|
Post by friedrichpsitalon on Apr 30, 2006 14:25:27 GMT -5
Below is a proposed changelist based on feedback for the Ladder mod, with a loose explanation of why a change was made, where reasonable and prudent: Unit Changes[/u] All resource requiring units now cost double what they used to and may be built without any resources. Having the proper resource will allow you to build the unit at a 50% discount in cost, reducing it to its normal value. This includes: Chariot (not changed; no-resource expensive spears become available at hunting with the above changes, which may actually make these units obsolete) Horse Archer (now 7 str, 35 shields) - cost increase to offset considerably greater threat to walled-archer citiesAxeman Spearman Swordsman War Elephant Crossbowman Maceman Knight (please note this unit went up in cost 4x - two resources) Pikeman Frigate Cavalry Ironclad Destroyer Tank Battleship Fighter Bomber Submarine Modern Armor (please note this unit went up in cost 4x - two resources) ICBM Jet Fighter (please note this unit went up in cost 4x - two resources) Stealth Bomber (please note this unit went up in cost 4x - two resources) Unique Unit Changes[/u] Russian Cossack has been reduced to standard cavalry strength, but kept its mounted bonus. Unit is intended to be anti-other-cavalry.Samurai's strength is now 10. Inability to promote for first strikes makes the Sammy's UU ability ineffective.India's UU now "Howdah Rider"8str, 50% bonus vs mounted, 25% bonus vs. melee, 1 movement per turn, requires ivory. India's UU should still be quite powerful, as the trait combination is not terribly impressive otherwise. This UU should resist spears and knights, but will still fall to pikes and be ineffective against longbow-held cities.Aztec Jaguar is now 5str, 10% attack, starts with Woodsman II. This unique unit is actually worse than a Sword, if you have iron. The goal of this move is to correct that without making the unit too dangerous on an early beeline.Greek Phalanx is now 5str, 100% vs mounted, 25% vs ranged. Unique units with strictly defensive roles are often ineffective, as your opponent simply refuses to field the "victim" of that UU. This change gives the Phalanx a mild aggressive role.Trait Changes[/u] Creative now grants 4 culture per turn. While we don't want this to be a blowout trait, all the traits should have similar impacts on the short-game environment. Right now, Creative's impact is more long game; inapplicable to us.Organized now grants a 75% reduction, rather than 50. Again, this is simply an adjustment to our game style. In a high-level or long-developing game, this would not be neccessary and would be very overpowered.Wonder Changes[/u] ON HOLD. This is planned for a later version, but I think we should digest the changes made to the main game here before we go any further. (Also, based on what some people are saying, I may need to improve my XML skills a bit more beforehand – I like that Sistine Chapel = Spiritual trait idea, for example.) Mechanics ChangesRoads now have 3 movement standard; engineering grants a 4th movement. (Unsure about this change.) Feel free to discuss these changes, but please be prepared to explain your arguments in a clear and factually backed-up manner.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Apr 30, 2006 18:15:19 GMT -5
heh didnt expect my suggestion to be the main adjustment - in fact i dont like it too much myslef anymore - as it makes choke pointless - choke should allways be 1 part of the game.
I m thinking about solution as in fact the double cost idea is good - d it be possible to set to allow building of the unit just when some player in game connected the nesasry res? hm it may just work out as it is - not sure
oh well and HA strenth 7 d blow - it d be stronger then a spear after choke - I dont think that it s so bad with strenght 6 u just gotta know how to use (ask navy guys) .. but it should totally blow away catapults - hm maybe allow it a choke upgarde as 1. upgrade to make it a nice counter to axe
hm and if u weaken cossacs like that redcostas are overpowered
oh and pls let india have it s fast workers - it s not like they are that much more powerful - its more like 3 ind worker = 4 normal workers : 3 cossacs > 4 cavs ; 3 conqu > 4 knights (in most situations) ; 3 phalanx > 4 spears; and so on and so on
|
|
|
Post by Gogf on Apr 30, 2006 19:09:11 GMT -5
Lots of good changes in here, and I particularly like the idea of having the double cost of units without the resource. I haven't been following the other thread so I have no idea who came up with that, but it's a great idea!
