Moving Horsemen to Classical Era

[Gothic_Empire]

We could just give horsemen a bigger city attack penalty to encourage more diverse ancient armies.

 

[civplayer33]

The decent mobile unit you're looking for would be called the Chariot Archer.
If you rely on Horsemen for Ancient warfare I think that indicates that they are a little OP because Horsemen are also dominant in the Classical Era. I get that Horsemen should be powerful but Spears, Chariots, Archers and Swordsmen deserve more time in the sun.

This is why I wrote that the two issues are not completely separate; the Chariot Archer is not in any way a "decent mobile unit":
- it can be one-shotted way too easily
- doesn't do that much damage
- requires a horse
- if there is even moderate rough terrain around it is heavily constrained in its only advantage (mobility); if I start in forest/jungle or an area with lots of hills the unit is almost completely useless
These factors mean it is not good enough for chasing down wounded units because I would lose it too often; it is not good enough for raids on its own; it needs protection from units that are slower than it.

Another issue with this thread is that it seems some people here assume that somehow all ancient units except the horseman are so useless that they never get built and we have this boring horseman-only warfare going on. This is just not true; horsemen require horses, which are not available in infinite quantity, they cannot perform ranged attacks (obviously) which means they are always damaged on every attack, they are fairly expensive to build and they take some researching to get to. On top of that, there are synergy effects that a well mixed army provides, which a pure horseman army does not. Finally, I don't think the typical player would bore themselves since this is a game, after all, and always build a horseman-only army (especially since, as I pointed out, they are not as OP as some here seem to think).

So again, please don't make this change!
The only compromise that I feel could actually improve on the status quo, if done right, would be @CrabHelmet's suggestion:

What could be done, and this might be controversial, is:
- make Chariots a melee unit which promotes to Horsemen
- swap Horsemen with Skirmishers in the tech tree
- adjust stats appropriately

That could fix the "weak Chariot Archer" problem as well as push back the stronger mobile melee unit. However, I'm still not convinced that any change here is necessary in the first place (though I'd be fine with simply increasing horseman production costs slightly).

 

[CrazyG]

I would have really enjoyed playing a game where horsemen unlock at a later tech, such as mathematics. Even if the chariot archer goes unchanged I hope this could happen, at least for an experimental beta.

 

[CrabHelmet]

...so what we're saying is we like my suggestion for a change?

http://i.imgur.com/1n5mxK9.gifv

 

[chicorbeef]

This is why I wrote that the two issues are not completely separate; the Chariot Archer is not in any way a "decent mobile unit":
- it can be one-shotted way too easily
- doesn't do that much damage
- requires a horse
- if there is even moderate rough terrain around it is heavily constrained in its only advantage (mobility); if I start in forest/jungle or an area with lots of hills the unit is almost completely useless
These factors mean it is not good enough for chasing down wounded units because I would lose it too often; it is not good enough for raids on its own; it needs protection from units that are slower than it.

Another issue with this thread is that it seems some people here assume that somehow all ancient units except the horseman are so useless that they never get built and we have this boring horseman-only warfare going on. This is just not true; horsemen require horses, which are not available in infinite quantity, they cannot perform ranged attacks (obviously) which means they are always damaged on every attack, they are fairly expensive to build and they take some researching to get to. On top of that, there are synergy effects that a well mixed army provides, which a pure horseman army does not. Finally, I don't think the typical player would bore themselves since this is a game, after all, and always build a horseman-only army (especially since, as I pointed out, they are not as OP as some here seem to think).

So again, please don't make this change!
The only compromise that I feel could actually improve on the status quo, if done right, would be @CrabHelmet's suggestion:

That could fix the "weak Chariot Archer" problem as well as push back the stronger mobile melee unit. However, I'm still not convinced that any change here is necessary in the first place (though I'd be fine with simply increasing horseman production costs slightly).

Check the Going for Gold:Units thread we're talking about balancing Chariots there.

