Pre-gunpowder the protective trait is quite underpowered, do people agree with me?

Comparing the Agressive trait to the Protective trait, more units benefit from the Agressive trait compared to the Protective trait Pre-gunpowder

Agg - Spear, Axe, Sword, Mace, Pike
Pro - Archer, Longbow, Crossbow

Solution to improve/balance or increase the power of the protective trait?

Add more Archery Units into the game at least 2 more archery type units to balance out the number of units that benefit the trait compared to Agressive.

What do you think?

Any other Ideas to improve the protective trait?

I dunno, man. Protective Longbows fortified in a city on a hill don't seem underpowered to me much at all. They're darn stubborn little buggers--Civ IV's version of cockroaches.

I think protective is just fine.

Just because something doesn't fit most peoples' playstyle doesn't mean it's weak.

I think protective is just fine.

Just because something doesn't fit most peoples' playstyle doesn't mean it's weak.

Also, if you play a "trade route" game, the cheap castles can be quite nice.

Protective trait does not need to be improved, toned down maybe, but not improved, archers re really good at defending, with the free CG promotion, they can advance easier, and really make their cities a pain to take down. Comparing to agressive, it gives a free combat 1 (+10% effectiveness) whereas protective gives City Garrison (+20% when defending a city). Imo, if you use your archers for city defense, which I honestly hope you do, protective is more than good enough.

I rarely ever defend, I'm more of the aggressive attacking type, The only time I defend a city is when I'm defending a city I recently captured from the AI. I guess the protective trait would be great for peaceful builder games as long as you can keep your tiles from being pillaged especially cottaged towns.

I have yet to play as a protective leader, but I don't think it means you have to play turtle.

Even when I'm warmongering and capturing cities, I still have to garrison them in order to keep them. Protective might mean I need fewer city garrison troops, especially since I can quickly build walls and castles there, meaning I can build more aggressive units instead. Also, some units I use aggressively (such as Grenadiers) would be able to do double duty as city defenders. And those free initial promotions open up a few mid-level promotions. Nifty!

I don't know if that bears out in practice, but the first time I play protective, that's what I'll probably be trying.

Pre-gunpowder the protective trait is quite underpowered, do people agree with me?

I'd say it's pretty much hopeless. Protective was a very bad idea to start with, and making every Asian civilization protective was even stupider. Mansa Musa was lucky to escape being saddled with Protective.

Why not just give the Cho-Ko-Nu a free drill promotion, then get rid of the Protective trait entirely, and replace it with something more useful, such as a trait that gives a bonus to diplomacy (unfortunately not very useful outside of single player games), an extra trade route, or even +1 movement to all your mounted units? Maybe a free promotion to your siege engines (not that they need it, being so overpowered already).

Almost anything would be better than Protective. Once a war becomes defensive, you've already lost it. Your opponent is guaranteed to have overwhelming numbers.

Protective is very powerful and it doesn't need to be spiced up. With a barracks, a protective civ can make extrememly powerful city defenders, without a second thought. No. It's strong, but it doesn't need changing. I think game play testing proved it.

Mansa Musa was unlucky to escape being blessed with Protective.


Fixed.

Protective skirmishers! Wow!

The only fix to protective that I see is that Machine Gun for all purposes is a pure defensive unit, even moreso than Longbow (mg can't attack however much you'd want to, longbow can). It should get the same protective bonus (free CG1 + Drill1).

Other than that, protective is fine. Maybe the leader traits could be reviewed to see if protective is the best for all that have it, or maybe add non-protective leaders to China and Japan.

Note that not all Asian leaders have the protective trait. Only all Chinese, Korean and Japanese leaders - there are some other Asian civilizations in cIV as well.

( protective Skirmishers would be nice indeed :) )

I think Protective needs a buff (so do Imperialist and Industrious imo). The archers are still easily run over by axe/sword attacks. And the vaunted longbowmen will melt in the face of a treb attack. Walls are nice...until siege weapons, then they arent there. And of course they are also pointless once you get gunpowder, which current threads have shown to be something quickly accomplished. Same with Castles. Someone mentioned the trade from Castles, which is nice...but dont forget they go obsolete. Does any other buildings that traits get a construction bonus on go obsolete? And iirc, promotions dont increase your power score...so the ai still sees the same # of archers.

So the only peacetime benefits are Castle's some bonuses to trade and culture, but this building goes obsolete. Defensively, the archery units arent much better, while walls and castles are easily overcome. The saving grace of this trait are the first strike...especially for Redcoats (churchill) and Chokonu(China).

So what would I do to buff it? I think one addition styled after the way Organized, Creative, and Expansive were buffed would take this trait from ok at best to good in any situation. Some ideas...

1. Add a modern defense building (or making bunkers give 25% defense to all attacks) and give it to protective for 1/2
2. Add a persistent bonus, maybe like -25% maintainence on soldiers
3. Give a hammer discount on defensive units...longbowmen, machinegun, sam infantry, pikemen, spearmen

HAHA, Protective is the best trait for me so far! (specially playing against those monster dagger stacks with Better AI)

Hah, it fits on me so well! I'm always one of the last in the power graph, because I prefer to invest more in research and culture, and protective trait is excellent for that! 90% of my wars starts defensively(later depending of the war I may take some cities) and man, a defensive unit with a protective trait + barracks is a pain!
a longbow inside a city ni a hill with protective trait is insane! He can take down knights without losing much hp if you get lucky!

I dont think the trait is broken sorry, it rocks!

As an aggressor/expander, I like Protective. I think most people who have the Aggressive dependance (soooo used to cheap Barracks) will find it a breeze as you can build nice promoted defensive units without having to even worry about a Barracks. It's great for the early expansion.

(I have a really hard time with the idea of defending my city with Archers with no promotions. The Protective trait cuts out that issue entirely.)

Problem with protective is the AI's battle tactics. Humans go after cities, so it's an annoying trait in the hands of an AI to have to face. Also it's good in MP I imagine. But when AIs attack they focus on pillaging, where protective aint so great. It doesn't matter if you can defend you cities well or what the odds of knights vs longbows are if their knights/cavs/gunships pillage all of your cottages. You've still lost. Ironically, aggressive is a much better defensive trait than protective. Your melee units are much closer to formation, shock or pinch to take out pillagers. IMO, protective is fairly useless in the hands of a human vs the AI.

Ironically, aggressive is a much better defensive trait than protective. Your melee units are much closer to formation, shock or pinch to take out pillagers

Exactly, and they are also better for going on the offensive.

Protective needs beefing up? Am i hearing correctly, with a simple barracks a civ can produce archers with 25 + 30% city garrison, combined with the 50% bonus that is inhernet with archers you can get an archer with 6.05 strength easy peasy, and thats before you get the cheap walls.

Personally when i play an offensive game i put protective civ's at the top of my to kill list, simply because the longer they survive the harder it is too conquer them. Especially Tokuawa, who starts out with combat I, drill I, city garrsion I and more than likely another promotion for every gunpowder unit :(.

Protective is weak because it's usefulness is for a large part dependant on what the OPPONENT does. As sooooo said, who cares if you have CG2 defenders if the enemy doesn't try and attack your cities?

Not to mention you can't even get a Medic I right off the bat with a rax. Talk about being protective huh :lol:

Protective serves it's purpose.
It is supposed to be useless to aggressive players who don't allow the enemy to attack their cities, just like Industrious is useless to a player who doesn't build wonders.
The advantage in the early game is that you can have an Archer with 2-3 first strikes from a barracks to hunt down barbarian warriors without taking much damage. When there are no more barbarians he will still be useful with his drill promotions and the city defense bonus.

Pre-gunpowder the protective trait is quite underpowered, do people agree with me?

Comparing the Agressive trait to the Protective trait, more units benefit from the Agressive trait compared to the Protective trait Pre-gunpowder

Agg - Spear, Axe, Sword, Mace, Pike
Pro - Archer, Longbow, Crossbow

Solution to improve/balance or increase the power of the protective trait?

Add more Archery Units into the game at least 2 more archery type units to balance out the number of units that benefit the trait compared to Agressive.

