New Unit Tree

[DudewiththeFood]

Inspiration for this thread. From here, another thread and my own imagination, I have devised a cunning plan. It changes the current unit upgrade paths and adds plenty of new ones to overall provide a better balance to the current system.

Frontline Infantry
Warrior - Swordsman - Longswordsman - Musketman - Rifleman - Great War Infantry - Infantry - Mechanized Infantry - Armoured Infantry*

Anti-Cavalry
Spearman - Halberdier - Pikeman - Fusilier - Anti-Tank Gun - Tank Destroyer

Anti-Infantry
Brute - Axeman - Maceman - Grenadier - Mortar - Rocket Team

Ranged Front Line
Javelinman - Archer - Composite Bowman - Crossbowman - Falconet - Gatling Gun - Machine Gun - Railgun*

Ranged Support
Slinger - Bowman - Longbowman - Sharpshooter - Sniper

Speed Melee
Horseman - Cataphract - Knight - Curaissier - Lancer - Landship - Tank - Modern Armour - Semi-Automatic Weapons System*

Speed Ranged
Chariot Archer - Mounted Archer - Horse Archer - Carabinier - Cavalry - Armoured Car

Ivory Holders
Elephant (near horsemen) Musket Elephant (near curaissier)

Recon
Scout - Ranger - Explorer - Dragoon - Gunship

Siege
Ballista - Catapult - Trebuchet - Cannon - Artillery - Mobile Artillery

Naval Ranged
Bireme - Galleas - Man-of-War - Dreadnought - Battleship - Aircaft Cruiser*
Carrier -

Naval Melee
Trireme - War Galley - Caravel - Frigate - Ironclad - Destroyer - Stealth Destroyer*
Privateer -

Submarine
Submarine - Nuclear Submarine

Fighter
Triplane - Fighter - Jet Fighter - Hypersonic Aircraft*

Bomber
Airship - Biplane - Bomber - Stealth Bomber

AA
AA Gun - Mobile SAM

Specialized
Marine - Armoured Infantry*
Paratrooper - Commando

Missile
Atom Bomb
Missile - Guided Missile - Satellite Missile*

*Future units like the GDR. Some aren't as futuristic as others.

Changes to civs UUs.
Slinger change to Quechua like in Civ 4.
Bowmen name changes to Asharittu.
Longbowmen changes to Billmen/Redcoats
Cataphract changes to Hippodrome.
Horse Archer changes to Tarkhan?
Ballista to Forum/Auxiliary.



What are your thoughts to this? It would definitely need the Tech tree to be greatly expanded but it could be a possibility. How many of you would prefer this over what we currently have and what please say if there is anything you disagree with.

 

[ense7en]

Honestly?

Way too many units.

I wouldn't mind seeing some minor tweaks, particularly with the Spearman line and how the archer line ends, but there's no need to flood the game with so many different units.

 

[Loucypher]

I really wouldn't mind a bunch of added units - they keep warfare fresh, especially if you're a bit of a roleplayer - but some of those on your list are really not needed. Like the Halberdier. There is no need for a unit between the Spear and the Pike. We DO need something after the Pike though. The Lancer being pulled back a bit, and then something between Lancer and Anti-Tank would be a great start, so you can get Spear-Pike-Lancer-Fusilier-Antitank-Helicopter

 

[DudewiththeFood]

Yeah, it's tricky with the Halberdier because Spearmen were used from almot the start of warfare until around 1100 when other polearms became more useful. And then again, pike were the main weapon instead of spears but were used until 1700 so Halberdier is just a way of bridging the gap so that line doesn't become dated.

@ense7en - It is too many units for the game we have now but if the tech tree was expanded how would you feel about that unit list? I also have a transport system like in Civ 4 but that doesn't work with 1upt.

 

[ense7en]

Yeah, it's tricky with the Halberdier because Spearmen were used from almot the start of warfare until around 1100 when other polearms became more useful. And then again, pike were the main weapon instead of spears but were used until 1700 so Halberdier is just a way of bridging the gap so that line doesn't become dated.

@ense7en - It is too many units for the game we have now but if the tech tree was expanded how would you feel about that unit list? I also have a transport system like in Civ 4 but that doesn't work with 1upt.

