Units, Upgrade tree, Combat, Healing and Equipment

[Knasp]

What about temporary units ?

You could have an (initially) very small standing army limit at the beginning (say 2-3 units)

But you'll have some stocks of equipment and (of course) some population in your cities.

Barbarian (or neutral) units approaching your territory could unlock a one-turn project in a city for conscription.

Next turn, some units (number and type based on equipment and population) spawn around the city for your civilization, with a counter before disbanding.

When the counter is down, the remaining personnel and equipment is sent back to the city.

We could have (longer) projects to plan for an invasion or cleaning that barbarian camp you've scouted, with a bigger counter for units, depending of the project.

thoughts ?

Sounds really interesting, especially if it required good planning for the Civ to develop and stockpile the necessary equipment to make an effective temporary army. I take it you mean that the population/productivity of the City would be reduced whilst conscription is in effect? But would the A.I.be able to use such a system?
Another cool project could be to prepare for a siege, where the city would stockpile food resources and construct defenses, whilst sacrificing other aspects. Especially if a cities access to all it's tiles could potentially be cut off, and not only by direct blocking/plundering of tiles.

 

[Gedemon]

Helping the AI to choose what to built in cities may be possible, and necessary if I want to implement the idea of a kind of governor building to automate production in human players cities.

There may be already enough event and methods exposed to Lua to force the AI to use conscription when planning a war (even if the diplomacy actions seems to be still limited, each new scenarios/DLC brings more methods, and I bet we'll get the source code before this mod enters alpha/beta anyway)

The difference with previous example is that it would involve (relatively) less coding to force the AI to build this or that in cities depending on context than to make it use completely new actions.

We use real number for population in cities and in units, so drafting population will have an effect on city size.

I'm also pondering to re-scale the city size, I mean the formula to relate city size (how much citizen you can place on slots or tiles around the city) to real population and re-balance the yields to have more citizen available in early game with less population, which would make the cost of drafting more visible (losing citizen slots even for size 6-12 cities)

I will have to think about it more, but I do like the idea of limiting early warfare to neighbors civilizations until you get new tech/policies to field real standing armies or get longer mobilization time.

 

[Knasp]

I will have to think about it more, but I do like the idea of limiting early warfare to neighbors civilizations until you get new tech/policies to field real standing armies or get longer mobilization time.

Maybe there could be different "Military campaigns" that you could embark on? If you go for a "Short campaign", then your army will cost less to maintain but will disband/lose morale more quickly (or the timer runs out). If you instead develop and go for a "Long campaign" then your army will require more plundering and capturing of enemy resource stocks.
Considering warfare, except for city projects to develop your military applications, it would also be cool if you could adopt technology/tactics from your enemy. Being at war should at least gain you some technology/application points.

 

[Gedemon]

Tech diffusion through combat is planned, yes.

 

[Gedemon]

Another draft for an unit upgrade tree (land units), showing some possible equipment classes (each class could represent multiple equipment type, for example Swords class: bronze swords, iron swords, steel swords)

"Infantry" and "Cavalry" are "melee" units, all the others are "support" units (stacking with melee)

All ranged units have a range of one, until rocket artillery. Relative ranges will be represented by the ability to provide various counter/support fire (or not)

Starting at the first "Skirmisher" unit, the "Recon" line will gain a ranged attack similar to the ranged line of "Light Infantry", and starting with musket, the "Infantry" line can "return fire" against the "Ranged" and "Recon" light infantry units

| Ancient | Classical | Medieval | Discovery | Industrial | Machine | Arms Race | Atomic | Information Infantry | blunt weapons + ancient armor (warrior)|swords + ancient armors + shields|medieval weapons + medieval armors|Musket|Rifled musket (Line infantry) upgrading to Rifle (Riflemen)|Repeating rifle + Combat Helmet (infantry)|Automatic rifle + Combat Helmet (infantry)|Assault Rifle + Combat Helmet (infantry)|Assault Rifle +Combat Helmet (infantry)
Infantry (alternate) |spear + light armor |spear + light armor|Pikes + medieval armors|( upgrading to musket )|||(motorized Infantry)|(mechanized infantry)
Cavalry |(chariot)|(horsemen)|(knights)|(lancer)|Rifle (cavalry)|Repeating rifle (cavalry)|(tank)|(main battle tank)|modern armor
Cavalry (alternate)||||||(landship)|(heavy tank)|( upgrading to main battle tank )
Light Infantry (recon)|light weapons (scout)||(explorer)|Musket (skirmisher)|Rifled musket (skirmisher) upgrading to Rifle (skirmisher)|Repeating rifle (scout on horses)|Automatic rifle + Combat Helmet (commando)|Assault Rifle + Combat Helmet (special forces)|Assault Rifle + Combat Helmet (special forces)
Light Infantry (ranged)|(slinger)|(archer)|(longbowman)|( upgrading to skirmisher )
Light Infantry (direct fire)| | |(crossbowman)|small cannons (culverin, volley gun)|(gatling gun)||(machine gun)
Light Infantry (anti-vehicule)| | | | | ||(AT crew)|(modern AT)
Artillery ||(catapult)|(trebuchet)|(bombard)|(field cannon)|(howitzer gun)||(rocket artillery)
Artillery (alternate)||(ballista)||( upgrading to bombard )|||(Field gun)|( upgrading to rocket artillery )
Anti-Air | | | | | ||(AA-Gun)|(Mobile SAM)