Anyway, nobody is saying all-horseman armies are common, or that other ancient units are useless it's just that Horsemen are prioritized in Ancient Era but are still dominant throughout Classical so they're just a really good overall unit. I think Ancient armies would be more balanced with Spears/Archers/balanced Chariots all playing a core role.

You can actually make the changes in your own game. Put horses on Masonry. I encourage you to try it.

 

[chicorbeef]

I would have really enjoyed playing a game where horsemen unlock at a later tech, such as mathematics. Even if the chariot archer goes unchanged I hope this could happen, at least for an experimental beta.

Masonry is the better tech imo (switching with Military Theory and adjusting Arena/Watermill).

...so what we're saying is we like my suggestion for a change?

http://i.imgur.com/1n5mxK9.gifv

Melee Chariots are impossible, sorry (Gazebo tried it).

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

I don't think any changes to horsemen are needed. Spearmen already get +50% CS towards horsemen, so they're strong enough, swordsmen have equal CS, so they're strong enough as well, and horsemen have a CS penalty when attacking cities, so they're not too strong either.

 

[chicorbeef]

I don't think any changes to horsemen are needed. Spearmen already get +50% CS towards horsemen, so they're strong enough, swordsmen have equal CS, so they're strong enough as well, and horsemen have a CS penalty when attacking cities, so they're not too strong either.

Horses have twice the mobility of Spears, fight Swordsmen toe-to-toe, better tank ranged hits, and are way better at fighting Skirmishers, Catapults, Archers and Warriors than Spearmen are.

That's why I want to see Horses in Classical. They can fight Classical units. But they come in Ancient. If they came at Classical, Swords/Horses would be a fair comparison because they're balanced vs. each other and other Classical units right now.

 

[Stalker0]

Horses have twice the mobility of Spears, fight Swordsmen toe-to-toe, better tank ranged hits, and are way better at fighting Skirmishers, Catapults, Archers and Warriors than Spearmen are.

That's why I want to see Horses in Classical. They can fight Classical units. But they come in Ancient. If they came at Classical, Swords/Horses would be a fair comparison because they're balanced vs. each other and other Classical units right now.

If there's an issue, in general the simplest solution is best. Switching the tech does propagate a number of changes, its a fairly involved change. Doing a -1 CS is a much simplier change. Now that said, what are the potential concerns with that change?

1) Skirmishers may become too good compared to horseman.
2) Knights may become even stronger, since they are stronger against a player's horseman that hasn't made the tech switch yet.

 

[CrabHelmet]

Switching the tech is even easier, IMO, because then you don't have to worry about rebalancing Skirmishers or Knights, since the Horseman stays the same relative to them, and is simply delayed somewhat on when the player can access it.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Spearmen are half cheaper, don't require any strategic resources (and therefore aren't vulnerable to pillaging pastures), require one less tech, there are plenty of early (spearmen) UU.

I'm not opposed to trying out changes to horsemen, but at a first glance, I don't see a pressing need for any changes, let alone big ones.

I'd also like to point out that when I'm playing against civs with early UUs, I'm grateful for horsemen being available fairly early, because that makes Greece, Persia,..., not OP. If you nerf horsemen, you buff all those civs.

 

[Stalker0]

Switching the tech is even easier, IMO, because then you don't have to worry about rebalancing Skirmishers or Knights, since the Horseman stays the same relative to them, and is simply delayed somewhat on when the player can access it.

I would say if we can find a home for horseman that doesn't require changing anything else I would say its the simpler solution. Couldn't we just simply move the horseman instead of having to adjust arenas and watermills, etc.

 

[chicorbeef]

Spearmen are half cheaper, don't require any strategic resources (and therefore aren't vulnerable to pillaging pastures), require one less tech, there are plenty of early (spearmen) UU.

I'm not opposed to trying out changes to horsemen, but at a first glance, I don't see a pressing need for any changes, let alone big ones.

