upgraded them to GG and MG. Especially with range promotion they are very nice and in siege they seem to do more damage to cities than normal tanks but do not get damaged.

It is weird that in Civ5 MGs can have a Ranged Attack of 2 hex while tanks with much more powerfull and long-range weapons can only attack in melee.

The combat system should not make such a clear distinction between melee units and ranged units. A generalized combat unit might have attributes for attack range, ranged attack strength, ranged defense, melee attack strength, melee defense strength, ...

- Typical melee units as swords or pikmen would have a ranged attack strength of zero.
- Modern gunpowder units would have the option to either snipe at the enemy from distance (less damage to target, no damage for attacker) or to engage in melee (more damage to target and attacker).
- Typical ranged units as artillery would still have their advantage in ranged attack (as it is already implemented).

Units with melee and ranged attack capability then should also have access to both promotions trees, e.g. leading to specialisation into ranged infantry (skirmisher) and melee infantry (stormtroopers). In consequence the player should also have full options to decide to which new unit type a unit is upgraded, e.g. if a crossbow unit with high range promotion should upgrade tank, artillery, infantry, MG ... to best use its promotions.

Actually, I'd like to see ranged counterattacks if the unit being attacked has range to fire back (akin to attacking in melee, if your archers shoot at another unit of archers they fire back, same for ships etc the one exception would be units that require setup - early siege - wouldn't counterattack unless setup) that way all units could technically be ranged once you hit gunpowder since if musketmen shoot at musketmen, they'd counterattack. It'd stop most of the early archer sieges if the cities fired back when shot at by units in range; however they'd have to extend range of siege a bit to 3 base....

Then again I'd also like to see city ranges escalate through the eras, up to 3 when they lob stones, 4 at artillery and finally 5 at rockets.
 
They still have machine gun nests at base fortifications in the modern military. Instead of being field troops, MGs have transferred to garrison units. Despite their low power compared to top end units, they can still add to city damage.

If you MUST upgrade them I'd say to create a ranged GDR to pair with the regular GDR?
 
If you MUST upgrade them I'd say to create a ranged GDR to pair with the regular GDR?

Nah, I did toy around with an upgrade (Mechanized Machine Guns - pictured HMVs with mounted MGs - had a CS/RCS of 75 which was still weaker than Mech Inf) but they were a wee bit dominant since most of mine upgraded from experience units so I simply removed the upgrade choice from them (and changed GoodyHut to Rocket Artillery).

Un-upgraded they still compliment as support troops/garrison units very well even vs Mech Inf/Modern Armor... :ar15:

Vs GDRs, not so much... :run:
 
Actually, I'd like to see ranged counterattacks if the unit being attacked has range to fire back (akin to attacking in melee, if your archers shoot at another unit of archers they fire back, same for ships etc the one exception would be units that require setup - early siege - wouldn't counterattack unless setup) that way all units could technically be ranged once you hit gunpowder since if musketmen shoot at musketmen, they'd counterattack. It'd stop most of the early archer sieges if the cities fired back when shot at by units in range; however they'd have to extend range of siege a bit to 3 base....

Then again I'd also like to see city ranges escalate through the eras, up to 3 when they lob stones, 4 at artillery and finally 5 at rockets.

I agree with all that.
 
Top Bottom