Gunpowder Unitcombat, Crossbows, and the Mounted Arquebus

[Former user]

I would recommend adding a separate 'Gun' Unitcombat for the Arquebus unit specifically. Well, and Teutorix Hero, and possibly others down the road. However, the primary point is that the Arquebus, imho, needs additional differentiation from other units, especially from that of the Archery Line. Part of that reason is if we decide to make Crossbows mass producible (rather than a national unit), then there would be two end-game mass producible archery units, which wouldn't make much sense.

My proposal is for Gunpowder to have access to Cover, Formation, City Garrison, Drill, Precision, and Keen Sight. Due to the nature of early Gunpowder however, I believe blitz should likely be impossible.

Shock and Cover both work against gunpowder ... but at half effectiveness. So for instance, Shock 1 gives +40% vs melee, and +20% vs Gunpowder.

Additionally, if Flanking 2 and Flanking 3 each gave +20% vs Gunpowder, that would be interesting. Since Guns have access to both formation promotions, certain units of rifles could specialize in fighting mounted units ... but in general the musket formations would have a certain weakness towards cavalry.

Also, given the novelty of firearms, I wonder if Gunpowder units should gain experience points a bit more slowly than other types (trivial detail I suppose). The easiest way to do this would be to have all Arquebus start with a promo that, opposite of the Great Commander, gives negative one experience per combat ... but as each combat gives at least 1 exp, it would never decrease the total experience gained, only slow it down considerably.

If Crossbows were to be a mass producible unit, they would be weaker (8 str, req. Iron, doesn't use metal weapons), but also cheaper (90 hammers?) Something like that ^_^ ... possibly a bit cheaper, but no cheaper than 60 hammers. Both X-bows and Guns should be added as Draft options, X-bows at 1 pop and Guns at 2 pop (even if their predecessors cost more pop than that, these weapons require less training, and therefore drafting is more effective for these units).

X-bows (archery) have access to mobility 1, Logistics, and Sentry 2 ... as far as mobility is concerned ...

while Arquebus (Guns) have access to Logistics only. This is due to the early gunpowder being unwieldy and hard to carry. If any nation would have mobile guns it would be the Hippus, but iirc the Hippus cannot build Arquebus, so the point is moot.

As arquebus is 10 str and 120 hammers, I would then propose a new Hippus UU .... 8 strength, 3 move, Gunpowder Unitcombat, 35% withdrawal, 30% chance to do 10% damage to units attacking the stack ... but at 180 hammers and +1 gold maintenance per turn. It is a 'mounted' arquebus, and is obviously more expensive (and lacking in the same raw strength) than the foot-soldier version. However, it is still a Gunpowder unit rather than a mounted unit, in terms of game mechanics, so it lacks the horselord promotion, yet gains defensive bonuses and Gunpowder based promotions. The Mounted Arquebus would still require Stables, and the additional Animal Handling tech (so that the horses can be bred to withstand the loud noise of musket fire). Perhaps use a form of Curiasser unit-art?

[joseasoler]

Although In general I like the proposal, IMO something like this would need to be developed taking into account some kind of proposal to improve the Archery line.

[Tasunke Witka]

I do suppose ...

I already believe that Archers should have access to both Flanking 1 and Flanking 2 (while leaving Flanking 3 strictly for Mounted Units) ...

Such a thing would lead me to wish to put the full 40% vs Gun in Flanking 3, so that there is no strategic overlap. While I realize that this, in combination with other proposals, would make flanking 3 a bit stronger than it formerly was, I consider it a welcome boost to an often overlooked, and more often unneeded, promotion.

The Crossbow change would need to include a change to Archers overall ... perhaps. At least one last look at the Longbow unit. HOWEVER, I do believe that Gunpowder Unitcombat and Mounted Arquebus could be achieved without looking at Archery at all.

After thinking about it, 180 hammers, 200 hammers, 220 hammers, 240 hammers .... all are possible costs for the 'mounted arquebus' yet I am not totally convinced as to the supreme merit of any one cost. My gut says that 200 hammers is best. But 180 hammers should probably be tested as well. Make the unit too expensive and its only situational at best ... make it too cheap and it could become the new status quo. Agreeably though, the nerf from 10 str to 8 str is already quite reasonable, and therefore with the cost increase from 120 to 180 hammers ... 180 hammers may well be expensive enough. Hippus HorseArchers are, afterall, both faster and cheaper than the 180 hammer Mounted Gunners. HAs start at speed4, and can reach speed6, while Mounted Gunners, as all Gunners, can only use the logistics promotion to increase speed, and have no 'horselord' promo ... so they start at speed3 and can only achieve speed4. That alone should allow for 180 cost for these units. Now, if the unitcombat was changed to a Mounted Unitcombat ... and it was allowed full speed, then perhaps additional cost would be necessary. The only reason I'm even considering the 200 cost for mounted gunners is that, as gunner units, they will recieve full defensive bonuses, as well as be allowed City Garrison promotions.