 

[Gedemon]

Ok, I think I'm going to try the standing army / mobilized army concept, the table above will have to be redone, with units specifics to a standing army, or, as discussed previously, related to the social position of the drafted personnel (social class ratio when mobilizing could be linked to policies)

For example, units using swords (or knights) would then be either part of a standing army or spawned from mobilized upper class citizen.

 

[Knasp]

Another draft for an unit upgrade tree (land units), showing some possible equipment classes (each class could represent multiple equipment type, for example Swords class: bronze swords, iron swords, steel swords)

Cool! I'd like to offer some suggestions, but what is the approximate time span of each era?
Is it something like:

Ancient = 3500 - 800 BC
Classical = 800 BC - 600 AD
Medieval = 600 - 1400
Discovery = 1400 - 1760
Industrial = 1760 - 1880
Machine = 1880 - 1920
Arms Race = 1920 - 1945
Atomic = 1945 - 1980
Information = 1980 - 2020

For example, I'm curious if you intend the Classical era to start with iron metallurgy c.1500 BC, or invention of Steel c.1300 BC, or c.800 BC when Classical antiquity "starts".

 

[Gedemon]

That's a good and important question. And a difficult one if we want to avoir Eurocentrism.

I may get around that difficulty by simply avoiding a calendar in the final mod (just using turns number and the age of the most advanced -known- civilization where it's actually shown), but for development we need to refer to it.

As in Civilization we refer to technological advancement, maybe we should split the ancient era in the three ages (stone, bronze, iron), linked to the previous discussion with dunkleosteus and the need to have starting units requiring far less personnel than the current Warrior, which means that it would be better to have the actual "Warrior" represented by 3 versions (same for spearmen).

 

[Gedemon]

I've finished to code the base for the multiple equipment per unit mechanism, including reserving equipment during construction and allocating it when the unit spawn on the map, and sending the equipment to units requiring it through supply line, as well as sending back surplus (when the unit is receiving better equipment that what's it's currently using)

Still need to code the "combat casualties" and "healing" for equipment, and we'll have something to test.

 

[Knasp]

I've finished to code the base for the multiple equipment per unit mechanism, including reserving equipment during construction and allocating it when the unit spawn on the map, and sending the equipment to units requiring it through supply line, as well as sending back surplus (when the unit is receiving better equipment that what's it's currently using)

Still need to code the "combat casualties" and "healing" for equipment, and we'll have something to test.

Looking good! Would it be possible to gain the equipment from defeated enemies? That would be really cool.

 

[Gedemon]

Looking good! Would it be possible to gain the equipment from defeated enemies? That would be really cool.

Yes, that's part of the design.

ATM you capture personnel and materiel, equipment will come later.

 

[Gedemon]

Now that I have advanced on the equipment mechanism, let's talk a bit about the units themselve.

An unit will be defined by its level of organization (personnel size, unit name and base strength) and the classes of equipment it will have access to (blunt weapons, swords, spear/pikes, ...)

Which would means that you could have an unit with a low organisation level (ie a "band of warrior") but with later era equipment ("steel warhammer"), making them much more stronger than a "band of warrior" with "wooden clubs", but maybe not as much as a "Men-at-arms company", even one with "wooden clubs".

Names and equipment types are just example, I count on everyone for suggestions...


edit: typo

 

[Leyrann]

I like that.

Strength comes from numbers, organization, training and equipment, where I'd argue that organization and training would go hand in hand and should probably fall under one denominator, where just "organization" would do fine.

