Russia - the most overnerfed civ in the game! Should it be improved?

[alpaca]

"Later" is relative. It depends on which line of the tech tree you decided to invest in. Generally speaking, for military purposes, I tend to emphasize the Military Science to Military Tradition part of that tree, partially for the Mounted line but also for the Grenadiers and West Point.

A Grenadier/Cannon army is absolutely doable, and IMO, a stronger play than a Rifling tech. A mainly Rifleman army can be stopped almost dead in its tracks if the enemy somehow manages to get Rifling. A Greandier/Cannon/Cuirasser army is not so vulnerable, and it can defend itself adequately with Pikemen and Longbows for stack defense.

Once you do get the Riflemen, your mounted units upgrade into Cossacks for even more ownage, or for the swing edge against a rival who also uses Cavalry.

Yeah by now I think I have to agree here that Grenadiers are probably somewhat better for such an invasion than Riflemen (i.e. if you can afford to build a decent number of them). You can get it even earlier, especially if you don't want to go over the Education route.

However I usually favor Printing Press, Education and Replaceable parts. It depends on what you want to tech I think, both are definitely doable.

 

[Wodan]

First off, let me apologize. Mortius has got me in RUFKM mode.

I am with .... someone. Warriors are counters vs Preats, no doubt about it. I'd say it even more strongly ... 3 warriors can beat 1 preat almost all of the time.

What an overwhelming number of objective arguments are involving in our discussion.

Give me a break. Warriors do not get a bonus vs Praets, and the cost of 3 warriors do not match the cost of 1 Praet. Compare apples to apples before you get sarcastic. Comparing apples to oranges just makes you look idiotic.

"Later" is relative. It depends on which line of the tech tree you decided to invest in.

I agree!

Generally speaking, for military purposes, I tend to emphasize the Military Science to Military Tradition part of that tree, partially for the Mounted line but also for the Grenadiers and West Point.

A Grenadier/Cannon army is absolutely doable, and IMO, a stronger play than a Rifling tech. A mainly Rifleman army can be stopped almost dead in its tracks if the enemy somehow manages to get Rifling. A Greandier/Cannon/Cuirasser army is not so vulnerable, and it can defend itself adequately with Pikemen and Longbows for stack defense.

I agree, but is not relevant to the discussion of "is Russia / Cossacks overnerfed".

Unless you are saying "even if you play as russia, you should never build Cossacks... instead, go for Grenadiers / Cannons."

Are you saying that? Or what?

Once you do get the Riflemen, your mounted units upgrade into Cossacks for even more ownage, or for the swing edge against a rival who also uses Cavalry.

If you're doing that, you don't have many (if any) mounted units in the first place. And, upgrading is almost always a poor economic choice, and a bad idea. If it makes sense to build them anew, then it's a good idea. Otherwise, examine your situation. You've probably put yourself in a bad position, which means your strategy is trying to make up ground and has failed.

Wodan

 

[onedreamer]

Cannons are later in the tree than either Rifles or Cossacks

You guys are really, REALLY funny with these statements. How can you say that a unit is later than another if the tech to build it costs LESS ?
Let's assume

From Gunpowder to Steel (standard speed Monarch):
Chemistry: 2808
Steel: 4368

You need a total of 7176 beakers (flasks ?) to build cannons after Gunpowder

For Riflemen you need:
Paper: 936
Printing Press: 2496
Repleacable Parts: 2808
Rifling: 3744

Total: 9984 beakers.

How do Riflemen come before cannons ??? Exactly in my last successful game I beelined for Steel and I was facing Longbowmen/Muskets with Cannons. One step after I had Grenadiers so even when my neighbor (which slipped from 1st in the list to last) finally researched Rifling and enlisted Riflemen, he had lost half his huge territory and yet he couldn't do anything to stop me.

edit: note that down the cannons path you even get a tech useful for production (like Repleacable Parts) that doesn't require any new improvement (unlike Lumbermill) and one prereq for a stronger navy, plus docks still for a stronger navy, and one of the best national wonders (ironworks).

 

[Wodan]

Pike does not counter Cavalry... 2 Pikes counter Cavalry [of course that ignores Cavalry movement advantage and retreat chances]

Basically 2 Pikes will beat 1 Cavalry if the Cavalry are unescorted and the Cavalry are defending (or if the Pikes are defending fort/city). If the Cavalry are with Muskets, they are protected from Pikes. So as long as they are stacked, they are OK... and they are a defense against Stack killers (cannons)

If the Cavalry are defending in the open with muskets, that obviates the Cavalry movement and retreat bonuses. This is the situation where the Cavalry are pillaging in a musket stack. In which case, we're talking about a musket stack (the cavalry add nothing to the offensive situation other than faster pillaging... they might as well be chariots).

