The Longbow should not be availble to every Civ

[Redcoat Captain]

Having been playing this game for years now, it strikes me there are several units that are avilable to all Civ's on completion of a certain research, that really, shouldnt be globally avilable units at all. One such unit is the Longbowman...

Given that the Longbowman is widely though to be of Welsh-English origin, first seen in use by the Welsh during the Norman English invasion of Wales, and adopted by the English upon witnessing its huge range.

King Edward I (1272–1307) ensured the Longbow was adapted into the English armies of the early Medival era. By the late Medival era it had risen to prominence as a defining unit of the English army, helping earn victory at the battles of Crécy in 1346, Poitiers in 1356, and most famously Henry V's victory at the battle of Agincourt in 1415.

Although the Longbow was occasionally seen in use by other European armies, it was more common place to see standard Bow's, Crossbows or the Arbalest Crossbow than a Longbow making it a defining English weapon of the era.

The French were known during this period for thier Heavily Armoured Knights, who trounced the far inferior English Knights during the Battle of Hastings.

So how come every Civ is instanly granted the use of what used to be a UU to the English Empire in previous games?

(by the way i know there are other units which are non-Civ specific which could also be used as examples, i just chose the Longbowman as an example)

Should there be a way forward for Civ's to have 2 Unique Units?? For instance, why have the Aztecs got the Jaguar Warrior as a UU and not the Eagle Warrior too? The French should have Heavily Armoured Cavalry as well as Musketeers. I think a two UU system would help sharpen the game. Thoughts?

 

[Shurdus]

As you pointed out there are lots of examples of this game not making a lot of sense. These units are granted to every civ in order to keep things fair for every one. Switching what units are available for what civ might have far deeper balance implications that you could foresee at first.

This game is also about changing history somewhat. In an alternative history every nations could potentially use longbows just fine. Just because other units can be seen as characteristic - or unique if you will - for a certain nation does not really mean that they should give every civ another UU. This would simply take things a little bit too far if you ask me.

 

[Redcoat Captain]

Ahh, yes, you may have a very valid point there. I hadnt though about subsidising these units and the imbalance it would cause. Being forced to stick with standard archers through the medieval era would be pretty impossible when the other medieval units are all much stronger.

You may be right, too much detail may complicate things a bit too much

 

[theskibum]

As a note, the Japanese had a similar weapon in Mideval times. I cannot remmeber the Japanese name for it, but it was a long range bow, the upper part very similar to the English longbow, and the lower part shorter and built like a recurve bow. I think the overall length was something like 60-65 inches, which is pretty close to English long bows. From what I have read, the range was comparable.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The mongolians launched a space ship?!

That should say all you need to hear about why every civ can build longbows . Anybody, once trained, could use it (though the training was quite extensive). It is not a unique racial or country thing in that sense...it's just that some used them a lot more (or at all). Native Americans using tanks is iffy too! But, that's how the game was designed...so that we could do just these sorts of things!

Longbows ARE really annoying though.

 

[De Begerac]

I also thought the goal of civ was to build a civilization as you saw fit?

Cyrano

 

[AmazonQueen]

The mongolians launched a space ship?!

That should say all you need to hear about why every civ can build longbows . Anybody, once trained, could use it (though the training was quite extensive). It is not a unique racial or country thing in that sense...it's just that some used them a lot more (or at all). Native Americans using tanks is iffy too! But, that's how the game was designed...so that we could do just these sorts of things!

Longbows ARE really annoying though.

None of the UUs or UBs are unique in that way though. Navy Seals are very similar to the Special Boat Service, Stock Exchanges are hardly unique to England (and there isn't 1 in every city in Britain) etc

In some ways I preferred earlier versions of Civ without them
Its a nonsense when landlocked Vikings or elephantless Khmer still have the same UU
Cultures developed in particular ways because of their environment. The UUs and UBs ignore that

 

[Verision]

I like the idea of having two UUs for every civilization. Its really annoying when you're playing as a civilization and you don't have the proper resource for your UU when it comes along. Obviously, this is a bigger problem for some civilization than others.

Maybe they should try to put in a two UU system where everyone has a situational, or resource dependant, UU (Situational: Vikings - If you are playing on a Pangaea, then the free amphibious isn't that great, especially if the AI is doing it's "one off the cost" city thing. Resource Dependant: Ballista Elephant -No Ivory, no UU) and another UU that is neither resource dependant nor situational (Ex: Bowman, Oromo Warrior, Fast Worker, etc.)

I think they would have to make an effort to put the two UUs in non-adjacent Era's, and on different unit paths. I.E. You wouldn't want the first UU for a civilization to upgrade to the second UU of the civiliation.