Eh, if the tech tree was expanded i assume we'd be talking about an even longer game?
Otherwise it's going to feel very rushed i think.

I guess i find normal speed takes too much time as it is, but i suppose lots of people have tons of time.

 

[Matthew.]

It is also too many units per era and would be much better to keep things simplified. With that many different units most won't be getting any use. For example, the front-line ranged infantry and anti-infantry. Why would anyone build regular infantry in a game where nearly everything counters it or works better? Regular infantry is too weak as is, and adding more anti-infantry options isn't going to help. The "speed" units are already niche so adding another upgrade path (melee and ranged) would likely kill off one or the other (probably melee for the same reasons the infantry line pales in comparison to archer line).

It also seems like there are a lot of added upgrades just for the sake of upgrades. Having more options after scout would be interesting (and most people seem to live the idea whenever it is brought up) but does it really need four upgrades after it?

BTW I like the ivory addition. It would be neat to not have horses but still have access to a horse-like unit if you had elephants. It could even be scripted so they don't appear within close distance of each other, so you don't get to double-dip and have horses and elephants.



I don't see it ever happening, but the best option would be to greatly increase the distance between everything, including minimum city settle distance. Have all units return fire like melee currently do. At Renaissance, have muskets work as 1-tile ranged, gatling as 2-tile range. Rifle as 2-tile range. Other ranged equivalents would be given special promotions for increased damage. 2-tile machine guns would have a bonus against 2-tile infantry, but tanks would have bonus damage against machine guns.

This one change would solve so many issues.

-People would stop complaining about the distance reduction of crossbows ~> gatling

-People would complain less about "immersion". Distance between everything is increased, so archers wouldn't be shooting from city to another, rifles actually shoot from range, etc.

-More space on map=more space to move carpet of doom. Units like the knight and lancer would have more use if there was more room to move around.

-Units returning fire would prevent ranged from being too powerful and also keeps things simple. Machine gun would be anti-infantry so no need for specialized anti-infantry units. It would also help out the AI as it would be more difficult to snipe out AI unit spam while taking zero damage (player is guaranteed to take some just by attacking).


Also, in the case of pre-musket warfare, they should go with the AoE3 system. That is the rock/paper/scissor system is in place with pikes, knights, and crossbows. Swords and long swords would be used as shock troops useful against everything, but balanced by A.) needing iron B.) needing techs on the tree that deviate from infrastructure C.) being more expensive in hammers/gold. So an army with swords in it would be stronger, but there would be less on the field than pikes. Have both upgrade into muskets and it would further keep things simplified by not needing additional upgrades after pikes.

 

[PsePete]

Drones!!!! Remote operated Drones. Launched from Capital can explore whole map for a max of 8 to ten turns then gets re-called to capital.??

 

[salocin097]

I don't see it ever happening, but the best option would be to greatly increase the distance between everything, including minimum city settle distance. Have all units return fire like melee currently do. At Renaissance, have muskets work as 1-tile ranged, gatling as 2-tile range. Rifle as 2-tile range. Other ranged equivalents would be given special promotions for increased damage. 2-tile machine guns would have a bonus against 2-tile infantry, but tanks would have bonus damage against machine guns.

what do you intend to do with range pre-gun powder. Becasue for range javelin-30m, crossbows-80m, composite 130m(not entirely sure on this one), longbows-200m
Also, depends on the crossbows, because the really heavy ones can outrange longbows. But those would probably require a set up similar to the siege units. But those shoot basically darts.

 

[kirbdog]

Six requests only:

(1) Move iron discovery down to bronze working (otherwise Iron Working is a great big stab into the risk not worth taking unless you're Hiawatha).
(2) Remove the dependence of Metal Casting, the prerequisite to Steel, on Engineering (allow Longsword rush instead of pike rush and increase the time between them and muskets). Add the dependence of Engineering as well as Metal Casting to Physics (for trebuchet balance).
(3) Move infantry forward a tick, into Penicillin, alongside the Marine (yay, now the whole series is well-spaced).
(4) Move anti-tank gun down to combustion (hey, a little love for the lancer upgrade).
(5) Change the upgrade path for chariots to the crossbow line and add a mobile ranged upgrade separate to Mobile Infantry.
(6) Add an explorer unit with an extra movement and 10 combat strength to the compass tech, an upgrade to scout (Marcoooo.... Polooo!)