If the Cavalry are attacking, then the Pikes get fortification bonuses, city defense bonuses, you name it. The Pikes clearly pwn the Cav.

Wodan

 

[onedreamer]

Unless you are saying "even if you play as russia, you should never build Cossacks... instead, go for Grenadiers / Cannons."

Are you saying that? Or what?

He is saying that the whole point of this thread: "Riflemen come 2 (?!) techs earlier than Cossacks and are its counter and are alone the best unit to beeline to in order to rush your helpless neighbor, making Cossacks -or anything else- useless" is sorely wrong.

If you're doing that, you don't have many (if any) mounted units in the first place.

For what reason ?

And, upgrading is almost always a poor economic choice, and a bad
idea.

Not if you have combat 5 cuirassiers. Why do you treat possibilities as facts ?

If it makes sense to build them anew, then it's a good idea.

Why wouldn't it make sense ?

Otherwise, examine your situation. You've probably put yourself in a bad position, which means your strategy is trying to make up ground and has failed.

Uh ? Failed in what ? And did you actually check the upgrade costs from Cuirassiers to Cavalry ? They are ridiculous. Oh, you are of course also aware that your super experienced Cuirassier General can be upgraded at no costs.

 

[Wodan]

You guys are really, REALLY funny with these statements. How can you say that a unit is later than another if the tech to build it costs LESS ?
Let's assume

From Gunpowder to Steel (standard speed Monarch):
Chemistry: 2808
Steel: 4368

You need a total of 7176 beakers (flasks ?) to build cannons after Gunpowder

For Riflemen you need:
Paper: 936
Printing Press: 2496
Repleacable Parts: 2808
Rifling: 3744

Total: 9984 beakers.

Chemistry requires Engineering, which requires Construction, neither of which you listed.

Ultimately, it depends on what you're beelining.

If you're going to challenge which is faster, then we need to analyze the beeline cost (without assumption that someone gets an intermediate tech, such as Engineering), plus the opportunity cost (e.g., if you don't get Engineering, what have you lost out?)

Anyway, when I made the statement that Cannons are "later" that was in the context of already having many of these techs. Possibly that is because I often lightbulb Printing Press. In which case I apologize. In any event, if you really want to do this kind of analysis then I think we should proceed with a full cost / opportunity cost list.

How do Riflemen come before cannons ??? Exactly in my last successful game I beelined for Steel and I was facing Longbowmen/Muskets with Cannons.

Congratulations. In my last game I beelined for Riflemen and I was facing longbowmen with nada.

edit: note that down the cannons path you even get a tech useful for production (like Repleacable Parts) that doesn't require any new improvement (unlike Lumbermill) and one prereq for a stronger navy, plus docks still for a stronger navy, and one of the best national wonders (ironworks).

Rifles require Replacable Parts. And docks are minimal benefit at this stage in the game IMO. Anyway, you have a point, but what you're pointing out is opportunity cost which is what I think we should look at.

Wodan

 

[onedreamer]

Incorrect

so 14.4 pike v. 18 cavalry

Or in the more realistic effect of a Formation Pike v. a Combat 2 Pinch Cavalry

7.2+125% pike v. 18 cavalry
16.2 pike v. 18 cavalry

before saying incorrect and playing the professor can you please do your maths right ?

pike combat 2 vs cavalry combat 1+shock = 7.2 vs 9.09
cavalry vs pike = 16.50 vs 11.70
pike combat 2+formation vs cavalry combat2+shock = 7.2 vs 8.33
cavalry vs pike = 18 vs 13.20
[/quote]

now if by "counter" you mean a defensive unit, then it's right that 2 pikemen will consistently win a cavalry. But if the pikemen have to attack this is not true anymore, especially with the new combat system that is going to be implemented with the new patch.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

^ It doesn't matter which 'Side' bonuses go to

X str 4 v. Y str 4

X is +100% v Y

X attacks Y

X= 4
Y = 4 / (1+100%)=2

X:Y Ratio is 4:2 =2:1

Y attacks X

X=4 *(1+100%) = 8
Y=4

X:Y Ratio is 8:4 = 2:1


Who is attacking and who is defending NEVER affects the final ratio, only the bonuses affect that (which sometimes require you to defend or attack)

and what new combat system are you talking about (going to check patch)
nope nothing in the notes about a new combat system

 

[onedreamer]

Chemistry requires Engineering, which requires Construction, neither of which you listed.

