Musketmen not very good

[BLackraven42]

Have being playing for a while now and have just found out that Musketmen are not all they have benn cracked up to be. They have setiously downgraded from Civ2 and aren't worth the turns it takes to build them.

[David Floyd]

This is also somewhat realistic, IMO, in that in a controlled environment (ie no one panics and runs) a force of 1000 English Longbowmen should wipe the floor with 1000 early musketmen, because the longbowmen had longer ranges and were much more accurate...

[Ecthy]

yes but there was a development of muskets and similar weapons... are there many infantry types available? if the first infantry unit after the musketman is a rifleman, then the musketman should be better than he is now or there should be another infantry unit there... can't be you beat musketmen with longbowmen until you reach the 19th century... (techngologically spoken)

[BLackraven42]

Think about the British and the Indians. The Indians had amazing bow and arrows that could only go up to 40 yards, while the British muskets could go up to 100 yards.

[Knight]

Indian bows were outranged by muskets. However, an English Longbow had a better effective range and rate of fire than early 17th and 18th century muskets. The reason musketeers replaced the archer boiled down to a manpower decision. Archers, especially Longbowmen, were tough to train. To string volly after volly of longbow fire, you had to be enormously strong and pretty well trained. This is why the French cut the fingers off captured and returned Longbowmen, they were a valuable resource that wasn't quickly replenished. The musket on the other hand was an easy weapon to learn. Even though it was complex to build, any farmer or pesant could figure out how to use it, and he didn't need the inherent strength to get the maximum effect. The gun did all that work for him. Even better, stick a bayonet on the end and the gun doubles as a pike, the most popular infantry weapon of the 16th and 17th Centurues. So, the musket became a more versatile and universally useful weapon, capable of giving every soldier the capability of a ranged attack while retaining close combat effectiveness. With the advent of Rifles and riflemen, the firearm was the weapon of choice.

[albiedamned]

Originally posted by Ecthelion
yes but there was a development of muskets and similar weapons... are there many infantry types available? if the first infantry unit after the musketman is a rifleman, then the musketman should be better than he is now or there should be another infantry unit there... can't be you beat musketmen with longbowmen until you reach the 19th century... (techngologically spoken)

The progression of foot units is:
Musketman 2/4/1
Rifleman 4/6/1
Infantry 6/10/1
Mech Infantry 12/18/2

[Knight]

Originally posted by albiedamned


The progression of foot units is:
Musketman 2/4/1
Rifleman 4/6/1
Infantry 6/10/1
Mech Infantry 12/18/2

That seems about right historically.

Musketmen - Early Arquebus(sp) Infantry through to flintlocks and early mass produced smoothbores of the late 18th Century.

Riflemen - Early Rifles of the 19th Century though rifled muskets of the civil war. Terminating in the bolt action rifles of the early 20th century (Enfields, Springfields, Mausers).

Infantry - Semi-automatic riflemen or bolt action riflemen intergrated with squad machine guns.

Mech Infantry - Infantry transported by and (later) supported by armored combat vehicles, WW2-Present.

[Ecthy]

Originally posted by Knight
Musketmen - Early Arquebus(sp) Infantry through to flintlocks and early mass produced smoothbores of the late 18th Century.

Riflemen - Early Rifles of the 19th Century though rifled muskets of the civil war. Terminating in the bolt action rifles of the early 20th century (Enfields, Springfields, Mausers).

19th century, as I said. Now tell me, is a bowman stronger than an infantrist from the late 18th century? I doubt it, therefore there should either be another infantry unit representing the era between early musketmen and riflemen or the musketman should be stronger so that he's elligible to represent the later pre-riflemen also.

[mmtt]

I think the musketmen would be easy to produce and maybe a new unit when you discover Military Tradition. Like Prussian Army of the XVIIIth century.

I played the French and I didn't like my musketeers being easily killed by the Russian Cossacks...


Rifleman are soldiers of the American Civil War till the end of World War I.
Infantry:World War II(the sound is a submachine gun firing)
Marine/Parachutists: World War II/VietNam and more
Mechanized Infantry: 1970+ I think

[Ecthy]

Well, to me, a rifleman was always a soldier equipped with a breech-loading gun. Those have been invented in the 1840s if Imperialism is right

Anyway, the American Civil war was like the first war where the significant advances of those weapons were shown. Maybe the Crimea war as well...

anyway, There just is a gap to fill between the early musketmen armies and the breech-loading gun riflemen units. In Civ2, I have filled the gap between Musketeers and Rifleman with a unit called Royal Infantry

my Civ2:

Musketeers 3/3/1 2/2
Royal Infantry 4/4/1 2/2
Rifleman 5/5/1 3/2

I think they should do something similar here... or just make the musketman powerful enough to represent the early and the later non-riflemen infantry armies as well

[Knight]

Originally posted by Ecthelion
Well, to me, a rifleman was always a soldier equipped with a breech-loading gun. Those have been invented in the 1840s if Imperialism is right

Anyway, the American Civil war was like the first war where the significant advances of those weapons were shown. Maybe the Crimea war as well...

Breach loaders were available in the 1840's, but weren't in widespread use. Most rifles, including 90% of those employed in the American Civil War, were muzzle loaders using the Mine Ball. Breach loaders were first used in masse in 1860 by the German Army with the development of the Dryse Needlegun. That weapon first saw action in the Austrio-Prussian war. The Needlegn was one of the central reasons for the overwhelming Prussian victory as the Austrians were still using muzzle loading rifles similar to our Springfield or England's Enfield.

If there's any change needed at aii it should be to seperate out the Musket units. Early Arquebus units of the 15th and 16th centuries should encompass the unit currently in the game. A new musketeer should take over for the superior 17th and 18th century firearms (like the famous Brown Bess).

[mmtt]

Yes but the French Speacial Unit, the musketeer, must be changed. I don't think it would be very useful if you can have better two technologies after....

(French Musketeer: XVIIth century, Louis XIII, Louis XIV)

[HalfLotus]

Defensive units blow until infantry, but knights and cavalry rule. Being able retreat rocks. Bring in some catapult or cannon bombardment and invation is easy as pie.