+1
This would also make them more useful and utilized, allowing also to "amortize" the switch from melee to gunner units. In most of my games I completely tend to ignore the Mortar.

A1y0sh4 wrote:

+1
This would also make them more useful and utilized, allowing also to "amortize" the switch from melee to gunner units. In most of my games I completely tend to ignore the Mortar.

Same situation here, alongside resource requirements of artillery units that creates very odd "bad to see" situations in that era 

A1y0sh4 wrote:
In most of my games I completely tend to ignore the Mortar.

Seconded/Thirded. I tend not to use mortars and I usually play as the Ottomans in Era IV!  They're an awkward part of the tech tree and I don't miss their presence, I guess?

while I agree, in theory, the problem is that then the Arquebusier tech becomes 100% skippable since the move would always to go mortar-musketeers. Having mortar before arquebusier would require moving arquebusier to bastion and make musketeers a leaf tech after bastion

I'd also argue that while cannons were first on the battlefield, they were little more than a gimmick before gunpowder weapons became more prevalent, so I think as far as dedicated units go, this order makes sense and maybe those early guns could be represented by some kind of siege buff at gunpowder tech.

Leve mortar where it is but add some early canon or mortar as a next siege weapon after trebuchet.

DNLH wrote:

I'd also argue that while cannons were first on the battlefield, they were little more than a gimmick before gunpowder weapons became more prevalent, so I think as far as dedicated units go, this order makes sense and maybe those early guns could be represented by some kind of siege buff at gunpowder tech.

I think designers doesn't want to upgrade trebuchet to some early cannon/bombard as siege weapons are costructed in place and not realistic (even for humankind) to build theme in place.

Fallus_Grimus wrote:

Leve mortar where it is but add some early canon or mortar as a next siege weapon after trebuchet.

Assuming that designers agree to let some kind of cannon build in place (it's a very astract game overall) Imho the early cannon should replace the mortar and lived where is it, to have a better transition with the Howitzer.

docktorkain wrote:

while I agree, in theory, the problem is that then the Arquebusier tech becomes 100% skippable since the move would always to go mortar-musketeers. Having mortar before arquebusier would require moving arquebusier to bastion and make musketeers a leaf tech after bastion

Of course this is an issue and is related to the weird progression of arquebusiers - musketers - line infantry all compressed in a very few tima span.

Arquebusier should be used alongside (late) medieval units

Musketers in full modern era along side halberdiers (as in this game there isn't reinassance era pikemen) for a pike&shot experienc

Line infantry should replace all the previous mixed closecombat&ranged infantry

Due to the lack of any intermediate infantry between Line Infantry and WW2 riflemen line infantry seems to cover all infantry from 1700 to 1890 so it's a bit weird to have 2 units for the early era of gunpowder and only one spanning from first muskets to ACW riflement and over

Maybe in the futures the devs will fix this issue. I saw somewhere DaarkArrow say that the team is considering the option to add new technologies. This one could possibly be the smartest solution.

A1y0sh4 wrote:

Maybe in the futures the devs will fix this issue. I saw somewhere DaarkArrow say that the team is considering the option to add new technologies. This one could possibly be the smartest solution.

Of course it will be and in the official roadmap they put "new units" and "expanding new gameplay features", this can be surely enabled by adding a few new tecnology in Modern Era and Industrial Era.

The game, as now, lacks of the improvements bringed by "God & Kings" Civ 5 expansion (I talk about it becouse I know it far better than civ 6 as I played it since day one in 2010)

Vanilla Civ 5, military wise, lacked all the units from ACW war and WW2. 

HK is in the same position (slightly better to be honest) and "TWR" added anything war related.

According to Amplitude "way of thinking" (I played a lot Endless Legend) about expansions, they will probably comes out with a warfare enanchement expansion next time

After noticing that Trebuchet lasts for the entire game I think is definetly crucial to move the Mortar to siege weapons (and maybe give a bonus to them for Ottomans) and add a Reinassance Cannon for field battles

While balance and gameplay wise, moving a cannon type gunpowder unit to the siege category would make a lot of sense, it makes absolutely no sense historically. Due to cannonry being ironworked, the idea of building cannons for a siege on the spot is pretty much impossible, whereas most armies in the classical and Medieval eras would just chop down trees near the siege area to build catapults, trebuchets, etc.