Where would another Heavy Cav unit go exactly?

[acluewithout]

So... I actually like the current unit gaps in the tech tree. I think they work from a gameplay view, and mostly, but not always, kinda work from an immersion view. But I get many people disagree.

In particular, there's a big gap between Knights and Tanks. Perhaps there should be a unit between the two...?

Thing is, I can't really see what it would be, or where it would go. Not unless you're going to do something drastic, like combine heavy and light cavalry.

Could you have a 'Lancer' unit in the Industrial Age? Would that then unlock at Military Science, along with Cavalry? Or perhaps it could unlock at Mercenaries in the Civics tree (like Winged Hussars)?

Thoughts?

 

[Ciarson]

since the gap is around the napoleonic wars, i will look at cavalry unit of that time : the lancers, the hussar, the cuirassier and the dragoon.

lancer unit were considered a ligh cavalry unit with the objective to attack other cavalry unit, so it dont fit the criteria.

so does the Hussar, which was a light cavalry unit who were used for harassment (with the exception of the polish and hungarian hussar who were heavy cavalries).

the cuirassier could be seen as a knight where we strip away all unnecessary piece of armour to reduce weight and therefore increase efficiency . they kept the breastplate (cuirasse in french, hence their name), helmet and front part of the leg armour.

another contender could be the dragoon unit but they were designed to be mounted infantry. they were to use horse for the mobility but were to dismount to fight, as time pass they ended up fighting on horseback quite often ressulting in them shifting to the cavalry and are considered medium cavalry (not a light cavalry but also not a heavy cavalry)

so in my view i would have it be the "cuirassier" and be unlocked around Metal casting/ballistic. (earlier than that and it would overshadow the knight, later than that and it would be unlocked too close to the modern unit to be used effectively.)

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Right now, both the heavy cavalry and light cavalry 'lines' have Three Era Gaps in their progression. Wth Light Cavalry, it is between Horsemen in the Classical Era and Cavalry (19th century type) in the Industrial Era. For Heavy Cavalry, it is between Knights in the Medieval Era and Tanks in the Modern Era.

Heavy Cavalry in the game fulfills the function of 'Battle Cavalry' - designed to have a shock effect on the battlefield, whereas Light Cavalry historically was marginal on the battlefield, but useful for scouting, screening, raiding, and pursuing a running enemy after the Heavy Cavalry broke his line.

The gap in the Heavy Cavalry line, as stated above, occurs in the Renaissance-Industrial period, or about the Eighteenth Century historically. In most armies of that period, Heavy Cavalry was armored to some degree, or if not armored (British Heavy Dragoons, French Grenadiers a Cheval, for instance) were big men on big horses to get the maximum Shock Effect from their charge (although, from personal experience, I can tell you that to a human on foot, it doesn't make a lot of difference whether it's a 'light' horse or a 'heavy' horse that runs into you, you get knocked flying by either!).
So, the proper Heavy Cavalry progression would be to Cuirassiers - who, though not as completely armored as a medieval knight, had much better quality of metal in their armor and weapons, and were as units much better organized, trained, and mobile. They were also hideously expensive to raise and use: those 'heavy horses' that could carry 250 - 300 pounds of man, armor and equipment were not easy to come by: in an army numbering millions, Napoleon Bonaparte managed to form only 14 regiments of armored Cuirassiers or Carabiniers, less than 10% of his total cavalry!

What gets confusing in the 18th century period is that almost all of the cavalry in European Armies, light or heavy, became Battle Cavalry as the century wore on. Hussars, for instance, were strictly irregular, untrustworthy raiders at the start of the century (how could you tell that your Hussar reconnaissance had found the enemy army? They disappeared and didn't come back until the battle was safely over!). Any 1756, the Prussian Hussars and Dragoons both were charing into battle and breaking enemy cavalry and infantry on the battlefield. Napoleon regularly used Dragoons as 'substitute' heavy cavalry to supplement his few Cuirassiers. The British labeled all their heavy cavalry as 'Heavy Dragoons' and used them like Cuirassiers, and lancers, always considered Light Cavalry, nevertheless were used against both enemy cavalry of all types and against infantry squares, since their lances outreached bayonets.

I would narrow down the previous suggestion and put the Cuirassier unit at the Tech: Ballistics. The Field Cannon already from that Tech appeared in the mid-17th century, and that was about the same time that the 'Heavy Horse' cavalry with helmet, breastplate, straight sword started to appear, that remained with minor changes the 'heavy cavalry' for the next 200 years.

 

[dunkleosteus]

If we're talking about the cavalry units, I want to say that I think the heavy chariot needs a slight adjustment: currently, the heavy chariot gains +1 movement if it starts its turn on flat, open terrain. I think this should be changed to "has +1 movement while on flat, open terrain". Civ 6 calculates movement cost by the tile you're entering, not the one you're currently in. If my chariot is currently in a hill tile, sure, it would be at a disadvantage, but if I move down onto a plain, I could really speed up. Moving from a forest tile into another forest tile is not penalized any differently than from an open tile into a forest tile, therefore chariots shouldn't be penalized for where they start.