What do you think?

Any other Ideas to improve the protective trait?

Honestly, my military is usually 50%+ Archery units, unless I'm going to warmonger. And often, it doesn't contain any melee units until the Classical Age (i.e. Chariots and Archers are plenty good until enemy Swordsmen can show up).

Combine that with only having to build a barracks in one city (which builds Chariots), since your Archers really don't need a promotion to be good. And for a protective play style, the Protective Trait gives a LOT more value than the Aggressive Trait.

Of course, if your going to build an army and conquer, the analysis tilts completely and the Aggressive Trait becomes way more useful than the Protective Trait.

But what about that needs to be fixed?

Maybe the only tweak would be one that makes the Protective Trait (which is focused primarily on City protection) more useful for Empire Protection (i.e. Pillage protection, as well. Perhaps an Attack bonus when attacking in one's own cultural tile? That would keep it as a Trait that's not overly attractive for warmongers to have themselves, but would make them take notice if their war target had it.

no keep it as it is ,i want the 2uu as english longbow.protective is a huge warmongering trait used right.

I should imagine it makes Qin Shi Huang an ideal leader for builders in Warlords, since he has Industrious to help with wonders and Protective to... well... protect them.

Another problem with protective (and to a lesser extent civs with archer UUs) is that archery is a dead end tech. Bronze-working is the most important tech in the game. In contrast, archery is not one, but TWO dead end techs (hunting and archery).

As for protective being good for defensive play styles, I dunno, but on higher levels (monarch/emp) I have found that having a good defense usually means that you are losing slower. Sure protective may be better if you are on the defense, but being on the defense is more often than not a losing strategy in the first place.

Finally, one of the other problems with Protective is the blatant stereotyping of East Asian leaders. I mean Qin of all people as protective? Methinks Firaxis didn't really take a good look at history :crazyeye:.

I agree protective is a stupid idea to start with.

We are here to play to win, not to play like cockroaches, then lose when 2050 comes.

True, like any trait protective gives you something extra, but what this trait gives you is something that won't help too much to win.

You know what scares me most in a war? Not my enemies attacking my cities, it's these buggers start pillaging my cottages that have turned into juicy towns after a zillion of rounds. The CG3 promotion and cheap wall don't help this.

Protective trait does not help my axes, swords, spears, chariots, elephants, catapult....etc. These are the units I use most. Unless I play Chinese, I seldom use crossbows. You only need certain number of Longbows to stay in the cities just in case. Most of the battles are fought in open field to reduce the loss from pillaging.

The life of castles is really short to be very useful. I'll take any other buildings for the half-cost.

When playing SP, your power ranking is not affected by the number of promotions, so the idea that you can build fewer units and still remain in peace is not a valid one. Once a war starts, you'll still build mostly other units to fight the open-ground war.

When playing SP, your power ranking is not affected by the number of promotions, so the idea that you can build fewer units and still remain in peace is not a valid one. Once a war starts, you'll still build mostly other units to fight the open-ground war.
I didn't think so. When I'm warring, though, I usually leave several units behind to garrison a city I've captured; I was theorizing that with protective, I could leave fewer units behind if I use the protective units for this purpose. For a recently-conquered city, the AI tends to leave off pillaging around it and tries to retake the city.

Protective serves it's purpose.
It is supposed to be useless to aggressive players who don't allow the enemy to attack their cities, just like Industrious is useless to a player who doesn't build wonders.
The advantage in the early game is that you can have an Archer with 2-3 first strikes from a barracks to hunt down barbarian warriors without taking much damage. When there are no more barbarians he will still be useful with his drill promotions and the city defense bonus.

hum who told you they would attack your cities. I think the Barbarians or any AI that have to attack your garrisoned cities will go pillage the country land instead. There goes the trait...

And I prefer my agressor to come and die on my walls rather then pillaging cottages

I should imagine it makes Qin Shi Huang an ideal leader for builders in Warlords, since he has Industrious to help with wonders and Protective to... well... protect them.Mao should be a really good expansionist now with the bonus to workers (to chop settlers and maybe archers). He could start a well defended expansion without needing Barracks.

Protective trait does not help my axes, swords, spears, chariots, elephants, catapult....etc. These are the units I use most. Unless I play Chinese, I seldom use crossbows.

Use crossbows. In any one on one fight, a crossbow is equally as powerful as a cho-ko-nu. It's also one of the best units for fighting in the field. As long as you have built enough roads, a group of crossbows and spearmen/pikemen/elephants is a very poweful combination for protecting your territory from pillaging.

In summary, use crossbows. As a bonus you'll find the protective trait much more valuable.

How about half the build time and upgrade cost for all archery units?

You know what scares me most in a war? Not my enemies attacking my cities, it's these buggers start pillaging my cottages that have turned into juicy towns after a zillion of rounds. The CG3 promotion and cheap wall don't help this.

Protective trait does not help my axes, swords, spears, chariots, elephants, catapult....etc. These are the units I use most. Unless I play Chinese, I seldom use crossbows. You only need certain number of Longbows to stay in the cities just in case. Most of the battles are fought in open field to reduce the loss from pillaging.


I agree with this post, pillaging can hurt more than someone directly attacking your cities, especially if you're cities are borderline unhealthy/unhappy, and/or have a lot of Villages/Towns. Or if they pillage resources you were trading to other Civs, you'll brake that trade and they'll get annoyed with you.

Pillaging is a tactic I frequently use when warring with a city.

Sides I think Power is calculated more by power, than potential Power. In Civ3 Someone did a test and the AI veiewed every attack point worth 1.5 defense, meaning aggressive/attacking units are better for keeping ppl from attacking you. Like a storng offense is the best defense.

I have found my problem with Protective is I assume someone won't attack me if I have a few archers with cg2-3 and forget to have a decent offensive army. Also I rarely build walls and find castles aren't usually worth it, they become obsolete so soon.

Protective is great for defending your stacks against counter-attacks after you conquer an enemy city. The free drill chance also means that your troops will take less damage, in the long run. Cheep walls/castles means more income from trade routes after Engineering (which even pure warmongers get for Trebs).

The free drill promotion also means that Archery and Gunpowder troops can take Pinch, Cover, and Shock as their first promotion; Drill II opens up Charge and Formation; Drill II-IV reduces damage taken from collateral damage.

Protective is a great trait for offensive warring.

Unless one is playing Agg/Pro (and for the life of me, why you would mod such a thing I don't know), Protective is a great trait. Just think, a slightly slower unit production in favor of jacked up units - all that must be done is keep cities a little bit closer so it's harder to pillage and run

Unless one is playing Agg/Pro (and for the life of me, why you would mod such a thing I don't know),

No need to mod, Toku is agg/pro in Warlords.

Seriously, I'm truly amazed that people think Protective is useful. I've never even been slowed down by a single turn when facing Protective civilizations. I laugh whenever I see them, because I know they effectively only have one trait, because Protective is so useless.

I play with the latest Better AI, too, and I'm not even that big of a warmonger -- I don't like long, drawn-out games, and warmongering slows down the game. My wins take two hours (small/medium), maybe four hours tops (large/huge).

The way I counter anything is simple: bring more units to the front than he has in his city. It never fails. I might lose five out of my ten swordsmen, but I always take the city. I then garrison one archer or longbowman or what-have-you, and move on to the next city. By the time I've burned through most of my first wave, the second wave is there with reinforcements, and so on.

I almost never pillage anything but resources, because I covet my neighbors' towns. However, if I did run into someone who had an overwhelming number of defenders, each with an overwhelming number of defensive promotions, I would simply pillage every single square around every single city. If I can't have your towns, then you can't have them, either. This is devastating. When you're on the receiving end of this sort of tactic, you swear off turtling forever. I sure did.

