Musketmen? What for?

[Antilogic]

I have suggested before (and received some positive feedback) that grenadiers should also require Nationalism or Military Tradition, so as to push back the advent of Grenadiers and give Muskets longer life on the battlefields.

However, I have built a few musket units, and I have found them, with Combat promotions, to be far more flexible than CR macemen. First, they can kill macemen, and just about any other medieval unit (besides knights, which are still effective against them). Second, the extra strength coupled with Combat promotions is strong anywhere on the map, not just attacking cities.

Their main problem is quick obsolescence to Grenadiers. Should Grenadiers be pushed back a little, and with the new cavalry setup in BtS, I think muskets will be a more attractive unit.

 

[obsolete]

I dont think it's just a lifespan issue. On defence longbowmen are superior to musketmen, which seems rather silly to some. And on the offence, well macemen still seem to outperform musketmen. Units are cheaper I believe, so that 1 extra hp is a sucker-bet. But there are other issues, macemen get that huge bonus vs mele while muskets again, don't. It's just a bad unit to crank out no matter how u look at it. I couldn't care how long you make muskets last, I won't be building them. I only get musketmen pollution from drafting.

 

[Charou]

I dont think it's just a lifespan issue. On defence longbowmen are superior to musketmen, which seems rather silly to some. And on the offence, well macemen still seem to outperform musketmen. .

I agree. They don´t perform as well in thoses cases.
Muskets don´t have those kind of strong assets.
But they don´t have flaws either. There isn´t a single (non UU) counter-unit during that era (prior to grenadiers). That´s what they are for : all-around purposes such as stack defense.

And they are not that expansive, actually cheaper than knights and can stand against pikemen.
Too bad for those not leveraging this.

 

[Innawerkz]

But they don´t have flaws either. There isn´t a single (non UU) counter-unit during that era (prior to grenadiers). That´s what they are for : all-around purposes such as stack defense.

While I wouldn't call it a counter, Knights are the odds on favorite. Personally, I would rather have Knights for: Defending my territory, Pillaging enemy territory, Attacking cities and Scouting enemy territory.

Knights are not that much more expensive either and move a lot faster. The sad part is: If you could draft Long-bowmen in a 'time of crises' for city defense instead of the musketmen, most people would. The odds are better.

Is there a use for a giant musketman 'Draft & Run'? Absolutely. If you are resourceless, this is your best bet. Is it a necessary tactic if you already have a Maceman & Knight army ready? Not really. The cost works out to the same: 10 Musktemen or 5 knights & 5 Macemen.

 

[futurehermit]

muskets are for stack and city defense. period.

using them to attack fortified longbows is not a good idea imo.

that is why i also am not thrilled about a prolonged life for the musket. it's ok-ish for builders but diplomacy is your best defense, not muskets.

and i'm more of the mindset that a good defense is a good offense and muskets don't really do much for me in that regard.

the fact that they are weak against knights and aren't great at taking out fortified longbows does it for me. so i would say they need to be 10 strength or else to receive a bonus vs. archers or cities. bonus vs. cities would make them an offensively-focused unit, which i'm not sure they're meant to be (which is why i'm not a fan of them). bonus vs archers is also offensively-focused, but makes them not as strong against non-archer units in cities. i don't know what to do to make them stronger vs. cav since i don't want to take away the janissary special advantage. hence, i think just making them 10 strength would be the way to go...

 

[Innawerkz]

i don't know what to do to make them stronger vs. cav since i don't want to take away the janissary special advantage. hence, i think just making them 10 strength would be the way to go...

Mm... France would become very exciting. A 2 Movement, 10 Strength Unit with no direct counter would be able to shred any nearby opponents economy. It would be like a swarm of locusts everytime Nationalism hit.

Oooh... goosebumps.

 

[futurehermit]

Knights could get a +25% bonus vs. them and cavalry would beat them nicely. Of course Janissaries would rock, but they're a UU and are supposed to rock Same with musketeers

 

[obsolete]

That´s what they are for : all-around purposes such as stack defense.

A stack should be using the advantage of mixed units. Thus, the Mustketman would be standing useless, as whatever comes at you, another unit would be superior in defending vs it. I don't understand the all-round unit. It sort of goes against the whole principal of mixed-unit warfare.

If a melee unit comes at you, your maceman will chew him up much better. If a knight comes at you, your pike man will chew him up much better, etc. That musket man seems to be wasted hammers.

 

[futurehermit]

I agree, actually, specialization is the way to go imo.

EXCEPT city defense. I kinda like some jack-of-all trades guys in there like muskets and, prior to them, longbows. Of course you want a couple specialized guys as well, but the thing is longbows/muskets are cheaper than their specialized counterparts and a fortified unit in a city is a powerful unit. In the open field, not so much, but longbows/muskets in cities are nice.

