Blasphemous said:
Yes but they have 7 attack I think that overall is a powerful unit, that represents well a fast, unarmored and powerful cavalry
Rhye's of Civilization - the fastest loading mod Expanded
- Thread starter Rhye
- Start date
- Status
Yes but they have 7 attack I think that overall is a powerful unit, that represents well a fast, unarmored and powerful cavalry
Lachlan said:When 2.52 will be out ?I want play England with 2.52
As soon as I decide to add enslave ability to some units, or not.
Rhye,
On the enslavement thing, endiku, hoplite, and immortal are almost never used offensively by the AI so it would pointless to give those units the ability. Maybe the impi and south american civ UU's would be good options along with ansars and keshiks.
Or if you want to open it up a bit, maybe make a generic unit like the swordsman or archer have the enslave ability so all civs would benefit. This might prove imbalancing though, especially for civs like Germany.
On the enslavement thing, endiku, hoplite, and immortal are almost never used offensively by the AI so it would pointless to give those units the ability. Maybe the impi and south american civ UU's would be good options along with ansars and keshiks.
Or if you want to open it up a bit, maybe make a generic unit like the swordsman or archer have the enslave ability so all civs would benefit. This might prove imbalancing though, especially for civs like Germany.
Chukchi Husky
Lone Wolf
If a Legionary is able to enslave, it should produce a worker and an auxilary.
Blasphemous
Graulich
I just don't feel that extra point of attack is worth the loss of defense, gameplay-wise... When you've got a fast, strong attacker with blitz, you wanna be able to utilize the unit's abilities to sweep through enemy territory without looking back. When the unit has low defense you don't have that option.Rhye said:
Blasphemous said:
I asked before choosing that stats and nobody answered. Have you better stats in mind that are still coherent with the role of a light cavalry?
Blasphemous
Graulich
I guess I just had to try it myself to see how viable it is.Rhye said:
Hmmm... Maybe give a small defensive bombard to replace the lost defense and to represent the versatility that light cavalry provides? The defensive bombard needs to be just enough to be very likely to harm an attacking knight. That should at least allow you some sort of security when sending your hussars into battle.
Oh, and please add to the pedia entry that the hussar has blitz... I was very out of focus yesterday when I looked at the pedia entry so I didn't remember the fact and I suffered for that mistake today. =X
I didn't remember that I left blitz to the Hussars. Probably my intention was a 7/2/3 with no blitz. Now if they have blitz instead I think they're enough powerful (on attack).
Instead, I don't think that the bombard is realistic, as they have swords.
Removing the blitz and giving a +1 defense (7/3/3) would mean not being light cavalry.
Remember that they were elite cavalry used for scouting and harassing.
The perfect would be 6/3/3+blitz, but that's the cossacks.
That would cause changing the cossacks to something more accurate. To what? 6/4/3 no blitz (like they were in vanilla) + ignore forests cost (useful for Russia)?.
Instead, I don't think that the bombard is realistic, as they have swords.
Removing the blitz and giving a +1 defense (7/3/3) would mean not being light cavalry.
Remember that they were elite cavalry used for scouting and harassing.
The perfect would be 6/3/3+blitz, but that's the cossacks.
That would cause changing the cossacks to something more accurate. To what? 6/4/3 no blitz (like they were in vanilla) + ignore forests cost (useful for Russia)?.
About the slavery, I'll send it to the Xpack because there are some problems.
It was very common in the Ancient world (Rome, Greece, etc.) but we must distinguish:
-who was made slave as prisoner of war
-who was made slave for other reasons (debts,...)
And in the first type we must distinguish between the civs that:
-bought slaves
-went to capture slaves.
The last type corresponds to the "enlave" ability. Egyptians for sure made raids into the Nile coasts with the only purpose of capturing slaves, but I need specific informations for the other units, too.
And after that, there's the balancement. Some units would be overpowered.
As in the Xpack many UU will change (I must make space for the 2nd UUs, and there's the archers swap), I will take the enlave ability into consideration then.
It was very common in the Ancient world (Rome, Greece, etc.) but we must distinguish:
-who was made slave as prisoner of war
-who was made slave for other reasons (debts,...)
And in the first type we must distinguish between the civs that:
-bought slaves
-went to capture slaves.
