I often read people on the forum criticizing the name “Soldado” (soldier) for being too generic, but then they should also criticize other units that have the same problem, such as the Regular, Jaeger/Cassador (hunter), Ruyter (rider), etc. It’s no different calling a unit “Soldado” than calling it “Regular”, but for some reason it’s the Soldado that gets the flack.
The devs are running out of historically accurate names, so I don’t think it’s wrong to use generic names for certain units, as long as you can clearly differentiate one unit from another. But certainly, there are cases like the “Veteran Rekrut” that don’t make much sense.
Rekrut is what soldiers in Peter the Great’s army were called. It’s not a perfect name and is a tad generic, but that was an actual term used in his army reforms. I think it works fine. Besides there are a goldmine of names to be used for Poland-Lithuania’s army. Denmark, I could see some problems though.
The point is that this unit is fit to become the Eastern European replacement for the Musketeer. PLC and Russians civs may share many common traits and it would make sense.
The name can be changed. But directly in Polish it sounds acceptable.
These are just suggestions. The fact is that each civ has its own strengths and weaknesses. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was precisely an exceptional case of a state that had few powerful strengths and many weaknesses - in the game they can have the best cavalry and an advanced agricultural economy system - Folwark. The rest of the military as well as industry would be their weak point.
And this is the least generic possible. Of course, Home City cards could bring improvements and modernizations, for example by referring to the numerous reforms of Stanisław August Poniatowski - the last king of Poland before the partitions.
It would not be a different unit but shared with the Russians civ. Rekrut would become the Eastern European replacement for Musketeer. The Piechota Wybraniecka wore similar attire but the cap had an additional feather.
The standard Musketeer doesn’t quite fit the PLC civ. Something in this style was introduced only by the last king of Poland.
As for the replacement for the Winged Hussar in the Vasa Royal House, it should be a Swedish, Finnish or Livonian unit.
No, the term would have been рекрут because they don’t use the Latin alphabet. It has exactly the same meaning and pronunciation as the English word recruit, and every single army ever has recruits. It’s not wrong, just generic to the point of absurdity.
Having a shared unit would be fine. But making that unit be the Rekrut is terrible. It’s a silly name picked solely for the reason that it sounds like Rusket. We also don’t know how compatible the civ designs of Russia and Poland will be so sharing a musketeer unit might be tricky.
Why not replace a Polish unit with a Polish unit? The Arquebusiers are already supposed to represent the Swedish component of the dynasty.
Tbh, i dont see it. I think its more to underline the low quality of those musks, since they are only recently conscripted soldiers. Rusket and Rekrut are phonetically not really close. basing an argument on such a vague claim is also meh at best…
I dont mind if poland gets rekruts; normal musks would be too good. A musk UU for poland would give the false impression of them being ‘good’. If you instead use rekruts, everyone understands that they are below average musks and as u said, every army recruits, so its also not ahistorical. But yeah maybe poland doesnt even get musks at all and our argument is void xD
Most of your examples aren’t nearly as bad as Soldado. “Hunter” is basically the default term for light skirmishing infantry in most languages because that type of unit evolved from literal hunters. The names are a tad generic, but it refers to a very specific type of unit. Same deal with Reiters/Ruyters referring to the type of cavalry that originated with the Schwarze Reiters, or units like Chevauleger (light horse) that got adopted by foreign armies and kept the original name.
Contrast that with Regular, Soldado, or Rekrut, where the name is so nonspecific that it would be equally valid for an infantry, cavalry, or artillery unit. Why is Soldado particular trashed more than the rest? Maybe because there are a lot of Spanish speakers in the player base who think it’s ridiculous.
In my opinion a generic name that has a very specific historical use is fine, but there’s room for improvement when a name is both very generic and nonspecific.
I see that you just don’t like that name. That’s the least of the problems. As I mentioned earlier you can change the name od this unit to “Piechota”.
Because it is the Swedish Royal House. Having a full-fledged Polish civ, you can add in its place a unit representing a nation without its own civ - Estonians, Karelians or also Sami.
I wouldn’t say that’s my only issue, nor would I say “Piechota” is a better name.
For one, Ruskets/Rekruts were designed around Russia’s infantry batch training which I doubt Poland will have. Part of what balances their cheap infantry is needing a full batch worth of resources and pop space up front. If Poland could individually train, they’d actually have stronger Rekruts.
Their commonalities end with being cheap and weak. I get what you’re saying about Polish musketeers looking distinct from western ones, but I disagree that Rekruts look any better.
I’d say Polish musketeers would be most accurate if they looked like this:
Overall, I don’t see any benefits to making them share the Rekrut as a unit. It would be worse balanced and look just as wrong as giving them regular musks.
Basically every other option would be preferable.
A) Give them regular musks. A Wybraniecka royal guard upgrade could give them the appropriate attire and simply discount their cost instead of boosting stats. After all, Poland relied a lot on foreign infantry, so western musketeers wouldn’t be totally out of place.
B) Give them their own unique musks like Wybraniecka or some kind of Registered Cossack infantry.
C) Not have regularly available musks at all. Hausa manages quite well with a cavalry unit that can siege instead of a standard musk. With the hints about Poland’s cavalry focus this is an option they might go with.
Vasa is in the game because it is both Swedish and Polish. I really doubt they wouldn’t put some kind of Polish unit to replace Winged Hussars.
Personally I think they should have the Wybraniec as a unique musketeer. It would look weird with Poland having western style musketeers with the musketeer becoming 16/17th century in the imperial age. Plus they should be weaker and cheaper as polish infantry were peasant levies for a long while.
Looks neither better nor worse to me. The only thing it has going for it is not having a tricorn hat, but then it gets one with the vet upgrade anyways. The coat is a distinctive Russian green and looks nothing like the Polish soldiers.
If you want something already in the game that looks like a Polish soldier, Hajduks are as close as you can get.
If a Polish musketeer looks like a Russian skirmisher it will be funny but stupid.
Well, that’s much better. In fact, it is technically possible for the troops of Eastern Europe to look similar and to save money, using the same models is not a problem. In extreme cases, the Russian musketeer can be repainted.
Unless they only had one “infantry” unit with firearms - Kurp (a hunter who can collect Wood and build Beehives). Access to other firearms infantry units could be granted via Age Up options. In addition they could also have the Archer (shared with the Russians civ) - can be upgraded to Piechota Wybraniecka (skirmisher).
Other infantry units for PLC civ:
Woj - a warrior with an axe/ rohatyna - can be upgraded to Hajduk or to Musketeer using the Home City card
I think this will not happen in euro civs.
Unlocking units is a very postcolonial age up mechanic and i guess poland will get quartermaster, gouvernor, naturalist, etc. as all the other euro civs^^’