As for the samurai, I think the new value may be somewhat overpowered. The counter to macemen and samurais haave always been crossbowmen, who are essentially nine strength against melee units. If the samurai was changed to ten strength, even knights would have bad odds when attacking them without the shock promotion due to the first strikes (are these being left in or dropped with the new version?). Wouldn't a better solution to the problem simply be to allow them to get Drill promotions, or would this not be possible?
As for India's new UU: the melee bonus is interesting. A phalanx will only have a 66% chance of killing an unpromoted Howdah Rider, which comes only from the free Combat I. A Howdah Rider starting with Combat I and Shock under Theocracy could be an extremely devastating pillager. There wouldn't be much counter to this until guns arrive, which are a long way off from construction. Maybe a two move war elephant would be a better idea? That might be overpowered as well, though.
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on Apr 30, 2006 19:37:07 GMT -5
Few comments:
Horse archers at 7 str really marginalize swordsmen even worse than they already are. Suggestions?
Roads at four scares me a little, but I'm not going to say it's bad.
Other war elephants are the best counter to Howdah Riders, but I have to say I think just leaving it with fast workers is fine now that tree chops are nerfed. The biggest strength of FWs before was instachops with Serfdom.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on May 1, 2006 2:46:53 GMT -5
maybe better give swords strenght of 7 then horses - they r really unused till now
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on May 1, 2006 6:47:01 GMT -5
Maybe specialize swords with +25% vs. archery instead (or in addition to) their city attack bonus? Then they would even stay useful for a little while perhaps against longbows, and they would effectively gain utility attacking cities (their current niche.)
|
|
|
Post by friedrichpsitalon on May 1, 2006 7:16:18 GMT -5
Interesting feedback, guys. The resource change is going to stand, at least for now. Double-cost units still may make a choke exceedingly effective; when you compare the cost of a double-hammer spear to a pike, you may find out just how bad a deal that is. This needs to be tested. I never thought I'd see someone defending the Cossack, heh. In regards to the Redcoat, I think we'll let that one sit for now. It is on the "Watch List" for future versions, though. Samurai: Can be countered by a knight with "shock" much easier than the Samurai can promote to "formation." Remember, this is a unique unit - think about how feared Praetorians are; Sammies aren't supposed to be paperweights. We could tailor this back down, but this actually isn't as big a promotion as a Praetorian has, when you crunch numbers. Howdah Rider: Its counter is sitting one tech away: pikes. (Also, as someone pointed out, other War Elephants work quite well.) Horse Archer: A spear doubled sits at 8, so I'm not sure why a 7-strength unit is much more dangerous. I'm open to discussion, though. Bear in mind the costs involved - Spears are considerably cheaper than a Horse Archer now. Sword: I'll agree that this unit needs some love - particularly in light of the Horse Archer move. City Attack? Cover? Moving the core strength of the unit is not an option - axes are meant to counter them reliably, and a core strength change would upset that. I'm really unsure about this "road" change. It seems to me that such a move would favor the defender over the attacker, which most people seem to feel is the opposite of the direction this mod needs to move? Also - no one commented on the move with Creative? Off to teach the childrens.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on May 1, 2006 12:45:55 GMT -5
Sword: I'll agree that this unit needs some love - particularly in light of the Horse Archer move. City Attack? Cover? Moving the core strength of the unit is not an option - axes are meant to counter them reliably, and a core strength change would upset that. IMHO City Attack. I'm really unsure about this "road" change. It seems to me that such a move would favor the defender over the attacker, which most people seem to feel is the opposite of the direction this mod needs to move? Well, with 3-move roads spearmans on roads will be faster than enemy chariots or horse archers. And defence will be significantly stronger. I think it's not nessesary. Let's start from that question: why do we want to speed up movement on roads? What do we wont to achieve with it? Also - no one commented on the move with Creative? +2 culture is still nothing when something serious is involved. IMHO 2 culture *2 or maybe *3 culture will be more useful. It still will be less than +1 square range compared to non-creative but effect will be visible. India's UU now "Howdah Rider"8str, 50% bonus vs mounted, 25% bonus vs. melee, 1 movement per turn, requires ivory. India's UU should still be quite powerful, as the trait combination is not terribly impressive otherwise. This UU should resist spears and knights, but will still fall to pikes and be ineffective against longbow-held cities.What if we'll give 3 moves to all workers? It will speed up the game without any significant changes and 3 move workers are familiar to players because of an India's UU. We can also give no anarchy (like spiritual) to all traits. That will also speed up a game a little and make civics more flexible. And no War Weariness? It's in XML as well.