Otherwise, perfect, don't change thing.

 

[mintcandy]

Way too many units...there are units I rarely touch as it is.

There are many other concepts that I would prioritize in a Civ expansion/sequel than expanding the unit tree, such as finding a way to discourage combat from taking place around cities.

That said, I don't see what the purpose is of making a distinction between "Ranged Front line" and "Ranged support". I mean, archer AND bowman for everyone?

Also, I'm not a big fan of how some of these trees don't end in mechanization. I mean "rocket team" and "sniper" aren't necessarily mechanized, which means these units will quickly get left behind.

I suppose you could make a mechanized version of both, but doing so would introduce even more units to a unit list that is already too populated.

Personally, I would be more in favor of Civ IV's approach to unit upgrade choices, namely that a player can have more than one upgrade choice for a unit.

 

[meowschwitz]

I don't agree with the ranged distinction you make here. I think that line is currently pretty great. However, we are getting a bazooka unit in BNW that will come after the Machine gun.

Speed ranged is something I'd like to see so that all the UU's would have correct things to replace.

Also I don't think we need an earlier siege unit or a unit between spears and pikes.

Anti-infantry seems well thought out except that it ends rather early

You could get rid of the ranger and dragoon and maybe even move the gunship to speed ranged. Their isn't much to explore after the explorer's era. The new archaeologist unit seems like it will be a late game explorer too.

A war chariot before horseman could be cool but probably unnecessary.

Just my two cents though and any implementation of these ideas would be cool.

 

[kingchris20]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/21/business/new-age-of-the-airship/index.html?sr=fb062113airshipnewage6p

Airships making a return IRL?

 

[PrimoXanthous]

i like this new idea of Anti-Cavalry unit line especially the Tank-Destroyer, currently Anti-Tank gun become useless when the Modern Armor comes.
also Splitting the Mounted unit to two Different unit line is a good idea; i like those

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

I misinterpreted this and got very excited. I really don't think we need truckloads more units unless combat changes.

However, what i could be intrigued by is a military "tech tree" based on exp and research. It would be quite interesting if you could gain access to a certain military unit earlier by speeding up your aquisition of units with military xp. I don't mean access to the tech a unit is on earlier, but i mean if you are seven turns out from say, rifleman and have an appropriate amount of xp, you could expend that amount of xp (instead of storing in for Great Generals/Admirals) to gain access to the unit(s) on the tech sooner.

 

[iamdanno]

Drones!!!! Remote operated Drones. Launched from Capital can explore whole map for a max of 8 to ten turns then gets re-called to capital.??

I like this unit. I've missed being able to do recon with airplanes.

 

[Erocco]

For additional units this is my wishlist:

We need the dreadnought between the frigate and battleship.
We need the jet bomber between the bomber and stealth bomber.
We need the stealth fighter after the jet fighter.
We need a range type unit between the crossbowman and gatling gun.
We need an antimount/antitank unit between the lancer and anti-tank gun.

Bonus: We need the cruiser which would update to the missile cruiser.

For additional technologies this is my wishlist:

We need the Jet Engines technology which allows the jet fighter and jet bomber.

 

[Altisma]

For additional units this is my wishlist:

We need the dreadnought between the frigate and battleship.
We need the jet bomber between the bomber and stealth bomber.
We need the stealth fighter after the jet fighter.
We need a range type unit between the crossbowman and gatling gun.
We need an antimount/antitank unit between the lancer and anti-tank gun.

Bonus: We need the cruiser which would update to the missile cruiser.

For additional technologies this is my wishlist:

We need the Jet Engines technology which allows the jet fighter and jet bomber.

What we need is lines that make sense. Why does a crossbowmen upgrade to a Gatling gun? They should upgrade to the centuries skirmishers/light infantry unit. Why is a lancer considered a anti-mount unit? All they were was cavalry that carried lances, meant to do damage on the charge but not sustain combat. They should be a upgrade from the Knight. Carrying those lancers actually made them useless against other cavalry.