conquastidors wrong place in ptw

[dovlvn]

as I understood from the chat the spanish will get their uu as a cavelry replacement. thats a bad idea because whichever way you make it it wont fit:
1 if he'll have like the screenshots show 5/2/2 he will be the only uu that is weaker than the regular unit.6/3/3. even a no resourse benefit wont conpensate for that especially when cavelry is the main world conquest unit in most games ive played or seen. the spanish will be as popular to play as an modern iraqi civ with saddam hussain as leader.
2.if he'll be stronger tham reg cavalry as some chats indicate it"ll create historically ludicrious situation. the 15 cen conquastidor will be stronger from 17cen cavalry
or the cossaks.no one will convince me that conqustidors were stronger (no more than panzer are stronger than mod armor
therefore I propose that conquastidors will come with the same stats 5/2/2 in the gunpowder advance together with musketmen. that will be more accurate historically will give real advantage to spanish (as they had in15 16 cen) but not too much to beat all and liven the games a bit before cavelry comes

[Coracle]

"It'll create an historically ludicrous situation"??

Firaxis has already created numerous historically ludicrous situations in Civ 3.

In this case, Conquistadores should have ZERO relevance unless fighting barbarians on a new continent. They never fought regular military units of rival civs, such as France.

What we should have for Spain is the TERCIO: a very powerful amalgam of musketmen and pikemen together.
You should be able to take a musketman, a pikeman, add some gold, and then get two tercios.

If you don't know what a tercio is (I'm sure Soren doesn't) here's a link: http://www.geocities.com/ao1617/TercioUK.html

BTW, the unit values that came from Firaxis were ludicrous: not only too few units, but much too low values for post-gunpowder units due to the absurdly low resource appearance rates.

[kring]

It sounds like, in the CivFanatics chat Friday, that Cavalry would still be available to Spain, as part of their unique ability.

CFC Chat Link

Specifically this info:

[22:11] Does Conquistador replace Cavalry?
[22:12] ChrTh: Currently, though we're entertaining the idea of part of their unique ability is that they don't replace the unit they replace. Conquistadors are light cavalry, so it seems wierd to block regular cavalry. We'll see

[dovlvn]

Originally posted by kring
It sounds like, in the CivFanatics chat Friday, that Cavalry would still be available to Spain, as part of their unique ability.

CFC Chat Link

Specifically this info:

then having such a uu for spain is even more useless
the 10-20 sheilds less wouldn't be worth the effort of making then . please Firaxis no more musketeer like useless uu!

[Solver]

Yeah, most probably it will replace light cavalry, but I think Spanish will also have regular cavalry.

Though, when Conquistadors were there, Cavalry was no longer "light".

[SpencerH]

I tried to make the point about a spanish cavalry UU during the improptu chat but I dont think it was noticed. Maybe I'm wrong, but I cant think of any historical context for this use even as light cavalry. Tercio would have been better, but even a conquistador as an explorer with decent combat stats would have been OK.

[dovlvn]

Originally posted by SpencerH
I tried to make the point about a spanish cavalry UU during the improptu chat but I dont think it was noticed. Maybe I'm wrong, but I cant think of any historical context for this use even as light cavalry. Tercio would have been better, but even a conquistador as an explorer with decent combat stats would have been OK.

I agree I can see no use for this unit if it comes together with cavelry.too late to be worth building and too weak to be useful if i lose saltpaper.I'll build one just for the graphics. I'll say it again please firaxis not another useless UU

[Gangerolf]

could it be possible that it replaces knights, not cavalry?

[Coracle]

Conquistadores if used as a UU would only show that Firaxis knows less than I thought about history.

Conquistadores were a bunch of gold-hungry adventurers and thugs, although most had mercenary experience. They NEVER fought - or were intended to fight - regular military units of other civilizations. Nor did they ever exist in large numbers.

The UU should be the tercio.

Of course Firaxis wants to keep the game painfully simplistic. Too bad.

[Darkworld Ark]

Originally posted by Coracle
Conquistadores if used as a UU would only show that Firaxis knows less than I thought about history.

Conquistadores were a bunch of gold-hungry adventurers and thugs, although most had mercenary experience. They NEVER fought - or were intended to fight - regular military units of other civilizations. Nor did they ever exist in large numbers.

The UU should be the tercio.

Of course Firaxis wants to keep the game painfully simplistic. Too bad.

I don't think Firaxis is trying to be historicly correct with their Civ games, I mean, you can take over the world with Aztec Tanks!

Anyways, I think Firaxis is trying to go for more 'known' UUs. Before everybody started complaining about how conquisadors should be tercios, I never heard of a tercio. Granted I'm really not intirested in Spanish history, but most people who play video games aren't either, & that's who Firaxis is aiming for.

[Ninot]

you try and balance a game while keeping it both realistic, historic, and fun.

[SomeOneElse]

Originally posted by Ninot
you try and balance a game while keeping it both realistic, historic, and fun.

and that's a hard balance. they're not stupid. in fact, its very smart to use a recognizable name for a uu. more sales. those with the time to know what a tercio is also have time to edit one in when ptw comes out

[Reptilicus]

It still reinforces bad history and plays on the ignorance of people.

