Problematic Russian Changes

[Josh1Axel]

I understand your point, and I also understand that it is historically correct to propose the strelet as a heavy infantry unit, but I think you should also consider that many players have used the strelet in AoE 3 as a numerous and weak skirmisher for almost 18 years, now, a abrupt change might not be well received.

Something that must be admitted is that in 2005 developers did not have as much access to information as they do today, in addition to the limitations of that time (graphics engine, weight, etc.) and they developed AoE 3 as best they could.

Now, if an abrupt change would really be justified, it would have to be done in a gradual and staggered way, in addition to seeing more options (something that can be done thanks to the flexibility of the current AoE 3 DE):

1. Change the resistances of the strelet according to the stances like the case of the Pavisers, or even in a more simplified way like the Azap.
2. Give strelet some special ability like Carolean Charge.
3. A card (that costs resources) that transforms strelet into “real strelet” that greatly increases their combat stats (as well as their cost).
   

There are also more drastic methods:

1. Focus on historical accuracy and remove the “Guard” upgrade to the Strelet (since the Strelet disappeared in 1698), this would give an excuse to change the Strelet nomenclature to Heavy Infantry and also create a new skirmisher unit for the Russians, such as the Russian Jägers or Lifeguard (heavy infantry)*
   

   
   

2. Retire strelet entirely as they are not historically correct, problematic to standardize with other units, and styled around stereotypes.

PS: For those interested, I also recommend taking a look at the Total War: Napoleon wiki.

*EDIT:

• I know you could just give the Russians the Skirmisher, but the characteristic of this civilization is to have cheaper but weaker units so eventually the devs would have to design their own Skirmisher.
• I also thought of the idea of designing a Russian heavy infantry as Skirmisher due to the historical reference that the Russian regular army served well as skirmishers during Napoleon’s retreat from Russia, but on second thought this would be too complicated and best discarded

[Josh1Axel]

In a better review, if a rework of the Blockhouse units is going to be carried out, the most obvious thing would be:

1. Rename Rekrut to Lifeguard / Leib Guard
   

   

2. Introduce Opelchenie as replacement skirmishers for Strelet: food and wood cost, trainable in blocks of 10 units; the Opelchenie is very similar to the Landwehr anyway.
   

   

3. Rework the Strelet, recategorize itself as HEAVY INFANTRY and increase its costs (might even cost coins). Also recategorizing it as “Archaic Infantry” (although I would call them infantry with traditional weapons) since the use of their ax is excuse enough for that category, as well as limiting their upgrade to only “Veteran” and treating them similar to that of the Crossbowman (but without ceasing to be heavy infantry). And most importantly: give the ax wielded by the Strelets a purpose.

PS: I like the detail in Napoleon: Total War that skirmishers and light infantry have full color uniforms.

[MatM1996]

@Josh1Axel

Introduce Opelchenie as replacement skirmishers for Strelet: food and wood cost, trainable in blocks of 10 units; the Opelchenie is very similar to the Landwehr anyway.

Yeah,this like me more…i say that Opelchenie need to be a counterskirmisher like the Schiavone and the Strelet remain as standard Russian skirmisher as now…

[M00Z1LLA]

This is way more complicated than just swapping the roles of Streltsy and Rekruts/Opelchenie.

First of all, Leib Guards were some of the most elite troops in Europe and are not at all equivalent to the role of a weaker than average musketeer. If they belong anywhere they should replace Counter-Jaegers (although not necessarily with the same function).

If you then made Streltsy a new heavy infantry unit you’d be loading the Barracks with 3 heavy infantry units which would be a little redundant.

I understand the desire to make Streltsy something suitably unique, but as a Rekrut replacement they would already be different from standard Musketeers. And if you send the Sovnya card then they also get a boosted melee attack that makes them even more unique in comparison to regular Musketeers.

[SirBarnzy1]

@M00Z1LLA

@MatM1996

But the Streltsy in AoE 4 is a light unit with bonus against cavalry

The unit classes in AoE4 aren’t equivalent to AoE3.

@MatM1996

in AoE 3 the cavalry wipe out the Strelets, because they are light infantry; the Russians now have the Rekrut to defeat the cavalry…

Which is exactly why Streltsy should be musket infantry. And I’ve already covered what’s wrong with the Rekrut

I disagree. Strelets were using arquebuses and then matchlocks (whilst the Swedes were with flintlocks) and had their bardiches as defense - they were used mainly to soften up targets before the cavalry charnged in. Despite being initially ‘Elite’ infantry they were never that cohesive up-close with cavarly. Though considered elite originally, they faded in power quickly whilst Western-style Musketeers were favoured and proved more multi-purpose.