It's frustrating to me sometimes, but superior numbers always win out, no matter what. Once I realized this, my games doubled in score, I stopped building defensive units, and I cackled with perverse glee as my catapults took down Tokugawa's Infantry behind walls and a castle. No contest.

when you start the game there needs to be an option? "no pillaging"

if you play against humans who have a clue about how to fight, the second you move your stack into their territory, they'll bombard it with cats (before you have a chance to use your cats), then obliterate it with other units (doesn't even matter what kind, because your units will be too damaged to effectively fight back)

and don't say use defensive terrain, what if there is none next to his cities? happens way too often...

so, the multiple drill promotions you can easily get with protective (and rax, maybe a military leader) really help you withstand the onslaught of those catapults

not only do your longbows/crossbows come out with more health out of the fights because of the first strikes, the other archery units in the stack also lose way less hp to collateral damage, and are still capable of standing up to the cats. Enemy cats are only 1 strength below your longbow/corssbow, so after a couple of them suicide, the rest can slaughter any of your units, especially if the enemy gives the suicide cats the "more collateral damage" promo, and the rest get combat)



The whole issue of "whoever gets to attack with cats first, wins" has been bothering me for a while.
So far the best solution I have come up with is don't attack at all during that period (if you don't have eles that is), the period before other high strength units appear (such as knights/muskets).
Or, you could hope the enemy is stupid enough to come into your lands with a stack that only matches yours, but doesn't exceed the size of it. In that case, you wait till he steps on a flat tile, keeping your army two tiles away from him so he doesn't know what's coming, and the second he is vulnerable, unleash your cats on his stack, then obliterate it. Then, while he is like "omfg wtf just happened, you proceed to eat his land".
I've done it so many times, it's really fun!!!

whats with all of you saying protective doesnt suck. thats how you win games? by protecting cities? the AI will pillage instead. offense is by far the best defense in civ 4 anyhow.

its a weak trait, end of story. to boost it, heres a few of my ideas:

- +20-30% strength inside borders
- higher cap on the fortify bonus anywhere (say 50%)
- bonus vs barbs
- healing rate bonus
- cheaper/better forts
- anything... it sucks

if you play against humans who have a clue about how to fight, the second you move your stack into their territory, they'll bombard it with cats (before you have a chance to use your cats), then obliterate it with other units (doesn't even matter what kind, because your units will be too damaged to effectively fight back)

Yes, this is how I react to the AI and/or humans who enter my territory. Siege engines, of course, are immune to collateral damage, so they remain unharmed. I try to take an overwhelming number of siege units for just this purpose. Of course, you can't just waltz into someone's land with 20 catapults and not expect to be crushed by horse archers. After mulling on that, I decided to go with drill longbowmen and/or war elephants to protect the stack. It's not perfect, but it works okay. I still have to retreat sometimes.

and don't say use defensive terrain, what if there is none next to his cities? happens way too often...

Yeah, humans are infamous for leaving you no defensive terrain. I like the idea of a guerrilla longbowman or two being in every stack now, just so that I can maximize the benefit from those few hills I do find.

so, the multiple drill promotions you can easily get with protective (and rax, maybe a military leader) really help you withstand the onslaught of those catapults

I agree. With humans, Protective could end up being useful. Often, I prefer to attack someone who's already at war with another human, so that he's fighting wars on two (or more) fronts. Unfortunately, many humans will cry, "Unfair!" and leave, if you do this. The better ones will crush each player in turn, winning the game.

The whole issue of "whoever gets to attack with cats first, wins" has been bothering me for a while.

I found catapults to be vastly overpowered in Civ 4. Now that Drill helps to reduce collateral damage in Warlords, I don't mind catapults as much, but Knights can slice through your Drill 5 Cho-Ko-Nu like a chainsaw through butter. I learned this the hard way, after getting too excited about my Cho-Ko-Nu.

Then, while he is like "omfg wtf just happened, you proceed to eat his land".

It's definitely fun. I also prefer to attack directly after a failed enemy invasion. Even so, I often suffer from the same kind of over-confidence and underestimate the strategic and tactical skill of my human enemies. Maybe playing against the AI too much does that to you!

when you start the game there needs to be an option? "no pillaging"

That's an intriguing idea.

when you start the game there needs to be an option? "no pillaging"I think that would remove some of the strategy from the game. Unless of course that was your intention? Quite a few of the AI are pillagers and would pretty much have their strategy screwed by such an option. Besides, with the expense of towns and the ammount of gold they give to the pillager, I think it gives quite a nice need for players (and AI alike) to have to defend their territory as well as their cities. This game forces you to focus on more than just defending cities, which I like. I personally don't mind Protective as it is, but maybe something could be done for helping Protective leaders to protect better within their borders, especially in civ4 now that there is more value on pillaging and therefore a bigger need in having to defend the land.

Maybe giving them an attack bonus for attacking enemy units that are within their borders? The bonus would give the player (AI or otherwise) more direct control when using the bonus to defend their territory.

I think that would remove some of the strategy from the game. Unless of course that was your intention? Quite a few of the AI are pillagers and would pretty much have their strategy screwed by such an option.

There's already an "always peace" option, and I can't imagine that having a "no pillaging" option could hurt their strategy any more than that.

Personally, I don't see the point to "always peace" being in a war game, but I guess someone else did.

There's already an "always peace" option, and I can't imagine that having a "no pillaging" option could hurt their strategy any more than that.

Personally, I don't see the point to "always peace" being in a war game, but I guess someone else did.Yeah, good point. I guess maybe quite a lot of people don't perceive the game as a war game, but instead see it as a builders game with a war component in it.

Yeah, good point. I guess maybe quite a lot of people don't perceive the game as a war game, but instead see it as a builders game with a war component in it.

Or half-half perhaps? I mean, its in the box, in the manual and in the marketing you know, you can win by pezce or war, you can be a buildr or a warmongger..No I dont see CIV as a war game, nor as a peacefull game, I just see it as, as hum, as a Civilization game heh...


I'm using a lot of the Better AI mod, and when that stack of 20 Trebs + 10 musketmen appears inb my boards, some drill promotions + the rest can be really usefull you know..
Beside the lower costs of upgrate and buildings..

I think cIV continues the fine tradition of empire building games. The most important component here is managing an empire which here consists of cities that extend cultural dominance over land. You choose your research goals and direct some amount of effort (commerce using research sliders or population using specialists) to get there. You build your cities, adding new infrastructure as it becomes available by research. You improve the land and get access to special resources.

The added component available in almost all empire building games is war. You build units instead of infrastructure. You send those units to opposing civs' territory, often with the goal of taking that territory (by capturing citites), but sometimes just to tear down the land improvements, taking the enemy back to the stone ages (lack of food, production, and commerce, due to lack of improved land).

The latter is optional. The former is not. If it is the other way (with building the empire being optional, war not) then it's a wargame with empire building components. That's a different kind of a game. So while clearly warring is a part of cIV, it's not half the game.

Now, being a builder and fighting defensive wars only (or using diplomacy to avoid wars completely) is possible in cIV. If the AI uses it's land and units smarter, then the player has to go down a level to be able to use the same builder strategy. If the AI wages war more aggressively, again the player has to go down a level to keep the same strategy. The choice is modifying the strategy.

Going down a difficulty level isn't a big deal. To me at least. But modifying the strategy is a good choice as well. Not necessarily going for aggressive war, but tweaking the strategy to be more efficient while still allowing for strong reactive army to be built (reactive meaning "one that is meant to actively take out the possible enemy troops that come to my lands"). Having an army has multiple benefits afterall: your power rating is higher, deterring possible aggressors (they might go pick on someone weaker), and if they come, you can crush them. And if you decide it's time for some amount of offensive, you just need to add a few units (city attack troops - reactive army might have catapults and large numbers of various counter promoted troops while lacking trebs and CR troops) allowing you to change from defense to offense fairly fast if you so decide.

And then again about the Protective trait..

Yes, I think walls and castles are weaker than barracks and drydocks. Even playing defensively, barracks are higher priority than walls. Castles I build rarely if at all (if I go for engineering early, I might build walls and castles to some cities that would gain large benefit of the extra trade), drydocks are similarly fairly rare (I build them to productive coastal cities that I might want to build some ships in). Aggressive wins on the buildings.

