Pikeman

[Willgar]

After playing .30, searching this forum, a quick look through the change log i understand that the pikeman has been removed. Can an enlightened forum user explain why?

PS - this is not a complaint, (.30 is magnificent) - the pikeman was my "grunt" troop of choice and i am just wondering as to the design for its removal?

Many thanks!

 

[Silverkiss]

I don't remenber exactly, but I think they merged Pikeman and Maceman because Pikes weren't being used enough, or something like that. I think Kael said something in some thread x.x

 

[Willgar]

hmmm.. i guess they play a lot of multiplayer then as in .25 the AI would make huge numbers of chariotes (and catapults) and the pikeman was fantastic. Although, in the last few games the AI has actually started fielding resonable balanced stacks and even (gasp) using magic.

Ah well, with pikemen gone - guess its time to adapt.....

 

[Ekolite]

I liked the pikemen too. I'm not sure I agree with all these unit types being removed because they're not used enough. Units like the pikeman and shieldwall were just like civics like mercantilism and theocracy (in fire), generally overshadowed by other units/civics but in certain situations they were excelent. I haven't had a chance to play lurchip (my favourite civ) in shadow yet, does anyone know if their gargoyle (pikeman UU) has been removed or not? They were great for defending cities.

 

[Silverkiss]

Don't think so, it states in the changelog that Unique Units have been kept.

 

[EvilBob22]

Gargoyle is still there, as is the Clan's pikeman UU (Ogre).

 

[xienwolf]

Pikemen were removed because they wanted to have 1 "defense" unit (archers) instead of 2. It is meant to streamline things down to a raw tactical (attack vs Defend) more than the Civilization's preference toward Paper/Rock/Scissors.

 

[EvilBob22]

Xien is right, the pikeman UUs replace champions for their civs. I remember seeing Kael's post mentioning that: it was in the first post in the Shadow schedule thread (or in one of the links in that post, too lazy to check ).

 

[Arqane]

I'm glad they took some stuff out of the game. As nice as it is to have features, there's a point where you have too many.

 

[Ekolite]

Oh right I see. They were taken out to get people and the AI to use the archer and cavalry unit classes more. Except for, the Hippus and ljosalfar the are apparently underused. I don't think that its worked at all, back then I primarilly defended cities with warriors, then sword/axemen, then macemen, now I just defend with champions annd warriors.

Cavalry aren't so underused as archers, I think to persuade more people to use them they should be able to get weapons promos, archers should too I think. After all, horsemen use swords and spears, arrows would have metal tips etc. I think the weapons promos are whats making the infantry line so dominant. I think that is what should have been done to sort it out instead of getting rid of pikemen, having multiple units to do the same job adds a bit of variety to the game.

Also, how much do people use the recon line because I don't, at all, beyond scouts. I do a bit of exploring in the early game and then later on, get other civs to gift me their maps. What are the advantages/disadsvantages of using recon? What do you actually use them for anyway?

 

[CyberChrist]

I for one don't see any benefit from removing any of the stuff that was removed. Vareity is the spice of life - and that is even more true for a strategy game where planning ahead and choosing right for each situation is at the core of the game.

Sadly then watering down the strategic options also messes with the required Suspension of Disbelief - I mean it is hard to believe in a fantasy setup where all empires would only ever deploy Archer units for defence no matter what kind of armies they faced.

Bottom line is - while you can get too many options in a strategy game then having too few is even worse.

 

[xienwolf]

Recon line is mostly just scouts, unless you are the right Civ. Then it is your lifeblood (primarily Svalt)

 

[Calavente]

yep.

I built more pikes than archers (and rangers, only to fill a druid slot),
more phalanx and flurries than any berserker or beastman.

and more of any of those than any siege unit.

for me, removing under-used units
(it is true that pikes are niche-units, it doesn't mean they are underused)

I liked the possibility to mix melee defense with melee attack, ranged attack with ranged defense.
maybe melee defense could have be made less powerfull than same level ranged defense and vice-versa but the diversity was nice.

furthermore, archery units are not scalable and more expensive with almost more expesive tech than melee... melee have scalable units (weapon promo) making them more effective : why spend money + science on an archer when a warrior + iron is almost as strong in defense and can attack.. and when for the same price or less (tech + cost) you can have a swordman that is as powerful in defense and more in attack..

removing melee defender won't improve the interest for archers..

 

[Cadaveres]

I really think that it is a good idea to keep the game small enough so players are not overwhelmed by options. Specialization in FfH2 comes from promotions, they are by far much more powerful than in BtS.

Right now there are three kinds of close combat units:
- Warrior -> They are grunts, they are barelly trained and they come from the early necesity of defending cities and workers. They are basically a guy with a basic armor and weapon who is told "ok, now you have to defend our cities". Cannon fodder, basically, they are fast to train.
- Axeman -> Soldier, troops, they are trained soldiers. They require more time to be ready. They come to conquer, they are the base troops for war.
- Champion -> They are the elite warriors, require a long time to train but they live for war.

Now, if you want elite pikemen, you train a champion and give them the "+40% vs. mounted units" promotion. This promotion means that they get pikes and they know how to use them. If you have access to Mithril, you can make base troop pikemen by building and axeman and giving him this promotion ensuring that you have a weaponsmith so they get mithril weapons. They will cost much less to build.

What I really don't agree is with the names of the units, but well, I actually don't care that much (I would call axeman -> soldier or something like that, and champion -> elite infantry).

Well, at least this is my opinion

 

[Ekolite]

Errm yeeees but... It would still look like, and basically still be a champion. I was against the name champion myself and I'm fairly sure its a placeholder name although it has grown on me. The names, soldier and heavy infantry are kinda boring.

 

[onedreamer]

Archers were useless, except for elves. I never ever built one (especially since I'd have to waste more resources in building archery range and possibly the other upgrade for xp bonus). If anything, I would have removed archers
Because of this, it may be possible that they just eliminated pikemen to make the mounted line more attracting...

 

[Ekolite]

No they took out pikemen to try and force people to use archers ,I still dont. I do actually use the mounted line anyway, horsemen are great for getting rid of to close neighbours in the early game, especially if the civ you're playing has a unique one eg Kuriotates, or if you are the hippus. Although after horsemen it goes a bit downhill, I think knights should be made a lot more powerful to give the line more appeal, does anyone know if the war elephant was removed? Now that... is an underused unit, but the dovellio unit art for it is just too cool to scrap i guess.

 

[onedreamer]

Removing pikemen to force people to use archers makes very little sense anyways. Since melee and recon units appear in the game MUCH earlier than archers do, and don't require any building to be built, they will always be used more than archers since they will be more experienced, the only exception is when you have no metal available.

 

[Humakty]

I think the recon line can come quite handy, because there are no specific promotions to counter them, whereas recon units can take the specific promotions to counter a type of unit.
I think the removal of pikeman allows for more balanced games, as cavalry units don't have the weapon amelioration. Hippus were at a big disadvantage before.

 

[onedreamer]

That's exactly what I thought: this changed favored the mounted line, doubtfully the archery one.