In practice this could mean you could start in a hill, move onto flat terrain (which would cost 1 movement, leaving you with 2) and then re-enter a forest or hill.

Also, I like @Boris Gudenuf 's idea with Cuirassiers. What about light cavalry though? Classical -> Industrial is a long gap. My understanding is that through most of the middle ages in Europe, cavalry were primarily heavily armored due to a number of factors. Lancers are a lightly armored melee mounted unit, but since they would come around ~the Renaissance, I think that might be too soon. What about this wikipedia article on light cavalry raiding? It seems to have taken place during the medieval period (mid 14th century). Another article seems to indicate the raiding was done by knights or men at arms of some kind, "or swift mounted raids called chevauchées, with the warriors lightly armed on swift horses and their heavy war horses safely in the stable".

To me, this sounds like a knight that isn't wearing heavy armor, on a lighter, faster horse using raiding tactics. If these riders were caught, they would not have the defences they normally would. They'd have lower combat strength and defense but be faster. Sort of puts a stick in the spokes of having a medieval light cavalry unit, unless someone else knows more about this than I do.

On the topic of raiding with light cavalry though, if such a unit could exist, it would be interesting to see something like "pillaging an improvement grants +0.5 movement, pillaging a district costs -1.5 movement". Obviously horsemen and cavalry don't have this ability, it would have to be just for that unit. Would make them a lot stronger for pillaging enemy tiles, which seems to be what they were designed to do in real life, but not good at pillaging districts (because I think that would make them too strong).

 

[Phrozen]

The Spanish did have the Jinetes in the medieval period which wore sort of mounted skirmishers.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

If we're talking about the cavalry units, I want to say that I think the heavy chariot needs a slight adjustment: currently, the heavy chariot gains +1 movement if it starts its turn on flat, open terrain. I think this should be changed to "has +1 movement while on flat, open terrain". Civ 6 calculates movement cost by the tile you're entering, not the one you're currently in. If my chariot is currently in a hill tile, sure, it would be at a disadvantage, but if I move down onto a plain, I could really speed up. Moving from a forest tile into another forest tile is not penalized any differently than from an open tile into a forest tile, therefore chariots shouldn't be penalized for where they start.

In practice this could mean you could start in a hill, move onto flat terrain (which would cost 1 movement, leaving you with 2) and then re-enter a forest or hill.

This is a very good idea. It highlights the deficiencies of heavy multi-horse chariots, in that they are very badly effected by any kind of rough terrain, both hilly forests and fat, marshy or flooded (flood plain) terrain.

...What about light cavalry though? Classical -> Industrial is a long gap. My understanding is that through most of the middle ages in Europe, cavalry were primarily heavily armored due to a number of factors. Lancers are a lightly armored melee mounted unit, but since they would come around ~the Renaissance, I think that might be too soon. What about this wikipedia article on light cavalry raiding? It seems to have taken place during the medieval period (mid 14th century). Another article seems to indicate the raiding was done by knights or men at arms of some kind, "or swift mounted raids called chevauchées, with the warriors lightly armed on swift horses and their heavy war horses safely in the stable".

To me, this sounds like a knight that isn't wearing heavy armor, on a lighter, faster horse using raiding tactics. If these riders were caught, they would not have the defences they normally would. They'd have lower combat strength and defense but be faster. Sort of puts a stick in the spokes of having a medieval light cavalry unit, unless someone else knows more about this than I do.

Light Cavalry wasn't the focus of the OP and Thread Title, which is why I tried not to 'hijack' the thread. Specifically on your comments, though: European Medieval Armies were characteristically full of men who were not paid or supplied regularly, so they, basically, stole everything that wasn't nailed down in the country they passed through, friendly or enemy. Everybody in the army was likely to 'forage' on foot, on light or stolen horses, individually or in small to large groups. Unfortunately, you cannot really call these military units. They could massacre civilians, pillage the land (tiles) but faced with any organized, armed resistance, were usually cut to pieces - and any of them that were captured were all too often handed over to the civilians they had just robbed for some creative carving. The best depiction of these, I think, would be a Social Policy (military) in the Medieval Era that allows a unit to Pillage an adjacent tile in addition to the one it is occupying, but on the turn it does this it is penalized in combat (all those knights galloping about the countryside looting instead of being armored in line of battle)

The Spanish did have the Jinetes in the medieval period which wore sort of mounted skirmishers.

