petition for the redcoats and cossacks

do you want redcoats and cossacks to be the they was in in the vanilla versoin

  • yes

    Votes: 23 23.7%
  • no

    Votes: 74 76.3%

  • Total voters
    97
Balancing = win.

And here's some useless knowledge: I live in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and when the british held this city - theres forts all over the place - the soldiers actually wore blue coats.
 
Wouldn't Civ4 vanilla redcoats/cossacks + Warlords be very overpowering? I can see it possible for someone having a few warlords (especially now playing as Victoria or Catherine) by this time ready for their free upgrade to a already powerful unit.

By the way, you can easily change them back.
 
Smidlee said:
Wouldn't Civ4 vanilla redcoats/cossacks + Warlords be very overpowering?

Yeah. That's what he wants. If it was not overpowering it would not be desireable. :D
 
Smidlee said:
Wouldn't Civ4 vanilla redcoats/cossacks + Warlords be very overpowering? I can see it possible for someone having a few warlords (especially now playing as Victoria or Catherine) by this time ready for their free upgrade to a already powerful unit.
not to mention how unstoppable they'd have been when under the command of charismatic and protective churchill!
 
i have looked ay your agruments and i get what you are on about ,so why didnt make the units more expansive than reduce the strengh
 
they were a bit tooo power full, but i agree, more expencive would have been a better change.
 
Overall the change is positive. My only qualm is that the Prat, the most overpowered UU in the game (IMO), seems to have gotten off pretty light. I haven't checked to see what the actual “increased cost” is, but unless they tripled the cost they’ll still be overpowered. A unit that is essentially uncounterable is worth a lot of hammers. The fact that chariots now counter axes, the only unit that stood any chance against Prats, makes Prats even more dominate (of course overall the chariot thing was a very good change).
 
They needed to be nerfed some for balancing reasons. Both the Redcoat and the Cossack were too powerful, both usefull well into the modern era.

The Praetorian is only powerful up until the time macemen start appearing then it quickly becomes obsolete and needs to be upgraded.
 
Murky said:
The Praetorian is only powerful up until the time macemen start appearing then it quickly becomes obsolete and needs to be upgraded.
Civil Service + Machinery is a long way from Iron working (and the AI doesn’t do CS slingshots, or even basic tech rushing). I’d say the comparison is more like Cossacks & Redcoats vs. Tanks then vs. Infantry. Cossacks and Redcoats also need support from Cannons for serious conquest, while Prats can be very effective even without catapults because they come in before cultural defense is really built up. But apparently the developers agree with you.
 
I haven't test it yet but does the protective trait hinder Praetorians some especially attacking without Cats?
 
Randolph said:
Civil Service + Machinery is a long way from Iron working (and the AI doesn’t do CS slingshots, or even basic tech rushing). I’d say the comparison is more like Cossacks & Redcoats vs. Tanks then vs. Infantry. Cossacks and Redcoats also need support from Cannons for serious conquest, while Prats can be very effective even without catapults because they come in before cultural defense is really built up. But apparently the developers agree with you.

The change to Redcoats is definitely good. I used to play as Victoria but the games were always the same. I would play defensively, get redcoats as soon as possible, and then conquer 1/2 the world (sometimes the whole world) with only redcoats. A stack of them with some promotions can take cities even without cannon support. They were way too powerful.
 
Kcbrett5,
Since you quoted my post I'd like to note that in an earlier post I said that I believe the change was positive. I simply feel that Praetorians are an equally (or more) powerful UU that got a (seemingly, I haven't experimented) less significant nerf.


Smidlee said:
I haven't test it yet but does the protective trait hinder Praetorians some especially attacking without Cats?
That's a good point, and a good reason for me to experiment before I start blabbing on these forums. But to speculate further, protective will obviously only protect the civs with the trait, so with the exception of situations where you have limited options of who to attack, protective will probably only determine who gets mauled by the Romans (with a human player), not whether someone gets mauled. Second, archers with a base strength of only 3 will need a total bonus of +167% to get even odds against a Praetorian with no promotions (and they’re going to have promotions ;)).
 
Randolph said:
Civil Service + Machinery is a long way from Iron working (and the AI doesn’t do CS slingshots, or even basic tech rushing). I’d say the comparison is more like Cossacks & Redcoats vs. Tanks then vs. Infantry. Cossacks and Redcoats also need support from Cannons for serious conquest, while Prats can be very effective even without catapults because they come in before cultural defense is really built up. But apparently the developers agree with you.

At the higher levels, the AI get longbows then macemen suprisingly quick. You may get to take down one or two of the AIs with Praets before needing to upgrade if you are lucky.
 