I think they are fine as Light Infantry - they were just used to soften up the enemy with gun-fire before cavalry charged in. They

[Josh1Axel]

@MatM1996

Yeah,this like me more…i say that Opelchenie need to be a counterskirmisher like the Schiavone and the Strelet remain as standard Russian skirmisher as now…

@M00Z1LLA

This is way more complicated than just swapping the roles of Streltsy and Rekruts/Opelchenie.

The Opolchenie/Opolcheniya are literally “militias”, as are the State Militia and Landwehr, so it would be consistent if they have the same roles and costs (cheap skirmisher).

Historically the Opolchenie have served the Russian army even since the medieval age having a prominent role in WW2, the Opolchenie were also decisive in the Napoleonic wars, specifically in the Russian invasion by Napoleon participating in the decisive Battle of Borodino (battle so far held in russia and gives the historical lesson that you can win a battle but lose the war).

Narodnoe Opolcheniye from the 12th century on a Ukrainian stamp, dating to the time of Kievan Rus’. ######## ополчение = Narodnoe Opolcheniye = People’s Militia.

Map of the Battle of Borodino, the bloodiest battle of all the Napoleonic Wars

Napoleon's Bloodiest Day: Borodino 1812

@M00Z1LLA

First of all, Leib Guards were some of the most elite troops in Europe and are not at all equivalent to the role of a weaker than average musketeer. If they belong anywhere they should replace Counter-Jaegers (although not necessarily with the same function).

I’m counting on it, at first I thought of suggesting the name soldat (soldier) or voyennyy (military) but on second thought I thought “Life Guards” were too cool to leave out, so digging into their history I discovered the Semyonovsky Life Guards Regiment that they were a rifle regiment (which justifies them to represent the Life Guards as regular troops), so I saw a unique opportunity to break the cold war stereotypes of the US people that Russian soldiers are numerous and weak .

Moscow. Monument to the Guard of the Semyonovsky Regiment

Create a card that transformed Lifeguards into Russian Imperial Guard, which would increase the Lifeguard’s stats, costs, and training time to a higher level than common musketeers from other civs, and also give them the option of being able to train them individually (since It is not mandatory to train them in a block, the Rekrut train in groups of 5 anyway).*

Modern depiction of the Russian Imperial Guard in the Crimean War.

@M00Z1LLA

If you then made Streltsy a new heavy infantry unit you’d be loading the Barracks with 3 heavy infantry units which would be a little redundant.

I understand the desire to make Streltsy something suitably unique, but as a Rekrut replacement they would already be different from standard Musketeers. And if you send the Sovnya card then they also get a boosted melee attack that makes them even more unique in comparison to regular Musketeers.

@SirBarnzy1

I disagree. Strelets were using arquebuses and then matchlocks (whilst the Swedes were with flintlocks) and had their bardiches as defense - they were used mainly to soften up targets before the cavalry charnged in. Despite being initially ‘Elite’ infantry they were never that cohesive up-close with cavarly. Though considered elite originally, they faded in power quickly whilst Western-style Musketeers were favoured and proved more multi-purpose.

I think they are fine as Light Infantry - they were just used to soften up the enemy with gun-fire before cavalry charged in. They

That’s why the Streltsy should be treated similarly to other “archaic units,” such as allowing them to be upgraded only up to the Veteran and giving them an ability that is effective in the early ages but becomes obsolete in later ages (unless specific cards are used, similar to the case of Longbowmen).

*EDIT:

A more simplified idea occurred to me:

Renaming the Rekrut as “Gvardiya” (Guard) and its hypothetical transformation into a Russian Imperial Guard as Leyb Gvardiya (Life Guard). It has a better historical sense, lexicon and easy to learn

[MatM1996]

@Josh1Axel

The Opolchenie/Opolcheniya are literally “militias”, as are the State Militia and Landwehr, so it would be consistent if they have the same roles and costs (cheap skirmisher).

Yeah, looks good to me…

[Josh1Axel]

Hello again

While exercising the following occurred to me:

I said that it was a stereotype that Russian soldiers were numerous but weak, but perhaps I should clarify that it is true that Russian military doctrine consists of training large armies with little training time and sometimes poorly equipped, but my point was that the Russians historically they have also had in their army elite units that have been decisive in important wars (such as the Napoleonic wars and world wars) having perhaps one of the best (irregular) militias in the world.

