Making the Cavalary Tech-Path more interesting

[QES]

Hm, how about a noncombat land unit with a high movement (3 or 4), that can carry two or three other units?

Unless its magical, generally nothing is faster than horses, and they travel at their "Fast speed" when they carry but one person, hence cavalry. Anything that "carries units" is thematically carrying hundreds or thousands of soldiers. What moves faster than a horse and can do that?
-Qes

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Oh, I never said it wasn't magical. I'm sure there are plenty of fantasy creatures that are massive and can move quickly. Also, don't forget that even horsemen have to rest during their travels. A magical creature/construct might not have to.

If not that, then why not airships? They might make a nice unit for the Luichirp, if nothing else.

 

[QES]

Oh, I never said it wasn't magical. I'm sure there are plenty of fantasy creatures that are massive and can move quickly. Also, don't forget that even horsemen have to rest during their travels. A magical creature/construct might not have to.

If not that, then why not airships? They might make a nice unit for the Luichirp, if nothing else.

Air units are out Until the development team can do them satisfactorily. Which I'm a bit fearful will not occur at all :-S.

But yeah, magics fine. I just had this image of a non-magical beast of burden, and was like. "No. Just no."
-Qes

 

[Nikis-Knight]

Ohh, Airships, drool. Probably need more flying functionality first, but those would be cool.

Unless its magical, generally nothing is faster than horses, and they travel at their "Fast speed" when they carry but one person, hence cavalry. Anything that "carries units" is thematically carrying hundreds or thousands of soldiers. What moves faster than a horse and can do that?
-Qes

Well, could be a chow wagon. Doesn't theoretically move them at a higher max speed, just eliminates the down time during that year-long turn when they would have to forage for food.

 

[QES]

Ohh, Airships, drool. Probably need more flying functionality first, but those would be cool.


Well, could be a chow wagon. Doesn't theoretically move them at a higher max speed, just eliminates the down time during that year-long turn when they would have to forage for food.

I dont know why, but when you say Chow wagon i have in my head the picture of the Warcraft III corpse wagon collector unit...thing.
-Qes

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Ohh, Airships, drool. Probably need more flying functionality first, but those would be cool.

I was thinking more along the lines of something like a gunship in vanilla. Acts as a normal unit, except it ignores terrain cost (maybe even able to cross mountains, coasts, etc.) and looks like it's flying. It's a cool idea... this I say just after I started a thread meant to break away from clichés.

 

[QES]

I was thinking more along the lines of something like a gunship in vanilla. Acts as a normal unit, except it ignores terrain cost (maybe even able to cross mountains, coasts, etc.) and looks like it's flying. It's a cool idea... this I say just after I started a thread meant to break away from clichés.

The "flying units" issue has been revisted by me several times, and has been shot down continously under the premise of "not until we can do it right". As this is the best of all possible arguements against implementation, I am begrudingly satisfied to wait to see what the development team comes up with.

However, i DO hope they come up with something.

-Qes

 

[loki1232]

Unless Kael corrects me, we're currently waiting for enough viable models to do it right (no one wants spitfires standing in as Luchuirp Orinthopters)

 

[QES]

Unless Kael corrects me, we're currently waiting for enough viable models to do it right (no one wants spitfires standing in as Luchuirp Orinthopters)

Well, if i had to take my pick in a fight, ill take a spitfire over an ornithopter. But I didnt realize it was merely models and art. For some reason i had it in my head that mechanics were also a big issue.
-Qes

 

[YohanLeafheart]

What about a phasing\tunnel effect magic unit?

Phase Shifter

• Ignores Terrain Movement Costs
• Cargo 5
• Non attackable unless the other unit has Phasing too
• Summoned
• Water Walking
• Can walk on impassible terrain
• Doesn't get road bonus

Essentialy it is an unit with Phasing Shift ability that would carry your other units really far and fast, but if you forget your other units in it when it unsummons, they are gone. I would put it in Entropy III\Summonning, probably.

 

[tyrantpimp]

Seems like at least one of these buildings/civics should give some sort of bonus to tiles that actually have horses on them.

