Why byzantine use dromon replace cannon galleon?

[MatM1996]

@MostDragon80736

It is truely awkard they cannot only introduce a very achronistic civ in romans, but also alter the old classic civs of aok that never needed that refinement. Huns with Dromons wtf ?? where would they have gotten these.

@MostDragon80736

It is truely awkard they cannot only introduce a very achronistic civ in romans, but also alter the old classic civs of aok that never needed that refinement. Huns with Dromons wtf ?? where would they have gotten these.

@KnightPandaMage

They gave them dromons, couse huns should’t have gunpowder units

@IcarusFall7982

Indeed,especially byz dont have the Siege Engineer, the dromon only have 12 range, the elite cannon galleon have 15.

@MostDragon80736

They never had gunpowder, so why do they need dromons?

@KnightPandaMage

probably for game balance to couter castles on shores

@IcarusFall7982

In your words, the byz seems to be poor in navy. However it has full tech in dock. So it’s really confuse. On one hand the byz have full-dock-tech, it means byz’s navy strong. On the other byz have the ancient dromon instead of the cannon galleon.

@IcarusFall7982

So it’s a kind of nerf to byz. I think it’s unfair to make Rome popular but nerf the EASTEN ROME, especially in the modern tech cannon galleon（compared to the Rome) .

@MostDragon80736

thats quite weird, cause then why arent meso civs and cumans affected ? instead of adding dromons to huns could also given all cg less civs some measure to deal with shore castles, like heavy transports to land siege under castles

@Alexios732

Byzantine having Dromons makes more sense than Western Romans and Huns having a capable navy like at all. Also, Byzantine by the later of 14th century were so poor that they are unable to field gunpowder armies.

@IcarusFall7982

That’s true. It makes a paradox of history/ time that rome,huns and goths have the ship with byz in the same time.

@IcarusFall7982

Also the Centurion are much better than Cataphract. I understand that maybe sort of balance, but it’s really confused the Rome have much better tech, weapon and armor than the Byz, which lasted longer than 1000 years.

That’s true…it’s a whole thing…

[WebbyVessel1318]

@MostDragon80736

cause then why arent meso civs and cumans affected ?

Good question.
Sadly I don’t think we have a n answer. Will they get it later? Maybe Meso will get a regional bombarding ship in a future expansion? Who knows

[Skadidesu]

@IcarusFall7982

In your words, the byz seems to be poor in navy. However it has full tech in dock. So it’s really confuse. On one hand the byz have full-dock-tech, it means byz’s navy strong. On the other byz have the ancient dromon instead of the cannon galleon.

1. the Dromon is not ancient, it was invented in the early Middle Ages by the Byzantines. So it’s kinda too modern for West Rome even.
2. The Byzantine Empire was practically destroyed in 1203 in the 4th crusade. They managed to rebuild their empire but it was way weaker then before that. At that time they obviously didn’t have cannons on their ships yet.
3. The Byzantines had the strongest navy in the early half of the Middle Ages so it makes sense to give them an early Medieval ship.

@IcarusFall7982

Also the Centurion are much better than Cataphract.

That is not necessarily true.
The Centurion has higher costs and base stats but the Cataphract has multiple very big advantages:

• Resistance to anti cavalry attacks #### #### #### #### to counter (Heavy Camels do basically no bonus damage against them)
• They have a large bonus damage against Infantry
• They have trample damage

[IcarusFall7982]

I understand what you means. However in the game the goths, huns and romes get the “modern weapon”，like you said. I also understand the balance of civs. But the goths and huns are the ancient civs, and they get the warship. That means the develops think it suits them.

For the cataphract, I means the stats of attack and armor (eg attack 15vs12). the ancient civ have modern tech again.

[MatM1996]

@Skadidesu

• The Byzantine Empire was practically destroyed in 1203 in the 4th crusade. They managed to rebuild their empire but it was way weaker then before that. At that time they obviously didn’t have cannons on their ships yet.

Yes, there were 3 moments that strongly weakened the Byzantines: Manzikert in 1071 (where they lost their territories in the Middle East), 1204 (where they practically disappeared being looted by the crusaders in the 4th Crusade) and in 1346 (due to the black plague where the Byzantine economy contracted a lot)…then obviously with Nicopolis in 1396 and Varna in 1444 they were condemned…

[Skadidesu]

@IcarusFall7982

I understand what you means. However in the game the goths, huns and romes get the “modern weapon”，like you said. I also understand the balance of civs. But the goths and huns are the ancient civs, and they get the warship. That means the develops think it suits them.

Goths had Cannon Galleons before which are even more modern so this is more historically correct.

Huns are just wrong in almost every way anyway.

For all civilisations the change will be an improvement.
Byzantines get 25% faster firing Dromons, Goths never had Elite Cannon Galleons and Huns not even Cannon Galleons at all.

[DukeOfLorraine]

The glory days of the Byzantine Navy were centuries before gunpowder was used in this part of the world. Notably that time they barbecued the Saracen navy that was besieging Constantinople, using greek fire. Dromons were a byzantine design.

By the time gunpowder was used, we’re after Nicea reclaimed Constantinople. And the navy was constantly on the defensive, with a fraction of the resources it once had.

Now gameplay-wise, having both dromons and cannon galleons would be redundanct, having 2 units with very similar abilities.

[AriesXBox90]

thats quite weird, cause then why arent meso civs and cumans affected ?