[kring]

How about hyping the use of the dogs against the First Nationers (Native Americans), that was in the video clip, as well as some of their other promotional stuff.

[Coracle]

Originally posted by Reptilicus
It still reinforces bad history and plays on the ignorance of people.

And there is enough of that in society and our lousy public schools these days. Just watch Leno's Jaywalking segments.

[Kingof the Apes]

Originally posted by Reptilicus
It still reinforces bad history and plays on the ignorance of people.

Well....It IS a game. I doubt people learn history from it; as was said, 'You can take over the worrld in Aztec tanks.'

Civ isn't supposed to be completely realistic, otherwise there would be a random map enerator and you had to place cities exactly where they were founded in real life.

[Christantine The Great]

Since when is it Firaxis' job to inforce proper history?

But really, conquistadors should replace knights and have stats somewhere in the line of:

5-2-3

Because, the way I see it, this gives them an advantage over evil pikemen of the day.

[Christantine The Great]

The UU should be the tercio.

Although you may identify with tercio, most people identify with the quasi-romantic stories of conquistadors completely destroying the Aztec and Incan empires. It's stupid to put a complete unknown unit in, not a recognized and common knowledge unit.

BTW: Tercio, it seems, equals musket/rifle with bayonet. Nothing inovative there.

[dovlvn]

Originally posted by Christantine The Great
Since when is it Firaxis' job to inforce proper history?

But really, conquistadors should replace knights and have stats somewhere in the line of:

5-2-3

Because, the way I see it, this gives them an advantage over evil pikemen of the day.

they shouldn't come with knights that is far too early for them (too strong for pikemen).the stats you offered are good as I proposed if they come with musketmen and gunpowder. then all the difficulties including the historical ones are solved

[dovlvn]

Originally posted by Christantine The Great


Although you may identify with tercio, most people identify with the quasi-romantic stories of conquistadors completely destroying the Aztec and Incan empires. It's stupid to put a complete unknown unit in, not a recognized and common knowledge unit.

BTW: Tercio, it seems, equals musket/rifle with bayonet. Nothing inovative there.

I agree If you have a famous UU why use an Unknown one? (although a tercio like unit would be a good general unit for the time between musketmen and rifle men

[Coracle]

Tercios are only "unknown" to people with no knowledge of Military History - such as Firaxis.

Tercios were strong as they combined early muskets with pikemen - units which usually did not fight alone. The Swedes also combined them, as did eventually others. Civ 3 does not reflect that. Tercios were the most powerful example.

There is NO bayonet-armed flintlock musket in the game. In other words, Firaxis is so pathetic with realism they neglected the significant difference between slow-firing muskets of the 16th and 17th centuries that did not have bayonets as compared to the faster firing bayonet-armed muskets of the 18th and early 19th century.

Conquistadores are NOT "a famous UU". They were NEVER a UU. They were a small bunch of gold-hungry thugs who spent their time massacring Stone Age people - which they could do only with the tremendous help of disease and Native America allies. They then started killing each other. Did you know Pizarro was murdered by his own men?

Conquistadores a UU? That is BAD HISTORY and just plain FALSE. But what does Firaxis care if it SELLS? They don't care.

[Tridotan1]

It is possible that Firaxis will make the Conquistador a unit that will be unique in being able to be useful for up to four different purposes.

1.Exploring
2.Fighting
3.Founding Cities
4.Looting Extra Gold When Capturing

The conquistador might, just might be a true moment of genius by Firaxis. For example; we may see a unit that replaces Cavalry(and is very similar statistically) and has the ability to found cities, loot extra gold and wreck improvements quicker.

Just a thought.

[Christantine The Great]

Tercios are only "unknown" to people with no knowledge of Military History - such as Firaxis.

Your opinion and a personal insult to boot. Not very nice of you.

There is NO bayonet-armed flintlock musket in the game.

There is also no need for such specialization. Musketmen cover the first hand cannons up to muskets used by the Americans and British in the Revolutionary War. Riflemen pick up after that.

Conquistadores are NOT "a famous UU". They were NEVER a UU. They were a small bunch of gold-hungry thugs who spent their time massacring Stone Age people - which they could do only with the tremendous help of disease and Native America allies. They then started killing each other. Did you know Pizarro was murdered by his own men?

They're not famous? I dare you to post a poll with the simple option "Tercio or Conquistador" and the only content of the post be "Which did you hear of first, not counting hearing it on this board from me". Then we'll see how well known the tercio is.

Who cares if Pizzaro killed his own men? Were all of the tercios nice guys who never murdered? The simple fact is that more people identify with "Conquistador". Gee, Immortals won the day because there was so many of them...does that diminish their status?

With the magic of "paitence", though, you can MAKE the tercio in all its glory. That's what the temp. excuse for an editor CAN do, despite your extreme distaste of it, CivIII, Firaxis, and everyone who disagrees with your views.