Tanks!

[Drawmeus]

you can upgrade lancers to gunships? didnt know that . Just lancers?

tanks are very good now , i thought they were OP till i met an AI with gunships , i had to do a tactical retreat .

Lancers upgrade to anti-tank which upgrades to gunships.

Basically, the horseman line is Horseman -> Knight -> Cavalry -> Tank -> Modern Armor. The anti-Horseman line is Spearman -> Pikeman (Upgrades to Rifleman) and then Lancer -> Anti-Tank -> Helicopter Gunship.

 

[gingerbill]

Lancers upgrade to anti-tank which upgrades to gunships.

Basically, the horseman line is Horseman -> Knight -> Cavalry -> Tank -> Modern Armor. The anti-Horseman line is Spearman -> Pikeman (Upgrades to Rifleman) and then Lancer -> Anti-Tank -> Helicopter Gunship.

thank you .

I usually have a couple of horsemen for upgrading to tanks later . Never used lancers or anti-tank so had no idea how they upgraded . Guess ill get a lancer in future games for upgrading to gunship.

 

[Sonereal]

This speaks to a problem in my mind, we need a modern continuation of crossbowman and a nerf to siege units when fighting other units. I think we need line like Archer -> Crossbow -> Grenadier -> Mortar -> Special Forces. These units have an effective ranged attack against non-garrisoned units but a steep penalty against cities and units in forts.

I don't know why a Crossbow would lead into Grenadier. I can see it leading in Mortar though. The key thing about Archers and X-bows is that they're indirect fire units. Grenadiers fit that bill but I don't know if they were thrown that far. Mortars work perfectly because it seems like it would be more anti-infantry than anything really. You lost me at Special Forces because I don't understand the continuation.

If Mechanized Infantry was ever forced to use oil (which it really should to be honest), then you wouldn't need something after mortars to balance things out.

 

[gingerbill]

i agree that mech infantry should require oil . Though if you didnt have any it might be too crippling , dont think so but not sure on that. And theres usally alot of options to get oil by the time you reach it.

 

[mattpilot]

Mech Infantry should require Iron, for the simple fact that it gives iron some use late game and it limits mech infantry somewhat, but not too much since iron is usually plentiful.

Of course, in reality it should require aluminium, but thats another story and would fudge with civ's balance to much...

Same with Oil - making mech infantry require that would fudge to much with the balance..

 

[seasnake]

I don't know why a Crossbow would lead into Grenadier. I can see it leading in Mortar though. The key thing about Archers and X-bows is that they're indirect fire units. Grenadiers fit that bill but I don't know if they were thrown that far. Mortars work perfectly because it seems like it would be more anti-infantry than anything really. You lost me at Special Forces because I don't understand the continuation.

If Mechanized Infantry was ever forced to use oil (which it really should to be honest), then you wouldn't need something after mortars to balance things out.

I think you need to fill the gap between Crossbow and Mortar. In the Civil War they had regiments called Sharpshooters, which were off the main lines and designed to focus on officers. Just some gunpowder unit between the two is necessary.

And yes, mech infantry could conceivably be the top tier of an anti-personnel ranged unit, but it should require Oil like you said. Special Forces was a place filler, really I'm not trying to think TOO hard about this just it's something I felt was missing.

 

[Sonereal]

The problem is that sharpshooters isn't a natural progress from crossbows. Archers and Crossbow weren't sololists, after all. They fired volleys indirectly. A sharpshooter would be a direct-fire unit which wouldn't make a lot of sense. Also, mortars were used during the Civil War. You could differentiate by having a Mortar and Modern Mortar the same way that there's a Tank and Modern Armor.

 

[Callonia]

Mech Infantry requiring Iron would be crippling, for u see, The side of pangea I'm on absolutely lacks the iron, they're all hidden in the far north or far east.

Only me on my side of the map actually have oil, 60 of them, and i only have 30 left over xD

That would mean the people with lack of iron and oil suffer and only can use Infantry.

There needs to be modern Infantry for such situations with slightly beefed up strength.

And Mortar / Modern Mortar yes please! I want them, I tend to have crossbowmens well into the age of tanks and plink them for 2 damage amusingly. Sometimes, they even finish off near death units xD with 2 hp and lower that is.

If I was to follow the mech infantry above, that would mean, I only have four Iron available to me. And that's after conquering the persian lands. I only can field four mech infantry and that's it, all the iron is in two other super powers, songhai and rome. And i'm battling both of them at same time.

Oh well i guess it won't matter too much cuz i been using a combination of panzer/modern armors and with occassional mech infantry. but still. I don't wanna be using WW2 Infantry in the age of mech infantry.

 

[leeuw01]

Why not make a ranged unit with 1 range? This would represent snipers taking out there targets , and because they are snipers the soldiers cant fire back. For example special forces could be: Range 1, ranged attack strenght 70, penalty versus armor and citiesand 45 melee attack points.

Good or Bad Idea?