Swords vs Axes
- Thread starter WCH
- Start date
JanusTalaiini
Prince
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2005
- Messages
- 340
Flavor, mostly.
There isn't much, though, as far as I can tell. Especially since the differentiation only lasts for one tier. If they had a (small) crunch difference I think it'd probably be better... maybe preserve the way they have it in vanilla Civ, where axes get a +% vs melee and swords get a +% on city attack. Or something to that effect.
kumquatelvis
Prince
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2007
- Messages
- 310
Axemen used to be able to chop down trees, but apparently that did bad things to the AI.
Yeah, its just an artistic difference. We didnt want to give all the civs axes and not have any swordsmen in the game, or do the opposite. The best thing to do would be to call them something generic ("Solider" is the best we have come up with so far) and get rid of the unit difference.
Keeper_GFA
Prince
I like "Soldier". It's certainly better than Solider. 
Seriously. IMO it fits the progression. Phalanx seems out of place to me though.
Seriously. IMO it fits the progression. Phalanx seems out of place to me though.
Corlis
Warlord
I suppose you could go with Armsman, but I don't mind having the, be two different units myself.
thomas.berubeg
Wandering the World
how about men at arms?
Emptiness
[]
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 1,922
Why is there a problem with having two types of units that are functionally identical but are flavored differently? Is this really an issue?
Lanun Swordsmen look different from Ljosalfar Swordsmen, for flavor purposes. The equivalent Clan unit, which wields an axe, looks different and is called an Axeman - also for flavor. All the tier 2 melee units could be made to look the same, and called "Tier 2 Melee Unit"; that would have saved a lot of work I'm sure, especially if extended to all the units in the game...
...but then the mod would taste like moist cardboard.
Lanun Swordsmen look different from Ljosalfar Swordsmen, for flavor purposes. The equivalent Clan unit, which wields an axe, looks different and is called an Axeman - also for flavor. All the tier 2 melee units could be made to look the same, and called "Tier 2 Melee Unit"; that would have saved a lot of work I'm sure, especially if extended to all the units in the game...
...but then the mod would taste like moist cardboard.
Avahz Darkwood
Emperor
The only issue, and its a very minor one, is that when you create distinctions that dont have a game effect it blurs all the distinctions that do have a game effect.
JonathanStrange
PrinceWithA1000Enemies
For awhile, I seem to recall seeing swordsmen represented by axemen with macemen graphics. Or something like that. I ended up recruiting archers. And no one say aught of wizards!
well if we HAD to have some difference, maybe 1 first strike for swordsmen, and 5% vs melee for axemen.
(since its based on what civ, therefore a very hard to control mechanic, less of an impact, but still a slight difference)
(since its based on what civ, therefore a very hard to control mechanic, less of an impact, but still a slight difference)
This. Currently it appears on the list of "unique units," which is potentially confusing. Minor, as once you're used to the game you don't even notice anymore, but for someone playing for the first time it's one of the things they're going to see advertising the civs they're looking at. Like, they'll see that Ljos have a unique Swordsman, but they won't see that they can build farms in forests.
Obviously swords vs axes isn't the only issue there, and as far as issues go it's very minor... but still, if something's going to show up as a "unique unit" it should actually be in at least some minor way different than what it's replacing.
It'd make sense, of course, to make swords require that you have access to at least one kind of metal... axes can be made from stone, bone or wood, but swords really can't. And then they could be given some minor bonus (like 1 first strike, as suggested above) to balance out that extra requirement.
WarKirby
Arty person
Did anyone notice that the new Elohim "axeman" is actually a spearman.
Personally, I say scrap the "axeman" title. Rename it "Fighter" or something similar, and let each civ have whatever art they want for it. Maybe I'll see about doing that for FF
Personally, I say scrap the "axeman" title. Rename it "Fighter" or something similar, and let each civ have whatever art they want for it. Maybe I'll see about doing that for FF
Warrior -> fighter -> champion ... makes sense to me xD
However, I have gotten so used to the current system that I highly prefer axemen and sworsmen as opposed to a generic fighter (even if they use the same art)
plus, how much work would it be to merge axes and swords into one unit? (maybe not that hard, but still, I don't think it really needs to be changed)
(by the way, why were macemen turned into champions?)
However, I have gotten so used to the current system that I highly prefer axemen and sworsmen as opposed to a generic fighter (even if they use the same art)
plus, how much work would it be to merge axes and swords into one unit? (maybe not that hard, but still, I don't think it really needs to be changed)
(by the way, why were macemen turned into champions?)
nihonjeff
Chieftain
How about "Conscripts"? It's weapon-generic, it gives the impression of a little more organization than "Warrior" (and is therefore appropriate for a Tier-II unit), and it also gives the impression of a lower troop quality than, say, a "Champion".