I'd also like to point out that when I'm playing against civs with early UUs, I'm grateful for horsemen being available fairly early, because that makes Greece, Persia,..., not OP. If you nerf horsemen, you buff all those civs.

Spearmen cost 70 hammers vs. Horseman's 90, so not half off. The Strategic Resource requirement is definitely a consideration but not having horses is rare enough that Horsemen will play a role in most games (and as a human player your horse pastures should really not be pillaged...or you settle on Horses). Also using Horsemen against Greece or Persia is suicide anyway, Spearmen/Swordsmen are more effective for those situations, so that's not that legit of an argument.

If you're relying on Horsemen to fight Standard units and can't get the job done otherwise (if you think that AI warmongering would be OP), I think that just goes to show how powerful Horsemen are early on in the hands ofand why they should be moved.

The one less tech point is interesting. First off I want to point out that it's one less first column, not second column, tech so it's 240 Science vs. 175 Science, technically, which is not as drastic a difference as it may seem. Bronze Working is more convenient than Military Theory if you have Mining or Quarry luxuries but less convenient otherwise. The key point to remember is Military Theory leads to Mathematics, which is a key tech for both Tradition players/Authority players. Overall I'd say the tech location of Horsemen is usually a bit more convenient for me.

I would say if we can find a home for horseman that doesn't require changing anything else I would say its the simpler solution. Couldn't we just simply move the horseman instead of having to adjust arenas and watermills, etc.

It's just that the current Military Theory would be a somewhat empty tech with no horsemen (and no War Elephants? still not sure what the position on this is), and watermills wouldn't make sense on a tech called "Military Theory" in the location where current Masonry is.

We could move Arenas to Iron Working and Watermills to Mathematics, that way we don't have to worry about timing issues (as they'll come in the same tech column) or adjusting their costs or yields.

 

[CrazyG]

I don't think any changes to horsemen are needed. Spearmen already get +50% CS towards horsemen, so they're strong enough, swordsmen have equal CS, so they're strong enough as well, and horsemen have a CS penalty when attacking cities, so they're not too strong either.

My issue is even if I have already unlocked math, iron working, and engineering, horsemen are still a really good unit. They compete well with swords, skirmishers and comp bows.

 

[Divsanchez]

If horsemen are put back (which I don't have a problem with) I would be slightly concerned about chariots becoming more prominent in the game.

Chariots don't deserve to be that important. They were always used as part of an army (never alone) and often only to cause fear.

The riders have very little to offer other than throwing weapons and in many cases would simply be delivered to the battlefield and dismount to fight.

It is not a credible fighting unit.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Hmm, after reading your replies and the two threads, I think I might be coming around to being more enthusiastic about having an experimental run with some changes to horsemen.

 

[andersw]

Would it change anything if horsemen got nerfed to 3 move?
or same rough terrain penalties as chariot archers?

 

[Divsanchez]

Would it change anything if horsemen got nerfed to 3 move?
or same rough terrain penalties as chariot archers?

That doesn't make any sense.

Chariots were very limited where they could go without getting stuck or wheels falling off. The horses are clearly going to be much faster without a chariot in tow.

 

[tu_79]

Horsemen are the strongest unit of its time, and this is fine, it requires a strategic to be made.
What is not right is how fast a player can actually produce them. Test this. Animal Husbandry -> Pottery. Produce a Settler while you scout for horses. Then Wheel -> Military Theory. Save some gold, settle over the horses and purchase the horseman. The strongest ancient unit, able to stand its ground for most classical age, in a few turns.
Only a barbarian raid can get in the way.
Why bother with chariots?

Nerfing the horsemen might be easier, but then, as others have pointed out, they'll become a mostly weak unit in classical, just when they should shine.

It just came to me.
What if horsemen require barracks in the city?

 

[Divsanchez]

That is the way ffh2 works that you need a specific building to produce each unit.

I don't think that idea should be introduced into VP. It would seem out of place to me.