Unit upgrade paths (cavalry -> landship)

[Tomice]

Gazebo recently added the Cuirassier unit as continuation of the mounted archer line.
Both the melee and ranged horse unit line merge into cavalry, which upgrades into the landship just a single tech later.

What about this:

• Lancer upgrades directly into Landship (3 tech columns between them)
• Cuirassier upgrades into Cavalry, which becomes ranged
• Cavalry upgrades into Helicopter (which should be unlocked earlier and may or may not become ranged)

As a result, we would get linear upgrade paths for both ranged and melee mounted units, meaning more unit diversity throughout the game.
Helicopters would become more meaningful and less of a one-trick pony (as they currently can't fight anything from their era successfully except for tank units).
Plus hit-and run tactics would fit beautifully for them.

 

[BenchBreaker]

yeah, makes sense

 

[Funak]

I brought this up before, in a slightly different way, but yes I don't like the merging of the melee and ranged mounted lines at all. I don't think this is the best solution however. Adding a new ranged mounted unit between the cuirassier and the Helicopter would probably be better.

I'm really still not a fan of how the mounted ranged (should probably be called something else if it continues beyond horses) combat units are operating however and fixing that should probably be the first step.
Helicopters are already stupidly powerful without getting the ability to do 2 range hit and run tactics with 7 movement, or whatever they have, and the ability to cross mountains.

 

[Sendaf]

"Skirmisher" could be a better word then mounted archer in this case.

I like this idea, mounted ranged units are fun to use and add a little finesse. I don't like the hit and run upgrades though. It makes sense historically but can be abused very easily in game. Keep the movement after shooting to Unique units only if anywhere at all

 

[Funak]

"Skirmisher" could be a better word then mounted archer in this case.

I like this idea, mounted ranged units are fun to use and add a little finesse. I don't like the hit and run upgrades though. It makes sense historically but can be abused very easily in game. Keep the movement after shooting to Unique units only if anywhere at all

Yeah I'm really not a fan of it either, it just gives you way too much power.
The three solutions I see to that are the following:

1. Make the unit unable to move after attacking, increase CS and RCS to compensate.
This would pretty much turn them into slightly more mobile and durable archery-units, which is think is fine considering they cost resources. It would make them more vulnerable to counterattacks since they are going to be in range of whatever they're attacking, which I also think is fine. They would still have no defensive bonuses (like other mounted units) so they would probably lose the fight vs an archery-unit of similar era if they are both in heavy terrain, which I also think is fine.

2. Keep the attack after moving and instead lower the range to 1 tile, increase CS and RCS to compensate.
This would allow them to keep their hit and run ability, but only on really favorable terrain. This I feel makes a lot more sense when you reach the cuirassier and helicopter part of the tree, all units around you have guns as well and I'm not sure why you would out-range them. Earlier on, I'm not sure, I feel like a stationary archery unit would have a better shot at making a target at range than a mounted archery unit, but not enough of a difference that the change makes sense. It does however make sense balance-wise.

3. Make the unit unable to mov e after attacking and lower the range to 1 tile, increase CS and RCS greatly to compensate.
Not sure how well this would work, but I kinda like the concept.

 

[phantomaxl1207]

I like how Rise of Nations has Cav Archers turn into Armored Scout Cars. Think Humvee, those vehicles.

 

[Tomice]

There was a discussion about early game mounted skirmishers recently, and I really didn't want to restart it less then a month after the results have been implemented.

I just wanted to talk about the lategame and about a possible, logical follow-up change.

That being said, an intermediate unit between cavalry and gunships would be ideal, but I can't come up with a historically fitting unit.

 

[Funak]

That being said, an intermediate unit between cavalry and gunships would be ideal, but I can't come up with a historically fitting unit.

Cuiriasser not Cavalry, right?

Dragoon perhaps? Having two different helicopter units wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea either, I think there were 2 of them in civ4, weren't there?


Also the 1 month time is almost up anyways, might as well start the discussion now.

