Swapping Knights with Longbowmen techwise?

[Ambassador]

I don't know if anybody has suggested this before and what counterarguments have been brought forward, but why don't we swap Knights with Longbowmen in terms of techs. Feudalism -> knights, Guilds -> Longbowmen.
What's perplexing me is how late the knights come into play, just before the Pikemen, which kinf of obsoletes them. To have them available sooner would be more in accordance with history (the knight being the mightiest unit until the late Middle Ages). Also, Feudalism and its companion Vassalage suits the Knight idea better than the Longbowman. Guilds, with its emphasis on the emerging merchant class is better represented by the increasing significance of peasant, non-aristocratic infantry.

Now concerning balancing questions vis-à-vis archers, axemen, spearmen ... maybe the knight could be tuned down a bit, to a unit strength of 9 instead of present 10. (or keep like it is).

What do you think?

 

[achilleszero]

Very interesting idea. Im all for moving the Knight back and giving it a longer lifespan. The horseman has a very long life, and the addition of cuirassier in BtS shortened the life of the knight. Your right that fuedelism would fit the knight better. But moving the Longbowman forward to guilds would probably be bad. It has already been made to come latter in LoR than it does in BtS. Having the main medieval defender come after all the offensive units would completely throw off balance.

I am confused by this statement:

What's perplexing me is how late the knights come into play, just before the Pikemen, which kinf of obsoletes them.

Pikeman doesnt make the knight useless. Its just its counter. Its no different than how spearman are available before horseman. Usually you need the defender to be available before the attacker for game balance.

 

[Ambassador]

Hi Achilleszero,

yes, obsolete is the wrong word.

 

[Dragonxander PR]

Well, about the longbowmen problem of them now comping up later, it DOES make sense, the original longbowmen (the ones from England) came during the later third of the mid ages (as in 500-800 AD=Early mid ages; 800-1200=Mid mid agres; 1200-1500=late mid ages). Also, that will make crossbowmen more widely used, something that irks me from regular Civ IV.

If possible, I'd reduce the production cost of the crossbowmen & raise the one of the longbowmen, so the periods of both units get balanced.

 

[morchuflex]

I completely agree with the OP. Knights are too short-lived and come too late. In fact, when I started fiddling with XML, my very first move was to make Knights available with Feudalism.

BTW, amazing mod! I have been playing LOR for 2 month and can't even imagine reverting to plain old BTS.

 

[Waterhouse]

I've thought the same thing, and thus also agree completely (with the OP).

 

[Ambassador]

Now, what's phungus' opinion about this matter?

 

[Perfxion]

How about Archers(strength 2) at Archery. Composite bows(strength 4)(new unit) at Monarchy. Longbows(strength 6) at Machinery.

Knights at Feudalism is a good idea. In a normal game, every horse unit gets a full era of work.

 

[Dragonxander PR]

How about Archers(strength 2) at Archery. Composite bows(strength 4)(new unit) at Monarchy. Longbows(strength 6) at Machinery.

How about composite bows at Mathematics; & longbows at Engineering or Guilds? Despite the specific tech requirements, I like the idea.