What's up with the Hoplite?

[Xetal]

I'm curious what the best use of the Hoplite/Companion combination will be. If a Greek player beelines Bronze Working, then does the same for Horseback Riding, they'll have a lot of time to build up veteran Hoplites while waiting on Companions to get researched/built. I'd guess that ancient Greek armies will be mostly Hoplites with Companion as support; possibly, a small number (<5) Companion will rush ahead to disrupt defensive formations while the main Hoplite line marches up, or the two stay together until engaging the enemy, where the Hoplites hold the line and the Companion flanks.

Seems like a very powerful one-two for the Greek player, and something I'd rather not be on the receiving end on.

5 speed.

Companions move faster than Modern Armor, almost as fast as Gunships.

That and a seriously beefed up Spearmen is a nasty, nasty combo. Even when you hit the iron age it'll be nasty. You can build less swords because you have stronger spears, which leaves you more iron for catapults.

In fact, Companions are actually somewhat comparable to Knights. The strength difference between Companions->Knights is the same as between Spears->Hoplites... and Knights only move 3 instead of 5.

 

[Thyrwyn]

The Romans really have no more of a challenge than other civs in that era: other civs will have to choose between Swordsmen and Catapults; Romans have to choose between Legions and Ballistae. So the Romans would have the same total number of these units, but since both of the Roman units are stronger, Rome will be doubly as strong in that era. And, since we know that each UU will have a unique special ability, and we have no idea what that will be for the Ballista, they will be even stronger than we now know. They will still clean up in the Classical Era.

 

[Lyoncet]

In fact, Companions are actually somewhat comparable to Knights. The strength difference between Companions->Knights is the same as between Spears->Hoplites... and Knights only move 3 instead of 5.

I didn't even realize that! Plus Companions don't require horse and probably require a lot fewer hammers. Depending on how units obsolete, we could see Greeks avoiding the CiV equivalent of Guilds for ages… that would be something!

Of course, we also can't assume that that 2 strength difference will be of the same magnitude as in CIV, or that with 1UPT it will be as viable to make more weaker, low-hammer-cost units. But still, that seems pretty powerful.

 

[Venereus]

Chivalry replaces Guilds.

 

[ShaqFu]

I didn't even realize that! Plus Companions don't require horse and probably require a lot fewer hammers. Depending on how units obsolete, we could see Greeks avoiding the CiV equivalent of Guilds for ages… that would be something!

Of course, we also can't assume that that 2 strength difference will be of the same magnitude as in CIV, or that with 1UPT it will be as viable to make more weaker, low-hammer-cost units. But still, that seems pretty powerful.

I don't know about resource-less; if it's a replacement for Horsemen it almost certainly inherits the Horse requirement. It's already plenty good with the strength boost and 5 move - being resourceless would push it over the top. Granted, it very well could be a "free" unit, but I'd be extremely surprised if it is.

And what's with Arioch's site? The info on the War Chariot is gone, and the Companion is replaced by:

(Ancient Transport)
Notes: Ancient/Classical version of the naval transPORT 71,131,22,79,133,186 g
Notes: Greek Unique Unit. Presumed to replace Horseman.

 

[Venereus]

I don't know about resource-less; if it's a replacement for Horsemen it almost certainly inherits the Horse requirement. It's already plenty good with the strength boost and 5 move - being resourceless would push it over the top. Granted, it very well could be a "free" unit, but I'd be extremely surprised if it is.

The Egyptian War Chariot is resource-free as far as we know. I recall someone from the forum asking if it runs on slaves then...Pretty funny.

 

[Lyoncet]

Chivalry replaces Guilds.

That's why I said "avoiding the CiV equivalent of Guilds." The point was "avoiding the tech needed for Knights."

And unless I'm mistaken, Arioch's site had Companions listed as not requiring a resource. Can't check now since the entry's all silly.

 

[Venereus]

That's why I said "avoiding the CiV equivalent of Guilds." The point was "avoiding the tech needed for Knights."

And I just gave the name, why are we still talking about this? Is it because I added a gratuitous ad?

 

[AriochIV]

And what's with Arioch's site? The info on the War Chariot is gone, and the Companion is replaced by:

That was weird; my web server was making some weird kind of substitution on the text "transport mode."

It should be fixed now.

 

[Lyoncet]

Ah I gotcha; thought you were offering a correction, not adding a factoid.

And really, would a life without Chivalry be worth living? Chivalry as the ad defines it, anyways.

[edit]
Well now that the Companion is back on there again, the ancient units page doesn't say that it requires horses, but the master list does. Which is good, because that probably would have been immensely overpowered with the strength bonus and the move bonus and the Hoplite being as strong as it is without a resource requirement.

So then for resourceless replacements of resource-consuming units, we have (probably) Camel Archers, (almost certainly) Naresuan's Elephant, War Elephants, and (pretty much confirmed) War Chariots. Also possibly Mohawk Warriors, but we don't know what they are or what they replace (swords?) So now I guess I can split my drooling between the Greeks and the Arabs again. Mmm, camel archers&#8230;

 

[Venereus]

CiV has
Knights with Chivalry​

Now it's clear!