Units types and their pips have been basically the same for a long time, and present almost no strategy. Most tech levels have few choices if any at all, and most of these choices have one that is simply better than the others, no matter how you play. Not to mention that some of the choices are ridiculous. Anybody in Western Europe can recruit Scottish/Irish Celtic warriors, Longbows aren't available at the start, despite having the heyday before game start, and some units are clearly melee, and others are ranged, It is all over the place etc.
The tech groups also mean that you have no control of your units pips. Sometimes in the game, you will just have your troops melt, even against troops with equal quality simply because of tech groups.
Unit types also don't really represent the various ways that armies were organised in terms of troops, and which were the decisive elements of the army.
I propose that instead of picking a unit type at various tech intervals, nations instead have military doctrines.
The military doctrines available, depend on the tech groups, but nations can also make an effort to adopt different doctrines.
These military doctrines grant different bonuses or negatives to unit types, terrain, movement speed, unit cost, etc.
Some nations could also have unique military doctrines.
So for example, France and some other Western Europe nations would have a heavy cavalry focused doctrines, allowing access to heavy cavalry. This would be a primary shock doctrine but their prime effectiveness would be on open territory and have a greater cost, and require specific government types, like feudal monarchies. They would be dominate vs other cavalry in head to head battles and need to be countered by quality infantry.
While for example Spain and Castille, would have a primarily infantry focused doctrine, like with the Terico, with somewhat lighter cavalry, like the Jinete. The Terico spread around Europe, but primarily was adopted by Spain, Germany and Italy.
Bohemia and Hungary instead would have access to at the start Wagonfort tactics. But these tactics also spread to the Ottomans, who called it tabur cengi, and used it to great effect to smash the Safavid Persians at Chaldiran. Who in turn used it later against the Uzbeks.
Poland and Eastern European nations would be more cavalry focused, but split between light cavalry and heavier cavalry.
Steppe Nations would be primarily cavalry focused, with superb light cavalry archers, as well as armoured lancers. Maybe even some restrictions on building infantry in steppe culture lands, and instead only being able to get them from tributaries or conquered, non-tatar peoples.
Etc.
The doctrines would have various counterplay. So, for example, the Terico is adapt at facing heavy cavalry, as it had the mass of pikes to fend off cavalry charges. But against light cavalry, their lack of firepower is a weakness. While armies with more focus on firepower, than pikes would be more vulnerable to cavalry charges.
Doctrines would also as mentioned depend on the terrain. So trying to use heavy cavalry in the rough balkans, would be less effective than using them in the farmlands of France.
Then throughout the game, the military doctrines will evolve, with innovations and new tactics.
The tech groups also mean that you have no control of your units pips. Sometimes in the game, you will just have your troops melt, even against troops with equal quality simply because of tech groups.
Unit types also don't really represent the various ways that armies were organised in terms of troops, and which were the decisive elements of the army.
I propose that instead of picking a unit type at various tech intervals, nations instead have military doctrines.
The military doctrines available, depend on the tech groups, but nations can also make an effort to adopt different doctrines.
These military doctrines grant different bonuses or negatives to unit types, terrain, movement speed, unit cost, etc.
Some nations could also have unique military doctrines.
So for example, France and some other Western Europe nations would have a heavy cavalry focused doctrines, allowing access to heavy cavalry. This would be a primary shock doctrine but their prime effectiveness would be on open territory and have a greater cost, and require specific government types, like feudal monarchies. They would be dominate vs other cavalry in head to head battles and need to be countered by quality infantry.
While for example Spain and Castille, would have a primarily infantry focused doctrine, like with the Terico, with somewhat lighter cavalry, like the Jinete. The Terico spread around Europe, but primarily was adopted by Spain, Germany and Italy.
Bohemia and Hungary instead would have access to at the start Wagonfort tactics. But these tactics also spread to the Ottomans, who called it tabur cengi, and used it to great effect to smash the Safavid Persians at Chaldiran. Who in turn used it later against the Uzbeks.
Poland and Eastern European nations would be more cavalry focused, but split between light cavalry and heavier cavalry.
Steppe Nations would be primarily cavalry focused, with superb light cavalry archers, as well as armoured lancers. Maybe even some restrictions on building infantry in steppe culture lands, and instead only being able to get them from tributaries or conquered, non-tatar peoples.
Etc.
The doctrines would have various counterplay. So, for example, the Terico is adapt at facing heavy cavalry, as it had the mass of pikes to fend off cavalry charges. But against light cavalry, their lack of firepower is a weakness. While armies with more focus on firepower, than pikes would be more vulnerable to cavalry charges.
Doctrines would also as mentioned depend on the terrain. So trying to use heavy cavalry in the rough balkans, would be less effective than using them in the farmlands of France.
Then throughout the game, the military doctrines will evolve, with innovations and new tactics.
- 8
- 1