American civs should not get Dromons. They are balanced around having no Cavalry and Gunpowder, and they have op civ bonuses because of that. So they should also not get gunpowder unit equivalants. They need heavy weaknesses to justify their bonuses.

[KnightPandaMage]

@MostDragon80736

thats quite weird, cause then why arent meso civs and cumans affected ? instead of adding dromons to huns could also given all cg less civs some measure to deal with shore castles, like heavy transports to land siege under castles

That is a great idea. i was always thinking why are ships so bad under castle fire. there should be heavy transport that can drop units under castle fire.

Also i am curious why are ships more cost efficient than units in any regard. these things are hard to build

[DoctBaghi]

@IcarusFall7982

The Rome, Huns and Goths are much more older than othe civs, so they have dromon. I wonder why byz do the same thing too? We all know the byz had last to 1453ad, nearly 1000 year after Rome fall. It’s ridiculous to have the ancient warship, especially byz have the elite cannon galleon, vs buildings are much better than dromon,and it’s like a kind of nerf to byz.

Byzantines actually was never a gunpowder power, the only cannons that they have were brought in by Italians mercenaries that defend Constantinople.

They already changes the BBT to be more similar to a greek fire tower, so it makes sense to replace the CG with the dromon.

@IcarusFall7982

Also the Centurion are much better in stats than Cataphract. I understand that maybe sort of balance, but it’s really confused the Rome have much better tech, weapon and armor than the Byz, which lasted longer than 1000 years.

Catas still cost less and are a counter infantry unit with trample damage, so they work very differently.

[MostDragon80736]

Huns also shouldnt

[JordanEver]

Dunno why they choose a specific ship (Dromon) instead of a generalist design catapult ship to be an option to all Civs that don’t have gunpowder.

They could even give dromon upgrade to specific ships, but we needed a generalist design for a non-gunpowder canon galleon.

[SMUM15236]

@MostDragon80736

Huns with Dromons wtf ?? where would they have gotten these.

Huns with Trebuchet with more accuracy. And now Dromon.

[IcarusFall7982]

Yes, Cannot agree more!

[Prokman7582]

@DoctBaghi

Byzantines actually was never a gunpowder power, the only cannons that they have were brought in by Italians mercenaries that defend Constantinople.

They already changes the BBT to be more similar to a greek fire tower, so it makes sense to replace the CG with the dromon.

Catas still cost less and are a counter infantry unit with trample damage, so they work very differently.

@JordanEver

Dunno why they choose a specific ship (Dromon) instead of a generalist design catapult ship to be an option to all Civs that don’t have gunpowder.

They could even give dromon upgrade to specific ships, but we needed a generalist design for a non-gunpowder canon galleon.

Simple and comprehensive. And I like Dromon conception.

[AriesXBox90]

Huns also shouldnt

Historically they had no Dromons, but the an idea of the Civ is to destroy building, so in the game it makes some sense that they have something to do this on water maps too.

In the game it is not important that Huns have such a pronounced weakness like no siege ship. Its not comparable to american Civs. The huns main bonus is that they need no houses. The Inca on the other hand have half of that bonus, they also have a weaker version of the Goth main bonus (cheaper units) and they also have a different version of the Frank cheaper Castle bonus. So I think in the game it is only justified if they have strong weaknesses. The Huns on the other hand, don’t need to have such weaknesses, because they have less boni.

[Alexios732]

@MostDragon80736

Huns with Dromons wtf ??

@SMUM15236

Huns with Trebuchet

Well you can pretend that the Huns that we play are part of the Roman army that Flavius Aetius hired when he’s still in good terms with Attila
One of the historically accurate things that I’m grateful that the devs don’t implement is giving Goths Legionary, because imagine how broken that would be.

[FearfulSugar350]

it’s kinda funny that Byz don’t have blast furnace and Siege engineer while they are roman themselves and last way longer than western Rome which have both.

[Skadidesu]

@JordanEver

Dunno why they choose a specific ship (Dromon) instead of a generalist design catapult ship to be an option to all Civs that don’t have gunpowder.

They could even give dromon upgrade to specific ships, but we needed a generalist design for a non-gunpowder canon galleon.

Considering it still having the Unique Unit class in the preview it was probably a unique unit at some point.

But there are many generic units that are pretty none generic looking.
How many places had full plate armour Infantry outside of Europe?
A lot of unit names are also pretty specific, Man at Arms, Cavalier, Paladin or Arbalester.

Ships are even worse. Fire Ships should be a Byzantine Unique Unit.

[JordanEver]

@Skadidesu

Considering it still having the Unique Unit class in the preview it was probably a unique unit at some point.

But there are many generic units that are pretty none generic looking.
How many places had full plate armour Infantry outside of Europe?
A lot of unit names are also pretty specific, Man at Arms, Cavalier, Paladin or Arbalester.

Ships are even worse. Fire Ships should be a Byzantine Unique Uni

Why we need to bring things from when the game was released in 1999? The game is very old, in 1999 they did not had a lot of resources and had to make a decision to make a unit that would be shared with all civs and as most civs where european it’s obvious they choose european designs.

But then we learned nothing? We still have devs that don’t have resources to do things properly? The Fire Ship is the craziest design decision, taking an unique unit and making them for all the civs.

And now in 2023 we repeat the same mistake…? We should be moving to fixing and improving these kinds of mistakes, but instead it looks like we will keep this game forever in the same way.