So I reckon these changes would give a better representation of the Russian Empire in the AoE 3 timeframe:

1. Replace the Strelet with Opelchenie, keeping the same costs and stats:

This would be historically accurate and would also give the Russians the best “militia” in the game, vastly outperforming the State Militia and Landwehr. With this change I believe that the basic skirmisher of the Russians would become a “negative stereotype” to a “homage to Russian history”.

2. Take advantage of the Rekrut’s name and icon change:

It must be recognized that it is historically accurate that it was common for the Russian regular musketeer to have less training and equipment than other musketeers of the time, so I do not consider it necessary to emphasize that the Russian musketeer in AoE 3 he was “a recruit or initiate”, it should simply be mentioned that the Russian military doctrine consisted of raising large groups of armies in a short time sacrificing quality, this military doctrine was decisive several times for the Russian victory.

But I also consider it necessary to highlight that in the Napoleonic wars the Russians also had elite corps that were equal to or superior to other European military regiments, obviously no elite unit was superior to the French Imperial Guard (Old Guard), but, the Leib Guard also took an important role in the Napoleonic wars for which I consider they deserve representation. So I think it would be a good historical representation to have the common Russian Musketeer have the chance to “evolve” into the Leiv Guard, thus giving better replayability and giving the Russians a powerful unit.

Crimean War

Regular

Lieib Guard

3. Complete rework to the Strelet:
Nothing more to say, it is a unit that seems to have been abruptly changed during the development of AoE 3 (possibly it was going to take the role of the Russian musketeer) and many of us were disappointed that despite looking like such an imposing unit, they were so weak.

I reiterate that a good idea is to give it the treatment of an “archaic unit” by limiting its upgrade to veteran and being useful (unless cards are used) only until age 3.
If most civs have main skirmishers that cost coins and archaic units (like the pikeman or crossbowman) that cost wood perhaps it’s equivalent to the Russians’ main skirmisher (Opelchenie) costing wood and their archaic unit (Strelet) costing coins. It might be a good idea to give Strelet better melee attack performance than ranged.

The Strelet was essentially (historically) meant to be a regular and even elite unit, and it is not correct to portray them as a cheap, massive unit.

https://i.redd.it/8l6cbdxo2hv51.gif(image larger than 3 MB)

[Josh1Axel]

Update: Reading before sleep, I finally think I found the historical piece I needed

In this drawing, two members of the “Leiv Guard” are depicted, an officer and a Private (or, as it is said in Russian, a “Ryadovoy”).

Researching the origin of the drawing, I came across this webpage (Bulgarian) where I found a good summary of the Russian Imperial Guard (Leiv Guard). However, based on my understanding of the text:

By the late 18th century, the Russian Guard, under the reign of Peter I, was mostly composed of nobles, and only in cases of significant battlefield losses were soldiers from other classes admitted. However, after the death of Peter I, this rule began to loosen, allowing nobles to be registered as non-commissioned officers from childhood, later ascending to officers without having served. This practice sometimes led to regiments with numerous non-commissioned officers who had never served. During this time, the Guard started recruiting primarily from lower social classes.

In short, it would be possible and historically justified for a “common Russian musketeer” to be able to join the Leiv Guard (especially given that it’s the late 18th century, on the doorstep of the Napoleonic Wars!).

I know that maybe this won’t be implemented in AoE 3, but it feels great to have discovered this historical element

EDIT:

The text is Bulgarian.

[M00Z1LLA]

Recruiting primarily from lower social classes doesn’t mean they were recruited en mass or were poorly trained. They probably were still selected in limited numbers and got elite training. Also, the Russian lower classes was like 99% of the population.

[Josh1Axel]

That is my point, remember that my idea is that there is a card that turns the “common Russian musketeer” into a Leib Guard.

Presumably they chose the best candidates from the regular army to belong to the Leib Guard, my goal is that the common Russian Musketeer has the possibility of becoming a musketeer with higher statistics than the musketeers of other civilizations, of course it will be a free choice of the player.

And by the way, the page and the language of the text that I presented is not Russian, it is Bulgarian

However, on the Russian page I found something similar, although I admit that I am not able to understand this sentence:

At first glance it also seems to say that lower class recruits were used, but I’m not entirely sure… I really need the help of someone fluent in the Russian language

[BroaderSheep35]

I think you guys need to enjoy the awesome changes instead of suddenly going deeper for another rework.