Ultimately, it depends on what you're beelining.

Well, if you think you're funny. You want to make this forum believe that you can get to Riflemen without building key military units of ancient and middle ages like catapults and pikemen ? I obviously assumed that we had researched all techs necessary for middle ages units. According to your own, silly, argument I also left out Civil Service and others before Paper to Rifling.

If you're going to challenge which is faster, then we need to analyze the beeline cost (without assumption that someone gets an intermediate tech, such as Engineering), plus the opportunity cost (e.g., if you don't get Engineering, what have you lost out?)

*Yawn* you want to play the stubborn part, go ahead. My point is made, ie: saying that Riflemen are before Cannons is incorrect. You can pull out whatever argument makes you feel better about it *shrug*

Congratulations. In my last game I beelined for Riflemen and I was facing longbowmen with nada.

Since you can't promote Riflemen with city raze promotions, I was having an easier time than you were

Rifles require Replacable Parts. And docks are minimal benefit at this stage in the game IMO. Anyway, you have a point, but what you're pointing out is opportunity cost which is what I think we should look at.

Wodan

I was speaking of the opportunity only as a side effect.

 

[Cvntpumeler]

Isn't this thread about Russia?

 

[KrikkitTwo]

^ which is about Cossacks which is about Cavalry.. which counter Cannons

 

[Cvntpumeler]

^^ Got it now. Cossack got nerfed too hard, they should make it better or give Russia something else to bolster it.

 

[peter450]

Well i think str wise cossacks are fine, there 15 str base vs

12 for cannon with a 50% bonus in favour 98.8 %
15 for cav with a 50% bonus in favour 90.1 %
12 for grenadiers 75.1 %
14 for riflemen with a 25% bonus against 28.8 % retreat 20.1%
6 for pikemen with a 100% bonus against 75.1 %

Above figures are for straight up non promoted units on flat terrain, city def bonus, hills etc can all influence these figures as can veterancy levels

I do however agree with one of the subsequent comments made by the OP and it's a very good point, and that is cossacks and cavelry does have a gapping hole in it's upgrade path, there does badly need to be a unit inserted between cav's an gunships

 

[onedreamer]

Who is attacking and who is defending NEVER affects the final ratio, only the bonuses affect that (which sometimes require you to defend or attack)

Ratios are different. Instead of speaking in theory just launch the actual game, open world builder and see it for yourself.

 

[Cvntpumeler]

Well i think str wise cossacks are fine, there 15 str base vs

12 for cannon with a 50% bonus in favour 98.8 %
15 for cav with a 50% bonus in favour 90.1 %
12 for grenadiers 75.1 %
14 for riflemen with a 25% bonus against 28.8 % retreat 20.1%
6 for pikemen with a 100% bonus against 75.1 %

Above figures are for straight up non promoted units on flat terrain, city def bonus, hills etc can all influence these figures as can veterancy levels

I do however agree with one of the subsequent comments made by the OP and it's a very good point, and that is cossacks and cavelry does have a gapping hole in it's upgrade path, there does badly need to be a unit inserted between cav's an gunships

I agree with the upgrade path thing also...

I think Cossacks (and cavalry for that matter) should get a 50% or 100% bonus against melee units to represent their ranged weapons that don't require a significant reload time to allow enemy advancement, as muskets and cultraissers and archery units alike would have. I don't understand how a defending Pikeman unit is going to stop a Cavalry from parking their horses 50 yards away and firing countless volleys of bullets into the Pike formation. Cavalry should be countered well by fortified musketmen and riflemen, but pikemen should not have a 25% chance of winning -- especially since their costs is so much cheaper as pointed out earlier.

I realize that this is a game and its about gameplay mechanics, and I just think that the fact that Pikemen are the counter to Cavalry and not Musketmen is a serious problem because of the fact that it makes building Musketmen almost useless. I rarely even build musketmen in my games because my CGII longbowmen and combat/medic pikemen are better defenders anyways, and I usually don't even bother getting Gunpowder until just before Rifling because it's essentially worthless to me until then. I guess what I'm saying is that giving Cavalry a boost against melee units would balance the game better in several ways...

 

[Wodan]

He is saying that the whole point of this thread: "Riflemen come 2 (?!) techs earlier than Cossacks and are its counter and are alone the best unit to beeline to in order to rush your helpless neighbor, making Cossacks -or anything else- useless" is sorely wrong.

That's not the point of this thread.

But, to respond to that point, I agree with you (and, if as you assert, with him). Maybe not in the particulars, but as is, yes.

For what reason ?

Well, for starters, because you beelined and don't have either Horseback Riding or Guilds.

