|
Post by pixiejmcc on Apr 1, 2006 15:05:13 GMT -5
OK. A full knowledge of this game is probably going to take years, but I'm sure if we pool our knowledge we will start getting somehere.
There's a few things I don't get no matter how much i search forums or look in the manual:
1. Which horseriding units get defensive bonuses and when they do does this apply to terrain and city defense?
2. What's the deal with collateral damage? i understand CD can be inflicted on a maximum of 6 units per strike. But how is it decided what amount of strength is taken away? Is a catapult's CD pretty well ineffective against much stronger units?
3. Does everybody always build worker first? This is what i've heard, may be it's a myth. I'm talking about ancient ctons here btw. For me it just isn't neccessarily the best first build.
There's more but I forget right now. Please spour out your knowledge. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Apr 1, 2006 17:12:41 GMT -5
I'm sorry I can only answer the last question. If people build worker first near me I kill them, you can see it in the score in ancient, it's so obvious it's scary. If you see someones score frozen for more than 8 turns, build four warriors, should be building one off the bat anyway and go kill them, I've done this so many times it's not funny any more(and the wow that was quick message that appears is so not a buzz for me,yeah and how easy was that? It's just stupid, yes you are dead, learn not to do it again) Worker first in a close map such as lakes or inland sea is suicide against all but the newbiest newbie.
In SP fine(comp is a moron) in MP get ready to die against anyone who understands the scoring system, I can tell who popped a tech, what tech path each player went for even if they lose out to a religion, keep you eyes on the score in anc, it reveals everything especially now that border expansions aren't reflected in score till 20 turns later. Lazy mans kill.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Apr 3, 2006 10:56:44 GMT -5
border expansions aren't recognized until 20 turns later?
I thought it was border expansions didn't reflect AFTER the 20th turn before end of game.
border expansions, even early in the game, reflect in score because they are border expansions through "CULTURE" - which reflects immediately as culture (thus population) is one of the primary game scoring methods.
You just don't SEE it reflect so much early in the game as it's "comparative" to it happening to eveyone at the same basic time (all scores go up) - unless your making worker first - no city growth.
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Apr 3, 2006 13:49:41 GMT -5
1. Which horseriding units get defensive bonuses and when they do does this apply to terrain and city defense? Only the Conquistador AFAIK and yes i believe so
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Apr 3, 2006 15:39:46 GMT -5
I think, up until knights (then cavalry) only the special unit UU's get a defense bonus (immortal, keishik, egyptian chariot, conquistador, cossak).
It's only the standard chariot and standard horse-archer who don't get a basic defense (without specific upgrading).
|
|
|
Post by notagoodname on Apr 4, 2006 1:32:52 GMT -5
1) The Immortal and Conquistadors get full terrain defensive bonuses - city defense included in that. (Keshiks and Cossacks definitely do not) Note the being attacked across rivers ALWAYS gives a defensive bonus to any unit (even when they say no defense bonus), no other terrain does this AFAIK. A nice trick that even fools good players is to put your combat+shock upgraded horse archers across a river from spearmen. The horse archers will get the river bonus wiping out his spearmen 99% of the time 2) Not sure but i beleive collateral is based off the damage to the first unit so a city with 1 modern armour and 5 healthy warriors should wind up with still healthy warriors after a catapult attack (something to try in the world builder sometime). 3) No - if you have lots of food grow to 3 before building a worker (or even 4 if you like warrior rushing and have heaps of food that so you can enslave to catch up). If your terrain is really poor food wise then go to 2 before getting a worker and churn out warriors whilst waiting for the growth.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Apr 8, 2006 3:11:58 GMT -5
1. Which horseriding units get defensive bonuses and when they do does this apply to terrain and city defense? Notagoodname gave the right answer. 2. What's the deal with collateral damage? i understand CD can be inflicted on a maximum of 6 units per strike. But how is it decided what amount of strength is taken away? Is a catapult's CD pretty well ineffective against much stronger units? Collateral damage is equal to a half of a combat round damage (3*AttStr+DefStr)/(3*DefStr+AttStr)/5 and divided by half. Collateral damage is explained in a "combat explained" thread here forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=137615Worker first is the best for economy i think. But you may die that way If you start with a scout and enemy is near then it's a bad idea to make a worker first.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Apr 8, 2006 9:27:11 GMT -5
worker 1. is not nescesarily best for economy espacialy as spi civ - as explained in my guide
|
|
|
Post by GERMANIA on Apr 8, 2006 10:55:35 GMT -5
well i never make worker first on a small map, there are other ways to get them fast and you are almost so fast like some one who started with a worker only that you have 2 more warriors to scout and attack. so its all about how your land is and how fare the others are
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Apr 9, 2006 5:05:57 GMT -5
Worker first is the best for economy i think. But you may die that way If you start with a scout and enemy is near then it's a bad idea to make a worker first. Actually if you start with a warrior on a small map such as inland sea or sometimes lakes(depends on the RMG) Don't do it, I've killed more people doing worker first than I'd care to name, it's a newb tactic, if you have anyone decent near they will kill you. Your score freezing for an extended period of time is a dead give away turn 1-10, this is obviously only aplicable in ancient. if someone has a score 56 and everyone else has around say 70, then target the low scorer with 4 warriors off the bat. Nice easy kill, thanks see ya later. At the very least youll be able to choke the guy into a crappy game. oops I said that before I'd forgotten. ;D
