The Pikeman Problem

DarkCloud · July 28, 2001, 15:17

In Civ II there were a few 'useless' units such as the Pikeman.
In Civ III hopefully we won't have to deal with these units.

An indepth look at the Pikeman

+Bonuses versus mounted foes
However, it is weaker than the Phalanx against other foes in cities.

You can also skip over the Pikeman's tech, Feudalism in the tech tree and research Musketeers instead of Pikemen to guard your cities after Phalanxes.

--
There are 2 problems here to realize

1. In civ you shouldn't be able to bypass a unit to a unit that does the same thing, but better and replaces the bypassed unit.

2. A unit upgrade should be better than the unit is replacing or else it shouldn't replace a unit.

Civ Pi(3.14)Fan · July 28, 2001, 16:10

The pikeman has the same defensive value as a phalnx (2),& has the 50% bonus vs. movement factor of two. In other word the pikeman is better than the phalnx, just not in every stat

Inverse Icarus · July 28, 2001, 17:13

i've said this way too much.

IN ORDER TO ADVANCE TO THE NEXT AGE YOU MUST COMPLETE MOST OF THE CURRENT AGE'S TECH TREE.

so you might actually be forced to use pikemen for a while.

Dauphin · July 28, 2001, 18:03

Another problem of this kind is that some units become obsolete before you can build and use them.

DarkCloud · July 28, 2001, 18:24

i.e. the Pikeman... Yes, but who here has used the Pikeman's movement bonus?

I didn't know that about the defense, it seemed as if the Pikemen were horrible on defense, however.

Theben · July 28, 2001, 18:27

Quote:

Originally posted by DarkCloud
There are 2 problems here to realize

1. In civ you shouldn't be able to bypass a unit to a unit that does the same thing, but better and replaces the bypassed unit.

2. A unit upgrade should be better than the unit is replacing or else it shouldn't replace a unit.

1. Why not? Is it so important that one unit must be used before advancing to the next age? Most nations didn't even deploy pikemen, but almost all had an army equipped with firearms of a sort.

2. Pikeman is stronger than both the warrior unit and the phalanx. In addition, the feudalism tech offers STWA, a very useful wonder to warmongers.

My beef with the pikeman and the phalanx is that they should have had a Attack rating of 2, not 1. Easily fixed in the rules.txt.

ChrisShaffer · July 28, 2001, 20:26

Pikemen are the units that solved the Civ1 chariot rush. They are great units.

DrFell · July 28, 2001, 20:54

Pikemen are very good units, far better than warriors or phalanxes. In 2x2x duels feudalism is the first tech I go for after monarchy, you simply can't afford to miss out on the far better defence offered (plus the chance to build Sun Tzu's).

Sabre2th · July 29, 2001, 00:11

While I rarely used them, I don't see a problem. (I usually used archers early on and went straight to musketeers)

JellyDonut · July 29, 2001, 02:21

They may seem to be worse at defense because they come later in the game and are thus attacked by more advanced units.

Alex 14 · July 29, 2001, 04:13

When your enemies strike your cities with horsemen, pikemen make their atacks completely useless.

Sean · July 29, 2001, 06:52

Personally I do not believe that there is a "pikeman problem". And that the these sort of units, even if you skip them, add more depth to the game.

I also found the pikeman unit rather functional.

Civ Pi(3.14)Fan · July 29, 2001, 18:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Sean
Personally I do not believe that there is a "pikeman problem". And that the these sort of units, even if you skip them, add more depth to the game.

I also found the pikeman unit rather functional.

I agree, if you don't like them, don't use them, but they are quite effective against ponies

S. Kroeze · July 29, 2001, 19:14

Quote:

Originally posted by DarkCloud
In Civ II there were a few 'useless' units such as the Pikeman.
In Civ III hopefully we won't have to deal with these units.

An indepth look at the Pikeman

+Bonuses versus mounted foes
However, it is weaker than the Phalanx against other foes in cities.

You can also skip over the Pikeman's tech, Feudalism in the tech tree and research Musketeers instead of Pikemen to guard your cities after Phalanxes.

Are you kidding? I couldn't disagree more!
Against non-mounted units Pikemen and Phalanx are equal in all respects.

Historically pikemen do not make sense at all. Essentially they were identical to a phalanx, I'll have to admit that.

But in the game they were excellent units for defense, in my opinion equal to musketeers, AND cheaper!
I always was angry when Leonardo changed my bold veteran Pikemen to silly non-veteran Musketeers. It always made border cities more vulnerable to attack and is the main reason I will not bother to build this generally overrated Wonder. The main advantage was that you could disband units and get more shields in return than they did cost in producing.

But how would one defend unwalled (and walled) cities effectively in Medieval times without those excellent Pikemen?

Civ Pi(3.14)Fan · July 30, 2001, 00:32

Actually I think the pikeman in the game represents new tactics and greater flexibility

Alex 14 · July 30, 2001, 02:21

Pikemen should be slightly modified.

Side Note: New things should be avalible with the Fuedalism Advance.

Urban Ranger · July 30, 2001, 12:36

Quote:

Originally posted by S. Kroeze
It always made border cities more vulnerable to attack and is the main reason I will not bother to build this generally overrated Wonder.

It's good for upgrading your phalanxes to musketters

Sabre2th · July 30, 2001, 12:52

Quote:

Originally posted by S. Kroeze
Against non-mounted units Pikemen and Phalanx are equal in all respects.

True.