On free unit promotions though, I don't think aggressive is that much better than protective. The reason aggressive players devalue protective promotions is probably that they don't value archery troops but do value melee troops.
Archers are mainly used against barbs anyway, and axes do the job just fine. Axes also benefit from the barb-duty xp in that they're going to be used in offense. Archers aren't. However, archers can go for drill line with the barb xp, get promoted to crossbows, and become offensive troops that way.
Longbows I feel are good only for city defense. And honestly, I don't expect anyone to get so far as to actually attack my cities - except newly conquered ones.
Crossbows going the drill line can get to Drill4 with 10 xp if they start as protective. And at that point, they're a real force. Of course you still need siege machines, and you still need spears/pikes, but you don't really need that many CR swords/maces.

I don't go for combat line in promotions. My city attack troops go for CR, my longbows go for CG. Combat line is needed to unlock counter proms (some shock axes/maces is good, formation spears/pike/'phants is good). Drill unlocks these just the same, and crossbows are better anti-melee troops than axes anyway, so I definitelly will value Drill1 Shock crossbow higher than C1 Shock axe. What's left is the anti-mounted troops, where if possible I'll opt for formation 'phants - and neither aggressive nor protective gets promotions to mounted units. Yes, aggressive gets formation spears/pikes easier due to free C1. So they should go for those instead of 'phants I guess.

Maybe some beefing up could be done. But what exactly? 20-30% strength increase in one's cultural borders is simply too much. Higher fortify bonus might ok (but I'd just double it so it's reached in the same five turns). I don't think barb bonuses would be that good an idea. Healing rate bonus - maybe. Forts suck any way you put them, so bonuses to them don't sound useful.

you know elandal, being critical is easy, being constructive afterwards is not. sadly, the latter is whats useful. BRAINSTORM PEOPLE!

and may i remind you thats what this thread was about: how to improve protective.

How about allowing Seige Weapons to benefit from the Protective Trait, by giving them free Drill 1 Promotion?,

I believe Before Warlords was released they were thinking about having the Protective Trait give Drill 1 & 2 Promotions to Archery and Siege Units but then they changed it Changed it to free Drill 1 and CG Promotions to Archery and Gunpowder units.

Free Drill 1 to Seige Weapons Would allow for Higher survival Rate of Cats and trebs etc when going for suicidal collateral damage.

How about allowing Seige Weapons to benefit from the Protective Trait, by giving them free Drill 1 Promotion?,

I believe Before Warlords was released they were thinking about having the Protective Trait give Drill 1 & 2 Promotions to Archery and Siege Units but then they changed it Changed it to free Drill 1 and CG Promotions to Archery and Gunpowder units.

Free Drill 1 to Seige Weapons Would allow for Higher survival Rate of Cats and trebs etc when going for suicidal collateral damage.
Drill 1 really isn't very useful though. I mean....seriously, are you going to have drill promoted cats? I think part of the problem is the woeful inflexibility of archery units. They can do nothing but defend, and even that they can only do on a hill or in a city, and even then they need to be well-promoted to outpace axemen against swords especially. They're a one-trick pony, plain and simple. The boosts for gunpowder units are good though...they cannot normally get drill 1, so it's slightly better than Combat 1 in that respect(though they cannot get further drill promotions), and it still allows you to select pinch out of the box just like an aggressive leader, with the added benefit that they all start with CG1.

Not to mention walls and castles aren't worth the time unless you have stone and are protective, because the AI mostly just pillages and any attempt to take a city is usually laughably pathetic. Basically, the only benefit archery units provide is promoting them to gunpowder units to utilize Drill promotions, and there's nothing wrong with those. Cumulatively, they're deadly, and Drill IV has the added +10% vs. mounted(something your typical rifleman will die for, as they have pretty shoddy odds against cav even with Formation, which you can basically throw out the window because of Pinch) and also a cumulative? -60% collateral damage. But cats eat archers in the open for breakfast, not that the archer would even be the first defender in the open anyways. The only archery unit that really brings anything compelling to stacks are Skirmishers(because they actually have the power to do something, but they don't get protective anyhow) and Crossbowmen. One of those is a UU. Cho-ko-nus are just beastly. But that's it.

So, really, in closing, there's nothing wrong with Protective. But archery units pretty much stink...

you know elandal, being critical is easy, being constructive afterwards is not. sadly, the latter is whats useful. BRAINSTORM PEOPLE!

and may i remind you thats what this thread was about: how to improve protective.

But his opnion has EVERYTHING to do with this thread, about improviments in Protective trait :)

And my opnion and his are simple, this trait does exactely what it supposed to do, so it doesent need further improviments..

By the way, dont forget it is also for gunpowder units..

well... wouldn't it be really easy to take Protective, plus barracks (+3), plus Vassalage (+2?), and theology (+2), and easily get combat 1, CG 1, CG 2, and be close to say... shock?

promos for seige units
50%more effects from walls and castles
-25 to bombard damage
units are hurt when pillaging
50% when foritied
machine guns get promos



btw; city gar 3 drill 1 pinch redcoats are easy to get:)

Protective is already very powerfull, especially with Tokugawa once you get gunpowder. No need to improve it anymore, Although this trait isnt quite as powerfull when using other civs, improving it would make Japan overpowered.

Protective is already very powerfull, especially with Tokugawa once you get gunpowder. No need to improve it anymore, Although this trait isnt quite as powerfull when using other civs, improving it would make Japan overpowered.

Personally havn't played Toku on warlord but I believe he's pretty overpowered already, able to draft 3 Riflies units, Under nationhood civic every turn that each one having 3 promotions + Barracks & Theology you get a 4th promotion. Depending on the number of cities you have and whether you got gobal threatre up and running or not. you could having an army of 15 soilders in 5 turns! That faster then any military production city I know of... while your drafting you can build those seige units eg-trebs or cannons.

My biggest issue with some of the benefits to be added with siege units is that it helps aggressive warfare, which shouldn't be a benefit of a Protective Trait.

I'd favor something like a 10% combat bonus on battles within one's cultural borders. A benefit that wouldn't help you much in taking over an opponent, but would go a long way to helping you "protect" your empire.

Drill 1 really isn't very useful though.

Indeed. Drill1 isn't much. Drill promotion line has a steep curve, and IMHO Drill4 is in most cases better than Combat4. The problem is getting four promotions in the Drill line. That practically requires protective trait and getting those proms on archery unit, as archery units start with the first one thus getting fourth at 10 XP.

Note that promotions are almost always situational - sometimes Combat4 is better, but I feel Drill4 is better more often. As you can't choose the situation, I'd rather lean on the Drill side than Combat side, then just grit my teeth those times Combat4 would be better.

So, really, in closing, there's nothing wrong with Protective. But archery units pretty much stink...

I almost agree with that one, with the exception of Crossbows. They have a solid place in the game. They're probably the only archery unit I consistently use on offensive campaigns. For them, Drill promotion line is great - if you think you can get all the way to Drill4, which practically requires protective trait (or charismatic with its lower xp requirements).

Archers at least are useful early game, with barbs. Longbows almost never engage in combat, just sitting in cities keeping watch.

If there was a stronger position for archery units, protective trait would be a lot better. Now it's slightly lagging, although IMHO not as much as some people seem to think.

One possible improvement for protective that came to my mind would be lower collateral damage taken. But it might be too powerful.

That's what Protective does, except only with archer and gunpowder units.

to all of you saying protective doesnt need improvement, what level do you play on? lets judge the credibility ;)

Protective is already very powerfull, especially with Tokugawa once you get gunpowder. No need to improve it anymore, Although this trait isnt quite as powerfull when using other civs, improving it would make Japan overpowered.

If we're gonna talk about overpowered civs, I wouldnt start with Japan. His ub is situational and Im willing to best most people dont build it or only build a couple. His UU is solid, but against a knight its just a maceman...so it is balanced. And I dont think a trait shouldnt be buffed because of how it might affect other traits...they just buffed creative, organized and expansive, making some leaders just outright nasty (the romans, mehmed come to mind).