Not if you have combat 5 cuirassiers. Why do you treat possibilities as facts ?

Because upgrading costs more (in gold) than the equivalent in hammers. Plus, when you upgrade, you put that unit behind the upgrade curve (because it gets dropped to 10XP).

Uh ? Failed in what ?

See above.

And did you actually check the upgrade costs from Cuirassiers to Cavalry ? They are ridiculous.

No, I didn't check. Unless it's free, it's a cost. And, any gold you spend is less you could have as research. Do you disagree with that statement? If so, we have something further to talk about. If not, it's a matter of comparison of degree.

Oh, you are of course also aware that your super experienced Cuirassier General can be upgraded at no costs.

So? That super-experience Warrior General can be upgraded at no cost. What's your point there?

Well, if you think you're funny. You want to make this forum believe that you can get to Riflemen without building key military units of ancient and middle ages like catapults and pikemen ?

Sure. If you're playing a "mounted" game you can easily skip Construction and Engineering.

Or, are you making this forum believe that you always have to get Construction? Well, you should state that when you make statements about Cossacks being balanced.

I obviously assumed that we had researched all techs necessary for middle ages units. According to your own, silly, argument I also left out Civil Service and others before Paper to Rifling.

No, only those which were prereqs for Rifling (or Steel, as we were discussing).

*Yawn* you want to play the stubborn part, go ahead. My point is made, ie: saying that Riflemen are before Cannons is incorrect. You can pull out whatever argument makes you feel better about it *shrug*

*Yawn* you want to play the stubborn part, go ahead. My point is made, ie: saying that Cannons are before Cossacks is incorrect. You can pull out whatever argument makes you feel better about it *shrug*.

Since you can't promote Riflemen with city raze promotions, I was having an easier time than you were

Who cares. If they had more than 1-2, my trebuchets knocked them down. At that point, a mace could take them down, let alone a rifle.

I was speaking of the opportunity only as a side effect.

Opportunity cost is a requirement, not a "side effect".

Wodan

 

[onedreamer]

Well, for starters, because you beelined and don't have either Horseback Riding or Guilds.

because you beelined you can have easily traded for them. Again you treat possibilities as facts.

Because upgrading costs more (in gold) than the equivalent in hammers.

I don't think it's true. Not in the case of Cuirassiers to Cavalry.

Plus, when you upgrade, you put that unit behind the upgrade curve (because it gets dropped to 10XP).

That's true, but a combat 5 unit doesn't really need more promotions as it does need an upgrade. This IMHO.

No, I didn't check. Unless it's free, it's a cost. And, any gold you spend is less you could have as research.

You can say the same about producing them instead of upgrading (could build research, wealth or university, instead). Mind you, I rarely upgrade, but there are cases in which upgrading is good. You dismissed upgrading as a bad idea.

So? That super-experience Warrior General can be upgraded at no cost. What's your point there?

The point is that it's free. A General most of the times can make the difference between a successful or a failed siege.

Opportunity cost is a requirement, not a "side effect".

I meant that the advantages of not beelining for Rifles are strong enough that the rest you get with techs is a bonus, or a good "side effect".

 

[Wodan]

because you beelined you can have easily traded for them. Again you treat possibilities as facts.

Okay... so, you're saying I could have traded for a tech. Oh, wait, I could have traded for Guilds, which would give me Cossacks earlier.

Dude, if you're going to point out something, point it out for where it matters between whether you're beelining Cannons vs Cossacks.

I don't think it's true. Not in the case of Cuirassiers to Cavalry.

Well, feel free to discuss that individual situation.

That's true, but a combat 5 unit doesn't really need more promotions as it does need an upgrade.

Agreee. Upgrading an individual unit is sometimes warrranted, whereas upgrading ALL your X units is usually not a good idea.

You can say the same about producing them instead of upgrading (could build research, wealth or university, instead). Mind you, I rarely upgrade, but there are cases in which upgrading is good. You dismissed upgrading as a bad idea.

Upgrading is a bad idea.

See... what we're debating is the inherent notion.

If I'm a new player, and my question is "should I upgrade, or should I build anew?" then my answer is "build anew".

That's not to say there won't be games where I upgrade all my units. What the question here is the baseline....

The point is that it's free. A General most of the times can make the difference between a successful or a failed siege.

Yes, I agree. And so, what's the difference? You're the one who tossed out the General distinction... so, how does it matter when wer're talking about Cannons vs Cossacks?

I meant that the advantages of not beelining for Rifles are strong enough that the rest you get with techs is a bonus, or a good "side effect".

