Firaxis, don't make a 5-3-2 knight substitute for a new Civ's UU

[Jaguar]

A knight with +1 attack would be way too powerful and imbalance the game. It would completely ruin Civ and I would have to play without it.

[Thrawn05]

Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior
A knight with +1 attack would be way too powerful and imbalance the game. It would completely ruin Civ and I would have to play without it.

Personaly, I would have said no more UU's to replace the knight, since there are too many as it is.


It's no fun, playing a small map, with India, China, and Japan at the same time. Well, I wouldn't say it's no fun, but it gets too over whelming for me at times.

[Spiffor]

I have no problem with a 5-3-2 knight if the Tercio or the Janizary is 2-5-1

[Skanky Burns]

I too think that the level of knight-based UU's in the game is at saturation point already. Adding even one more would push it over the edge.

[Zanzin]

A couple more modern or industrial UU's are what is in order for a bit more balance, me thinks!

[da_jaymz]

you do know that you can change it in the editor if you don't like it, right??

[nationalist]

I think that the simple solution to this problem would be to give the UUs more interesting bonuses than simple attack/defense/movement modifers. That is why I think that screaming viking's idea for the Viking UU to be a swordsman with an amphibious attack ability is so great. I hope Firaxis pays attention to that one.

[I-iZ-1337]

D00dz, mayb33 w33 cud uze sum ship bazed UU and make them kick azz more than the englishz UU duz?

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by da_jaymz
you do know that you can change it in the editor if you don't like it, right??

But that's cheating.

[Nikolai]

Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior

But that's cheating.

Not really. Only name it something like "super-duper-ultra-realistic-real-world-scenario", and post it here!

[Solver]

Actually, I had a thought of a special Worker UU - just a Worker, but one that can defend itself, IMO, very powerful.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Solver
Actually, I had a thought of a special Worker UU - just a Worker, but one that can defend itself, IMO, very powerful.

That's a pretty cool idea. What civ has hard working outdoorsmen? Canada? Give them a pioneer unit. (Though I would take this over the F-15 anyday). maybe give a defensive point and works faster.

[Grrr]

Actually I think the Worker such as that should be available to all civs. Costs twice as much as a regular worker, works at the same pace, and keeps a reasonable defence (improves over time).

[Miznia]

How about an air unit that can rebase anywhere, even in enemy territory or in water?
A paratrooping mounted warrior? (This would help the Celts get out of Ireland and spread into Europe as expected.)
Or, if that's a bit farfetched, maybe a mounted warrior with helicopter abilities. It could transport other mounted warriors.

Could a nationality-less unit (like the Privateer) be a UU? I know it's a retarded idea, but you could have a no-nationality PLO unit for the Arabs and no one would ever know who's attacking them!
But at any rate, terrorist land units with cruise missile functionality are necessary. It would be more fun than espionage menus, anyway.
How about a tank that can build a city or something?
I definitely think the Hebrews should have a Slinger unit, a kind of Warrior who can bombard cities. And lethal bombard against GL's.

What civ has hard working outdoorsmen? Canada? Give them a pioneer unit.

How about just having Mounties that constantly add production to the nearest city? They're always chopping down trees, right?
Or similarly, how about letting the French get culture from building the Musketeer?

P.S. No offense to Arabs, I love Arabs

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Miznia
How about an air unit that can rebase anywhere, even in enemy territory or in water?
A paratrooping mounted warrior? (This would help the Celts get out of Ireland and spread into Europe as expected.)
Or, if that's a bit farfetched, maybe a mounted warrior with helicopter abilities. It could transport other mounted warriors.

That is exactly why I'm glad they don't have a unit workshop in this game. ridiculous unit combinations.

Originally posted by Miznia
But at any rate, terrorist land units with cruise missile functionality are necessary. It would be more fun than espionage menus, anyway.

