Arquebusiers / Musketeer / Line infantry rework

This is the simpliest integration in tech tree that comes to my mind.

I can't agree more with your proposal. You have covered most changes I would like to propose about early modern infantry. Glad to see people also interested in early modern warfare. But of course, there were some points I think we could discuss about in another day. (such as additional era and early modern melee infantry)  

Era:

I believe it wouldn’t be fair to establish an independent era like enlightenment alone. After all, it does belong to the early modern period. For adding or rework era, I actually have a whole new idea. What I was thinking is that we could divide each time period into different ages. ( I must say this is not my original idea, I gain it from paradox game EU4) take early modern for example, we could add “age of discovery” (late15-16th), “age of reformation” (17th), “age of enlightenment/revolution” (18th), each cover one third of the tech in early modern tech tree. 1st and last age serve as transition phase from one era to another.

Melee infantry: 

In my opinion, there is no need to add another spear unite in the mediaeval era, only strengthen it. If must, Halberdiers/Voulgier/bill man should be a late medieval unit rather than an early modern one, Pike man should be the early modern unit consider the fact it was widely used since the 16 -17th century. I’m sure Spanish Tercio mainly consists of pikeman instead of halberdiers. 

Another “bright idea” about cavalry:

I believe cavalry traits should be renewed. All cavalry should provide stability bonus station in the city (MP/gendarme), Heavy cavalry(cuirassier) receive slightly more strength bonus attack on the flank or in the rear, light cavalry(dragoon/hussar) should be able to fire in point blank range (1 or 2 tile) then choose to charge or flee, gaining extra percentage of loot, shorter turns when raiding district.

I agree with you. 

I don't think that a new era is really needed. It was an example to figure where line infantry should but of course is better to have longer eras than a new one.

There are a lot of units that need to be added in this game imho but I wanted to address at least this one without too many changes

+1

Hopefully, one day we shall see a big land battles update similar to the one sea units have just seen (though not so close in time obv... fingers crossed for the new year)

A1y0sh4 wrote:

+1

Hopefully, one day we shall see a big land battles update similar to the one sea units have just seen (though not so close in time obv... fingers crossed for the new year)

I hope so.

The game is cool but there are some clear gaps in unit progression.

Hope to have them fixed soon.

I just had an idea, think it might be worthy of discussion: What do you think about bayonet charge? Trait allow gunner units to conduct melee battles. I knew it wasn't really a necessary change in the game, consider massive bayonet melee battle rarely happened in actual battle, but it is there.

Mark1812 wrote:

I just had an idea, think it might be worthy of discussion: What do you think about bayonet charge? Trait allow gunner units to conduct melee battles. I knew it wasn't really a necessary change in the game, consider massive bayonet melee battle rarely happened in actual battle, but it is there.

thanks for the comment. 

I think your suggestion will broke the concept of "gunner unit" (If I understoo well)

Anyway, imho, bayonet introduction simply made disappear pikemen in armies as musketmen doesn't need them anymore, so his introdution is somehow included in "line formation" tech and the small bonus I proposed against cav.