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on May 1, 2006 19:16:46 GMT -5
Swords are great against archer defended cities. I think double the cost without resources is better than 50%, choke is a serious thing and it hurts an early rush with warriors if they can just rush to bronze, build 1 axe man, and kill the entire warrior population you are sending in an early rush......... Imagine a world where I give Steel railroad and combustion the finger and produce a hand load of tanks really fast, well that world is here Make creative 5 atleast "come onnnnnnnn" lower culture victory to 25,000 atleast or atleast make it so only 1 city has to get to 50,000 and not 3. Make expansive 4 health atleast. Make the horse archer get only 25% towards catapaults Ivory isn't common, maybe make the cost of this UU without the resource only cost 25% more if it is kept at 50% and 50% more if it is kept at 100%. Raise Kremlin back to 50% and make it so everyone can build it and it becomes a national wonder....... Roads: Making roads give 3 maybe too much for defense. This will make it a must to build cities 3 spaces apart and can possible make it impossible to take a city... Seriously.... Ohh and please believe an early rush with horses now at 7 will be rediculous. I will get my horses to my enemy so damn fast. Long bowmen need to be 5 STR. They are way to deffensivly overbalanced currently and they are hurting the game considering they can even take out everything when defending a city. I throw a Longbowmen on a hill with double hill promotion, that long bow aint getting off that hill for a longgggggggg time. And if you keep roads at 3 and dont change longbowmen, You aint taking my cities.......... Finacial gets Markets and Grocers at 50% pleaseeeeeee. Spiritual only has to wait 3 turns before they can change civics again. Most 120 turn games, especially ancient, you aint going to be changing civics more than 1-5 times. so you only save 1-5 turns, which is ok, dont get me wrong, but not as much as promotion, finacial, wonders, etc. (Especially if you make the chapel give spiritual abilities).
|
|
|
Post by zerza on May 1, 2006 22:09:11 GMT -5
Its gonna be a meat market. Game runs a bit slow to play like an RTS.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on May 2, 2006 6:23:28 GMT -5
I dont agrre that 3 move roads are a advantage for defender - he got his units in his front city anyway - but it gonna be much more easy to do coordinted attacks in a teamer. Oh well it wasnt my suggestion
these longbows are really superpowerful compared to their price - the thing is that for an ancient start a strngth of 5 for em d be good - but for ren start - there s no more resourceless def unit left. in med start they destroy game - there s just no unit to take em
and horse strenth 7 is really a noob killer - better players gonna be able to pop em out kinda crazzy and overwhelm less experienced before they do nuts
@mrgt: to get 1 legendary city is kinda easy - i have done it several times - but 3 is really kinda imposible in a competetive game where u just dont get all the wonders and all the religions maybe 2 d be some idea
ya and give swords more city attack bonus - more like 50% then 10% and HA more power vs catas - i was so damn pissed when a upgraded HA didnt take city with only a cata in.
cre with 4 or 5 might be decent - I thought about double culture for buildings from a cre civ - guess it s hard to implement and maybe too powerful in a epic game.