I actually think this is an interesting idea. Can you make a cruise missle with the no-nationality tag? Could be interesting

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel



I actually think this is an interesting idea. Can you make a cruise missle with the no-nationality tag? Could be interesting

that would get really old, really fast (imho). imagine 3 boatloads of "Terrorists" popping up on some shore. bleh./

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by UberKruX


that would get really old, really fast (imho). imagine 3 boatloads of "Terrorists" popping up on some shore. bleh./

Well, just have to protect the border, shoreline better. And, since they could'nt use your roads, if they tried to penetrate far in, you could take them out easily.

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel
That is exactly why I'm glad they don't have a unit workshop in this game. ridiculous unit combinations.

Nah, you are a bit confused! A unit workshop enhanced from SMAC model can easily forbid silly combos, while adding lance to a a horse mounted unit can let you have a Lancer unit, without forcing Firaxis in a search for interesting units (limited list).

In Smac you can do strange and really powerful combo units, but the former can often offer less over more realistic units, while the super powered usually sink your production rate with a crazy cost.

With an pound of balancing you can have plenty of interesting units without permitting silly flying elephant with rockets.

As you can see for former suggestion: take a sword, add amphibius special ability and you have a Viking ready to raid the shoreline

You can have some trouble with graphics, I know, but then you can spend more effort on a good solution there, without the need for programming every new unit from scratch.

Well, wait, except if every player can assemble new units him/herself, Inforgrames will have less customer apppeal for an XP version...

[Darkworld Ark]

I think it'd be cool if Leonardo's Workshop allowed you to make Air Corkscrews! They'd be equiped with low tech bombs & could rain rennessance terror upon your foes!

[Austin]

I'd like to see the Iroquis unit changed, as the Iroquis were not noted for massed horsie units.

Instead give them a combat unit with "treat all terrain as roads" as their UU, in better keeping with their ability to move combat units through terrain thought impassable.

Call the unit a "war party".

I would replace either the musketeer (making it 3-3-1 in the process), or the spear man (making in 1-2-1) with this unit. I lean more towards the musketeer. I moved a point from defense to offense because the Indians tended to be better on attacks but lack staying power.

Austin

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Austin
I'd like to see the Iroquis unit changed, as the Iroquis were not noted for massed horsie units.

Instead give them a combat unit with "treat all terrain as roads" as their UU, in better keeping with their ability to move combat units through terrain thought impassable.

Call the unit a "war party".

I would replace either the musketeer (making it 3-3-1 in the process), or the spear man (making in 1-2-1) with this unit. I lean more towards the musketeer. I moved a point from defense to offense because the Indians tended to be better on attacks but lack staying power.
Austin

As a rule, UUs should never subtract from the stats of their unit. This example in particular is a bad idea, because the player would be left with no defense over 3 until nationalism. He'd get creamed by cav. Each UU is designed to be unquestionably better than the unit it replaces... As in, a musketman UU should be always preferable to the musketman unit.

If you modify the unit as stated, what you have is a musketeer with an extra ability... which makes the French unit even more wothless. Keep trying...

[Austin]

Originally posted by cyclotron7


As a rule, UUs should never subtract from the stats of their unit. This example in particular is a bad idea, because the player would be left with no defense over 3 until nationalism. He'd get creamed by cav. Each UU is designed to be unquestionably better than the unit it replaces... As in, a musketman UU should be always preferable to the musketman unit.

If you modify the unit as stated, what you have is a musketeer with an extra ability... which makes the French unit even more wothless. Keep trying...

How about a plain musketmann with the addition of the treat all terrain as roads ability then?

Austin

[Spiffor]

I like the idea of a special musketman for the Iroquois, but I think that "treat all terrains as roads" would be unbalancing : the special Iroquois would be the first defensive unit to have 3 movement points, long before mechanized infantry comes out. Maybe just giving it an extra movement point would be more balancing, don't you think ?

[Switch]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I like the idea of a special musketman for the Iroquois, but I think that "treat all terrains as roads" would be unbalancing : the special Iroquois would be the first defensive unit to have 3 movement points, long before mechanized infantry comes out. Maybe just giving it an extra movement point would be more balancing, don't you think ?

I agree. That would make sense, and would give them a UU with bonuses to match every other UU (ie, one point added to A, D, OR M). At least a lot more sense than NA natives with horses (which the British brought over from Europe).