Hello everyone, I’m going to share my opinion on this matter. I want to emphasize that this is just my personal opinion, and it’s perfectly fine if you choose to ignore it. However, for those interested in my “wall of text,” I recommend listening to the following soundtracks while reading:
From what I’m deducing:
- Grenadiers have had a design flaw since their introduction in AoE 3 in 2005.
- Although possible “reworks” for this unit have been discussed for 18 years, no convincing alternative has been presented so far. Additionally, a significant number of players may oppose the idea of major changes to the grenadier, as they have been playing with this unit the same way for 18 years.
- The grenadiers presented in AoE 3 are not only historically inaccurate but also have technical and mechanical issues, such as their category, function, and effectiveness against other units.
I know I’ll look like this image as I add some historical and gameplay concepts, but the truth is, I consider the Grenadiers as one of the “representative military units of humanity,” just like the Macedonian phalanx, the medieval European knight, the Roman legionary, the stormtrooper, among many others. These iconic units often become symbols of specific eras and styles of combat, making them memorable and significant in both history and popular culture.
Grenadier are an iconic military unit that has left an indelible mark on the history and culture of many nations. Although their role on the battlefield has evolved over the years, their legacy endures in the form of honor guards at royal palaces and iconic buildings around the world.
These units have their roots in the military history of various countries and have been used to protect royalty, represent the armed forces, and uphold ceremonial traditions.
Personally, I don’t like the implementation of “grenade launchers” in AoE 3 because in the game, they have a more fictional and less historically accurate background:
Primitive grenade launchers (Hand mortar) used in the 16th to 19th centuries were rudimentary firearms designed to launch explosive grenades at short distances, but they weren’t widespread due to their technical and tactical limitations. They were less precise, had limited range, and required a dangerous manual process to load and fire. Furthermore, grenade production was limited, and as firearms technology advanced, more effective rifles and muskets with superior range, accuracy, and firepower emerged.
The practice of using “tall and strong” soldiers as grenadiers dates back to the 17th century, with the early grenadiers being infantrymen selected for their physical strength and grenade-throwing abilities. Given that hand grenades of that era were relatively heavy and required strong and precise throws, recruiting robust soldiers for this role was common practice. These grenadiers were known for their ability to throw grenades over longer distances and with greater accuracy than their counterparts. Their training included specific practices for grenade handling and use in combat. While the role of grenadiers evolved over time, and they became more versatile, the tradition of recruiting physically strong soldiers skilled in grenade usage continued throughout military history, making grenadiers an iconic unit in many armies well into the 19th century and beyond.
Another aspect of the grenadier that I dislike (and probably many other players as well) is that the grenadier is terrible in melee combat (despite wielding two swords). Historically, Grenadiers excelled in melee combat, often preferring that style of fighting. So far, the unit that has best represented the grenadier has been the Mexican “Soldier.”
So far, the best option for the Grenadier that I’ve seen is the rework of the “Line Grenadiers” card:
This card should be a powerful one, and all European nations should have access to it (such as the Spanish, for example). This card should cost resources, and in addition to allowing the creation of Grenadiers in barracks, it should transform Grenadiers into “Line Grenadiers” armed with muskets. The use of this card should be voluntary and costly, as the “Line Grenadier” should be superior to the regular Grenadier.
The Line Grenadier should be more expensive than the regular Grenadier, possess two types of resistance (vs. ranged and vs. melee), and have melee bonuses against cavalry and infantry. They should be slower than Musketeers and deal less damage with muskets compared to two Musketeers.
This would make the “Line Grenadiers” more expensive, slower, and more powerful than the “Mexican Soldier,” available from Age III. Line Grenadiers will only use grenades against buildings, and they will also have the special ability “throw grenades against units” with a 45 second cooldown.
Personal suggestion: Remove the grenade launchers; I believe they harm historical immersion (and they are aesthetically unappealing). Instead, replace this card with “Light Grenades” to increase the grenade throwing distance and add an additional cinematic for grenade throwing in the game to show that this card is being used.
PS: Yes, I am aware that “Line Grenadiers” will also benefit from Musketeer upgrades, which means civilizations like the British could have powerful Line Grenadiers. But isn’t that historically accurate? 