The way I counter anything is simple: bring more units to the front than he has in his city. It never fails.

Exactly. Protective doesnt chance this at all. And that is the problem. Sheer numbers will bring down ANY city, I dont care if you're protective or not. If they made it too strong and you couldnt take a city, then it would be overpowered. But leaving it as is, the only time I hesitate to attack a protective civ is if I dont have catapults...which you can pick up quick if you beeline for it, its only a couple techs past alphabet. So worst case scenario, I attack a protective civ second instead of first. Otherwise...I dont think twice, its not a big deal. And I know it has frustrated me when Ive lost a city while being protective...there goes half my trait because if I cant defend then what can I do, considering my buildings go obsolete with musketmen which you can get pretty quick. Heck, Izzy's ub gives better protection then anything protective has against siege weapons!

to all of you saying protective doesnt need improvement, what level do you play on? lets judge the credibility ;)

Does the difficulty level really matter? For me, Prince (for easy games) and Monarch (if I want challenge).

Or maybe you're saying that on higher difficulty levels you can only war, and thus the only thing that matters is if the trait helps you in offensive war? If that's how it is, I couldn't care less about higher difficulty levels, and would balance the traits on mid-levels where you don't need to war to play a good game.

Or maybe you're saying that on higher difficulty levels you can only war, and thus the only thing that matters is if the trait helps you in offensive war? If that's how it is, I couldn't care less about higher difficulty levels, and would balance the traits on mid-levels where you don't need to war to play a good game.

Huhu, that is my opnion as well. ;)

I don't think pro needs more power. I have to upgrade my swordsmen to macemen when I am attacking Churchill's archers.

The only fix to protective that I see is that Machine Gun for all purposes is a pure defensive unit, even moreso than Longbow (mg can't attack however much you'd want to, longbow can). It should get the same protective bonus (free CG1 + Drill1).

Good point. I can't understand why the MG is classified as a siege weapon, other than that they couldn't fit it in any other category.

Siege weapons are 100% offensive, the MG is 100% defensive. Go figure. :confused:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=197612
had a nice idea, though it could not simply be added (as i said there).

but either 50% fortify, OR general 15% defense bonus in borders might work out if you skip one of the auto-promos.

Something else: does the game differ between being aggressor or defender in a state of war?
If so, one could add a miniature golden age when war is declared on you.
10 turns of increased unit production maybe, like a temporary war academy in every city?

Something else: does the game differ between being aggressor or defender in a state of war?
If so, one could add a miniature golden age when war is declared on you.
10 turns of increased unit production maybe, like a temporary war academy in every city?

Not bad idea, not bad at all..

No need to mod, Toku is agg/pro in Warlords.
Yeah - I can start units with at least 6 promotions later in the game.

Marines w/ 3 free gunpowder promotions (combat, drill, city), a couple from west point, instructors, civics, whatever, and then of course amphibious. Or armor, or mech inf, or whatever. Plus that's the only way you can get a drill promotion for gunpowder units except for whatever older units you promote.

I think protective is just fine.

Sorry, joined this thread late. Civ4 is a war game? That says it all. Is it a major marketing failure or a major design failure?

I think Protective just needs better cheap buildings. Maybe in addition to walls and castles.

Basically, how about giving protective a special unit such that, whenever I use it, I automatically win the game?

Sorry, joined this thread late. Civ4 is a war game? That says it all. Is it a major marketing failure or a major design failure?

I think Protective just needs better cheap buildings. Maybe in addition to walls and castles.

Maybe they can have half priced market or grocer.

Sorry, joined this thread late. Civ4 is a war game? That says it all. Is it a major marketing failure or a major design failure?

I think Protective just needs better cheap buildings. Maybe in addition to walls and castles.

How about half priced Jails to decrease War weariness during Defensive Wars. Although you could use the Jails for offensive Wars too.

But I'm not sure if extra half priced buildings are enough to effectively improve the Protective trait.

How about allowing Protective Gunpowder units have the ability to have Drill Promotions. If Protective gunpowder units can have Drill Promotions beyond Drill1 it would make more sense.

This means Protective gunpowder units can promote to Drill 2,3 & 4

What Does everyone else think?

How about Protective gets +1 extra happiness from Walls + Castles? It can be done, as can be seen with Charismatic and Momuments/Broadcast Towers.

My rationale is that your citizens can see that you're investing in their defence, and are reassured by it. Might be powerful with Churchill, but Health provides a balancing factor, and the happiness bonus would expire with Gunpowder/Economics, or whatever techs obsolete Walls/Castles...

A nice, if not overpowering, early game bonus, that would work best on Higher difficulty levels.

Good point. I can't understand why the MG is classified as a siege weapon, other than that they couldn't fit it in any other category.

Siege weapons are 100% offensive, the MG is 100% defensive. Go figure. :confused:

Well, the obvious choice for MGs is a gunpowder unit, however infantry would then be too powerful against it. I think siege was selected because no units get a bonus against siege until Artillery comes along. CG promoted MGs in cities and Drill promoted MGs out in the field are usually selected to defend and are tough to take out (until Artillery and Marines).

You can't give city garrison to machine guns.

True but you can upgrade Grenadiers to MGs. You typically don't need all that many city garrison MGs.

Protective is a decent trait as it is! ...It's just not particularly great for protecting (unless applying the old saying that offence is the best defence) :p If it needs to be modified in any way, it's to rename it to something more appropriate - and then make up a brand new trait to call Protective. For such a trait, the idea of a combat bonus for battles fought within your borders sounds like a decent idea. As it is, I'm quite happy with free drill for crossbowmen and gunpowder units. I consider the free CG more of a symbolic freebie.

How about making Protective castles produce 1 wealth each, which will never be obsoleted?

Something else: does the game differ between being aggressor or defender in a state of war?
If so, one could add a miniature golden age when war is declared on you.
10 turns of increased unit production maybe, like a temporary war academy in every city?Nice suggestion. Takes it into a completely different direction. Maybe the ability to draft without causing unhappiness for 5 turns after they have been attacked might work.

I definitely think it needs improvement. The AI never attacks my cities unless they have a huge force that I don't stand a chance of beating (even if I have protective). I'm sure it's better against human players, but there are rarely any situations where having the protective trait would make any difference against the AI.

Nice suggestion. Takes it into a completely different direction. Maybe the ability to draft without causing unhappiness for 5 turns after they have been attacked might work.

Hm... i like that.
Cheaper draft as defender, no :mad: or less population loss.
That is, ofc, available without nationhood (if you are being attacked).

If nationhood is active, twice the number may be drafted.

Another possibility would be the ability to draft defensive units only if nationhood is not active, with nationhood you get to choose.

Ideas to improve protective trait:
-All units produced start with city defender 1, even if they cannot normally earn it. Archery units still get their drill 1 promotion in addition.

-Units earn more exp, only when defending.

-Protective cities get an additional 10% defense bonus. This stacks with normal culture defenses, as well as wall/castle bonuses. Even cities with no culture or walls will still have a 10% defense bonus.

-Reducing the defense of a protective city takes longer than normal, this extra resistance is added to the one provided by walls and castles.

-Protective civs can research the Archery tech at half cost.

-A protective city that is being bombarded by enemy artillery may draft a single unit, even if nationalism isn't your current civic. This "free draft" still carries happiness penalities, and may only be done once every 10 turns by cities under attack.

-Workers and Settlers become a strength 1 unit that cannot attack. This so they might have a slim chance to survive an animal attack in the early game.

-Protective civs suffer 0 war wearniess when fighting a defensive war, no matter how long it lasts or how many units are lost.

-Protective cities can be raized, but only after the resistance has been crushed. If the protective civ can take the city back before it stops resisting, the city remains in tact.

-In order to pillage a tile within a protective civ's border, a unit must have ALL of its movement points unspent as well as its action. Units that have more than 1 movement will not be able to move and pillage in the same turn.

Obviously I'm not suggesting ALL of these be given to the protective trait, but maybe a few might beef it up a bit.

Protective should build forts faster...

I had another idea.

