RedCoat and Cossack Nerf - Does It Go Too Far?

[Reggie]

*sigh ... so finaly the Redcoats got nerfed ... i like it, but just because of Churchill ... getting free Drill I and Garnisson I would be awfull great with Redcoats.

In other games the strength of redcoast depends on your playstyle ... Dommination is normaly won before Redcoats apear. In Space Race and Culture they are normaly pure defense units and therefore not that overwhelming cause you dont chose to attack.

I think the balance of the UU has a lot to do with the traits of the Leader and the type of victory you aim for. With warlords expension it seems to me that you have to specialize more then without. The UB + traits normaly give a hint on wich victory would be the most easy to obtain one. So i think the nerf wasnt that much needed, but it didnt hit me that hard as an old Vici Lover.

Btw. Cossacks where nerfed, but now you start with at least 6 points of exp. cause of the new stable, which counters that a bit imho.

 

[FuRRie]

Let's not nerf overpowered Reds and Cossacks but let's give the Quecha 5 strength, + 10 % city attack and + 100 % vs Archery, then it's balanced !
Yeah, I was being sarcastic, Cossacks and definitly Reds needed a nerf badly, Reds basicly destroyed everything untill thanks game around (yeah even Infantry had touble winning...)
As for the Cossacks, the still counter anything but Pikes/Gunpowder...

 

[UncleJJ]

How do Cossacks and Redcoats suck now? Cossacks got the worse of it, but +50% against mounted is useful when you're fighting a cavalry war. It means you have two units to counter your foes cavalry, riflemen and cossacks.

Redcoats are still very good. Their +25% gunpowder bonus means they still are good against everything in that era except cannons. The reduction of base strength means they aren't nearly as dominant but they're still an amazing do it all unit.

I guess they had to tone down these two units due to the other changes made in the game. Now you'll be able to get highly powered Cossacks by using the new General GP in various ways and by building the Stables. Remember the reduction in the barracks to +3 xp affects your targets as well as your own forces so that is essentially a neutral change.

If you want your horde of fast moving all-conquering Cossacks you'll just have produce highly promoted ones. Imagine National Epic, barracks, stables and a settled general, with Theocracy and Vassalage to get a basic 11 xp unit at 100% production and other cities (without the general) will be making them at +9, so one soft target and they get to level 3 as well.

Add West Point into the mix to get another +4 xp in your production city although that takes a long time to build and can delay the initial rush and exploitation of Cossack abilities.

A silimilar argument applies to Redcoats.

One thing I'm currently unsure of is how merging your General GP into a unit will affect the gaining of xps by your other units, apart from the initial 20 xp gift. I think there is a lot more to the changes they've made than simply reducing basic strengths of these two UUs.

 

[Head Serf]

@ DarkSchneider: I read Harrison Bergernon. That book/short story was really strange.

About the UUs I really think if Cossacks recieved just one point advantage (from 15 to 16) it would work out just great.

 

[GIO888]

Also worth remembering:

At the point they appear in the game, both Cossack and Redcoat have no competition, even now - especially if you bee-line for the tech, which of course no AI would do.

Just makes it more fun!

 

[Reggie]

Also worth remembering:

At the point they appear in the game, both Cossack and Redcoat have no competition, even now - especially if you bee-line for the tech, which of course no AI would do.

Just makes it more fun!

As i play almost exclusivly mix multiplayer (multiple Non AI with added AI to map size normal). If you dont beeline to redcoat, which would give you no other chance to win else to Conquer/Dommination, the way to Infantry isnt all that far away ... and machinegun's arent a big prob if you want to takte spacerace ... i dont think this UU is that much overpowered ....

 

[monkspider]

I think these units definitely needed a nerf, but I would agree that the nerf they received was an overnerf. They went from top-tier UUs to arguably bottom tier since the bonus they offer is now so minor and they arrive so late in the game. I wish Firaxis would find a happy medium on these units.

 

[DarkSchneider]

I think these units definitely needed a nerf, but I would agree that the nerf they received was an overnerf. They went from top-tier UUs to arguably bottom tier since the bonus they offer is now so minor and they arrive so late in the game. I wish Firaxis would find a happy medium on these units.

I agree, now they are just average UUs that come late in the game, which puts them at the bottom of the list. I had originally thought one of the reasons they were made better than most UUs was to make up for their late emergence...

 

[Araqiel]

I would rather that they had strengthened the weak units rather than gimping the few fun ones. What's the point of having unique units if they're not going to be significantly better than the regular ones? Just personal preference, of course, but there you are.

How aren't redcoats and cossacks still not signifigantly better than riflemen and cavalry?

Redcoats still get a free pinch promotion out of the box, and they can still get the normal pinch promotion. Thats a big advantage. Similarly Cossacks with +50% have nothing to fear from grenadiers/cannons/cavalry. Only riflemen threaten them.

Thats pretty good.

 

[monkspider]

I agree, now they are just average UUs that come late in the game, which puts them at the bottom of the list. I had originally thought one of the reasons they were made better than most UUs was to make up for their late emergence...

I would even go so far as to say that they are quite a bit below average now. Consider UUs that most people consider to be truly "average" such as the Phalanx or Skirmisher. Even these units get a strength increase, in addition a percentage boost of some kind (city defense, hill defense, etc). Now, the Redcoats and Cossacks only receive a percentage boost, while their strength is no better than the normal unit! Moreover, these units come late in the game so they are even more damned!