|
|
|
Post by pixiejmcc on Apr 10, 2006 16:14:35 GMT -5
thank you so much for the link ellestar. that article answered a lot of my questions. i found it a little too complex for my liking , but all the same i got a lot out of it. a few points that i picked might interest some people: a cata or other unit which inflicts collateral damage can only inflict collateral damage if the unit is below 50hp and will not damage the unit to any amount below that sum. therefore i suppose it is better to use it against healthy targes. Also they inflict CD on a maximum of five units (making a total of six including the one strongest unit it battles with in the normal way). This figures but I wasn't totally sure whether it was the case: less collateral damage will be inflicted if the cata is less strong. Actually, going over this again has put yet more questions in my head . Another point worth noting is that specific bonuses take strength away from the defender, instead of adding it to the attacker. E.g. An axeman with cover promotion attacking an archer (on plains - no other bonuses to either party), will mean 5 v 3 - 3x.25 (5v2.25). Instead I always thought the bonus went to the attacker which would mean: 5 + 5x.25 v 3 (6.25v3), which is more favourable to the axe (i think). So basically you get more advantage from a specific bonus when the defender is stronger than you. Or, at least this is how I read it. Arathorn (the author of the thread) also mentioned something called jump points. Basically he was saying that at certain levels of N (attacker value/defender) - stay with me here, it might be worth it ;D - the chances of winning changes significantly. This change was most marked when the two units strength values are very close to one another. To cut a long story short when N = only 1.01, ur chances of winning are a mighty 62%, when compared to 50% when N =1. So if your unit is only a tiny bit stronger you have a much better chance of winning. I am going to see whether this is the case in my next few games. Anyways, I shouldn't advertise another civ4 site , but I would recommend this thread to any serious civver and if anyone fully understands it or can correct me on what i've said above then please do.
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on Apr 11, 2006 3:14:29 GMT -5
Worker first is almost 100% always the strongest build if you're only concerned about growth and not immediate defense.
You can even get away with worker first in a cton situation. I do it if one of two things are true:
A) I know that the map is big enough (i.e. hub, some sizes and players on inland sea, etc) that I will have worker and BW quick enough that I could chop military by the time someone arrives.
B) I am capable of producing enough hammers in my capital that I can get a warrior out in an emergency if I see an enemy warrior outside my borders. For some reason I'm too tired to remember how far; you're either going to need 3 hammers per turn (warrior in 4) or 4 hammers per turn (warrior in 3). The second is very possible if you start on a plains hill and it's happened several times to me.
It's worth noting that getting stuck building half a worker and then having to emergency switch is nutsty for growth; you should have just built the warrior first and grown to size 2 if you knew it was coming. So you shouldn't use that as a stopgap strategy unless you are about 90% sure that you'll get the worker out; i.e. a large inland sea where your nearest enemy almost certainly won't find you quick enough, but it's possible.
If you can build worker first and survive to chop out military and more workers/settlers, you will be at an almost 100% guaranteed production advantage over someone who is building early warriors.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Apr 11, 2006 10:06:48 GMT -5
i wonder how early strategy will changed with the new patch. apparently chopping trees will yield less production, so perhaps it won't be as fundamental a part of the game anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Avogadro on Apr 11, 2006 16:58:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Apr 12, 2006 2:27:26 GMT -5
a cata or other unit which inflicts collateral damage can only inflict collateral damage if the unit is below 50hp and will not damage the unit to any amount below that sum. therefore i suppose it is better to use it against healthy targes. Also they inflict CD on a maximum of five units (making a total of six including the one strongest unit it battles with in the normal way). Note that these numbers are different for high-tech units with collateral damage. There is a full description there, i guess you missed it. This figures but I wasn't totally sure whether it was the case: less collateral damage will be inflicted if the cata is less strong. Yes. Another point worth noting is that specific bonuses take strength away from the defender, instead of adding it to the attacker. E.g. An axeman with cover promotion attacking an archer (on plains - no other bonuses to either party), will mean 5 v 3 - 3x.25 (5v2.25). Instead I always thought the bonus went to the attacker which would mean: 5 + 5x.25 v 3 (6.25v3), which is more favourable to the axe (i think). So basically you get more advantage from a specific bonus when the defender is stronger than you. Or, at least this is how I read it. If the overall value is negative, the defender’s modified strength is found by taking the original defender’s strength divided by (1-overall_value).So, it will be 5.5 vs 3/(1-(-0.25)) = 5.5 vs 2.4 (2.2916 to 1) instead what you thought 5*(1+0.25+0.1) vs 3 = 6.75 vs 3 (2.25 to 1) Note that you forgot Combat I for Axe. Arathorn (the author of the thread) also mentioned something called jump points. Basically he was saying that at certain levels of N (attacker value/defender) - stay with me here, it might be worth it ;D - the chances of winning changes significantly. This change was most marked when the two units strength values are very close to one another. To cut a long story short when N = only 1.01, ur chances of winning are a mighty 62%, when compared to 50% when N =1. So if your unit is only a tiny bit stronger you have a much better chance of winning. I am going to see whether this is the case in my next few games. You can use my calculator if you want to see these jump points for healthy units. There is a link to it in that thread on civfanatics. Open it with Internet Explorer (it has a faster JavaScript parser compared to Firefox) and check "chances vs multiple units". Don't cancel that script. It will take some time, especially on a slow computer.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Apr 12, 2006 9:35:01 GMT -5
