[C3C] UUs Historically Accurate or Gameplay ccurate?

[SayHayKid]

Since different civilizations/continents progressed at vastly different rates some of the UUs appear much, much, much earlier than is historically accurate, but makes sense gameplay-wise. For example, the Impi is a replacement for the spearman, but that would be thousands of years ahead of their actual historical experience. Or the Mounted Warrior, a horseman replacement, historically would be more of a knight replacement. Same with the Aztecs.

Anyhow, has anybody thought about improving their stats and bumping them forward to a later era? It then becomes a matter of Impi at the time of Rifleman and does it make sense to give them comparable stats? Or Mounted Warriors similar stats, especially defense, compared to knights?

 

[Predator145]

In my modded epic game the mounted warrior is moved to Chivalry and replaces the "cavalry archer" (8/2/2 , 4 def bombard, 60 shields) , which is a separate line of mounted units from knights. They upgrade from horsemen and only require horses. Knights upgrade from a heavy cavalry line that requires horses and iron from the start, taking away the very strong mass upgrade+disconnect+mass upgrade strat. The mounted warrior only costs 40 shields. So the atk to shields ratio remains the same to stock game but by moving them to Chivalry, Iroquois (renamed First Nations) get nerfed a bit since they already have the Ag+Exp trait combo.

Jags and Impis aren't actually far ahead of their historical tech tree. 15th century Mexicas were in the stone age tool and weapon-wise. The Zulus were an iron age society with tech on par with ancient Celts and Germans. With the Aztecs (renamed Mexicas) I did give them another UU called "Eagle Knight" (8/4/2, enslaves to worker, requires iron, 60 shields). This foot unit is separate from the knight line and comes with Chivalry. It's also a way for me to ensure the AI gets their GA.

It's already a stretch to give stone age eagle knights comparable stats to high medieval old world troops. You could bump impis to medieval times at least. Maybe turn them into part of an offensive branch since their tactics were far more about charging and enveloping than shield wall hoplite warfare. Then they can very well overwhelm riflemen with sheer numbers.

 

[Spoonwood]

According to civ III combat calculator, 8 attack 4/4 units win most of the time vs. 4 defense 4/4 units in a city, almost 70% of the time when attacking 4 defense units with 3 hitpoints, and over 80% of the time if attacking 4 defense units with 2 hitpoints. Those numbers compare to 6 attack cavalry fighting 3 defense pikemen in cities. Mounted warriors vs. spearmen don't have those sorts of odds if attacking a city or walled town.

If favored to win most battles and having the first mover's advantage, what motivation does there exist for artillery type units?

 

[Civinator]

Or the Mounted Warrior, a horseman replacement, historically would be more of a knight replacement.

Even this setting would not be historically accurate, as in the age of knights there were no horses in America. The setting of units in Civ 3 is frequently a big compromise.

 

[SayHayKid]

Even this setting would not be historically accurate, as in the age of knights there were no horses in America. The setting of units in Civ 3 is frequently a big compromise.

True. I just meant as far as when the Civ actually existed or their leader was in power.

Technology wise the Impi is a spearman, but historically Shaka Zulu and the Impis were in the Industrial era and would be contemporaries of the Rifleman. However, gameplay wise it wouldn't make sense to have Spearman versus Cavalry. Or the case with the Iroquois that they were actually in power during the Rennaisance.

I was trying to think of a balance to bring such units forward a little bit in the timeline to a different tech closer to their real-life existence. I understand where they are for gameplay purposes. I just thought I'd see if anybody else moved such units and how they made it work. Ultimately gameplay balance wins out of course.

 

[Sakharov]

I tried to do something similar in my personal epic mod. However, I replace unit with tottaly different one, much later in tech tree. For example, Korean UU in stock game really sucks. So I replaced it with Infantry counterpart which has 6/10/2 A/D/M stats and it uses Nipponese Infantry graphics from WW2 scenario. I called it "Jungle Patrol", LOL, maybe you'll give me idea for better name. Somewhat Impi of industrial era. It also ignores jungles, forests and marshes. I think that in industrial era it won't be overpowered advantage, cause most of forests and jungles are cleared by that time.
Also I replace that stupid French UU (really useless IMHO) with Foreign Legion. At first I made it 8/10/1 plus airdrop ability, but then I thought that 8 attack won't be enough to use them offensively, maybe give them attack of 10? How much UU should be stronger than its counterpart? Some percentage value? For example, Hoplite has 50% more attack than Spearmen, but Swiss Pikeman has 1/3 more that regular one.

 

[SayHayKid]

The Musketeer is pretty lame. I am looking to add a Fusilier and move the French UU under that as Imperial Guard. No idea what a Korean guerrilla type unit would be called. But I don't think they have jungles. Early units it is typically a bump of one (sometimes two) for a UU. Modern I'd say at least 2.

 

[Spoonwood]

Also I replace that stupid French UU (really useless IMHO) with Foreign Legion.

Given that you attack a lot more than defend, I can understand how you can get your impression. However, AIs fighting wars aren't able to strategize effectively. For AIs, I think the musketeer more useful than you've indicated.

For example, Hoplite has 50% more attack than Spearmen, but Swiss Pikeman has 1/3 more that regular one.

Any hoplite has 50% more *defense* than any spearman.

The French musketeer in a non-capital city on flatland has a defense strength of 8. A musket in a city on flatland has a defense of 6.4.

The defensive value of the musketeer probably would take on greater relevance if you either played an "infantry variant", where you just can't use horse based units (and maybe also tanks). Perhaps also if the movement of horse based units got nerfed. I guess something like all horse based units have a movement of 1.

 

[Ozymandias]

BTW I did post the revelatory "C3C Combat Calculation Tables" for d/l.