Ive always taken Protective as a kind of isolationist-themed trait. So what if every protective leader started with mercantilism...the isolationist economy civic? You wouldnt be forced to use it, it would be mostly citizens until you got a library, temple, forge up, it would still have the no trade route caveat. But at the same time it would help your economy, giving you a peace-time bonus. And it might alter some people's tech path...going for pacifism or caste system, delaying banking. Eventually you would get the tech for mercantilism along with everybody else, but the sharp protective leader could/would leverage early mercantilism into a early-to-mid game bonus.

-Units earn more exp, only when defending. .
good idea but might be overpowered with great wall/leadership promo


-Protective cities get an additional 10% defense bonus. This stacks with normal culture defenses, as well as wall/castle bonuses. Even cities with no culture or walls will still have a 10% defense bonus. .good walls&castles willl be useful(howabout this idea for all civs?)



-Reducing the defense of a protective city takes longer than normal, this extra resistance is added to the one provided by walls and castles. .
i getthe idea but i dont like the idea


-Protective civs can research the Archery tech at half cost. .
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=4915521#post4915521



-A protective city that is being bombarded by enemy artillery may draft a single unit, even if nationalism isn't your current civic. This "free draft" still carries happiness penalities, and may only be done once every 10 turns by cities under attack. .
might be overpowered


-Workers and Settlers become a strength 1 unit that cannot attack. This so they might have a slim chance to survive an animal attack in the early game..
how about +x :stenght: promo to civiliions units


-Protective civs suffer 0 war wearniess when fighting a defensive war, no matter how long it lasts or how many units are lost. .
might be overpowered maybe -50%:mad: to charismatic leaders


-Protective cities can be raized, but only after the resistance has been crushed. If the protective civ can take the city back before it stops resisting, the city remains in tact. .



-In order to pillage a tile within a protective civ's border, a unit must have ALL of its movement points unspent as well as its action. Units that have more than 1 movement will not be able to move and pillage in the same turn.

.
good idea

After reading all this, I see two things:

1. Aggressive leaders get a bonus ALL the time to melee and gunpowder units no matter if they are in city tiles, attacking, defending, neutral ground, etc..,

2. Protective leaders get a bonus ONLY IN CITY TILES to archery units

My idea would be to have these two traits balanced a bit. The AI likes to destroy as much as it can before ever reaching the city which renders the city garrison useless.

Idea 1 - Check mark option for "Raze City Improvements" on or off

or

Idea 2 - Follow the idea of what a true aggressor is and a true protector is:

Aggressive trait - bonus xp when in foreign territory, normal in neutral, and penalty when in own territory. Instead of a few units getting an upgrade, all units get an upgrade. And make it unique like: +15% when attacking in foreign, +10% in neutral, +5% in own. That way it doesn't follow the normal upgrade tree, but all units get the bonus.

Protective trait - Same idea here... Bonus xp when in own territory, normal in neutral, penalty in foreign. All units get an upgrade unique from the normal upgrade tree: +25% when defending in city, +20% in cultural boundry, +10% in neutral, and none in foreign (you shouldn't be defending, you should be attacking anyway).

This way barracks still play an important role as you don't start out with one of the first upgrades on the tree, but all units gain a benefit.

Edit: There is no leader with both traits, as that could be too powerfull I think.

The drill promo helps outside of cities (assuming you get the FS) and unlocks the same promos combat does.
There is no leader with both traits, as that could be too powerfull I think.
Just because you can't get open borders with Tokugawa doesn't mean he doesn't exist.

how about tacking on 25% or 50% more combat points toward a Great General while fighting within your boarders, like the Great Wall.

how about tacking on 25% or 50% more combat points toward a Great General while fighting within your boarders, like the Great Wall.

I still think that somewhere you should get a defensive bonus reguardless within your culture boundry instead of just the city.

Edit: but yes, good idea on the combat bonus.

[QUOTE=Just because you can't get open borders with Tokugawa doesn't mean he doesn't exist.[/QUOTE]

I meant there is no leader with both aggressive and protective traits, yet.

Edit: don't know how to use the quote correctly yet, sorry.

Protective leaders get a bonus ONLY IN CITY TILES to archery units


...and gunpowder units.

I meant there is no leader with both aggressive and protective traits, yet.Tokugowa is Aggressive/Protective.

"Personally, I don't see the point to "always peace" being in a war game, but I guess someone else did." one of my most fun/suspenseful games was in always peace, with only domination victory enabled. i had to gain lots of land tile flips (some city flips but they weren't actually necessary) to win, and couldn't take any by war. it was challenging in a completely different way and lots of fun for me. i have always been the type to think in SP that it's your game, play how you want and ignore (no offense meant to any of) the "so-and-so isn't a real victory" types. the game is designed to appeal to different folks in different ways and that's a great thing, it doesn't limit anybody it just adds more options, i <3 that.

back on real topic:

i agree with most that half-price castles are a waste. they go obsolete way too early and aren't that useful even during their lifespan.

"How about allowing Protective Gunpowder units have the ability to have Drill Promotions. If Protective gunpowder units can have Drill Promotions beyond Drill1 it would make more sense."

i've seen that in action in a back-door way and it might be overpowered. for hubby's first game using Warlords, he picked Toku, he wanted to try out the agg/pro combo and liked the idea of the UU with those traits and the UB (it had never dawned on me until that game that the shale plant provides power, as in even if you don't have coal, nifty even not counting the +10% hammers). i was cyrus, with immortals. we did lots of barb farming early on for exp.

granted, this experience was on a MP team game, and at a low level (warlord i think) since it was his first. so we had many advantages that don't usually apply (lots of money to share, so we were able to upgrade a lot of promoted vets which can be really really powerful, we were able to mostly split military duties--he led the foot soldiers, i was the royal canadian yaksman division). so if you want to skip this since it is clearly atypical, feel free.

we rocked. hardcore. he got to drill4 on a lot of early units, and kept them around to upgrade to riflemen/infantry later (the game didn't last to mob inf or tanks). he ended up using quite a few offensively on opponents--even the ones we didn't have a military-tech advantage on it was a slaughterfest. and i'd made some medic units early on, boy howdy even if the enemy suicided cats/trebs/you name it on our SODs in the field, hubby's troops would start next turn barely scratched, ready to go. he used his first GG on a drill4 samurai or something and then went up the CR line, he wanted to see how that worked out and that guy was a killing machine. our combined combined forces were amazing.

drill4 is amazing, and can be used offensively in the right circumstances (we had better circumstances than most, of course). the getting to drill4, and keeping those units around to upgrade them to CR later is the challenge, and probably impossible in real person vs. person MP (which i haven't tried). but when you can do it, you'll be impressed. everybody knows that drill4 is far better than drill3, but not everybody has seen it in action, particularly offensively, and i assure you it's impressive.

just sharing a unique perspective, admittedly in hard to achieve normally circumstances.

Drill 4 is the single best non-warlord promotion in the game. The problem is, to get it you have to waste promotions on Drill1 and Drill2. I'd rather have drill 4 than combat 4, but I'd rather have combat 1, 2, 3 and 4 than drill 1, 2, 3 and 4.

Tokugowa is Aggressive/Protective.

You are right, I overlooked that. That's dumb imo. How can you be both?

Tokugowa is Aggressive/Protective.

and over powered im triing to put i right

Prot is nice if you're playing Raging Barbs. In fact I tend to go Chm/Prot if I'm doing that for maximum archer/infantry dominance.

How can you be both?

I would classify it as being militaristic.

He makes sure his cities are properly defended before he marches out to war. It really makes perfect sense, and any good warlord should do it that way. I don't find it to be over powered, his cities crumble in the end reguardless.

My suggestion: drop all current bonuses and instead make protective units impossible to 'bypass' by enemies, as was the case with all units in previous civ versions.
I.e.: in order to move while in the vicinity of a protective unit there must be at least one open tile between the destination tile and the prot. unit, or the latter must first be destroyed.

They'd then at least be able to actually defend an empire, rather than hole up in cities while everything around them is being laid to waste.

You want zone of control back?