I would assume then, that strength would be a level of equipment, multiplied by a level of organization, multiplied by the amount of soldiers?

All things would handle different parts, I assume. Equipment would probably be a baseline - it gives an amount of strength, which is then augmented one way or another by the organization and raw amount of soldiers.

After the baseline is set - a strength per soldier - it is then multiplied by the amount of soldiers. This should not, however, be a simple, straight multiplier, because if numbers on one side are larger, then those larger numbers will allow them to earn a larger advantage, further increasing the difference, which leads to a kind of snowball effect, where their advantage starts to stack up, so an army of 10000 would probably twice as strong as an army of 7000, despite not having twice the numbers.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, the organization comes around. First, and most obviously, more trained soldiers will work together better, allowing them to overcome number differences by making less mistakes and therefore dying less, as well as holding out better in a losing battle, not letting it turn into a rout. Additionally, a higher level of organization will allow for better coordination, meaning that a negative number difference matters less as your troops are positioned better, while a positive number difference matters more as, again, your troops are positioned better. Lastly, a higher level of organization may partly negative a technology advantage in an enemy army, as your army will be prepared to deal with it, maybe in the battle itself, maybe in the troop movements. So, long story short, a better level of organization would mean less men lost per round (I kinda assume that combat works with rounds like in IV, but I have to admit I have no idea), a smaller disadvantage while outnumbered, a bigger advantage when outnumbering and a smaller penalty for going up against superior weaponry.

(oh, and it's "wooden", not "wodden")

 

[Gedemon]

thanks, "wooden" fixed in my post

update on gitHub:

add code to handle equipment transfer from reserve to frontline when "healing"

This was the last bit of code to handle the equipment transfer/production from raw resources to an unit's frontline via supply line and reserve, including capture from other units and sending back surplus to cities.

Now I need to add a bit more of equipment in the database to test it...

Because I do expect some bugs at this point...

BTW If you are willing to modmod and play a bit with values, open Equipment.xml and Buildings.xml in \my games\Sid Meier's Civilization VI\Mods\Ged Civilization Overhaul\Data

There are only 2 units (remembrer that everything is temporary/placeholder for testing purpose) using equipment ATM:

• Warrior ("Blunt" weapons class: Wooden Club, Stone Axes, Spiked Club)
• Swordsmen (Swords class : Bronze, Iron, Steel)

The equipment are produced by the following buildings:

• Carpenter: Wooden Club (from Wood)
• Stone Mason : Stone Axes (from Stone)
• "City Center": Wooden Club, Stone Axes (the number are very low ATM, I do need to lower the requirement of the warrior to balance things at start)
• BlackSmith : Spiked Clubs (from Copper), Iron Swords (from Iron) (yes, I need to add the other swords here)

They are "unlocked" by techs (like some resources, say "iron", on the map)

An equipment/resource that you haven't unlocked by tech can't be produced in your buildings (or collected from the map) BUT it can be captured when fighting an unit using it or gained from your trade network, and it can also by used/transferred by/to your own units (if they can use that class of equipment).

For now they do not affect combat as they will when I'll apply promotions based on equipment percentage to an unit, they only affect the "anti personnel" value of your unit (the ratio of dead/wounded/prisoners from an unit's frontline casualties after a combat)

What's planned is to have units with a base strength value, representing the combat capacity of that unit when using the lowest kind of equipment in the classes it can use.

Based on the composition of the equipment class in frontline, the attribute of the units will change, and some "fake" promotions will be applied to raise its strength.

When two units enter combat, the value of the damage dealt (ie "frontline casualties") is only defined by the units strength, as described above, but the equipment will also have multiple attributes defining how exactly those "casualties" are applied to the units, like:

• AntiPersonnel: higher value raise the ratio of death in the enemy unit (personnel casualties from frontline can be: dead, wounded, captured)
• Desirability : Units request equipment types of higher desirability first (Your personnel will prefer to use Steel swords over Bronze swords)
  
• Toughness: higher value lower the ratio of loss of that equipment type compared to lower equipment type (for example losing relatively less Steel Swords than Bronze swords)
  
• PersonnelArmor : higher value lower the ratio of death in your unit (not coded yet)
  
• AntiPersonnelArmor : higher value lower the effect of PersonnelArmor in the other unit (not coded yet)

More attributes are planned, like IgnorePersonnelArmor, VehicleArmor, AntiVehicle, AntiVehicleArmor, IgnoreVehicleArmor, Reliability, FuelConsumption, FuelType, ...

