Rekrut is absolutely fine for PLC civ. It can also be Royal Guard - Piechota Wybraniecka.
Scytheman could be available for training in Folwark. Additionally: Archer, Woj (axe), Kurp (hunter-skirmisher).
2 Likes
Si lâinfanterie est faible ainsi que lâartillerie Ă lâopposĂ©e de la cavalerie qui serait puissante, je crains que lâont se retrouve dans la situation oĂč les Lakotas Ă©taient avant DE Ă devoir presque tout miser sur leur cavalerie.
How I would probably work this would be with an Arsenal replacement which only has cav upgrades. They probably need Culvs (for balance reasons) since artillery free civs are harder to balance. Letting them have an Arsenal full of cavalry upgrades while maintaining access to imperial culvs, mortars, and Falconets (or Organ Guns) would seem best. They wouldnât need (though would definitely like) Horse Artillery. Without an Arsenal, their artillery would lack +6 los, +10% hp, and +15% speed with no Arsenal which would seem fair.
Notably, with no regular Arsenal their melee infantry would lack +10% hp, Gun Powder inf would lack +15% attack, +10% hp, Muskets would lack +20% melee damage, skirms would lack CIR and all infantry would lack Military Drummers.
I think it could be possible to give Poland a âlight cavalry Skirmisherâ which would have bonuses vs Heavy Infantry and Light Cavalry, but would lose vs Foot Skirmishers due to having a Light Cavalry tag.
1 Like
I think both factions are going to be fairly unique.
For Poland i imagine 1 or 2 âgenericâ units for cavalry and infantry, something like musketeers, crossbows and cavalry archers if i had to guess.
However i donât think there will be any unique artillery or naval unit for Poland.
For Denmark i would expect more generic esp in cavalry, however it would not surprise me if the infantry remains relatively unique, we might see 3 or 4 unique âranged infantry unitsâ; based on the files a royal guard likely with a repeater rifle seems likely, and i think Friskytte/snaphane is also very likely, then you get things like Norwegian ski infantry which is probably the most famous unit due to civ 5.
We can also be pretty confident there will be 1 unique artillery piece for Denmark, and almost certainly at least 1 unique boat.
It honestly wouldnât surprise me if both factions push towards 10 unique units, though who knows.
3 Likes
Iâm kinda hoping not, though if so Iâd expect Cav armies that mix âconsulate unitsâ (+10% attack and hp that shadow tech) with Polish or Lithuanian cavalry. The reason this doesnât seem impossible would be itâd be a different way to manage a lot of upgrades. China shows us numerous cheap upgrades for each individual unit type, but if Euro civs pay more than this would allow for one standard cost upgrade tied to each army. What also could be done would be big button upgrades like the African civs (one for Ranged and another for melee), or smaller âNational upgradesâ where one tech upgrades Polish Cavalry, one tech upgrades Cossack Cavalry, one upgrades Lithuanian cavalry etc. In that case it might be basically one normal cost upgrade for 2-3 units spread across banner group. They could also simply have upgrades for each army, though that might get complicated due to overlapping units.
Yup. This makes great sense
2 Likes
Could Denmark specialize economically in livestock and milk production? I think that would give it a very unique touch. It would be my favorite faction if it were so.
1 Like
âRecruitâ is technically correct for every single civ. I really hope they have better standards when coming up with the new Polish units because Rekrut is a bottom of the barrel name for a unit and literally just chosen because it sounded like Rusket.
Cows trickle food and coin I suppose? Maybe you have a cow limit of 40 and receive one with each shipment?
Same thing for the Mexican âSoldadoâ (soldier)
2 Likes
Like the Italians civ⊠old civs should also be updated to match this level of uniqueness for civ.
This unit really could fit into a PLC civ. Being Royal Guard they would have the correct appearance.
If it takes a royal guard upgrade to have the correct appearance, you could achieve the same thing with regular Musketeers. That avoids the stupidity of having âVeteran Recruitsâ.
Giving them a unique building for artillery and infantry because both were terrible IRL sounds incredibly counterintuitive. Moreover, deliberately nerfing their artillery cuz theirs was unremarkable IRL is terrible design.
Just⊠make them generic, give them nothing unique about them and no HC improvements and call it a day tbh.
2 Likes
True. But for Russian and Polish, it fits the bill for their musketeers. Polish musketeers were pretty poor in comparision to western European counterparts to which they eventually adopted the attire and tactics of.
As others have mentioned âSoldadosâ is another good one - really not especially meaningful naming but at least itâs different.
(just saw your âveteran recruitsâ comment, to which I agree with - itâs silly and Iâm sure thereâs a better coverall term of not-so-good musketers/ruskets)
1 Like
As I pointed out earlier, just replacing their Arsenal with a unique Cavalry Arsenal would also work. No Arsenal upgrades for Artillery or Infantry would achieve whatâs being discussed, and having another 5-10 Cavalry upgrades would be great.
Yes, something that could alternate between currency and food. Although I donât know if Denmark also had sheep as well as cattle, and that could make some produce food (milk), and others currency (wool).
2 Likes
But do they really need a different unit to achieve kinda crappy musketeers? Making them lack upgrade cards does essentially the same thing.
Personally I think Strelets should be Russiaâs crappy musk and Opolcheniye their cannon fodder skirms.
Poland could probably get away with standard musks. Iâd be inclined to make Piechota Wybraniecka a royal house unit that replaces the Winged Hussar given they were recruited only from royal lands.
1 Like
What kind of eco bonus might Poland have? If cavalry come in banner armies, will they be discounted like Russian Infantry?
Strelets being an elite unit at their inception have always made them goofy as the âcannon fodderâ they are ingame. Ratniks would have made more sense, but itâs too late to change now that the term has been muddied by, uh⊠world events.
Guess thereâs the argument that they represent the late strelets where it more of was a corrupt and inexperienced class of soldiers recruited from a hereditary caste or whatever.
1 Like
My biggest gripe is that the guys with a huge melee weapon and archaic, short ranged firearm donât share a role with all the bayonet boys. Instead they get lumped in with the riflemen that suck at melee.