I'd rather see the Civ3 system of a free shot implemented. And Protective civs could receive a bonus free shot at units passing by in the open.

You could add another promotion tree to the game, even...

Right now spiritual is actually a far better defensive trait. I just switch to nationalism or slavery, draft/slave a unit when under threat and then switch back when im out of danger.

My suggestion to fix protective civs.
Make protective civs able to draft units at any time, even when out of nationalism. When in nationalism a draft should have half the unhappy face duration for a protective civ.

The draft without nationalism will still have the minimum 7 pop required for the draft so it should be balanced as there is no easy way to abuse it in ancient times.

You want zone of control back?

I'd rather see the Civ3 system of a free shot implemented. And Protective civs could receive a bonus free shot at units passing by in the open.

You could add another promotion tree to the game, even...
Oh, that's would be just as well for me :) It would indeed open up a couple of new options, such as an additional promotion tree.

My suggestion to fix protective civs.
Make protective civs able to draft units at any time, even when out of nationalism. When in nationalism a draft should have half the unhappy face duration for a protective civ.


I think that's a sketchy way to do it. I like how the current game traits don't add additional abilities or brand-new specials, but rather improve existing ones or simply grant abilities that are available to everyone for a cheaper price. Going back to what Joe said, you can add an entire system to the game, and then give Protective a leg up in that system (much like how Aggressive gets a leg up in the Combat promotion tree or Philosophical leaders get a leg up in the great person births).

My suggestion: drop all current bonuses and instead make protective units impossible to 'bypass' by enemies, as was the case with all units in previous civ versions.

That actually would be a pretty nice trait, especially for raging barbs. No bonuses but gives all of your units a 1 space zone of control around it's position.

I think that's a sketchy way to do it. I like how the current game traits don't add additional abilities or brand-new specials, but rather improve existing ones or simply grant abilities that are available to everyone for a cheaper price. Going back to what Joe said, you can add an entire system to the game, and then give Protective a leg up in that system (much like how Aggressive gets a leg up in the Combat promotion tree or Philosophical leaders get a leg up in the great person births).

Well i don't see it being that different to philosphicals benefits.
Philosophical civs get +100% great people even without the pacifism civic, essentially it's the civic for free. When they actually do take the pacifism civic the bonuses add.
So protective should get the nationalism civic for free and then when they get actually do go for the nationalism civic they should get an additional benefit.

Well i don't see it being that different to philosphicals benefits.
Philosophical civs get +100% great people even without the pacifism civic, essentially it's the civic for free. When they actually do take the pacifism civic the bonuses add.
So protective should get the nationalism civic for free and then when they get actually do go for the nationalism civic they should get an additional benefit.

The major difference is that all civilizations, irregardless of civics, can generate great people points at any time. Pacifism improves this already existing game function, as does the Philosophical trait (stacking is not the same as "civic for free"). Not all civilizations can draft at any time, irregardless of civics, so your analogy does not hold. Even giving Protective civs a "Nationhood" bonus doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

Yes that's right, other civs can't draft without changing civics, that's the whole point.

As it stands now a spiritual civ can switch as soon as they are threatened into slavery+nationalism and slave+draft units immediatly. That is far more powerful for defence than protectionist is currently.

Also you can't draft until your cities reach a certain size, so it isn't going to become a rush trait and draft never gives outwardly offensive units, it only gives archers/longbows/musketeers/rifles/infantry/mechinf.

Even giving Protective civs a "Nationhood" bonus doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

How so? Giving half unhappy faces for drafting is no different than what the aztecs altar does for slavery.

Also you can't draft until your cities reach a certain size, so it isn't going to become a rush trait and draft never gives outwardly offensive units, it only gives archers/longbows/musketeers/rifles/infantry/mechinf.

Actually if you research Nationalism Before gunpowder and Switch to Nationhood, You draft Macemen, No archery Units are drafted But I guess Someone could change it for Protective Civs.


How so? Giving half unhappy faces for drafting is no different than what the aztecs altar does for slavery.

You meant half unhappy citizens under the nationhodd civic right?

Instead of half unahppy citizens with nationhood, how about half unhappy citizens, when drafted during a war?

How about allowing Protective Gunpowder units have the ability to have Drill Promotions. If Protective gunpowder units can have Drill Promotions beyond Drill1 it would make more sense


That's a Great idea... I think I posted this idea in an earlier post... maybe I didn't express it right... doesn't matter. It would make Toku Overpowered, possibly Churchchill too.

Here's an Idea to Balance the Drill promotion line for Gunpowder units, make it so that any gunpowder units that have 'Combat' Promotions cannot receive any new Drill Promotions.

So for example if your Gunpowder unit has Drill1 and Combat 1 promotions it cannot receive any new Drill promotions once it gains the experience.

but if your gunpowder unit does not have any combat promotions it can receive Drill promotions.

This obviously makes Toku in the drill promotion sense a little bit weaker because all his gunpowder units can't get drill promotions because they also get combat 1 due to his aggressive trait. This will keep the game balanced but people will see his traits as a bit of a negative synergy if this was implemented.

Obviously NO melee unit should get drill promotions..:S Drill4 & CR3 Samurais sound insanely overpowered. :S

Although once you get Drill 4, you won't have any problems going for combat promotions.

For cheap buildings, I'd say giving cheap hospitals to Protective Civs, because hospitals, heal your units by an extra 10HP per turn, if your unit is injured. Even if the hospital comes late it's better then walls and castles... and I actually Personally build hospitals in my cities. I rarely build walls or castles

Another Idea I thought up is... double movement to all Military units, but only within your own broaders to a protective Civs, so if someone backstabs you, you Military units can quickly rush to aid in the denfece of your cities and broaders. If someone comes pillaging with mounted units your spears and Pikes and quickly take them down with their double movement and your opponent's pillagers will have a tough time escaping.

Double movement to mounted units in your own broaders maybe overpowered though... can move 4 tiles, not including road, forest or hills.

Maybe make this only available to Melee, Archery and Gunpowder units. If it's still overpowered, make it only available during war.

I would suggest that half of the way to make protective civs more useful is just in making archery units in general more useful. Something like giving archers str4 (but maybe only 25% city defence bonus and maybe a penalty on offense) so that they're a more generally useful defensive unit, and one that can hold its own defending in the field.

Another suggestion (someone may have already suggested it) is to allow protective civs some sort of bonus to fortifying archery/gunpowder - e.g that they can fully fortify in a single turn, or fortify over 5 turns up to 50%, or something. An "entrenchment" promo or something. So moving archers out for more proactive defence in the field would be favoured and help prevent pillaging.

I would suggest that half of the way to make protective civs more useful is just in making archery units in general more useful.

Problem would be dealing with them as defenders on hills. They can already be fairly tough without city garrison. Add city garrison, an extra first strike, hill defense and culture defense and you need lots of troops to take them down. Stronger longbowmen in a city on a hill? No thanks.

Plus I am a fan of crossbowmen. When Im a protective civ I'll build lots of them and go crazy with first strikes. Their only fear is mounted units, something pikes and even macemen can deal with. I think crossbowmen are underrated by a lot of people.

Protective just needs "something". After playing a game a couple days ago and making a point to build castles, I was astonished to see how quickly they go obsolete. Add that to the fact you needs walls for them (basically a "build 2 buildings to get 1") and the combined cost is hardly worth the extra trade, AND the defense bonus is muted by a unit that comes around maybe a couple techs behind it in gunpowder units...getting them at 1/2 price is not that great at all. After my game I saw protective as the "first strike trait" and not much more.

Maybe buffing castles would help. Giving them some kind of coin bonus in addition to their trade bonus, and make them able to be built far longer. I like the citadel because of its siege bonus...of course she isnt protective though.

I like the give gunpowders units access to drill2-4.

Protective helping against barbs would go a very, very long way towards making it a useful trait.

As it stands now, I don´t play China, Japan or any other protective leader.

Actually a better option might be improving Drill 1

Perhaps give it some extra resistance to collateral damage

Perhaps Drill 1= 1 First Strike (Not 1 First Strike Chance)
and
Drill 4 = 1 First Strike +1 First Strike Chance (rather than 2 First Strikes)

so Drill 4 would be the same but Drill 1 would be better.