I routinely use drafted muskets for city defense (and by default stack defense) in the renaissance era. France is king for this because their muskets can keep up with cavalry.

 

[obsolete]

It has already been mentioned that longbowmen out-perform musketmen on city defense. So I fail to see any arguement for mixing muskets in that area either.

Not only are longbowmen cheap, but they also get a built in extra city defense modifier... a first strike modifier... a built in hills defence modifier (yes even if in a city they get this defence cumulative), and they also can not be countered by anti-gunpower units or pinch upgrades.

So again, how can it possibly be worthwhile to use muskets for city defense?

 

[kniteowl]

From what I've heard Cavalry and Grenadiers will be pushed further down the tech tree and the Musketman will have a longer lifespan.

I hope it gets a bonus vs Cuirassiers.

 

[Mutineer]

Muskets is very good model of real word history, if you care about it a bit.

Initially advantage of early gunpowder units were not there strength in battle.
There biggest advantage were learning time.
To teach Longbowman to be good was a life time process. With apperance of gunpowder one can train recrute of 2 weeks and they will be as good as they could be. They were still worce then Life long trained longbowman, but you can get a lot of them and fast.

So, Nationalism letting one to draft a lot of muskets is a very good model.

I have not idea how they change in in BTS, but if it was me I would not change muskets. I would made currasires str 10 mounted units with 50% bonus agains archery units.

 

[AThousandYoung]

They should be cheap as well as draftable.

 

[CivCorpse]

You find yourself in a metal-free place. Would you prefer trying to break out with trebs and longbows or trebs and muskets?
And for stack defense it cuts the number of troops you need. Two macemen + two pikes or just four muskets. Uh-oh they have crossbows, better have some knights in there too (unless you have no ponies.) And as you lose the occasional unit your stack becomes more vulnerable to a certain attack. Or if they attack your stack with 5-6 units. Either your weakened defenders are now defeated or they rotate in units without specific counter abilities suited to for that particular defense. With muskets they face a fresh all-round defender each attack.

 

[futurehermit]

It has already been mentioned that longbowmen out-perform musketmen on city defense. So I fail to see any arguement for mixing muskets in that area either.

Not only are longbowmen cheap, but they also get a built in extra city defense modifier... a first strike modifier... a built in hills defence modifier (yes even if in a city they get this defence cumulative), and they also can not be countered by anti-gunpower units or pinch upgrades.

So again, how can it possibly be worthwhile to use muskets for city defense?

Because you can draft muskets

 

[Charou]

and they also can not be countered by anti-gunpower units or pinch upgrades.

That´s not a valid point, since there is the cover promotion that gives bonus against archery.

 

[InFlux5]

I wouldn't place Janissairies in the same category as regular Muskets. The Jans are a fantastic all-around unit, and worth bee-lining Gunpowder.

 

[popejubal]

I dont think it's just a lifespan issue. On defence longbowmen are superior to musketmen, which seems rather silly to some.

If you've ever fired a muzzle loading gunpowder firearm, you know just how scary and how cumbersome those things are.

I find it not at all silly that longbows are superior to what muskets when you are able to defend a set piece of land with some minor fortifications built in (i.e. a city).

Sure, exceptionally well trained musket brigades can do impressive things in spite of the limitations of muzzle loading weapons.

So can a well trained archer.

 

[scu98rkr]

mustketmen ignore city walls when macemen dont which can be useful sometimes

 

[Divaythsarmour]

Just following history, I would have given Muskets a little more strength, and given Grenadiers a bonus against Muskets. Muskets were an improvement over archery units, but they weren't very fast in firing. That's why cavalry was so critical an adjunct to a musket army up until the advent of the repeating rifle during the US Civil War. Napoleon's armies were all muskets, grenadiers, cannons and (non-gunpowder) cavalry.
By the way, where is the non-gunpowder cavalry anyway? I mean those dudes with swords that you see in the 18th century paintings. I always thought the US Unique Unit should have been Rifle Cavalry or something like that. No other nation really had those guys, but in Civ IV they seem to be the model for ALL Cavalry. And the Rifle Cavalry really only worked for about 50 years, between the US Civil War and WWI, but boy were they effective during that time. Teamed with Riflemen, they were pretty unstoppable.

You're right. For instance, there were the Hussars in the Napoleonic period. They didn't wear armour (like knights) it had been obsolete for quite some time, by then. They were cheap, light, fast and deadly. Russia had thousands of them and they were definitely a force to be reckoned with. There were also Dragoons who were similar to mounted musketmen. Although the Dragoons were technically more versatile, they were also much more expensive to train. It would be nice if Civilization had a similar type unit. Hussars should be considerably cheaper than knights (who had to have all of that armour hand made). They definitely would be cheaper than the Cavalry in the game (with repeating rifles) and they should be available along with muskets.