Making Ancient Cavalry upgrade to Cavarly?

[player1 fanatic]

For those that have tried this modification:
How much was it unbalanced?
Or not?

Is 120gp upgrade per Ancient Cavalry as unbalanced as 30gp upgrade per Knight?
Or maybe as Horsemen to Knight upgrade (120gp)?

I would welocme any opinion on this matter.


P.S.
Just to be known, upgraded Ancient Cavalry loses hit point bonus.

 

[Cuivienen]

I haven't tried it, but I think it would only make the Statue of Zeus more of a game-breaker wonder. Right now, if you manage to build the SoZ, you'll have a larger, more effective military than the AI throughout the AA and early MA. If those ACs can be upgraded -- well, then the advantage is even bigger. IMO, it would be a bad idea.

 

[player1 fanatic]

What if AC was a slightly less game breaking (like same stats, but without +1HP)?

 

[Dell19]

1 hitpoint does make a difference but perhaps not being able to upgrade AC has a larger negative impact on the power of the wonder since eventually you may have to get rid of the units... Or at least no longer be able to use them in an offensive role.

 

[Hygro]

In your mod, didn;t you tone done the ancient cavalry to the point that they aren't significantly better than horsemen?

 

[player1 fanatic]

True, in current version of PS-mod, I nerfed their attack rating to 2, while keeping +1HP.

 

[Potatish]

I made a mod for myself, in which every unit that should be upgradeable IS upgradeable.

Take the cavarly path...

Chariot -> Horseman -> Heavy Cavalry.

Every civ can build Heavy Cavalry, which is just Ancient Cavalry without the HP bonus. This puts every civ on even ground, and fills in the gap between the very ancient Horseman and Midieval Knight.

It helps the game drastically. Rather than nerfing Ancient Cavalry, I just converted the Heavy Cavalry from the Rise of Rome scenario. You actually have a chance of defending your empire against Ancient Cavalry hordes!

 

[Commander Bello]

I wouldn't mind if ACs would be upgradeable.
Everything depends on the costs, though. 120 gold per 1 unit is quite an amount, I'd guess.
Personally, I am very much surprised how many players seem to fear sheer stats. Some months ago, it were the Immortals which made you win every game, now it's the AC.
Both just isn't true, although both are some good units.
On the other hand, it does no harm if ACs are not upgradeable since they don't block your building list as other non-upgradeable units do.

 

[Dell19]

I guess it is easy to overreact when you see how successful a unit can be especially since you cannot produce more ACs than the ones you get for free but they do still give a huge benefit if you are going to have a war against reasonably weak opposition and they work well if you have a knight UU.

 

[socralynnek]

I wouldn't mind either if AC were upgradeable, because by the time Cavs come in, you shouldn't have too much of them around or you haven't used them enough in offense, and btw you have paid upkeep for them all of the time, so maybe its fair to make them upgradeable, but a high price is a must be.

 

[player1 fanatic]

Just to note that if they were upgradeable that they would have cost of 120gp.

AC has "hidden" cost of 40 shields.
Cavalry is 80.
So (80-40)*3=120gp

 

[Theoden]

As long as they cannot upgrade to knight I think it's okay. You have to wait a long time to get cavalry. And you don't get so many AC from SoZ that it would make a too large cavalry force. (at least if you look at an average cavalry force of mine)

 

[Dell19]

Yeah I guess the difference between AC and cavalry is large enough to make it effective although there would be some benefit to keeping the ACs around if the were being used to increase happiness in a monarchy.

 

[Theoden]

Yes, and you can also use them as decoys. The AI is so stupid that it will probably send halve it's force of tanks to destroy a few AC's.