Then again, it may be really hard to balance two UUs for every civilization.

 

[theskibum]

.. Native Americans using tanks is iffy.

Haven't you heard of equal opportunity?

 

[Maronae3]

If you want to be historical, longbows would come much later.

They appeared around 200 years after the Feudal Era in Western Europe had ended so... kinda out of place. Also, they should be a lot stronger considering how they were used to basically obsolete the knight's use in warfare...

But I'm still even more for the idea of the "rewriting history" thing. Sometimes I wish the game would generate some 5th grade history book I could read on my Civ and the world . But now I'm getting nerdy.

 

[Ambidexter]

There's a lot in this game that doesn't make sense. In reality railroads were quite widespread before heavier-than-air flight came about, but in CIV4 you can learn to fly before discovering railroads.

 

[Balderstrom]

As a note, the Japanese had a similar weapon in Mideval times. I cannot remmeber the Japanese name for it, but it was a long range bow, the upper part very similar to the English longbow, and the lower part shorter and built like a recurve bow. I think the overall length was something like 60-65 inches, which is pretty close to English long bows. From what I have read, the range was comparable.

Daikyu IIRC.

 

[Shurdus]

The mongolians launched a space ship?!

That should say all you need to hear about why every civ can build longbows . Anybody, once trained, could use it (though the training was quite extensive). It is not a unique racial or country thing in that sense...it's just that some used them a lot more (or at all). Native Americans using tanks is iffy too! But, that's how the game was designed...so that we could do just these sorts of things!

Longbows ARE really annoying though.

Yet another example of you being unable to let go of an IU loss.

I agree though that the UU and UB are not there to really make a lot of sense. It should be recognisable, but that would be about the only thing that makes them qualify I think. In the end they are just there for diversity though, not really to make sense or te reflect real life accurately.

 

[Camikaze]

Should only China be able to use gunpowder units?

 

[Shurdus]

Should only China be able to use gunpowder units?

Are gunpowder units characteristic for the Chinese army?

The OP makes a statement that longbows were in fact pretty much an English weapon even though the English were not using them exclusively. Now I do not really know about the history of that but if what the OP claims is true then it is not farfetched that longbows would be a suitable UU for the English.

Gunpowder units otoh... You get the idea.

 

[Camikaze]

As you say, the longbow was used by more than just the English, but not to the same extent. Perhaps a better example of what I mean would be querying whether or not the aircraft carrier should be uniquely American, seeing as they use them more than anyone else.

 

[Elukka]

We could take this further and say that concrete civilizations as we have now don't make a whole lot of sense. Would 'Germans' living in a tropical rainforest really end up being culturally German?
I can't think of any better alternative, though I'm sure there is one...

 

[hundrumfun]

The French were known during this period for thier Heavily Armoured Knights, who trounced the far inferior English Knights during the Battle of Hastings.

What? You have no idea what you are talking about. The Anglo-Saxons lost Hastings because, after their hilltop shield wall fended off William's archers and knights and William's formations began to retreat, the Anglos broke formation to pursue them (despite orders to the contrary), allowing William to gain the upper hand. It had nothing to do with inferiority/superiority of Heavily Capitalized Knights or whatever.

 

[ston]

...and most famously Henry V's victory at the battle of Agincourt in 1415.

Use of the longbow is where the (in)famous English two-fingered salute comes from - "I still have my bow fingers!" A captured longbow man used to have his index and middle fingers cut off before being ransomed back to their kingdom. For that reason, they were pretty adept sword fighters too - discarding their bows and fighting with swords if the enemy came too close for comfort. If the enemy mistook them for infantry, they'd be more likely to keep their digits.

As a note, the Japanese had a similar weapon in Mideval times. I cannot remmeber the Japanese name for it, but it was a long range bow, the upper part very similar to the English longbow, and the lower part shorter and built like a recurve bow. I think the overall length was something like 60-65 inches, which is pretty close to English long bows. From what I have read, the range was comparable.

I think that the Japanese bow was designed like that to allow it to be used on horseback. I saw a demonstration years ago in Hyde Park of a bunch of Japanese horse archers galloping along hitting targets as they rode past. They have to draw and fire whilst effectively being no-handed on the horse - pretty impressive stuff!

 

[theskibum]

Horse archery is damned impressive if you ask me. I have seen live demonstrations of Hun mounted archery (never Japanese, though with that bow, would be cool) and I have seen live demos of Egyptian chariot archery. The horseback archerery requires incredible coordination and balance. Its amazing