 

[Zarrk]

What about this:

• Lancer upgrades directly into Landship (3 tech columns between them)
• Cuirassier upgrades into Cavalry, which becomes ranged
• Cavalry upgrades into Helicopter (which should be unlocked earlier and may or may not become ranged)

I totally agree with you:

• Cavalry to Landship is too quick and the need of coal was never a problem
• Hard to justify the loss of ranged attack by upgrading long pistols to rifles
• Helicopters come too late and with no veterancy

That being said, an intermediate unit between cavalry and gunships would be ideal, but I can't come up with a historically fitting unit.

To keep the mobility/raid aspect of this unit line and history consistency, I think the best choice would be a tank destroyer half-track or an armored car, sadly I don't think anyone has made an adequate model. Maybe the anti tank gun could be reintroduced with extra moves for a total of 4.

 

[Zarrk]

Cuiriasser not Cavalry, right?

Dragoon perhaps? Having two different helicopter units wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea either, I think there were 2 of them in civ4, weren't there?


Also the 1 month time is almost up anyways, might as well start the discussion now.

Actually Cavalry is more a sort refined Dragoon than an evolved unit, both are mounted infantry fighting with saber and rifle. Also Dragoon appeared in the beginning of the 17th century.

 

[Funak]

Actually Cavalry is more a sort refined Dragoon than an evolved unit, both are mounted infantry fighting with saber and rifle. Also Dragoon appeared in the beginning of the 17th century.

I mostly meant that they were active around the same time, and one could be ranged and one could be melee, but if you have a better idea, by all means.

 

[Hakan-i Cihan]

Actually Cavalry is more a sort refined Dragoon than an evolved unit, both are mounted infantry fighting with saber and rifle. Also Dragoon appeared in the beginning of the 17th century.

In the USA they renamed the dragoons to "cavalry" after a reorganization while in Europe two different classes of cavalry with firearms existed: cuirassier and dragoon. As I understand it, cavalry is an "American UU" for the dragoon.

Also my suggestion would be use of Cuirassier instead of Cavalry as melee unit and the dragoon as the ranged unit. This because the cuirassier was heavy cavalry with armour and firearms and the dragoon were medium cavalry (initially mounted infantry) with firearms.

I like how Rise of Nations has Cav Archers turn into Armored Scout Cars. Think Humvee, those vehicles.

I definitly like this idea for later part of the upgrade path for the mounted ranged units.

 

[tu_79]

"Skirmisher" could be a better word then mounted archer in this case.

I like this idea, mounted ranged units are fun to use and add a little finesse. I don't like the hit and run upgrades though. It makes sense historically but can be abused very easily in game. Keep the movement after shooting to Unique units only if anywhere at all

When I hear skirmisher, I inmediatly think of slinger halfings (Fantasy General). They were fast units on rough terrain, had a weak and short range attack (no retaliation), but they could hide in forests or buildings, dealing great damage with a surprise attack.

Hit and run tactics are good for units with high mobility and low attack and health. They are just an harassing unit, easy to kill, not really dangerous but insidious. Such behaviour is like a ranged 1, movement 4, low health unit in Civ 5.

Dragoons may fit. They are fast, they can shoot with rifles and they are few.

Cuirassiers are the horsed 'tank'.

 

[Tomice]

Currently we have this for melee mobile units (number indicates tech column):

• 2 Horseman
• 5 Knight
• 8 Lancer
• 10 Cavalry
• 11 Landship
• 13 Tank
• 16 Modern Armor
• 17 GDR

... and this for ranged mobile units:

• 1 Chariot
• 3 Skirmisher
• 5 Heavy Skirm.
• 8 Cuirassier
• (10 line merges into Cavalry)
• (15 the lonesome helicopter)

I suggest "stealing" cavalry from the melee line and turning it into an continuation of the ranged line. We could then attach helicopters by allowing them 2 eras earlier (which would be ahistoric - they were introduced in Vietnam, not WW2). This would still leave a gap of several lategame tech columns.

So you guys are right, we could really use some WW1/2 era unit for the ranged fast-moving unit line. Or two kinds of helicopters. Or maybe a futuristic, hovering helicopter successor.

