Why do people still say redcoats are awesome?

[sylvanllewelyn]

Cheffster: yes, it's very possible to have a good tech lead on immortal and deity, but that rarely translates to masive territorial gain. Even with a group of 3-dozen riflemen, the AI can throw twice or even three times as many medieval troops into your face, and while you can easily massacre the attackers in a city, you won't have enough left to launch any counter-attack at all. Therefore I agree that redcoats are very overrated, because by that point, if you do not have a territorial lead, you will fall behind and lose in one of many ways.

 

[Julian Delphiki]

I think i will need to try Churchills Redcoats again.. only once in Warlords era i have been there (and FIN is a bore to play ).

 

[JBossch]

The poster is right, redcoats where horribly nerfed.

Are people seriously saying that getting a tech lead means you should necessarily step up your difficulty level? I thought that was one of the most important parts of the game. Any victory condition with the possible exceptions of cultural and (maybe) diplomatic rely on this strategy. I almost always go to war after getting a key military tech and rarely do so when on par. I usually use liberalism to grab printing press on the way to riflemen which will result in getting rifles long before the AI even though they may be beating me on other tech paths. Thus, redcoats are useless to me.

 

[Belisar]

I agree with sylvanllewelyn and would rate them only average.
The earlier a UU appears, the more usefull its is because:
1) a small advantage early translates into a big one later and
2) the unit itself my be good within it's era but a lot of games are decided before it appears.

 

[martin026]

I have never used the redcoat before, I think I am going to try a game as Churchill.

As far as the tech lead is concerned, in my games there is usually one tech leader, a couple right behind and then a few who are quite backwards. I have found myself in each position. So the coats might have some usefulness in that situation.

 

[Mr. Civtastic]

I can say that about most UUs. There are very few exceptions: The Jaguar, Numidian Cavalry, and Samurai.

What you need to judge UUs by is how strong their advantages over the generic unit they replace are, since it usually goes without saying that there will be no drawback. IMO, Redcoats aren't that good there.

Actually most UUs still have a counter. All the mounted units, most of the melee units. The Redcoat is one of the few that has no true weakness and yet gains an advantage over every unit of its era (compared to the phalanx which doesnt gain an advantage over axemen).

 

[IDave]

The redcoat is a great UU, it rules it's age and has no real weakness. Whats the issue?

 

[PimpyMicPimp]

The redcoat is a great UU, it rules it's age and has no real weakness. Whats the issue?

It's not as WTFBBQSUACE as Prats?

 

[UncleJJ]

The Redcoat is a great UU and is arguably the best and most decisive one (on some maps at least). The standard rifleman is the best draftable unit (in terms of cost effectiveness) and that is one powerful way to leverage a victory based on conquering neighbours in the Renaissance / early Industrial - by using a combination of drafted and ordinary troops.

To get the best use out of the Redcoat with one of the English leaders simply grab enough land in the early game, win the liberalism race (taking Nationhood) and then research Rifling, adopt Nationhood and draft a load of Redcoats. That works in a wide variety of situations and on many maps and is probably one of the best ways to use the English leaders. With drafting a Redcoat can cost as little as 18 food, a bargain by anyone's standards.

I am not sure why people say they have trouble with medieval troops. No medieval troops can deal with the 14 basic strength of the rifleman, as long as you have enough riflemen (and here is where drafting comes in). Earlier troops can only suceed when used with huge numbers against very few up to date troops. If they don't outnumber you 3 to 1 they won't win. The perfect accompaniment to riflemen and Redcoats in this situation is cannons. Not only do cannons damage the top of the medieval stack they also give collateral damage to many other in the stack and then the riflemen can easily defeat the damaged troops either by defending against them or attacking over several rounds killing one a round. The damage is so slight that they hardly need to heal. The key concept is to set up a situation with a killing ground where huge stacks can be slaughtered. The main problem I have against these huge stacks of obsolete troops is the intense WW they produce (simply due to the number of attacks) rather than any losses. So it is best, if possible, to fight the initial battles on your own territory and use the resulting WW against the other side.