Quote:

overrated Wonder. The main advantage was that you could disband units and get more shields in return than they did cost in producing.

I disagree. Leo's Workshop could save you a lot of building time, especially if you have a large military.

Jonny · July 30, 2001, 23:11

Pikemen are just fine the way they are. They are great for defending against those pesky elephants until you get musketeers. I say leave them alone.

Also, Leonardo's Workshop is a great wonder. By the time it expires, your phalanxes, pikeman, and other ancient infantry become riflemen. Your knights become cavalry, your catapults become artillery, and your settlers become engineers. How could you dislike it?

Rommel393 · July 31, 2001, 00:18

I personally rarely used the pikeman. Although, several times I have put them to very effective use against mainly cavalry enemies. Normally, I just use musketeers, but I think its all a matter of personal preference.

fittstim · July 31, 2001, 07:18

Quote:

Originally posted by S. Kroeze
I always was angry when Leonardo changed my bold veteran Pikemen to silly non-veteran Musketeers. It always made border cities more vulnerable to attack and is the main reason I will not bother to build this generally overrated Wonder.

I disagree. A veteran pikeman (1.5a/3d) is surely worse than a non-vet musketeer (3a/3d) against everything except the horseman and/or chariot. BUT...the point is that a musketeer in a city will always beat a horseman and almost always beat a chariot. And through this combat, there is a good chance that the musketeer becomes a veteran, thus becoming (4.5a/4.5d).

AND the missing ingredient here is that sometimes you actually want to attack from your city. How many times has that lone pikeman been killed trying to attack a catapult or canon that just plopped itself down next to your city (or any other unit that used it's moves to position itself next to the city). A musketeer will have no trouble dispatching that lame threat.

Kropotkin · July 31, 2001, 08:04

I think that there's more or less useless units in civ2.

Chariot: Sure, nice but you'll have elephants after a short while.

Horseman: One for scouting early on is nice but...

Frigate: Almost forgot what those look like (would have if the enemies didn't build them once and a while).

Cannon: A nice unit between the Cavalry and the Tanks but I hardly builds more than a handful before mobile Warfare.

Buck Birdseed · July 31, 2001, 08:10

The Phalanx will probably be the Greek special unit with the Spearman being its standard replacement. I'm guessing. And essentially front-line infantry of the pikeman type will be more useful here due to the addition of Armies.

Inverse Icarus · July 31, 2001, 15:41

maybe its just me, but 2 cannons and a riflemen in a caravel is a standard attack force for me mid game.

the units i find useless in civ 2 were the Frigates / Galleons.

i just had ironclads and transports before i work on magnetism.

another useless unit, the eelephant.

when u get polythesim, monotheism is the next step... for me anyway.

loinburger · July 31, 2001, 16:20

Historically, pikemen were not immediately phased out by musketeers. The development of musketeers caused the pike square to be replaced by a combined army of pikemen and musketeers; the pikemen would stand in front of the musketeers in order to slow down any horsemen or foot soldiers who managed to avoid being gunned down by muskets. It wasn't until the musketeers were able to put bayonets on their guns that the pikemen were phased out.

In Civ terms, non-vet musketeers would do 3/3 while non-vet pikemen would do 1/2, double against Move 2 (upping it to 1/4). Musketeers would be better all-around, pikemen would be better against horses/chariots/etc until the Rifleman. Easy enough to change in the game files (although Leo's still gets rid of the pikemen), and suddenly pikemen are a non-useless unit (until riflemen, of course).

Point is, "useless" units should still be included. They make the game easier to customize (I'd rather change a text file than have to make my own sprites), and they also allow for different styles of gameplay (i.e. the "skip feudalism" style versus the "do not skip feudalism" style).

kittenOFchaos · July 31, 2001, 16:35

Those who consider the frigate useless are fools...plain and simple.

Those that don´t use pikemen...oh dear is what I´d say unless they eschew defensive units for attack units that attack vs enemies at the gate (as it were).

The frigate is VERY powerful as it can appear LONG BEFORE gunpowder and WILL crush pikies and phalanx unless the city is on hills (on a river or forest the frigate will suffer, BUT win...especially if vetted with the lighthouse.)

Quite simply those that ignore the frigate, ignore a most devastating unit in most games.

KrazyHorse · July 31, 2001, 16:53

I agree. I love frigates for their fighting/transport ability too. If I'm feeling aggressive, Magnetism spells the end of any enemy coastal cities.

Sabre2th · July 31, 2001, 16:56

Not really kitten. The ironclad, which is quite a bit stronger than the frigate, is available at right about the same time. The only advantage a frigate has is its ability to carry units, which the galleon can do better.

Sidenote: Gunpowder actually comes before magnetism in the tech tree.

Recurve · July 31, 2001, 17:03

Quote:

Originally posted by kittenOFchaos
Those who consider the frigate useless are fools...plain and simple.

Whenever I launch a frigate it's immediately surrounded by enemy ironclads (why is that)?! Anyway, I find pikemen very effective against diplomats, caravans and explorers.

TechWins · August 1, 2001, 03:11

I'll tell you how useful I find pikeman, I have never even built one. I think this will all change with the fact that UberKrux pointed out, "IN ORDER TO ADVANCE TO THE NEXT AGE YOU MUST COMPLETE MOST OF THE CURRENT AGE'S TECH TREE.". Although, this will take out my whole strategy of tech finding, I think it will add more fun to the game. I actually find many units in Civ2 useless for me but that will all change with Civ3.