Musketmen - poor design, poor tech placement?

[a4phantom]

I don't have Warlords yet, how're trebuchets? I assume they fill the insanely long gap between cats and cannons, it was always interesting to march to war with rifles and cavalry and catapults (realistically cannons should predate musketmen but whatever). What tech enables them? How strong are they? Also, are they the only new nonunique unit?

Also do Janisaries get a bonus vs. mounted or just archers and melee?

 

[AriochIV]

Trebuchets are enabled with Engineering, and they're very dangerous against cities. They can attack a city-entrenched Longbowman and have about a 40% chance to win (in addition to collateral damage), so using a Trebuchet for collateral damage doesn't always mean sacrifice (as it does with a Catapult).

The other non-unique new unit is the Trireme, which is basically the same as a Galley, but it gives up the ability to carry units for a +50% in combat against Galleys.

Janissaries are +25% against Archery, Mounted and Melee.

 

[homan1983]

All pointless wankery/infighting aside, I normally don't use muskets much, if all. However, the occasional game finds me fighting in a musketman time period, and this is the case in my current game. They're actually quite good if you've got a slight tech lead on your adversary, as they'll stand up well against just about anything the opponent can throw at them, and do well supported by lots of trebuchets for taking cities. They're not miraculously great, but they can reliably beat war elephants and macemen in the field, which gives you a good advantage in that era.

Of course, French Musketmen can be darned effective if paired with knights or cavalry with their 2 speed, and Janisaries, if obtained early enough, can be game-breaking. It's effectively a unit with a strength of 11.25 against everything medieval except for siege engines, which it can handle fine with its strength of 9.

Ermmm, the problem with what you're saying is that you have a tech lead.

This should lead you to an advantage no matter what since you are ahead.

However in a normal game as you rightly said they come and go far too quickly for one of the most important warfare units in the game - which is a shame really.

 

[homan1983]

Funny, since I'm the one presenting and asking for evidence. You claim I've said certain things, but you refuse to show where. You claim that your opinions are self evident truths, proven by "the real world", but you refuse to give any evidence which should be plentiful. You lack even the courage or integrity to define which you consider the first "military" rifles, when you're trying to make the whole debate hinge on that distinction! So I'm not at all sorry to see this end. Goodbye, goodluck.

Will you just give it a rest you <snip>
Moderator Action: Warned for language.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Proteus]

I don't have Warlords yet, how're trebuchets? I assume they fill the insanely long gap between cats and cannons, it was always interesting to march to war with rifles and cavalry and catapults (realistically cannons should predate musketmen but whatever). What tech enables them? How strong are they? Also, are they the only new nonunique unit?

Aside from the informations given by AriochIV it might also be worth mentioning, that they they do 25% of damage if you use them to bombard the city defenses, meaning that you need just 4 Trebs to lower the city defense to 0%.

 

[snipafist]

Aside from the informations given by AriochIV it might also be worth mentioning, that they they do 25% of damage if you use them to bombard the city defenses, meaning that you need just 4 Trebs to lower the city defense to 0%.

Which is why I see no need to upgrade them to increase bombard damage or collateral damage, they do plenty of both as it is. City raider is where it's at for these guys, and with CRII or III, their bonus against cities gets crazy, and can become city attacking units on their own, rather than support. I am rethinking musketmen a bit though - in the late medieval, stacks of muskets with a pike or two for cav defense and trebs for city taking can be very hard to crack. It is, of course, dependent on tech levels and the "feel" of the game at the moment - in times of war, you're likely to be able to sit on musketmen for a while, but in prosperous times, grenadiers aren't too far behind musketmen.

 

[DigitalBoy]

I stopped reading this thread about two pages ago. I was kind of enjoying it until it turned into flame bait.

 

[snipafist]

One other thing I wanted to add - with trebs being able to function as city raiders, macemen become less crucial to late medieval warfare (as they can take city raider upgrades, while muskets can't) than they were in vanilla civ 4. This opens up a bit more room for incorporating muskets in.

 

[a4phantom]

One other thing I wanted to add - with trebs being able to function as city raiders, macemen become less crucial to late medieval warfare (as they can take city raider upgrades, while muskets can't) than they were in vanilla civ 4. This opens up a bit more room for incorporating muskets in.

Interesting, that means I'll have to reexamine my strategy (always a good thing). I've gotten very comfortable promoting swarms of macemen to CR3 and then upgrading them => rifles/grens => infantry, which helps fill in the time when no unit besides cats/cannons had city raider available. If trebs (what's their strength?) are now the most efficient way to conquer cities in the medieval era, this strategy won't be so seamless. And to be honest I feel a little cheap, since the AI doesn't deliberately do it, even though it's a natural use of the units at hand. PS how's the Korean unit?

 

[snipafist]

trebs are strength 4 with +100% against cities. hwachas het +50% vs melee, which makes them wonderful catapaults for defense or clearing the field, but only slightly better than normal cats when assaulting cities.

 

[a4phantom]

trebs are strength 4 with +100% against cities. hwachas het +50% vs melee, which makes them wonderful catapaults for defense or clearing the field, but only slightly better than normal cats when assaulting cities.

Wouldn't the hwacha (4+50%=6) be only as good as a catapult when attacking melee units in the field, and worse than a catapult if there's a nonmelee unit in the stack? Plus I doubt that 50% or that 100% apply to collateral damage.

