You can also find the images on my Instagram here: https://www.instagram.com/p/CWdrJ6_rjqJ/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link 

Very helpful

Big o7 for my Elephant buddies.

Finished the video.

I agree with the concept of making Armor be the anti-Infantry defense, though HUMANKIND does not exactly have a amicable representation for Infantry gaining access to User-Friendly rocket/grenade launchers and other hand-held anti-vehicle weaponry; so I'd want a compromise be that Armor Combat Strength Penalty doesn't effect against the Contemporary Garrison Unit and the Premium Late Infantry unit. Although, sure, there could be an argument made for just adding a little circle under a technology that says: Handheld Rocket Explosives gives all infantry units increased combat strengths against Armored units, but I digress.

Couple of points regarding the commentary :

- Line Infantry is not the first unit to have the Gunner trait. In the Early Modern Era you have Rotiskenrakehte, Janissaries and Conquistadores who have this trait. They are Culture-specific units but you will encounter way earlier and possibly fight against them.
- Machine units all have double-range and a special ability compared to Industry Era Infantry units. With good placement a Machine-units army will obliterate an infantry-based army before they can even fire. Siege Artillery can bombard them from out of combat as well, if the infantry decide to wait out in an garrison or a city. I see it as a good change to limit the number of Machine units and make sieges in later Eras more interesting. Keep in mind the population cost as well - Infantry need 4 units of population while the machine units require only 2.
- Impi. In an Era of Range combat and all other Infantry units being Ranged, the Impi are at a huge disadvantage tactically. You can still successfully fight them with Dragoons even with the lower Combat strength, since you can move and fire. You move into woods or elevated terrain and then fire at the Impi. Zulu is basically a very strong Defensive culture and they wanted it to remain relevant into the Contemporary Era if you happen to lag behind others.

All in all, good review, when taking a look at emblematic units try to put them in the context of their Culture and Era, possibly the Era ahead as well.

Changlini wrote:
I agree with the concept of making Armor be the anti-Infantry defense, though HUMANKIND does not exactly have a amicable representation for Infantry gaining access to User-Friendly rocket/grenade launchers and other hand-held anti-vehicle weaponry; so I'd want a compromise be that Armor Combat Strength Penalty doesn't effect against the Contemporary Garrison Unit and the Premium Late Infantry unit. Although, sure, there could be an argument made for just adding a little circle under a technology that says: Handheld Rocket Explosives gives all infantry units increased combat strengths against Armored units, but I digress.

To be honest, I do need me an extra contemporary infantry unit for aesthetics reasons, and my thought was a meager CS upgrade (if any) over Rifles, but some extra skill. Some anti-armour capabilities could be that thing.

Like a Pioneers unit for example ? That can build garrisons if need be ? Districts can still be raised or destroyed easily if you do not need that garrison afterwards. :)