Murky said:
At the higher levels, the AI get longbows then macemen suprisingly quick. You may get to take down one or two of the AIs with Praets before needing to upgrade if you are lucky.

I'm not sure what you mean by "higher levels," I've certain wiped out 3+ entire civs with Praetorians on Monarch. If your talking about deity, I'll readily admit that I have no idea what the game dynamic is at that level, but I'd imagine that the situation wouldn't improve much by the time redcoats are available.
 
Randolph said:
Overall the change is positive. My only qualm is that the Prat, the most overpowered UU in the game (IMO), seems to have gotten off pretty light. I haven't checked to see what the actual “increased cost” is, but unless they tripled the cost they’ll still be overpowered. A unit that is essentially uncounterable is worth a lot of hammers. The fact that chariots now counter axes, the only unit that stood any chance against Prats, makes Prats even more dominate (of course overall the chariot thing was a very good change).

I was reading in another post (lost track of it in the "Warlords rush" we've been getting on the boards), and I did the calculations myself, but a Praetorian easily susceptible to two axemen. In an even fight two axemen beat a Praetorian and with the raise in the praetorian's cost you can get more axemen out there quicker than a group of praetorian. Just because there is a counter to axes now, however, doesn't mean that this doesn't hold true (especially since chariots only get that bonus when attacking).

As for Redcoats and Cossacks, I never used them so I can't gripe or make an argument against changing them. Most of my games as the Rusians or English were done before this time, but from an outsider standpoint I have to say that the only reason I see such vehemence against the change is that now the unit is still better than it's counterpart, but it cannot dominate the entire era of units. Nobody is making the only valid point that now things are fair and balanced because THEY CAN'T in regards to these two units.

In the end it's about counters even more now than before. Early warfare is heavilly defined by it as is the (Pre-)Industrial era which comes later.

Praets only counter before was Axes (who were the real unbalanced Ancient/Classical unit before the chariot upgrade). The Praets were dominating not because they were so much better 8 vs. the Axe's 7.5, but because they were winning in production ratio. Praets now cost more and so you can get more axes out to counter them quicker. This means that it's a Roman players decision which way to go (and the Roman's opponent's boon knowing that he can produce a counter on equal production terms as the UU).

As time goes on, however, the list of options and counter quickly diminishes. When you get to the (pre-)industrial era players are left with three options vs. the multitude from earlier eras. Rifles counter Calvary, Grenadiers counter Rifles, Calvary counters Grenadiers (and Cannon), and Calvary vs. Calvary is a bloodbath What the UUs for Britain and Russia do is change the paradigm a bit. Redcoats are now on almost even footing with Grenadiers and with two promotions (combatI and pinch) easily beat them. Cossacks don't gain a boost vs. rifles, but they do negate the final option in my list above. If you're like me and you get into a protracted war in the industrial era you send fast moving "raiders" in to resource pillage. Just hitting the outskirts of an empire and retreating before slow moving infantry can react. The Russians, however, stop that in its tracks because their Cossacks will chew up opponent calvary.

I like the new balance in the game since it at least makes things equitable. I would say to those who are still upset, however, that the only thing I see as a weak point in the argument above is the Cossack's less than even chances vs. rifles (which I think an at least even chance is important for UUs in any era) so I would suggest a simple ONE point upgrade in their strength making them still susceptible to rifles, but only about on par with the redcoat vs. grenadier from before.

Anyway, just trying to keep blood pressures down, so remember... XML is ridiculously easy to edit and all this would involve is:
1.) Going to your "Program Files/Civ 4/Warlords/assets/xml/units" folder (not an exact addy of course) and copying the "unitinfo" xml document.
2.) Paste that file in "My documents/games/warlords/customassets/xml/units" folder (again not a necessarially exact addy)
3.) Open said file and find "redcoat" and "cossack" (or "Praetorian" if you want to change them) and go to the line with their strength and change it to whatever number you like.
4.) Save your changes and load up Civ IV. The program reads from your custom assets folder first and so any changes you make in there affect the game without changing the core values (which I think are used in multiplayer).

Edit: Fixed the Praetorian cost error I had made. Still make my point tho...or try to.
 
Two axemen cost 70 while one praetorian cost 45.
 
Smidlee said:
I haven't test it yet but does the protective trait hinder Praetorians some especially attacking without Cats?

I played as Rome and encountered Churchill. His city had walls, two archers with CG2 and Drill 1, an axe and a spear. My CR1 Praetorians didn't bother and looked for another civ to waste. The 1/2 price on walls is a real bother for early warmongers and coupling that with CG2/Drill 1 Archers makes one want to look for easier targets.
 
Top Bottom