The last type corresponds to the "enlave" ability. Egyptians for sure made raids into the Nile coasts with the only purpose of capturing slaves, but I need specific informations for the other units, too.
And after that, there's the balancement. Some units would be overpowered.
As in the Xpack many UU will change (I must make space for the 2nd UUs, and there's the archers swap), I will take the enlave ability into consideration then.
Blasphemous
Graulich
The defensive bombard is meant to represent the Hussars sending out small skirmishing parties to cause some damage before the battle begins, not actual bombardment.Rhye said:
Now, the problem with having this light cavalry UU replace a heavy cavalry standard unit, is that Austria is left with no heavy cavalry. afaik, UUs are meant to improve on the standard unit, not to replace it with a unit that fulfils a very different role.
They may be incredibly powerful on offense, but it's hard to conquer and hold with a unit that defends like a spear in the age of guns...Horton said:
tacfun said:
The beta is over since 2.0, these are updates!
Seriously, I think that updates to the mod will end with the release of the expansion pack.
Then, I'll begin updating the Xpack
Blasphemous
Graulich
I think it may make more sense to only release these updates when there's something critical (like barbarian Cavalry) or a large accumulation of tweaks... It's just that if you don't have enough time between updates for people to complete a couple games, well, what's the point?Rhye said:The beta is over since 2.0, these are updates!
Seriously, I think that updates to the mod will end with the release of the expansion pack.
Then, I'll begin updating the Xpack
Lachlan
Great Builder of Civs !
Agree
I understand, but you don't have to halt your game and restart it with the new patch (unless there's some critical bug).
I think that's a good thing that I update often, instead of the opposite If you want me to stop updating and delay for months, just tell... (j/k)
I think that's a good thing that I update often, instead of the opposite
If you want me to stop updating and delay for months, just tell... (j/k)
Blasphemous
Graulich
The thing is, I'm using Hussars against enemies with pikes and heavy horsemen and elephant archers and knights, and still, their counter-attacks are pretty effective against my Hussars...Horton said:
As I said, when a UU replaces one unit that serves one purpouse, with another unit that serves a different purpouse, you've got a problem.
If there were seperate lines for light and heavy cavalry, then the Hussar could fit in with the light line... It's just a bit of a problem in the heavy cav line.
Of course you don't have to, but you would rarely get a chance to play two different full games on the same version, meaning you never really get to fully feel the changes before more are added on... As I said, it would be better if you'd make patches whenever there's something critical or big, or whenever there's already a large buildup of small changes.Rhye said:I understand, but you don't have to halt your game and restart it with the new patch (unless there's some critical bug).
I think that's a good thing that I update often, instead of the opposite
The only drawback would be you don't get to use us all as testers for each and every change...
Blasphemous said:
In the Xpack there will be 2 upgrade lines. For the basic version I feel that the unit is enough strong. The alternative is making it 6/3/3+blitz (like the Cossacks) and making the cossacks 6/4/3 (no blitz) + ignore forests
Blasphemous said:Of course you don't have to, but you would rarely get a chance to play two different full games on the same version, meaning you never really get to fully feel the changes before more are added on... As I said, it would be better if you'd make patches whenever there's something critical or big, or whenever there's already a large buildup of small changes.
The only drawback would be you don't get to use us all as testers for each and every change...
I've got the 2.52 on my HD with these changes:
- Removed Lutetia (Paris), Caesaraugusta (Zaragoza), Hispalis (Seville), Trebizond (Trapezus), Hearclea (Herakleia), Brusa (Bursa), Iconium (Konya), Tokyo (Edo), Ta-Tu (Beijing). Many thanks to Chukchi Husky
- Chinese city list replaced with the one made by Chukchi Husky, containing Pinyin romanizations. The order was slighly changed
- Added some Indian, German and Zulu city names; removed Taormina from Byzantine list
- Slightly changed German and English city lists
- Ethiopian capital moved to Aksum, the ancient capital
- The whole Abyssianian region has been redrawn
- Ethiopian traits now Agricoltural (instead of Militaristic) and Religious
- Some mountain/plateau swaps
- Tuned Incan, Roman, Babylonian, Iroquois, Indian, Persian and Ottoman strength
- Added coal in Uralis, Ucraina, England and Spain
- Removed a forst hill near a grassland in the Uralis
Now tell me, should I upload it or you all prefer to stick with the 2.51?
- Status