 

[Gazebo]

"Skirmisher" could be a better word then mounted archer in this case.

I like this idea, mounted ranged units are fun to use and add a little finesse. I don't like the hit and run upgrades though. It makes sense historically but can be abused very easily in game. Keep the movement after shooting to Unique units only if anywhere at all

They're already called Skirmishers (and Heavy Skirmishers for the medieval counterpart).

So, what I'm reading (I think) is this:

1.) Lancer into Landship (makes sense)
2.) Cuirassier into Cavalry (will need to check unit, make sure it can)
3.) Cavalry into something into Gunship (probably going to use anti-tank gun)
4.) Mounted ranged units reduced to a range of 1, CS increased slightly

Sound good?

 

[Tomice]

They're already called Skirmishers (and Heavy Skirmishers for the medieval counterpart).

So, what I'm reading (I think) is this:

1.) Lancer into Landship (makes sense)
2.) Cuirassier into Cavalry (will need to check unit, make sure it can)
3.) Cavalry into something into Gunship (probably going to use anti-tank gun)
4.) Mounted ranged units reduced to a range of 1, CS increased slightly

Sound good?

We discussed the ranged skirmishers not long ago. I consider them mostly fine as they are, but I could live with range 1 as a compromise - as long as they retain hit&run!

Could you give them the "retreat" promotion against melee infantry as compensation?
This way, they'd have historically correct counters (melee cav and foot archers).
And no, I don't think melee cav should get it as well (because they represent heavier cav which is slower and also doesn't need to run away from a melee battle).

Another possible compensation would be 5 movement points for this line, if we see 1 range cripples them too much.

 

[supracseduch]

They're already called Skirmishers (and Heavy Skirmishers for the medieval counterpart).

So, what I'm reading (I think) is this:

1.) Lancer into Landship (makes sense)
2.) Cuirassier into Cavalry (will need to check unit, make sure it can)
3.) Cavalry into something into Gunship (probably going to use anti-tank gun)
4.) Mounted ranged units reduced to a range of 1, CS increased slightly

Sound good?

As long as the AI can do some 1 range hit-and-run, I don't see why not. And while we're at it, do we also apply these changes to Chariot Archers and War Chariots? If so, they're gonna need the Move After Attacking promotion too.

 

[Funak]

They're already called Skirmishers (and Heavy Skirmishers for the medieval counterpart).

So, what I'm reading (I think) is this:

1.) Lancer into Landship (makes sense)
2.) Cuirassier into Cavalry (will need to check unit, make sure it can)
3.) Cavalry into something into Gunship (probably going to use anti-tank gun)
4.) Mounted ranged units reduced to a range of 1, CS increased slightly

Sound good?

You could probably spread the skirmisher line out a bit instead, and keep the cavalry for the lancer line. I mean there are 3 units in the skirmisher line before the cuirassier and 2 units in the lancer line before the lancer (and they are on the same tech).

Honestly speaking I'm a little bit weirded out by the Landship, it just comes at a way too awkward time, maybe it can be moved back a tech or something?

We discussed the ranged skirmishers not long ago. I consider them mostly fine as they are, but I could live with range 1 as a compromise - as long as they retain hit&run!

Could you give them the "retreat" promotion against melee infantry as compensation?
This way, they'd have historically correct counters (melee cav and foot archers).
And no, I don't think melee cav should get it as well (because they represent heavier cav which is slower and also doesn't need to run away from a melee battle).

Another possible compensation would be 5 movement points for this line, if we see 1 range cripples them too much.

I think just letting them have enough CS to take a blow or two is better than giving them all a chance to retreat. It would make flanking their worst enemy/counter instead which I think is fine. It would buff Mongolia a bit I guess, but I don't necessarily think that is a problem.

 

[tu_79]

Yes, sounds good. If they can stand a city hit, they'll make good pillagers also. Are they able to steal trade routes?

 

[Zarrk]

What about giving them "Survivalism 1" instead (maybe not for AT and Gunships), it seems most people don't like to take it on scouts, it would certainly help the AI to protect range 1 squishier units and it fits their raider role.