Ginettes or Jinettes were light cavalry armed with javelins, a Spanish version of the light Grenadine/Islamic cavalry they spent most of the Medieval Era fighting. Unfortunately, they are pretty exclusive to Medieval Spanish armies, and are quite simply the ONLY organized light cavalry in Europe between about 1000 AD and 1450 AD, other than people who could get horses but simply couldn't afford armor: Irish, Balkan, and other 'peripheral' groups. The first 'light' cavalry you start to see were the earliest Hungarian Hussars, armed with lance and (rarely) bow.
On the other hand, in the Renaissance Era you do start to see a number of mounted units that could be considered Light Cavalry: Hungarian (NOT Polish) Hussars, Dragoons, Mounted Pistoliers/Aquebussiers/Carabiniers (although they tended to keep adding armor until they were almost Gunpowder Knights!)

So, except for a possible Spanish/Aragon/Castile UU of Jinettes in the Medieval Era, the Light Cavalry Upgrade could be the Mounted Aquebusier or Mounted Pistolier at about Tech: Metal Casting, which in the Industrial Era will Upgrade to the 19th century Cavalry, turning in their pistols for rifled carbines and revolvers...

 

[acluewithout]

I am constantly amazed at how knowledgeable people are on this forum. Thanks all.

If there was a new Heavy Cav unit in the Renaissance or Industrial era, say a Cuirasser, is there perhaps somewhere on the Civics tree they could unlock? That might stop the tech tree getting too cluttered...

Poland’s Hussars unlock at Mercenaries, but having a new Heavy Cav unlock there might conflict with Knight unlocking at (Medieval) Stirrups. Maybe Nationalism?

The other question is, what would be the resource requirement for eg Cuirassers? The usual rule seems to be Heavy Cav and Melee tend to require harder to obtain resources, while Light Cav use easy to get resources (horses) or need no resource. Would Cuirassers still just use Iron, or perhaps Niter? Niter is a bit hard to justify seeing as they were armed with spears...

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I am constantly amazed at how knowledgeable people are on this forum. Thanks all.

If there was a new Heavy Cav unit in the Renaissance or Industrial era, say a Cuirasser, is there perhaps somewhere on the Civics tree they could unlock? That might stop the tech tree getting too cluttered...

Poland’s Hussars unlock at Mercenaries, but having a new Heavy Cav unlock there might conflict with Knight unlocking at (Medieval) Stirrups. Maybe Nationalism?

The other question is, what would be the resource requirement for eg Cuirassers? The usual rule seems to be Heavy Cav and Melee tend to require harder to obtain resources, while Light Cav use easy to get resources (horses) or need no resource. Would Cuirassers still just use Iron, or perhaps Niter? Niter is a bit hard to justify seeing as they were armed with spears...

Cuirassier should be at the earliest a Late Renaissance or early Industrial Era Unit. IF Civic was to be used, I'd suggest Enlightenment, which falls at about the right time, or the Technology Metal Casting in the late Renaissance
Cuirassiers NEVER used lances. They were armed with (sometimes) carbines, but their main weapon was a long, heavy, straight sword which allowed them to skewer infantry or other horsemen in their charge - a shorter, much more mobile lance, if yo will. The lance itself had gone completely out of favor with heavy cavalry in Europe from the 15th to the 18th century. Reason was simple: the knight's lance was 8 - 10 feet long, the Pike was 18 - 20 feet long: charge a pike unit, and your horse was dead and you were pinned under its carcass before your lance got within 5 feet of a pikeman! Mill around outside the reach of the pikes, and the crossbowmen or aquebusmen/musketmen sheltering among the pikes blew gaping holes in your armor: the only question in the battle was whether you or your horse was more likely to survive.
The helmet and cuirass of the 18th century was much better metal than the medieval knight wore. Each cuirass was 'proofed' by firing a pistol at it from close range, and the cuirass was pretty much also 'proof' against any kind of sword or lance thrust. I suggest to represent the scarcity of Cuirassiers, which was largely due to the expense of providing the big horses, that the Knight and the Cuirassier both require 2 Horse Resources to build with an Encampment, 3 Horse Resources without an Encampment.

 

[acluewithout]

When I said ‘amazed at people’s knowledge’ perhaps I should have also said ‘dumbfounded at my own lack of knowledge...’.

I think Niter could work as a resource, even if it’s not a perfect fit historically. Niter is harder to get than horses, and I think it works that it’s also the resource for musket men given swords and knights both need iron.

I think the expense of these units could also be represented by giving them above average maintenance costs.

Enlightenment is a good choice for civic. The only downside is that Enlightenment is a ‘on the main track’ civic, so no one would be going out of their way to get this unit (same problem as my Nationalism suggestion). There aren’t many civic choices in the Renaissance or Industrial, so the options are a bit limited.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

When I said ‘amazed at people’s knowledge’ perhaps I should have also said ‘dumbfounded at my own lack of knowledge...’.

Well, I have a very Unfair Advantage: I've spent the past week re-reading Elkin's Swords Around the Throne, an extremely erudite and well-written account of everything about Napoleon's Grande Armee which was, among other things, the epitome of the Renaissance - Pre-Industrial military, including the Heavy and Light Cavalry!