The great advantage the Redcoat has over the ordinary riflemen is that it is effective against other gunpowder troops and so its useful lifetime is greatly extended. With your own cannons leading the way you can easily attack other civs defending with riflemen or grenadiers using a mixture of newly drafted and more experienced Redcoats. Only large numbers of infantry brings the age of the Redcoat to an end

 

[hardwarevreag]

I can say that about most UUs. There are very few exceptions: The Jaguar, Numidian Cavalry, and Samurai.

What you need to judge UUs by is how strong their advantages over the generic unit they replace are, since it usually goes without saying that there will be no drawback. IMO, Redcoats aren't that good there.

Ok, as I only play Vanilla, I can only judge samurai and in my opinion they are verery strong...

Try using them against any melee unit and you will see what samurai are like...

Though their double first attack victory is definitely yours...

And they can be extremely helpful attacking archers as well through their first attacks, cause they (bowmen) will get dmaged in nearly every position...

Just think about it before writing.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

Yeah, their advantage is pretty great. What I was saying is that they are only one of three UUs which are in some way worse than their generic counterpart. In the Samurai's case, they can only be built with iron, whereas normal macemen can be built with either iron or copper. Those other 2 UUs each lose a strength point which is usually a much more serious drawback.

 

[DigitalBoy]

I, for one, think Redcoats are a great unit. The fact that the bonus vs. gunpowder isn't fully conducive with the tech whore strategy doesn't really make them much worse in my eyes. Like others have said, a strong advantage over vanilla units isn't necessary when your high tech army is facing units half a millenium old.

On the topic of the Redcoat nerf, I think the level where Redcoats are at right now is fine. As it stands, Redcoats still have a significant edge over Rifleman against fully half of the units in their era. It's a win-win for England as long as they to Rifling: either they beat the snot out of rivals with obsolete units or enjoy a unit that gets +25% versus all same-era units (save cannons).

 

[Florian]

Pimpy,

WTFBBQSUACE

You lost me after the first three letters. The rest looks suspiciously like "barbecue sauce," but I can't get an acronym out of it.

 

[DigitalBoy]

Pimpy,



You lost me after the first three letters. The rest looks suspiciously like "barbecue sauce," but I can't get an acronym out of it.

It is. There is no acronym; it's a silly way of expressing (or sarcastically feigning) astonishment.

 

[Florian]

DigitalBoy,

Wacky. Thanks.

 

[Melon Head]

I, for one, think Redcoats are a great unit. The fact that the bonus vs. gunpowder isn't fully conducive with the tech whore strategy doesn't really make them much worse in my eyes. Like others have said, a strong advantage over vanilla units isn't necessary when your high tech army is facing units half a millenium old.

Actually, I find that the Redcoats synergize nicely with the tech-whore nature of those english leaders. First, you can get to Rifling ridiculously early, with drafting, as UncleJJ said. The tech-whore gets there way faster. Redcoats vs. longbows? Easy wins. But here's the key, and what sets redcoats apart vs. rifles. They last waaay longer. Even vs. infantry, an unpromoted redcoat is str 14 vs. 15 on the offense, or 17.5 vs 20 on the defense (if I'm getting my numbers right). That's decent odds. Since your redcoats will no doubt have more promotions than the infantry, that weighs even more heavily in your favor. Thus, a tech-whore can concentrate on building infrastructure, wonders, colonies, etc. instead of building the next era of units. Build marines when they show up, and then mech inf. Basically it lets you skip an era of military units and funnel that production elsewhere.

In some ways, it's what I find so good about Praets, it just doesn't come as early. Praets can beat the snot out of any previous or contemporary era unit, and remain effective up through the middle ages, because they're as good as maces vs. longbows, crossbows, knights and siege.

 

[kazapp]

I don't see why this needs to be discussed.

The Redcoat used to be one of the really cool units together with the Praetorian - a UU you could base a whole game around: a truly awesome unit.

Now it has been nerfed - even though the Roman UU always was more overpowered, as well as coming much earlier (and thus being even more overpowered)!

So my answer to the original question is, "I don't know, as it's clearly and painfully less awesome than it used to be".

The fact it still doesn't suck is simply not relevant here, folks.

 

[Melon Head]

It's less awesome than it used to be, sure, but it is still awesome. Also it needs to be discussed as a way to explore the uses of the redcoat, even in a world where we all like it as a UU. take your trolling elsewhere, or just read a different thread.