The Cossack and Redcoat Over-Nerf

[monkspider]

There has been some discusion on CFC about this, but I would like to see what the superior minds of Apolyton think. I think that the nerf the redcoats and cossacks received was a fairly significant over-nerf.

I think most players would agree that these units needed a nerf, but I would say that the nerf they received went too far. They went from top-tier UUs to arguably bottom tier since the bonus they offer is now so minor and they arrive so late in the game.

Consider UUs that most people consider to be truly "average" such as the Phalanx or Skirmisher. Even these units get a strength increase, in addition to a percentage boost of some kind (city defense, hill defense, etc). Now, the Redcoats and Cossacks only receive a percentage boost, while their strength is no better than the normal unit! Moreover, these units come late in the game so they are even more damned!

If it were up to me, I would give the Cossack 16 or 17 strength, and the redcoat 15 strength or give them the old stats and increase the cost by ten hammers. Either of these would be reasonable solutions and help make up for the fact that they are such late bloomers, so to speak.

[Blaupanzer]

Modify your expectations. In the case of the Brits, the UU is quite secondary to the UB. Britain is all about money, not superior infantry relative to the other great powers.

France on the other hand, should get faster Grenadiers rather than musketmen. It's the Old Guard that is the famous unit of note. (The Three Musketeers (plus one) hardly represent a unit of any importance.)

The cossacks were really raiders and riot suppressors, hardly great field cavalry.

[Thedrin]

They went from top-tier UUs to arguably bottom tier since the bonus they offer is now so minor and they arrive so late in the game.

Bolding mine.

Both of these units come at a very significant point in the game. The first civs to reach the gunpowder era gain a significant military advantage over their opponents. Even a small boost on top of the regular units at this stage will play a very big part.

The Cossack change looks very interesting. The early game is going to have a stronger reliance on mounted units. Should players choose to do upgrades, promoted cavalries will become much more common. In that way, the Cossack 50% bonus against mounted looks to be far more useful than it was previously.

The Redcoat - while still powerful relative to other units of its time - looks fairer. It now has a viable counter. Base Redcoat vs. base grenadier: 17.5 vs 18. Previously this would have been 20 vs. 18.

I'm not saying that the changes will be perfect. I am saying that they could prove to work very well and don't look to make the 2 units all that weak - just all that weaker than their previous, very powerful incarnations.

[Blake]

Cossacks are fine .

The fact that they utterly dominate Cavalry make them well worth using - because Cavalry are the only unit that actually breaks-even against Cavalry, with the exception of the Aggressive Formation Rifleman.

Consider this. Promoted with Shock they counter the following units quite effectively:
Cavalry, Cannons, Grenadiers, Riflemen. They are still tough enough to have reasonable odds against Artillery, Machine Gunners and Infantry - provided those units are not highly promoted and the cossack is promoted suitably.

As for Redcoats...
While the nerf hurts them more relatively (altough gunpowder units are extremely common), you must consider the Churchill factor. He has the ultra-overpowered combo of Charismatic (cheaper promotions) plus Protective (extra promotions) and these both apply to his UU, the Redcoat - Which can be drafted for 1 population!
Lizzy has always been a popular leader for her traits. Not sure about Victoria her trait combination is quite odd (normally expanding full-tilt with Imperialistic crashes your economy, maybe financial can buffer that?).

Anyway I don't consider that either Civ has really been hurt, they may be not quite as good (overpowered) but they are far from nerfed into submission.

[Fosse]

I think the nerf is appropriate. That it seems so harsh is merely indicative to how powerful they were before, not how weak they are now.

Previously the units in question had no effective counters in the eras they are contemporary with. A beeline to those units effectivly wins whatever military engagements you choose to win.

Even the Praetorian has the cheap counter of the axeman which comes before it does on the tech tree.

I think the reason that units like the Phalanx are viewed as lesser UUs is not because they suffer from less of a boost, but because they are defensive in nature. Offensive UUs already grant the civ who gets them a slight edge because they can be used for taking cities. Giving those offensive UUs too huge of a boost means you can clean up the entire game with them with little effort.

Cavalry and Riflemen are already units worth beelining to because they are so dominant.

[Solver]

The changes are good. It makes both units have a reasonable counter.

Cossacks previously would do well vs. Riflemen, and sometimes even decently vs. Riflemen in cities. Now, Cossacks remain great units, a retreat chance, high power and absolutely kills enemy Cavalry, but can be countered by Riflemen.

