Renaming old generic unit lines

I think we have lost potential with unit lines that use so much names:

(all should be called spearmen) spearman - pikeman - helebaldier
(all should be called xbows) archer - xbow - arbalest
(all should be called or scout and then light cav then elite) we already have 3 different hussars Z and winged ones,
(also knight line should be called knights upgrade to elite knights then you can differentiate their upgrades for specific civs.
cavalier, savar, paladin, etc.) There is too much naming for the same units.

Like TW games used early and late,but to english speakers it seems strange.
What do you think? Units use different weapons.

PLEASE READ MY NEXT POST as this one poorly written.

2 Likes

“Elite Knight” sounds boring, unimaginative, and soulless.

6 Likes

‘Elite’ is for UU/regional unit. ‘Heavy’ is for ranged generic unit.

1 Like

Current naming is fine so lets leave it as it is.Your name suggestion are plain and boring.

If Im renaming stuff none of the generic unit lines will have elite word for the.Elite should be only for unique or regional units.

Skirmisher line peltast javalineer.

5 Likes

To be honest, I don’t really see the point.

If you’d like some constructive criticism, instead of the overused and over-overused ‘Elite’, you could use one different word. This is already done in the Italian translation of the game with the cavalry line:

  • Knight → Cavaliere (from the Provencal cavalier)
  • Cavalier → Cavaliere scelto (lett: Chosen Knight, but with the meaning of “Distinguished knight”)
  • Paladin → Paladino

It’s a hard no from me. Boring suggestion that doesn’t seem to improve anything. I actually think we have too many unit lines that are just X → Elite X. Unit upgrades were originally supposed to represent technological advancement through time, not better training, but that has sort of been lost as the game has gained more unit lines.

4 Likes

A different, and more important question: if they remove crossbows from some civs by reskinning, should the unit be renamed or not?

1 Like

I see I wrote it abit badly, so you missed my point.
Problem is that bow and crossbow are not the same weapons, and should not be a direct upgrade.
All civilisations share archers but not crossbows. So crossbows should be specific/regional units that fire slowly and are cheaper/train faster so easier to mass. To reflect realism a bit.
Also spear, pike and helebard are not.
Spearmen line should all be spearmen mybe.
pikemen should be like kamayuks.
and helebardiers should be more like flemish militia also good in melee.

I don’t care what “elite imperial heavy or whatever” u add to upgrades you can add numbers if you like, you should get someone english speaker to decde what is best.,but crossbowman is a different unit than archer, and arbalest is a french crossbowman. But the weapon they carry is a type of crossbow.

I don’t like elite either as it implies veterancy not gear upgrade. But its everywhere so i don’t mind it anymore. Heavy is also strange on horse archers, but i am not native speaker.

Skirmishers are already elite


For knights its the same, paladin should be french only or at last regional, cavalier is again strange name for a knight upgrade means kind of different thing.
Knight is a title.
Cavallier = cavalry men but french word i think.
Paladin is very political specific to Charles Ier (le Grand) so again regional at most. Or King Arthur as a Myth.

Mybe just an idea(mybe bad) we could name units by age upgrade is in feudal archer, archer, imperial archer. i dunno. give it your best shot I am bad probably at this. Or just upgrade but don’t change the name at.

But: technological advancement of crossbows did not remove archers from existence, they were still the superior force to crossbowmen in everything (range, force ,rate of fire) just less cost effective as they did require much more training to be effective.

That is what is the closest question to my point. I think yes.

Only 2 civis lack the xbow ironically both of them are european.xbows are not region spesific and pretty generic,ingame civis only americans would lack it.

I almost completely disagree.

I absolutely hate how AoE3/AoE4 are naming their units. Upgrading a unit to “Elite”, “Veteran” or “Champion” makes no sense. How can your entire army change from normal units to Elite units. Elite is defined by the contrast to generic units.

I think “Elite” makes sense on Unique units because they usually represent the Elite of your army but Skirmishers should definitely not be “Elite” they are a trash unit.

But I do thing that “Pikeman” and “Hussar” are bad names. Pikeman are using glaives. Real pikes were very long, so Incan Kamayuks or Macedonian Phalangites are Pikeman. Hussar is also a bad name. Chronicles calls them Raiders. The Chronicles names for the Knight line are also somewhat more generic (Lancer → Shock Cavalry → Imperial Cavalry) and therefor would work better for none European civilisations.

Names like “Heavy”, “War”, “Imperial” work better for upgrades because they imply technological improvements or just better equipment. But I think they should only be used where they make sense. “Heavy” units should have significantly more armour and/or HP and not more movement speed.

4 Likes

Only 2 civis lack the xbow ironically both of them are european.xbows are not region spesific and pretty generic,ingame civis only americans would lack it.

Sure. But that is still 6 civs (as of now), so the question is still relevant.

That’s true but not really important in my opinion. The point is to give the overall impression that your civilisation’s technology and material culture are developing over time. Archer → crossbow → arbalest doesn’t reflect the exact historical development, but it gives a much better impression of development than any variation of archer → better archer → even better archer would.

I ment all human civilisations on the planet i think knew about archery in 1000-1600. but crossbows were common only in europe and china.

why rename a unit then? keep it archer and jus make it a better in stats and do a visual upgrade (still using bow not xbow) And you can make a regional unit of xbow would make much more sense.

Renaming does more harm than good also from a new player persective, couse its the same unit same counters and everything. its probably bad design as game was never intended to go this far when it was first released 25 years ago.

Please read my next post and you will agree with me.

I think the things you mention in the 2nd post are way more a skin issue then a name issue.

If you would rename “Cavalier” to “Heavy Cavalry” they would still look European. If you rename the “Crossbow” to “Heavy Archer” they still look like Crossbows.

I would rather have a unit that looks like an Archer but is still called “Crossbow” so we don’t have different names for the same unit.

1 Like

Khmers have a balista on an elephant which is similar to a giant xbow,pretty sure those people would have known about xbows.Even in india people knew about xbows but did not use them on mass as bows were a better option.

Give them a unique upgrade then,why change the whole game for 6 civis?

If Briton Longbowmen weren’t a thing, I could see an argument for the Archer line to look like this:

Archer → Longbowman → Composite Bowman

(Unless, I guess, the existing Longbowman is renamed “Briton Longbowman”?)