I did notice maximum collateral damage inflicted is different for more high tech units ;D. It's just I am an ancient addict (it's bad, I know), so I rarely use those other units. I f I remember correctly, this is the maximum hp a unit can inflict with collateral damage:
cho-ko-nu = 60 cannon= 60 artillery = 70
btw, this is pixiejmcc,. i changed my nickname.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Apr 12, 2006 9:37:21 GMT -5
Oh, good point about the combat one. I was about to rant that the axe v archer scenario had no extra factors to make it simple. But, of course if the axe had cover it would have to have combat one . I'm afraid I didn't understand the maths (note, I am British!) you used there though. Could you explain that in terms a dumbass could understand? Oh and one other question ellestar: This stuff about jump points seems to be a pretty crucial aspect of combat, but I'm finding it difficult applying the knowledge, or even understanding the concept. Is it really as useful as it appears when used correctly or it just an interesting observation?
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Apr 17, 2006 4:26:54 GMT -5
I'm afraid I didn't understand the maths (note, I am British!) you used there though. Could you explain that in terms a dumbass could understand? There is a full description in that "Combat explained" article. What exactly you don't understand? You sum up all general attacker bonuses, add 1 to it and multiply it by attacker strength. Then you sum up all defender bonuses and substract all attacker bonuses that work in specifically that situation (bonus against unit type, city attack bonus etc.). If the resulted value is positive, then you multiply the defender's strength by 1+resulted value. If it's negative, you divide it by 1-resulted value. Oh and one other question ellestar: This stuff about jump points seems to be a pretty crucial aspect of combat, but I'm finding it difficult applying the knowledge, or even understanding the concept. Is it really as useful as it appears when used correctly or it just an interesting observation? Well, there aren't a lot of important jump points but still it's nice to know that: 1) Even if you just slightly wound a stack of units of one type and you have exactly the same type of unwounded units then your losses will be significantly smaller (62.9%+ chance to win or 0.589 units lost on average per 1 enemy unit instead of 50% chance to win and 1 to 1 win/loss ratio). That's because enemy unit will need to win one more combat round in battle. So, it may be efficient to use a collateral damage units, obsolete units you no longer need etc. before the main stack. Though you may need obsolete units to finish enemy wounded units (if strength difference is small) and i'm not sure which way is more efficient under which conditions. 2) When you have a stack of units of one type against another such stack, if you have 1.533+ times as many units as your enemy you'll lose 0.533 units on average per 1 unit lost by enemy (instead of 1 to 1 average losses with equal numbers of equal units where each unit has 50% chance to win). 3) No matter your numbers advantage if you use same units but enemy has a 35% or bigger defence bonus you'll lose more units on average than the enemy (35% bonus - 1.005 average kills for a defender, see "Av[erage] Kills" coloumn in a combat calculator after you calculate "Chances vs multiple units". Also, you need (Av Kills+1) times as many units on average or your win/loss ratio will be even worse than that (though it matters only for big stacks where it's better to use catapults first anyway, for a small number of units it's better to look up your chances from the same table "Chances vs multiple units"). Other than that, jumppoins may make some unit a better or a worse counter to some other unit (compared to "average" result if there was no jumppoints). But i don't think that there is any way to use such knowledge. All that matters is if a unit is a good counter or not with the system that exists.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Apr 17, 2006 10:55:02 GMT -5
border expansions aren't recognized until 20 turns later? I thought it was border expansions didn't reflect AFTER the 20th turn before end of game. border expansions, even early in the game, reflect in score because they are border expansions through "CULTURE" - which reflects immediately as culture (thus population) is one of the primary game scoring methods. You just don't SEE it reflect so much early in the game as it's "comparative" to it happening to eveyone at the same basic time (all scores go up) - unless your making worker first - no city growth. The score from cultural/border expansions, and therefore the added territory from new cities, takes 20 turns to be added to your score. Population is added right away however. This was a change in 1.52 that remains to counter the last turn Great Artist Culture Bomb exploit that had no counter and could and did add upto 300 or more points prior to 1.52. CS
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Apr 24, 2006 16:30:23 GMT -5
man, this forum is desolate.....
anyways there is something else i dont get: SLAVING STUFF
i rarely use it. only in emergencies really. and i think i am missing out massively because of this.
i have read complicated articles and posts on the subject but nothing that really computes with my mind.
could someone please give an easy to understand explanation of when and how it should be used. and is slaving ur 1st worker and absolute must?
|
|