Ditto the Redcoat - Grenadiers can counter them, but they remain a very solid unit. Given that Churchill's Redcoats get City Garrison I and Drill I for free AND Churchill is Charismatic, you're looking at 8 XP five-promotion units. City Garrison I, Drill I, Combat II, Pinch. Shabby? I think not.

[dregor]

The changes seemed pretty in line to me. Thedrin is exactly right. They may come later, but they come at one of the 'crucial' periods of the game. Any advantage to can squeeze out of the initial gunpowder era is more than great. You yourself agree that they were too powerful, and this way they're still more powerful than their counterparts, the gap is just lessened.

[Prussia]

Originally posted by Blaupanzer

The cossacks were really raiders and riot suppressors...

And rapists.

Which brings up a good suggestion for the next XP, Cossacks now start with the Rapist promotion, which let's them pillage food, production, money, and happiness from looted cities.

I can see it now.

MOSCOW

8
-8 "It's too crowded!"

15
+2 "We enjoy our luxury resources!"
+2 "In our religion we trust!"
+11 "We enjoy watching our cossacks destroy, rape, pillage, burn, and kill whatever they please!"

[DirtyMartini]

Originally posted by Prussia


And rapists.

Which brings up a good suggestion for the next XP, Cossacks now start with the Rapist promotion, which let's them pillage food, production, money, and happiness from looted cities.

yeesh.

[Randolph]

Originally posted by Fosse
I think the reason that units like the Phalanx are viewed as lesser UUs is not because they suffer from less of a boost, but because they are defensive in nature. Offensive UUs already grant the civ who gets them a slight edge because they can be used for taking cities. Giving those offensive UUs too huge of a boost means you can clean up the entire game with them with little effort.

Another thing that seems to make a UU particularly potent is when it is able to take on an additional role that the normal unit couldn’t. E.g. The old redcoat could not only do what normal riflemen could, but was also better then it’s counter (grenadiers), and had a slight advantage against cavalry in the field, opposed to as slight disadvantage for normal rifles.

Originally posted by Solver
Ditto the Redcoat - Grenadiers can counter them, but they remain a very solid unit. Given that Churchill's Redcoats get City Garrison I and Drill I for free AND Churchill is Charismatic, you're looking at 8 XP five-promotion units. City Garrison I, Drill I, Combat II, Pinch. Shabby? I think not.

I don’t disagree with these nerfs, but I really don’t buy this logic. If both your traits are geared towards improving your units, then I’d certainly hope your UU is powerful, but there’s a significant opportunity cost to this. Sure Churchill’s UU will have all sorts of bonuses, but Mansa Musa will have more cash (faster research, more upgrade cash), and the ability to switch to and from +XP civics. It strikes me as inappropriate to compare one civ’s UU to another civ’s UU plus trait bonuses that will be applied to the UU.

Edit: P.S. I didn’t look up the exact “increased cost” of the Prat (and I’m at work now), but unless it’s really significant this strikes me as a comparatively insufficient nerf. I, and I don’t think I’m alone, considered them an even more valuable UU then either the redcoat or the Cossack. When you have a unit this is largely unstoppable (no effective counter), paying extra isn’t such a big deal, as they don’t tend to die very often. Of course I’ll have to try these thing before I know for sure, I could hurt more then I think (you won’t be able to rush as early for one thing).

[Solver]

The logic is that UUs should be more powerful than the units they replace, but still have a counter - the same unit that counters the unit that the UU replaces. The Cossack used to have no counter, now it's still better than Cavalry, but is countered by Riflemen.

[Randolph]

Originally posted by Solver
The logic is that UUs should be more powerful than the units they replace, but still have a counter - the same unit that counters the unit that the UU replaces. The Cossack used to have no counter, now it's still better than Cavalry, but is countered by Riflemen.

I completely agree with that. My point is that while a UU with no counter is certainly a problem that a UU + trait 1 + trait 2, is a very different matter. Even if such a unit has no "in the field" counter, you have to consider how it can be countered in other ways: faster research, more wonders, civic flexibility, etc., are all indirect "counters" to a powerful unit.

[Solver]

Yep, but for balance purposes, it's better not to make the player rely, in any situation, on the indirect counters. Obviously, there are indirect counters to everything, even Tanks, if you get to Modern Armor first .

[DrSpike]

Not got the game yet but on paper neither change looks like an overnerf to me.