|
|
|
Post by zerza on May 2, 2006 6:38:50 GMT -5
But will this overbalance the trend of the game to war and cause people to neglect the societal part of things? I ask because I got a stack of war games, but they dont have what civ has. But for civ to be a war only game I have better (less frustrating) war games. Especially the civ traits, seems we are moving to the trend of making the "civilization" part of CIV become automatic. I hate to lose focus of what makes CIV, This would appeal largely to the RTS crowd, who is a very fickle beast indeed. (A trend of making the societal aspects of CIV automatic will prove the single players right, that we play watered down CIV ) One reason I never got into Quick Civ, the reduced costs for everything definately made the "civilization" part of civ very automatic and brainless. (I think the psychological implications a battle mod would have on the community is a valid rhetorical question) Strategicly speaking: I think the road movements (especially 4) is extremely overdone. Maps are so small compared to civ3 that I believe its akin to having 4 movement (then5) on a civ3 map. This will definately reduce the effectiveness of horsemen in enemy land, almost to the point of making them worthless. (spears can reach the entire empire at whim)
|
|
|
Post by weaksauce on May 2, 2006 10:41:26 GMT -5
Russian Cossack has been reduced to standard cavalry strength, but kept its mounted bonus. Unit is intended to be anti-other-cavalry.Samurai's strength is now 10. Inability to promote for first strikes makes the Sammy's UU ability ineffective.India's UU now "Howdah Rider"8str, 50% bonus vs mounted, 25% bonus vs. melee, 1 movement per turn, requires ivory. India's UU should still be quite powerful, as the trait combination is not terribly impressive otherwise. This UU should resist spears and knights, but will still fall to pikes and be ineffective against longbow-held cities.Aztec Jaguar is now 5str, 10% attack, starts with Woodsman II. This unique unit is actually worse than a Sword, if you have iron. The goal of this move is to correct that without making the unit too dangerous on an early beeline.Greek Phalanx is now 5str, 100% vs mounted, 25% vs ranged. Unique units with strictly defensive roles are often ineffective, as your opponent simply refuses to field the "victim" of that UU. This change gives the Phalanx a mild aggressive role.Cossack should be str 18 and no bonus vs. mounted. by definition having 18 str makes it strong vs. mounted. Lowering power to 15 and making it bonus vs. mounted just makes it too vulnerable to Agg pikeman and rifleman, imo. Samurai power 9 is sufficient, imo. 10 is too much. just my opinion tho. This india unit is way too powerful, almost Cossack-like. Creating a unit like this pretty much ignores how people tech in multiplayer games. Elephants are pretty strong as they are... making a UU elephant is really dangerous imo. No one ever has engineering by the time several elephants are out. I think elephants are just right now. They are really really strong units as they are and available to all in relatively equal fashion. I also dont know why you would want to give a UU to India when it's basically the strongest civ in the game (all around) right now anyway... doesn't make any sense to me. Phalanx - leave how it is. it is like one of the best UU in the game already, I dont see the point of adding range attack. the civ player is already Agg civ and he can make axe w/ barracks to have bonus vs. Archers.... doesn't make any sense to add this benefit to phalanx, just overpowers it. - Org and Cre changes are just fine, in fact probably perfect. - Road movement should NOT be increased. Part of being smart in how you build cities is your ability to move units between them. This sort of thing is going to make problems especially with units like cavs/musketeers (2 move units) as they cross into enemy territory....
|
|
|
Post by weaksauce on May 2, 2006 11:20:40 GMT -5
I re-read all the posts from the other thread. Here are other changes I request/agree with from other posters that were not listed previously:
1. Jungle needs to be removed in fewer turns. It has no economic value when chopped. It's bad enuf you have to waste time to remove jungle, get no value from it, but it also takes too long. It should take a turn or two less to chop a jungle.
2. I think Frigate should come from replacement parts tech, but still require Astro. There were a couple people who suggested grenadiers show up before rifles, rendering them less useful. The problem really is that you get too much from chemistry tech, it's too valuable. Frigate and Grenadier need to come from separate techs, I think.
3. Add 100 pts to your score when you raze an enemy city.
4. AI capability needs to be taken down as much as possible. Lot of times we play games with more than 2 teams... CTONs, 4 team games and 1 team/person will concede and then AI will go on a rampage building. If a person quits/concedes he really should be gone from the game along w/ his civ. If this cant be done, then take AI capability down as much as possible please.