[Josh1Axel]

Hello again

@Josh1Axel

At first glance it also seems to say that lower class recruits were used, but I’m not entirely sure

I got some help and I’m told that the Russian text that says "tax class recruits" is the equivalent of “lower class recruits” (what a way to put it )

@Josh1Axel

By the late 18th century, the Russian Guard, under the reign of Peter I, was mostly composed of nobles, and only in cases of significant battlefield losses were soldiers from other classes admitted. However, after the death of Peter I, this rule began to loosen, allowing nobles to be registered as non-commissioned officers from childhood, later ascending to officers without having served. This practice sometimes led to regiments with numerous non-commissioned officers who had never served. During this time, the Guard started recruiting primarily from lower social classes.

I also received complementary support on this, most of the translation is correct although I should mention that in the text it is mentioned that during the reign of Peter the Great (1721-1725) only noblemen were allowed to belong to the Leiv Guard (unless that this guard suffered heavy casualties), but after his death this requirement was relaxed (in addition to the lack of motivation of the nobles to belong to the army) for which they began to recruit soldiers from lower social classes, reaching the point that at the end of the 18th century most of the soldiers of the Leiv Guard came from the lower social class (serfs). That explains the stories about Napoleon’s Guard being shocked at seeing Leib Guard soldiers with such poor manners during an official dinner in his honor

On the Russian page I also found this interesting text:

It basically says the following:

During the reign of Alexander I, the Russian Guard took part in all wars except the Turkish and Persian. In the Napoleonic Wars, the Russian Guard regained its prestige as a military elite, excelling in important battles such as Austerlitz, Friedland, Borodino and Kulm. Unlike Napoleon’s Old Guard, the Russian Guard was present in almost all the major battles of this time, thanks to their constant participation in combat, the Russian Guards acquired valuable military experience, making the Guard Corps one of the strongest military formations in Europe at the end of the Napoleonic Wars.

Hopefully these historical facts can be implemented into game mechanics in AoE 3 one day

@BroaderSheep35

I think you guys need to enjoy the awesome changes instead of suddenly going deeper for another rework.

I enjoy all the changes the devs have been making in AoE 3 (especially the historically based ones).

I do these investigations because for me they are fun, I am not demanding changes or that a game be 100% realistic (that would be too boring). I just enjoy the story and help the developers at best

[Josh1Axel]

Finally, I will discuss the possible function of these bad boys

This topic is dealing with the weak points of the Poruchik, which also seems a little disappointing to me simply having made them “a cheap copy of the original Halberdier” (but now accessible from Age 2)

HISTORY

With this unit I will try to be careful in the hope of adequately treating this unit (within the framework of Russian history)

According to the in-game description poruchik means “lieutenant”, which is unimaginative, so I focused on the weapon they use.

I noticed that in all its variants the Poruchik uses a Partisan, which was a very popular weapon in Europe during the AoE 3 timeframe, but, doing some research in Russian history I discovered that the Partisan was replaced by the Halberd in the years 1700-1811 where they were the combat weapons of infantry officers and non-commissioned officers, also in Russia halberds were the honor weapons of palace guards and royal bodyguards.

A historical detail that seemed important to me is that the Halberd was the weapon of the lower ranks of the Russian police city until 1856 (I suppose that in the first centuries of the AoE 3 timeframe the policemen used the Partisan as a weapon as shown in some drawings).

“The city in Nikolaev times” by M. V. Dobuzhinsky

GAMEPLAY:
It seemed very simple to me to create a weaker Halberdier variant, but, it reminded me of the cheap Halberdier from AoE 2 that although it is a different game, it reminded me that the Slavs had the Druzhina technology that allowed them to have one of the best Halberdier from AoE 2 (cheap unit that had trample damage ability).

I know “Druzhina” is a medieval term, however it seemed apparent to me that if the Poruchik’s best feature was its numbers, then it would be great to make that feature more powerful:

Give the Poruchik trample damage, I know it seems very OP at first but if you look closely in AoE 3 their main fights are done using muskets and a low HP Halberdier is an easy target for ranged units.

Of course, Poruchik can be nerfed to compensate for the trample damage (less health, slower, less attack) and its function would be mainly defensive, being in practice a cheap version of the Doppelsoldner (And by the way, the Landsknechts also initially used the Partisans as weapons).