 

[Knasp]

I wanted to compile a preliminary suggestion for units & equipment regarding the Ancient-Classical era. The table below is a suggestion loosely based on the history of ancient Egypt (Old, middle, new kingdoms), the empire of Persia and classical Greece (and a little China).

The most common weapon of the Ancient Era is the bow and arrow. And therefore it is also logical that the most common form of protection is a large rectangular shield. One problem with planning units and equipment for the Ancient Eras is that before 2700 BC you don't really see any specialization or division of soldiers due to weaponry. Beginning with the Old Kingdom however, the very basic structure of archers/skirmishers and spearmen is established.

Would love to hear some comments/thoughts/feedback:

| Pre-Bow (50,000-10,000 BC) | Pre-Ancient (c.10,000-3000 BC) | Archaic period (3000-2500) | Old-Middle Kingdom (2500-1500) | New Kingdom (1500-1000) | Early Iron Age (1000-500) | Later Iron Age (500-0)
Light Infantry (ranged)|clubs, javelins,spears (stone,flint)*, slings (pebbles)|horn bows (flint')/slings|simple wood bows (flint)/rarely recurve bows (copper)/slings|bows (flint,bronze)/slings|improved recurve bows (bronze)/composite bows (bronze)/slings|recurve bows (bronze,iron)/composite bows (bronze,iron)/slings (lead bullets)|crossbows (bronze/iron)
Light Infantry (close)|||large shields (wood/reed) + spears/javelins (flint/copper), clubs|spears/javelins (flint/bronze) + large shields||spears/swords, javelins (bronze/iron) + medium-large shields, maybe helmet (bronze/iron)|
Heavy Infantry||||rare bronze swords,axes + large shields|swords/axes/maces (bronze) + shields|(immortals) scale armor + shields + spears/swords, bows/slings|(thorakitai)(roman legionaries)
Heavy Infantry (alternate)||||||(hoplites)|(phalangites/pikemen)
Cavalry (skirmishers)||||chariots + shields + bows + spears + javelins (bronze)|chariots + scale armor (bronze) + composite bows|(horsemen) javelins + spears + swords, maybe bows and armor|(horse archer) composite bow + spears + maybe armor
Cavalry (alternate)|||||||(cataphracts) long spears (2-handed) + armor + swords, maybe horse armor
Artillery (anti-personnel)|||||||(ballista)
Artillery (anti-fortifications)|||||||(catapult)
Artillery (alternate)|||||||(traction trebutchet)

*() = within brackets I've specified either names of historical unit, or the materials commonly used for weapons, equipment and missiles (arrowheads etc).
, = Mixed use within same unit
/ = Alternative weapons and equipment, that are more optional and differing between units
+ = Combinations of weapons and equipment​

When it comes to unarmored combat, metal doesn't really offer any advantage in regards to flint (or the more rare obsidian) arrow- and spearheads. And the simple curved bows are better suited for flint arrowheads, whilst recurve bows and later composite bows generally require arrowheads of metal to be effective. Recurve and composite bows are also more costly to produce and maintain (moisture sensitive).

You need bronze or iron to make effective armors and arrowheads for recurve/composite bows (because copper is too soft). However, many metals (copper, meteoric iron, tin, lead etc) were quite expensive and desired for other uses in Ancient history. Especially tin (required for bronze) is a rare metal, meaning for example that Egypt had to import all its tin for bronze production.

 

[Knasp]

I've got another idea regarding military units and gold purchasing. Maybe all of the units available by gold purchase could be Mercenary units.

The recruitment cost could be low but the upkeep cost high. You could even have a time limit for how long they would stay in your service, similar to the "city conscription/emergency drafting" previously discussed. The number of turns that they're at your service would represent the length of their contracts. For example: the Persian (Achaemenid) Empire hired a lot of different mercenaries, especially when defending against Alexander's Macedonian armies. They hired Indian War Elephants with crews, and even Greek Hoplites. The Greeks in turn employed thracian Peltasts. The Egyptians employed Nubian Archers, perhaps starting off as prisoners of war. Some rulers even used foreign troops as bodyguards, because they were less likely to take political sides.
Basically Mercenaries were unit types which the Civ couldn't produce themselves, or whose skill and training was hard to match.

Is it at all possible to "save" units that are disbanded? Because then once a contract has expired, you could rehire the same unit (more expensive of course) but with replenished manpower, intact experience and promotions, maybe even improved equipment. It would be really cool if the pool of mercenaries would be shared between Civ's, and the units more or less permanent. It would be simply awesome to face mercenary units, that were previously on your side. A destroyed mercenary unit would slowly be restored after some time, and then become available for hire once more.