If it were up to me, I would give the Cossack 16 or 17 strength, and the redcoat 15 strength or give them the old stats and increase the cost by ten hammers. Either of these would be reasonable solutions and help make up for the fact that they are such late bloomers, so to speak.

 

[MisterBarca]

I think these units definitely needed a nerf, but I would agree that the nerf they received was an overnerf. They went from top-tier UUs to arguably bottom tier since the bonus they offer is now so minor and they arrive so late in the game. I wish Firaxis would find a happy medium on these units.

Agreed. They were over-nerfed. As a general rule, it's better to boost weaker competitors than nerf a strong unit, because nerfs create unhappiness and nothing else.

 

[MisterBarca]

How aren't redcoats and cossacks still not signifigantly better than riflemen and cavalry?

Redcoats still get a free pinch promotion out of the box, and they can still get the normal pinch promotion. Thats a big advantage. Similarly Cossacks with +50% have nothing to fear from grenadiers/cannons/cavalry. Only riflemen threaten them.

Thats pretty good.

You have to consider that they are Renaissance units. And in the case of Redcoats, they are obsoleted very quickly.

This was a dumb move.

 

[Pvblivs]

Redcoats still get a free pinch promotion out of the box, and they can still get the normal pinch promotion. Thats a big advantage. Similarly Cossacks with +50% have nothing to fear from grenadiers/cannons/cavalry. Only riflemen threaten them.

Not to forget that redcoats under churchhill get a free city garrison and drill promotion. Thus they still remain very powerful and I believe that this was one of the two main reasons to weaken redcoats. The other reason was this unit was quite too strong which you can see therin that people cry out loud.

With cossacks ... ok this unit was really heavy before. I remember having loved to play Cathy for her late conquer-uber-unit and creative-gain-fast-territory ability plus the mighty financial bonus.
Cathy just rocked, the AI couldn't make any use of it, of course...

 

[MisterBarca]

Not to forget that redcoats under churchhill get a free city garrison and drill promotion. Thus they still remain very powerful and I believe that this was one of the two main reasons to weaken redcoats. The other reason was this unit was quite too strong which you can see therin that people cry out loud.

With cossacks ... ok this unit was really heavy before. I remember having loved to play Cathy for her late conquer-uber-unit and creative-gain-fast-territory ability plus the mighty financial bonus.
Cathy just rocked, the AI couldn't make any use of it, of course...

Don't assume that people who are complaining are those who played either Russia or England. While I did play Russia often, I rarely played England. And I do think a Cossack nerf was warranted--just not to the extent that it received.

 

[Pvblivs]

You have to consider that they are Renaissance units. And in the case of Redcoats, they are obsoleted very quickly.

This was a dumb move.

Every unit obsoletes very fast if you discover its tech late and the next faster.

The Roman Praetorian is only that powerful if Iron Working is a priority in the very beginning. The redcoat if you prioritize rifling, the cossack with fast military tradition and gunpowder.

Of course, if you want to have liberalism, economics etc. for all the free bees first you won't ever have much war with those unique units. But then I don't understand why you play England/Russia and bother about your weak units. Either you want superior military or not. If you want everything you might consider an easier difficulty level

 

[monkspider]

Don't assume that people who are complaining are those who played either Russia or England. While I did play Russia often, I rarely played England. And I do think a Cossack nerf was warranted--just not to the extent that it received.

I agree, I rarely played either Civ, but I agree strongly that the nerf that these units received was not in line with good game balance.

 

[Pvblivs]

Don't assume that people who are complaining are those who played either Russia or England. While I did play Russia often, I rarely played England. And I do think a Cossack nerf was warranted--just not to the extent that it received.

Just compare it to other UUs. Even now there aren't many that are stronger. Now they're almost the same as the base unit but with a significant bonus in a special field. And THIS is what makes most of the rest of other UUs as well.

 

[MisterBarca]

Every unit obsoletes very fast if you discover its tech late and the next faster.

The Roman Praetorian is only that powerful if Iron Working is a priority in the very beginning. The redcoat if you prioritize rifling, the cossack with fast military tradition and gunpowder.

Of course, if you want to have liberalism, economics etc. for all the free bees first you won't ever have much war with those unique units. But then I don't understand why you play England/Russia and bother about your weak units. Either you want superior military or not. If you want everything you might consider an easier difficulty level

I said I don't play England. And while I play Russia, I can swallow that nerf more readily than the Redcoat nerf.

 

[binhthuy71]

Cossack was the only unit that would influence my gameplay. If my randomly selected leader was Cat or Peter then it was just a matter of building Cossacks early and often while I got to Astronomy (Play Fractal maps most of the time so sea transport is usually a necessity) then on to a domination victory. Yes, I think that they were nerfed a bit too hard. On the other hand, I'm indifferent to the UU concept other than adding a bit of color to the game. If you don't have the fundamentals in place no UU is going to win the game for you.

 

[MisterBarca]

Just compare it to other UUs. Even now there aren't many that are stronger. Now they're almost the same as the base unit but with a significant bonus in a special field. And THIS is what makes most of the rest of other UUs as well.

Raw combat utility isn't the only thing you put into the equation when you measure the effectiveness of an UU. As I have said, you also factor in the timing of the UU's appearance, as well as its longevity.