CONCLUSIONS

1. Change the name, please.
2. Make the Poruchik even more particular, a good idea is to give them trample damage, or by default some other quirk that benefits their numbers.

I remind you that this is my humble opinion, I am open to all constructive criticism and if you consider that I make a mistake, feel free to let me know

[Ekdal1378]

Just saying thats not a good idea strong fast spamming units, we had enough with gendarmes

[Apocalypso4826]

@Josh1Axel

I noticed that in all its variants the Poruchik uses a Partisan , which was a very popular weapon in Europe during the AoE 3 timeframe, but, doing some research in Russian history I discovered that the Partisan was replaced by the Halberd in the years 1700-1811

Unrelated fact, but one of my favorite games of all time, Phantasy Star Online, follows this same progression, so make of that what you will.

[Josh1Axel]

Hi again, I spent some time reading up on some Russian military history, and found some interesting topics (as well as perhaps the reason why Russian halberdiers were named “Poruchik”):

Partisan (In Russian history):

This weapon was a symbol of the OFFICERS of the Russian army (as well as the palace guard). Until the 1730s, all OFFICERS in the army owned a Partisan, who had the particularity of having tassels (excuse me if I can’t find a better word) of different colors depending on the rank of the officers.

Rank	Color of tassels on Partisan
Colonel	Gold
Lieutenant Colonel	Silver
Important	Silver with gold threads
Captain	White
Lieutenant Captain	Blue
Lieutenant	Red
Ensign	Green

Spontoon (In Russian history):
The Spontoon was the “evolution” of the Russian officer’s weapon, replacing the Partisan in 1730. The Spontoons were finally withdrawn from service in 1807.

Officer of an infantry regiment armed with a Partisan (1700 to 1732)

Infantry officer armed with a Spontoon (1756-1761)

Fun fact: Landsknecht armed with a Spontoon, early 16th century.

Halberd (In Russian history):
In the Russian army, the halberd already existed as an officer’s weapon since the 18th century, although it was only carried by captains and sergeants (it was to differentiate them from the rest of the troops). It was not until the year 1796 that all officers were assigned a halberd.

An officer with a Halberd, note the design is a bit different but it’s still a Halberd

One fact that I found interesting is that the Halberd did not disappear as a weapon for officers (and non-commissioned officers) until they were abolished from the army and the guard in 1911

As a personal note I could not find out the reason for this Poruchik design, at first I thought it was some honor uniform of the Tsar’s palace guard but I have not been able to find any descriptive image of the palace guard uniforms during the 19th century (probably because much of that art was destroyed by the Russian revolution of the 20th century). But still the design of this unit looks great to me and should be kept.

Conclusions:
Understanding the history of polearms in the Imperial Russian Army, it seems evident to me that the more appropriate name for “Poruchik” should be OFITSER (Officer) since polearms were wielded by infantry officers.
The idea that the Russian Halberdiers cause area damage also seems more palpable to me, not only because of its historical similarity with the Landsknecht, it is also related to the “Druzhina” technology from AoE 2 which, as I understand it, means “squad”, hence it could this term could be extrapolated to imply that thanks to “Russian Military Officers” the infantry was more effective, especially in large numbers.

Remember that it’s my personal opinion, you can use this information however you want (you can even apply these mechanics to other civs), I just do this historical research for fun

For those interested, most of the information was taken from this web page

Знаки различия званий в России. Алебарда. - alebarda-a.html

@Ekdal1378

Just saying thats not idea strong fast spamming units, we had enough with gendarmes

Yes, cuirassiers were one of the main reasons new players chose the French civilization

But in all fairness, cuirassiers are a fast cavalry unit that costs a lot of resources and requires a lot of population. My idea was more focused on making the Poruchik a cheaper version of the Doppelsoldner (basically having half their stats). Doppelsoldner are powerful at age 2 but eventually become less powerful in subsequent ages.

@Apocalypso4826

Unrelated fact, but one of my favorite games of all time, Phantasy Star Online, follows this same progression, so make of that what you will.

Interesting, that another game uses the mechanic that a polearm can deal area damage is a good indication

[Apocalypso4826]

@Josh1Axel

Interesting, that another game uses the mechanic that a polearm can deal area damage is a good indication

Did you look it up, or are you just guessing? Because in PSO, Partisan-type weapons target enemies in a wide sweep in front of the player.

[Josh1Axel]

I researched it

[Apocalypso4826]

Good man. You did your homework. Now you’ve glimpsed a little into the other games I like.