Okay. So, as I asked previously... you're saying that, whether you play as Russia or not, you should never go for Cavalry/Cossacks. Instead, you should go for cannons?

Wodan

 

[kniteowl]

I agree with the upgrade path thing also...

I think Cossacks (and cavalry for that matter) should get a 50% or 100% bonus against melee units to represent their ranged weapons that don't require a significant reload time to allow enemy advancement, as muskets and cultraissers and archery units alike would have. I don't understand how a defending Pikeman unit is going to stop a Cavalry from parking their horses 50 yards away and firing countless volleys of bullets into the Pike formation. Cavalry should be countered well by fortified musketmen and riflemen, but pikemen should not have a 25% chance of winning -- especially since their costs is so much cheaper as pointed out earlier.

I realize that this is a game and its about gameplay mechanics, and I just think that the fact that Pikemen are the counter to Cavalry and not Musketmen is a serious problem because of the fact that it makes building Musketmen almost useless. I rarely even build musketmen in my games because my CGII longbowmen and combat/medic pikemen are better defenders anyways, and I usually don't even bother getting Gunpowder until just before Rifling because it's essentially worthless to me until then. I guess what I'm saying is that giving Cavalry a boost against melee units would balance the game better in several ways...

Lmao yeah I can't believe a Mounted Rifle will be defeated by a Pikemen every 1 out 4 times, that sounds really silly doesn't it???

how can someone with a Pike that can only fight close range and a Unit who can move around really fast and have a Weapon that fires Projectiles with few reloading times/requirements, lose 1 out of 4 time... sounds very silly indeed.

Cavalry definitely require a Boost, I think a overall strength increase would be a better choice then a Melee counter, makes the countering system a bit less confusing.

My idea would be

Increase Calvary strength to 18
Increase Riflemen Counter to 50% vs Mounted units.
Give Muskets a 50% bonus vs Mounted units.
Pikemen now upgrade to Muskets.

now Pikemen have a lower chance of defeating a Cavalry, you'll probably need more then 2 Pikes... maybe 2 and a half Pikes to beat one Cavalry and Muskets are more specialized now.

Makes me realize that a Formation Janissary can beat a unpromoted Cavalry, but that's more realistic then Pike isn't it?

Attacking Janissary vs Cavalry

(10*1.2) = 12 str vs 10 (15/1.5)

Defending Janissary vs Cavalry

(10*1.2)*1.5 = 18 str vs 15 str

 

[0R4NG3]

Sure you don't want, since Grenadiers are 50% better at it and come BEFORE.

You are being incredibly stubborn, in fact I get a feeling that you just want to flame me for some reason, perhaps because I dared to propose a "crazy" idea that cossacks have very little use.

It is also strange that you refuse to accept that riflemen come before cossacks, yet you write that grenadiers come before riflemen as a fact. Not for me they don't.

Wow, that must be a very good strategy

Very funny... However the AI doesn't always prioritize grenadiers over riflemen, sometimes especially if they are being attacked by mounted units they will go for riflemen first.

I never said it ? I said it's pointless to speak of beelining and saying a unit of a later tech that you beelined for is stronger than an earlier tech. Seems obvious to me. The error you make is saying that it comes before, because it comes before ONLY if you beeline for it. But in strict terms, Military Tradition comes before Rifling, IE it's faster to research, and it's better to research before. There is nothing you can possibly invent to state that Rifling comes before Military Tradition as a matter of fact because it's simply false.

From post one I was talking about beelining exclusively, so there was absolutely no reason for you to argue with me. Maybe you should read my posts better.
And I never said that Rifling comes before military tradition, I said that rifles can come before cossacks and cossacks can't come before rifles. Go on, contradict that!

1) That way you have only a 50% chance of success, Cavalry has a much, much better chance.
2) If you didn't research Military Tradition not only you won't have Cavalry to protect Riflemen from Grenadiers, you won't even have Cuirassiers, and most likely not even Grenadiers since you beelined for Rifling.

Yes yes that's true. But as I said if cavalry's main role is to protect riflemen from grenadiers it is not very exciting.

Again we are talking about different things here. You see I almost never wage wars on tech parity, I always beeline to some unit, be it macemen, riflemen or tanks and abuse that advantage as much as I can, if the AI catches up in tech during the war I usually stop warring. And no I don't play multiplayer.

- Cossacks have no real counter.
Riflemen have Grenadiers
Grenadiers have Cavalry
Cossacks have ... nothing and counter both enemy Grenadiers and Cavalry, which is huge.

Wow, ever heard of riflemen? In fact that is probably the best counter ever since it comes with the same tech as what it counters.