 

[tyrantpimp]

Phase shifter sounds interesting but i would hate loosing a bunch of units due to my own incompetence, Hehe i loose so much to that as it is already

 

[QES]

What about a phasing\tunnel effect magic unit?

Phase Shifter

• Ignores Terrain Movement Costs
• Cargo 5
• Non attackable unless the other unit has Phasing too
• Summoned
• Water Walking
• Can walk on impassible terrain
• Doesn't get road bonus

Essentialy it is an unit with Phasing Shift ability that would carry your other units really far and fast, but if you forget your other units in it when it unsummons, they are gone. I would put it in Entropy III\Summonning, probably.

Phasing in Magic the Gathering was stupid, and Id not want it here. But thats just personal bias.
-Qes

 

[Chandrasekhar]

I'll take a dimensional spell that summons a phasing creature. Dimensional II/Summoning?

 

[YohanLeafheart]

Phasing in Magic the Gathering was stupid, and Id not want it here. But thats just personal bias.
-Qes

I agree with you that it was stupid in MtG, Mirage was when I stopped playing and phasing was one of the main reasons I did (the other money). But I thought more about teleport when thinking about it that idea. Since teleport would be too strong IMHO, I changed for phasing.

Invisibility would work too, and make the Shadow be able to attack and destroy the carrier.

 

[Grey Fox]

Maybe there could be a national wonder against phasing, protecting your territory from phasing units, like a barrier between dimensions.

 

[QES]

I think that Cavlary should be seperated into two catagories Armored and Unarmored.

Unarmored cavalry would have higher withdraw chances, first strike promotion opportunities, be faster, and be better at killing archers.

Armored Cavalry would be useful at killing other cavalry and melee, these would have higher base strengths (for thier era), be a bit slower, more expensive - but hard hitting.

I'm wondering if we cant add a couple promoiton concepts to cavalry as well.
Charge - Promotion available in first strike line. If first stirke combat is successful (works) another immediate first strike is given. So that a charging unit could decimate its opponent by simply running them down. (Armored Cavalary Promotion)

Flank - Promotion available in Withdraw line. The Str Value of the Defending unit (flank only works on attack) is havled. Bonuses are applied after this, so the base number is lower. (Unarmored Cavalry only [which are weaker in str naturally])

-Qes

 

[Grey Fox]

Light and Heavy cavalry that is.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

It might be good to separate the light and heavy cavalry by technology, as well as buildings or whatever else is decided. For example, heavy cavalry techs might also require some metalworking/melee techs, while light cavalry techs might need archery/recon techs to be researched. This would help make the Civs more different as some might go for recon, archery, and light cavalry while others go for infantry and heavy cavalry. It sounds like it might be feasible.

 

[QES]

It might be good to separate the light and heavy cavalry by technology, as well as buildings or whatever else is decided. For example, heavy cavalry techs might also require some metalworking/melee techs, while light cavalry techs might need archery/recon techs to be researched. This would help make the Civs more different as some might go for recon, archery, and light cavalry while others go for infantry and heavy cavalry. It sounds like it might be feasible.

Heavy Cavalry should also be realatively expsensive and uber units, where as Light Cavalry should be able to zerg.

I'm also thinking that emphasis for Light Cavlary should be on raiding, terrain manipulation and seige, where as heavy cavalry should be based on barrier breaking.

Much like "air supriority" - "Cavalry Superiorirty" should be an issue civs must deal with. Heavy cavalry superiority would make defenses (other than in city) very hard to hold, Light cavalry should make defenses useless as they'll be bypassed.

Also a BIG issue i have in the game. It is rare for battles to be fought outside cities. I finally had one very satisfying war with the elves when i was playing the cabalim. Almost every fight took place outside of cities (it was also realatively early game). I won through attrition and razing of citys with bambur. Dwarf v Elf. (I was runes). But most games i play, one or the other side simply awaits a siege, either offensively or defensively. The seiger gets wittled at, until its unable to take the city, OR it takes the city. But there are very rarly Army V Army IN THE FIELD combat. Which is primarily where cavalry shine.

One major reason why cavalry are commonly underused, is because they're specialties lie in a realm where combat often does not take place. I do NOT have any ideas on how to solve this problem.
-Qes