5. Maps. We need new maps - mirror resources (not terrain) of Pangea that are equal/fair. A map shaped like a big X -- somewhat like four corners but really big and wrap around like fractal... again mirrored resources (not terrain)...
Maps r a big problem. Inland sea is too gay.
/weak
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on May 2, 2006 17:09:49 GMT -5
Honestly, the best thing I think would be a "tournament mode" option where any quitting players (instead of being replaced by AI) were wiped off the map after a turn.
|
|
|
Post by weaksauce on May 3, 2006 0:59:34 GMT -5
i also think something needs to be done to reduce the collateral damage of cats or take them down in power somehow, but i'm not sure exactly what the right answer is yet.
i think they r the most abused unit next to cossack, but not sure what the answer is to fix them. maybe make horse archer stronger counter them like tommy said... dunno
/weak
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on May 3, 2006 2:14:35 GMT -5
Well, the problem is that catapults are the counter to the stack advantage of picking the best defender against an attack. If catapults weren't as effective, attackers would be a lot more free to just walk around enemy territory pillaging everything without fear of retribution, and it would be really hard to stop them except with overwhelming force (depending on the military era, I guess.)
They're just barely powerful enough to do that job as it is; right now it's fairly happily balanced so that in the classical era if a catapult sacrifices on, say, a knight, pike, and mace, they will probably become just barely weak enough that counter-units can kill the three with maybe one death. Things would change a lot if you had to use 3 catapults to accomplish the same, or just had to throw counter-units at it.
One thing I would sort of agree with is that catapults are maybe too strong as a standalone unit in the ancient-ish era, right when you get construction. But you can't drop their strength without decreasing their utility in all eras by a whole lot, until Steel, which I think is even worse, so I'm not sure what to do about that.
One other thing:
I always hate how I am building a warrior for cheap happy faces in an internal city and I accidentally hook it up to metal, so production switches to a spear and it takes longer for something I don't need. How are things going to work now that resource-dependent upgrade units are always available? Because it might be very very plausible that a guy would prefer to build a warrior than, say, a double-priced spear or axe - for barbs or city happiness or scouting. Hopefully that isn't tough to mod.
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on May 3, 2006 2:27:55 GMT -5
Red coats 15 Cossacks 16 Catapults cost 50% more hammers' 2 Cities 35,000 Culture Sword 25% 100% hammers when no resource. trees Give 25% more - Keep it 3 turns to cut them down. Long Bow 5 2 road movement
This isn't turning the Game into a insane war game with no strategy, this is making the game perfectly balanced so there are more ways to counter single strategies that are currently too dominant.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on May 7, 2006 23:23:57 GMT -5
well just a quick note. best change i see fried is to the jaguar. what a yucky crappy unit that is atm. it is even worse than the unit it replaces (and i must admit i don't find a use for them very often anyway).
i would agree with +25% city attack for a swordsmen (10% just sounds like nothing - and really it is)
good work btw, thak you for the time you have spent. and thank you to people posting constructive recommendations. there are some very interesting points raised
|
|
|
Post by zerza on May 8, 2006 8:29:24 GMT -5
I fear a majority of these proposals will open up a whole new realm of imbalances.
Cats are tough because their tech path is far in, even going straight for them they arrive late on the scene. Changing them will make it next to impossible to stop a large stack.
Moving Frigates to Replaceable Parts leaves Galleons alone to long. This will effectively kill the age of exploration and render Frigates useless. Ironclads just as far in.
Changing road movement is a killer. This will remove most of the strategy from the game. Look for this to cause rampant reckless expansion. No longer will it matter how skillful one is at reinforcing. Sentries wont be nearly as useful or needed. The thrill of sneaking into enemy lands will be gone, just miles well march straight in. This will kill alot of the suspense of CiV and is a very poor idea IMHO.
The knight costs 4x more now, this is barely seen in ancient games, and if so in very few number. Look for this unit to dissapear altogether in ancient games.
Many other changes I fear will break other balances. I could go on but my face is getting blue.
|
|