Even if a permanent roster of individual/legacy mercenary units isn't possible to implement, there are many possible conditions/sources for the availability of Mercenary units:

• Diffusion by neighbouring Civs. By trade networks, or the neighboring Civ's: military units, production, applications, training, traditions, resources etc.
• Whenever a Civ disbands (or looses) a military unit, that unit type becomes available for Mercenary recruitment.
• Whenever you defeat an enemy unit or capture men in battle, you're more likely to have that kind of unit available as Mercs.
• Mercenary units could become available based on the Era
• Mercs could be based on resources in proximity to the Civ, even unexploited ones.
• Mercs could become available based on the Research level of your Civ.
• Mercs could become available simply because the Civ is lacking the application or tech for that specific unit. (Supply and demand)
• The number of Mercs available for recruitment could depend on the size of the Middle class population of your own or your neighbors cities.
• The greater the military production/development a Civ focuses on, the more and better Mercs will become available for neighbors.
• The lower the military production/development in your own Civ, the more Mercs would become available, since you are more dependent on their services when lacking a national army.
• If you add mechanics of Independence movements/Civil wars, then mercenaries could be a result of such conflicts. Maybe even exiled nobles (inspired by GoT's "The Golden Company")
• If you keep City states in some form, then they could also be a source, especially militaristic.

I'm not saying that Mercenaries are a must-have, or that it's worth the effort to attempt the coding, but I think it would be really awesome to see.

 

[Knasp]

For the personnel recruitment, policies could affect the % drafted from each population class, the base values will change.

I'll try to put some more thoughts on the difference between a self equipped army and one with standardized equipment, suggestions on implementation are welcome.

Could be also linked to the difference between "building" an unit (multiple turns) and "buying" one directly with gold.

I have a suggestion regarding recruitment etc:

• Gold = can be used to hire mercs (temporary expensive soldiers)

• City production of units = When units are produced in a city, this represents the Standing/Professional army. No time limit but high upkeep.

• City project for conscription = A project for mustering (temporary?) local troops in a city, as defense against invaders or when preparing for a military campaign. This requires a sizeable Lower class population and stocking of weapons & equipment resources, for maximal gain. Lower upkeep than Professional army.

Utilizing social classes

• Basically all professional soldiers (specifically produced by city) would be recruited from the Middle class population. Their upkeep costs would be less than Mercenaries, but still higher than conscripts/militias.

Edit: Alternatively, you could let all "Light" units from City production, i.e. mostly unarmored archers, skirmishers, spearmen etc, be recruited from the Lower class.​

• All chariots/cavalry/airplane pilots would be recruited from Upper classes

• When mustering an army through a city project: i.e. peasants/conscripts/workers/slaves. Their numbers would be extracted from the Lower class population.
• Hiring Mercenaries wouldn't reduce population at all. Although most would probably be Middle class.

Policies
Possible policies affecting these factors could be for example:

• Warrior caste - Privileges given to Middle class becoming dedicated warriors = Better equipment and training of standing army. Less income from Middle class taxation.

• Militias - Training/organising peasants for better defense = Faster defense mobilisations, higher experience and/or equipment level of Lower class conscripts/Light units, higher upkeep.

• Vassalage - Subjects required to supply troops for the king's wars = Cheaper Cavalry units/better equipment & training. Less income from Upper class taxation.

I think it's important that Social policies have a downside (however minor) and not just purely positive bonuses.

 

[Gedemon]

@Knasp

Thanks, a lot of good suggestions, I like them.

The idea of conscription using the stocked equipment and the city population has made redondant the ability to buy units that I wanted to reimplement (with units construction representing the standing army in all cases, yes), and mercenaries are the perfect replacement.

As that ability (buying unit) would be a "project" represented by a "fake" building made available on context (like what will be used for conscription), so this doesn't require particular AI coding (but I still need to code the conditions of course...)

Saving units is possible, yes, to a point. I mean the mode already save extra data for units (composition in personnel - materiel - equipment - food - etc..., and a few other things, including turn created and HP), so the code is already here, it's just a matter of adding new entries in the table saved (conscription/contract turn, disbanded at turn, experience & promotions)

But on the technical side I've already tried to lower the data in that table because its serialization (done 2-3 times each turn before "save game" events) in end game on large map could take a few seconds, as it was generating a string of more than a million caracters... In the current code, I'm cleaning it from dead units to prevent this, still there is a limit to what can be kept in it, but eventually I could use an archive table less accessed for disbanded units (and another one for dead units in case we want to access stats - I know some people love end-game stats like which unit had made the more kills, best in offense, defense, etc... Yep, I'm one of them)

So short answer: yes, saving units is possible, part of their attributes are already saved by the mod.

