Discussion in 'Civ4 - Modpacks' started by thamis, Nov 29, 2005.
I don't care what Spanish you write.
Kargath mercenaries are very very important.
In South America is very common a few words that in spanish stardard are no-frequent, like "acá" ("here" in english and "aquí" in spanish normal speaking ( athough "acá" is accepted)).
Mercenaries will certainly be in the game. I will see whether I can get the game to make them very cheap (nearly free) but have a higher upkeep cost.
And as long as every Spanish person understands the Spanish... fine by me.
Doh, as soon as I get home I'll upload it again. I uploaded that real quick before leaving for work. Or maybe I can do it at work, let me see.
As for teh tech tree, sorry =( No more changes now, heh.
And yeah, the categories are going to be used like the ones in the game right now. For example, Flaming Pigs(a promotion, probably for siege engines) will give bonus against elephants.
Units are more or less in synch with what's in the game right now (I don't want thousands of standards units), but the promotion system is going to be really different.
And yeah, Mercs are going to be important, but I dunno how we want to do that. Do we have a merc for every type of units? or only certain units with certain techs? Enslave-like ability? As long as the standard units are done, mercs and others can be put on the chart real easy.
Oh mounted spearmen, sure.
Q: could technologies lower cost of units representing lowered training required (discovery of stirrups) or cheaper equipment (bronze->iron change)?
I hear, but I would like to bring it to the gods' attention that An Husb requiring Patoralism rather than vice versa is weird.
It also seems odd that Riding requires An Husb while Chariot does not.
Links are fixed.
What would be a real-world counterpart to the Armoured Javelineer? A legionary throwing his pilum?
Here are my thoughts on the unit list:
- I like the Archer/Javelineer split. The combat values should be a bit higher, though. Why ever build a normal skirmisher, if the clubman is stronger (also vs SKI)? I suggest:
Then, I think Spearman good vs Cavalry should be much weaker. The spearman should also get an archery bonus. I suggest:
The Elephant shouldn't do collateral damage.
I don't think the Siege Tower is a good idea at all. By itself it can't attack, so why should it be able to?
Hmm... my thoughts are a bit confused right now. In general, I think we should weaken the Cavalry side. Only Heavy Cavalry should be very good. I think we should rather make Cavalry highly likely to withdraw, but weak compared to the other units. It's more of a harrassment unit.
Siege: I'm only for catapult in this area. The Ballista was important, but it's more of a put-man-on-spike weapon. It shouldn't get bombard, only collateral I think.
I had previously noted this too, but assumed in this thread that since chariots will most probably needs horses to be built, and horses need Animal Husbandry, chariots will in fact need Animal Husbandry in the end.
About Javelineers. Why do they get a bonus vs SKI ? SKI units are Javelineers themselves and Archers. AFAIK Javs were not put on the field to contrast other javs or archers... they should get a bonus vs MED IMHO.
Another note, the Chariot, if we look at realism, is more of a SKI unit than a CAV unit. Fighters on chariots would use ranged weapons, like bows or javeleens.
maybe instead of giving large bonuses to SKI just give them several "free strikes"? From my reading on Peloponesian war peltastes were able to defeat hoplites only thanks to their mobility... But if hoplites catched up with them they were mincemeat.
If you'll notice, Karhgath has both chariots and chariot archers.
Historically, charioteers normally fought primarily with bows (don't ask me why the CivIII chariot guy fights with some kind of funky polearm), but some apparently prefered close-combat weapons. Hettite charioteers are usually portrayed as spearmen.
Ok... Here we go:
I see early Javelineer without armor or shields, since it comes so early. Armored Javelineer are peltast and the like, since they usually are somewhat armored and sporting a shield.
I have trouble making them fit properly, but I think, like Thamis said, that reducing the clubman would be good.
Well, when you check it out, a Javelineer vs Javelineer, the bonuses negate each others, so they aren't better. I don't want to add a ARCHER and SKIRMISHER category just for that.
I always pictured javelineer as archery killer... get them in range and they just harpoon the poor unarmored skirmishers, still with a certain range between them. A javelin is much more powerful and precise than an arrow. Give them a shield and they are even better at their job.
I'll read again on them... one thing I DON'T want to do is include 'special' battles and such. So yeah, if you read that one or twice peltast killed a hoplite, well, that will be 'luck' and the dice roll in Civ4, it's not a rule. Peltast aren't hoplite killers.
However, I could see them having a smaller +bonus against med infantry...
Still, you guys haven't seen my promotions, so units can 'specialize' and get specific bonus against other types. For example, medium units can get some promotions to give them bonus vs heavy units, or city attack, etc. So, for Skirmishers, I'd allow them some promotions against med units, maybe heavy, but stock they wouldn't be better against them. Usually, mobility promotions gives some bonus against med/heavy, and skirmishers will have access to mobility related promotions.
The promotions aren't 100% done, but I'll post it tonight and we'll be able to talk about it.
Yeah. At first I didn't wanted to split them(only 1 chariot unit), but I had no choice, after reading extensively on the subject.