 

[homan1983]

Cats have Str of 5 so that makes hwacha 7.5vs melee. And it is never worst than a catapult.

Is there something about the guy you just quoted that leads one to think hwachas are trebs?

 

[a4phantom]

Cats have Str of 5 so that makes hwacha 7.5vs melee. And it is never worst than a catapult.

Is there something about the guy you just quoted that leads one to think hwachas are trebs?

If you insist on being rude, please go back and finally justify your earlier claims before you start something else. The way I'd read the previous statements made it sound like hwachas were treb replacement. If they are catapult replacements, then it's a good thing I ask questions to learn about things I don't know, such as Warlords. You should really try it sometime, you could start with history or logic or manners.

 

[Proteus]

Yep, homan is right, Hwach&#180;as are Cat-Replacements.

 

[snipafist]

If you insist on being rude, please go back and finally justify your earlier claims before you start something else. The way I'd read the previous statements made it sound like hwachas were treb replacement. If they are catapult replacements, then it's a good thing I ask questions to learn about things I don't know, such as Warlords. You should really try it sometime, you could start with history or logic or manners.

I don't see how his response was rude at all. I said hwachas were catapaults in my post and it looked as though your confusion came from missing that. He simply cut right to the chase. If he said "you idiot, ..." then that would be a different story.

 

[homan1983]

If you insist on being rude, please go back and finally justify your earlier claims before you start something else. The way I'd read the previous statements made it sound like hwachas were treb replacement. If they are catapult replacements, then it's a good thing I ask questions to learn about things I don't know, such as Warlords. You should really try it sometime, you could start with history or logic or manners.

Ermmm, I wasn't being rude AT ALL. I was just moving on since this thread was quite interesting until you decided to be a smartass. And the "discussion" (if u wanna call it that) between me and you ended when you failed to prove your point even minutely but also went on to contradict yourself.

Now just give it a rest and get on topic or just don't post.


In anycase, what do you guys think should be done to make musketmen more useful in Civ4?

There are currently 3 attributes of the musketman that are making people skip right past them:

1) Musketmen are 9Str whereas Macemen are 8 +50%melee which is very uncompetitive especially considering the higher cost and the significantly longer techpath. Maceman also gets City Raider whereas Muskets IIRC doesn't have that option.

2) There is no way to go straight for Gunpowder, it requires too many expensive techs too far ahead unlike Machinery or Civil Service

3) As soon as muskets come with Str9, you are just SOOOOOOOO close to Grenadiers with Str12 which is a HUGE upgrade [especially compared to Mace vs Muskets]. And grenadiers have much more flexible promotion options ranging from City defence to city raider. They also last much longer since they are from the rifleman era.



If they are making muskets on-par with maces, then I think they should also make em available at the same time.

 

[Proteus]

IMHO either add some filler techs between gunpowder and the tech needed for grenadiers, so that there is a longer timespan between the time you get gunpowder and the time when you can build grenadiers. (which IMHO would be interesting, as the filler techs could make it possible to build new improvements/units/buildings)
Or let gunpowder appear further down the tech tree, so that most players will get to gunpowder earlier.

 

[Wodan]

3) As soon as muskets come with Str9, you are just SOOOOOOOO close to Grenadiers with Str12 which is a HUGE upgrade [especially compared to Mace vs Muskets]. And grenadiers have much more flexible promotion options ranging from City defence to city raider. They also last much longer since they are from the rifleman era.

If they are making muskets on-par with maces, then I think they should also make em available at the same time.

Except that Maces have a promotion against them, which has been available all game up until then, and all units with it are now promoted to Maces to fight your Maces. So, your Maces are effectively -25% strength, which makes them Str 6. (Yes, I know it's not that straightforward, but you get my point.) Whereas your Muskets have no "counter" yet.

Wodan

 

[DigitalBoy]

There are currently 3 attributes of the musketman that are making people skip right past them:

1) Musketmen are 9Str whereas Macemen are 8 +50%melee which is very uncompetitive especially considering the higher cost and the significantly longer techpath. Maceman also gets City Raider whereas Muskets IIRC doesn't have that option.

2) There is no way to go straight for Gunpowder, it requires too many expensive techs too far ahead unlike Machinery or Civil Service

3) As soon as muskets come with Str9, you are just SOOOOOOOO close to Grenadiers with Str12 which is a HUGE upgrade [especially compared to Mace vs Muskets]. And grenadiers have much more flexible promotion options ranging from City defence to city raider. They also last much longer since they are from the rifleman era.

I think #3 is the real problem. Maces vs. Muskets is fine. The macemen still have their uses with their city raider promotions, but the musketman, aside from having 1 more strength, have the added bonus of not having a counter (plus whatever percent against gunpowder). The only thing that can beat a musketman in the field is a knight, which you can protect against by stacking pikeman (which is realistic, wasn't pikeman + musketmen a military formation at some point in history?) or by placing the musketman or a hill or forest.

 

[a4phantom]

I don't see how his response was rude at all. I said hwachas were catapaults in my post and it looked as though your confusion came from missing that. He simply cut right to the chase. If he said "you idiot, ..." then that would be a different story.

Ok, I was reacting to his previous statements which were so ridiculously nasty the forum moderator censored them. If you read them you'll understand what I meant. In this case I guess I overreacted, and I apologize.