I also like the idea of a "pool of mercenaries", if I had to expand it a bit I'll consider mercenary armies, ie not just single unit (well, initially single units in early eras, then hiring "armies" of 2-5 units until the era where standing armies become the standard)

Barbarian units could also somehow be linked to mercenaries (roaming and looting the map when not under contract), if we can make less agressive barbarian units (ie non-suicidal)

Quick summary, please correct me if I've forgotten something:

Standing Army : unit construction in city, from "personnel" reserve and equipment stock - medium upkeep cost, no auto-disbanding (I need to think about the opportunity to create an "officer" reserve, something I'm pondering since R.E.D. WWII)
Conscription: construction of a one-turn "building-project" spawning unit(s), mostly from "lower class" population, unit type dependant of population classes and available equipment, % from each classes could change with policies, low upkeep, (low) turn limit before disbanding
Mercenaries: buying a "building-project" spawning unit(s), unit type dependant of nearby civilizations context (or/and the mercenary group history), no resources required, high upkeep cost, (medium) turn limit before disbanding

Now, do you think that you could try to include that information somehow in the units table ? Eventually with an estimation/guess of the number of "personnel" required in an "unit" ?

For reference, we'll use division-sized units in latest eras, (ie 5,000 to 10,000 personnel in an "Infantry Divison" units), but lower values for the first units (50-100 for example in a "Hunting Party" ?)

We'll need some kind of progression on which the general balance of the mod will be based (production, growth, ...)

And propositions for unit's "organization" names (could/should change based on the civilization ethnicity ?) are welcome

 

[Knasp]

@Knasp

Thanks, a lot of good suggestions, I like them.

Glad to have something to offer.

Barbarian units could also somehow be linked to mercenaries (roaming and looting the map when not under contract), if we can make less agressive barbarian units (ie non-suicidal)

Yeah, that's really neat. Barbarians never crossed my mind. Actually, if you want to you wouldn't need to disband the mercenary unit once the contract runs out. Just turn the unit into a barbarian ^_^

Quick summary, please correct me if I've forgotten something:

Standing Army : unit construction in city, from "personnel" reserve and equipment stock - medium upkeep cost, no auto-disbanding (I need to think about the opportunity to create an "officer" reserve, something I'm pondering since R.E.D. WWII)
Conscription: construction of a one-turn "building-project" spawning unit(s), mostly from "lower class" population, unit type dependant of population classes and available equipment, % from each classes could change with policies, low upkeep, (low) turn limit before disbanding
Mercenaries: buying a "building-project" spawning unit(s), unit type dependant of nearby civilizations context (or/and the mercenary group history), no resources required, high upkeep cost, (medium) turn limit before disbanding

Now, do you think that you could try to include that information somehow in the units table ? Eventually with an estimation/guess of the number of "personnel" required in an "unit" ?

For reference, we'll use division-sized units in latest eras, (ie 5,000 to 10,000 personnel in an "Infantry Divison" units), but lower values for the first units (50-100 for example in a "Hunting Party" ?)

We'll need some kind of progression on which the general balance of the mod will be based (production, growth, ...)

And propositions for unit's "organization" names (could/should change based on the civilization ethnicity ?) are welcome

Is there an easy way to make a table in a forum post? Otherwise, I'll probably just do a google sheet.
The hardest part isn't really to gather information about a specific Civilization, specific soldiers and equipment. The problem comes when trying to generalise the information into unit categories, and determine how/when units should be upgraded/replaced.

Anyway, I'm gonna look into info on unit sizes/organization etc.

 

[Gedemon]

I've added a few equipment classes for testing purpose, especially constructing units before having the infrastructure/tech to produce their equipment by stealing it (or from trade routes)

Updated on GitHub

- Add Spears, Bows and some Armor equipment classes
- Add Artillator and Armorer Buildings
- Remove pre-required techs for Archer, Spearman, Swordsman, Chariot
- Lower personnel requirement for all early units
- Change Standard number of game's turn to Marathon (but all production are still at standard speed)
- Remove units upgrades path (until the custom replacing mechanism is implemented)
- Add some mod-related rewards to Goody Huts and Barbarian Camps

Let me know what you think of it.