Ok for clubman and Spearman. I actually found the bonus too high, especially since there are VS CAV specific promotions (Hold the Line, etc.).
As for CAV, yeah, I had 4/6 for horse archers at first, I increased them a bit after adding Chariot Archers, but you are right, 4/6 is better.
For elephant: so no trample? I dunno if they actually trampled in batte. So both shouldn't get trample?
Siege towers were really important in ancient warfare... I agree it's hard to picture it as a unit itself. However, I already have Ladders, Battering Rams and Infiltration as promotions, so maybe adding Siege Tower there too, or not, since there are already 3 +% city attack promotions.
So, should I remove Ballista? One thing I did is read up on ancient siege warfare... did you actually know that, the catapult that we know about, it actually not a catapult... in fact, a catapult throws a big arrows and a ballista is a rock thrower. Furthermore, the stone thrower all used slings instead of the usual cups we see, since a sling has MUCH more range. Cups were used a bit in early medieval for more precision, but not that much.
Anyway, we'll use the standard civ terms, but I was surprised when reading that, hehe.
So, no Siege Tower, no Ballista, only Catapult coming with Siege Warfare?
As for cavalry, should I reduce Light Cavalry to 5? Do I lower Chariot too?
Also, with the elephants not doing collateral... there is not much difference between Elephants/War Elephants and Spearman/Heavy Spearman... Except that elephant withdraw and get a bit more bonus against CAV/MSK. Collateral gave them a slight edge and usefulness... I know that they weren't actually that useful tho, but where's the fun in not having trampling elephants? =) I want my (trampling) elephants!
Is this compatible with the new patch at all?
Happy Christmas day (at least where I am )
Of course they are not heavy infatry killer, under even least non-favourable conditions.
Q:What is the role of javelineers? If we still have archers as primery city defenders we will use javelineers as city attackers?
I don't see archers as pure city defenders, like civ4, until fortifications, that's why they don't have native + city defense. Javelineers are low cost units, especially good against archers, so it's a good idea to have some around to protect your troops. Obviously, they aren't going to be your main troops, just support as it's supposed to be. With promotions, they have a broad range of usefulness.
However, the diff between Archers and Skirmishers are the promotions. Archers are more about support and defense, and skirmishers are more about support, mobility and some offensive capablities.
HEY THAMIS thx soo much I registered just to thank you for creating the ALPHA and OMEGA mod For any civ game. this mod got me playing ((after countless uninstallation and reinstallation's due to the fact that TAM was not in my life!))civ III for about a year till Civ IV came out. I wish i can help you in any way but i have no skill but i will be learning programming this christmas vacation. soo i might as well learn XML and Visual Basic. i will learn them and from that day i will help wou with XML.
By the way i was thinking (for gameplay purposes) the siege towers, im my opinion, were an important asset and helped to produce victory for the besieger. soo why dont you make the Siege tower in the game have the ability to carry units and like a transport have the unit attack from the siege tower giving the unit a bonus attack on cities or forts. its a stupid idea but you will make good out of it guys.
Thanks again thamis and his helpers you guys did a great job in civ III TAM v. 2.5 and it is inevitabe you will do better this time around with Civ IV
Javelineers are good for removing shields/disrupting formations. Skirmishers should get a bonus attacking into or out of rough terrain if possible but be practically defenseless in the open. Slingers and javelineers should be approx equivalent in strength but javelineers would be better against heavier armored troops and more expensive. Both should have a very high withdraw chance on attack.
Balance to archers, archers are more expensive (to train and maintain) with more first strikes (better range) compared to skirmishers. Comparable power though, which would make skirmisher attack against archers more effective in terms of cost.
In the chart, the only heavy units are spearmen, which are effective in formation but weak on flanks. Also they're very slow so skirmishers should get a bonus vs them.
Why is elephant in a category by itself? I know it's unique but it's similar to cavalry and could have effects applied to the individual units themselves.
Most fast cavalry should negate first strike bonuses (preferrably only when attacking).
Another possibility for an early siege weapon would be a battering ram. Only good for reducing city defenses and cheap.
For the period, massed infantry (med and heavy infantry) were the powerhouses. Spear phalanxes winning out on the open and med inf winning in rougher terrain. Skirmishers and archers would be needed in the supporting fire and disruption of enemy formations. Towards the end of the period cav starts getting very effective, though should just be on open ground.
Also, where are the naval units?
Elephant are in a category of their own because some promotions will give bonus against them (flaming pigs and break formation). As I recall, spearmen weren't that good against elephants, so I don't think spearman should get a bonus against elephants either. In fact, powerful hand weapons(axes and the like) were usually used to cut the legs of elephants. I think I should increase the power of elephants tho...
For cavalry, negate first strike is a promotion, as I don't want them to negate first strike right away, flanking tactics and the like with cavalry took a while to appear and be perfected.
Battering rams is a promotions, since it's not a unit by itself. Ladders too, so maybe siege tower too since having it as a seperate unit is weird.
Naval units are in the pipeline, but if anyone wants to do naval units and promotions, go ahead.
Separate names with a comma.