(you could also give the bonus to Recon units... as a sort of bonus v. barbs)

How about this improvemnt to castles? which is an improvement to all Civs in the game.

Castles now give +2XP to Seige Weapons, The Spainish Citadal (replaces Castles) Give +5XP to Seige Weapons post patch 2.08. It'd be similar to the normal Stable and the Mongolian Ger and you'd finally have a reason to build those half priced Walls and castles with the Protective trait, makes sense doesn't it???|

The castles obviously still have the weakness of becoming obsolete with economics, this is subjective... we could make it that the trade route becomes obsolete but the XP does not, or find another tech that will obsolete the castles at a later date... maybe Artillery... or some other tech you guys could come up with.

How about this improvemnt to castles? which is an improvement to all Civs in the game.

Castles now give +2XP to Seige Weapons, The Spainish Citadal (replaces Castles) Give +5XP to Seige Weapons post patch 2.08. It'd be similar to the normal Stable and the Mongolian Ger and you'd finally have a reason to build those half priced Walls and castles with the Protective trait, makes sense doesn't it???|

The castles obviously still have the weakness of becoming obsolete with economics, this is subjective... we could make it that the trade route becomes obsolete but the XP does not, or find another tech that will obsolete the castles at a later date... maybe Artillery... or some other tech you guys could come up with.


This makes perfect sense.

Does the +5xp become obsolete right now as it is with the Citadal?

This makes perfect sense.

Does the +5xp become obsolete right now as it is with the Citadal?

The Spanish Citadal becomes obsolete with Economcis like a normal castle, the +5XP increase becomes obsolete also

btw can someone mod this and also include the drill2-4 so we can test it out to see how balanced it is? thanks sorry I don't know nothing about Codes

Improved Protective (http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/98030/ImprovedProtective.zip) Put in your custom mods folder.

Problem would be dealing with them as defenders on hills. They can already be fairly tough without city garrison. Add city garrison, an extra first strike, hill defense and culture defense and you need lots of troops to take them down. Stronger longbowmen in a city on a hill? No thanks.

Plus I am a fan of crossbowmen. When Im a protective civ I'll build lots of them and go crazy with first strikes. Their only fear is mounted units, something pikes and even macemen can deal with. I think crossbowmen are underrated by a lot of people.

Protective just needs "something". After playing a game a couple days ago and making a point to build castles, I was astonished to see how quickly they go obsolete. Add that to the fact you needs walls for them (basically a "build 2 buildings to get 1") and the combined cost is hardly worth the extra trade, AND the defense bonus is muted by a unit that comes around maybe a couple techs behind it in gunpowder units...getting them at 1/2 price is not that great at all. After my game I saw protective as the "first strike trait" and not much more.

Maybe buffing castles would help. Giving them some kind of coin bonus in addition to their trade bonus, and make them able to be built far longer. I like the citadel because of its siege bonus...of course she isnt protective though.

<Quoted with reference to others posting in the thread about castles as well>

I think the problem with the castle is it gives a variety of bonuses with no particular focus. Already, it reduces bombardment damage from artillery since the patch, it gives a defense bonus, and it gives a trade route. Unfortunately, most of these become useless at Economics. I will build castles in coastal cities because that trade route can be worth 6 commerce per turn or more if you have good connections to foreign empires and a harbor.

@TheArchduke: You are missing out by avoiding China. The synergy they receive with their UU is quite good, and it causes collateral damage. The Crossbow is a great unit to have...and even better when it's a killer with two free promotions.

@notagoodname: I thought you were going to modify something about Nationhood instead of the unhappiness, like give them a two-for-one or something or enable them to draft without the civic. You didn't really specify, so that's why I responded in that manner.

Improved Protective (http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/98030/ImprovedProtective.zip) Put in your custom mods folder.

i will try that
bump

[QUOTE=Powerslave;4872519]I'd say it's pretty much hopeless. Protective was a very bad idea to start with, and making every Asian civilization protective was even stupider. Mansa Musa was lucky to escape being saddled with Protective.


You realize that Mali is in Africa, not Asia, right...?

When he said Mali was lucky not to get hit by the protective trait, what he meant was making the offensively challanged skirmishers even more challanged. Most people know Mali is in Africa.

Protective is a niche skill I suppose. I don't like it, but the drills are certainly welcome. And I actually disagree about protective being useless in multiplayer. It's actually that much more annoying for the enemy, an edge that your opponant needs to do something about. You don't RELY on 2 archers per city to defend your empire, but it's still a part of your defense, and it's still helpful. And of course, drill 4 Chinese UU are totally cruel.

whould city gar1-2 drill 1-2 be strong enough

Protective is stronger than Aggressive, in some ways.
1. Combat I gives access to the shock etc. promos
2. Drill I also gives access to that
PLUS protective gives a nice extra +20% city garrison, which gives access to +25% city garrison AND with vassalage and/or theology +30% city garrison.
3. ...but protective only grants those promotions to archery and gunpowder units. But hey? Crossbowmen are aggressive units, your riflemen can have pinch in one promo. What more can you ask for?
4. You can have fewer units guarding your city = less upkeep = more money.

Protective does NOT need an upgrade.

Thanks, Skippy--that's what people need to realize. Protective isn't that bad, and already 20% bonus on city defense is great.

@kristopherb: Can you say overpowered? All archery and gunpowder units getting +40% or so city defense (or is it 45?) and 1-2 first strikes and reduced collateral damage? Please!

Ever gotten a regular archer with an experience of 58? This protective one won a war for me while playing Churchill.

To my experience: when I encounter a non-protective AI civilization my first reaction is: that is an easy target! I don't like it when I have protective neighbours. They have strong archers and those cities have early walls.

When I think of the worst neighbour I could meet it would be a creative and protective one.

@kristopherb: Can you say overpowered? All archery and gunpowder units getting +40% or so city defense (or is it 45?) and 1-2 first strikes and reduced collateral damage? Please!

the reason why i asked is because i cooked a small mod increasing the power of traits

I don't know whether giving all siege units including machine guns free drill I and city garrison promotions might make a difference in every epic games.

Protective is definitely underpowered in multiplayer. No-one in their sane mind will lead a group of archers out to conquer, and sitting 2 archers per city aren't the best defensive system out there either. The oracle-forge-engineer-machinery gambit with Qin is about the only use for protective really, and he'll need defense from his team before CKN's can rule the fields.

Out of all the suggestions, I believe the best one is walls giving +1 hapiness for protective civs. It's not something I would build automatically even with that bonus. Actually, a better solution is the option for the player to build a castle without building a wall, also costing 75 hammers (halved from 150), and give the +1 hapiness to the castle. If they have stone it becomes a castle in every city for a small boast, and gives that civ some flavour.

Protective is definitely underpowered in multiplayer. No-one in their sane mind will lead a group of archers out to conquer, and sitting 2 archers per city aren't the best defensive system out there either. The oracle-forge-engineer-machinery gambit with Qin is about the only use for protective really, and he'll need defense from his team before CKN's can rule the fields.

Out of all the suggestions, I believe the best one is walls giving +1 hapiness for protective civs. It's not something I would build automatically even with that bonus. Actually, a better solution is the option for the player to build a castle without building a wall, also costing 75 hammers (halved from 150), and give the +1 hapiness to the castle. If they have stone it becomes a castle in every city for a small boast, and gives that civ some flavour.

+1 Happiness to Walls may work, but not +1 Happiness to Castles as by that point in time you should have many methods of increasing your hapiness cap, eg- Luxuries, Culture Slider, Temples from Religion, Hereditary Rule Civic etc so the Extra happiness from castles is Negligible but my idea of giving Siege units an extra 2XP from castles, would definitely be useful in the game although it obsoletes quite quickly with economics.

The Idea of building castles without a wall requirement is an interesting idea, but I think the wall requirement was put in place, so you can reach 100% city defence when you build castles. Although I guess you can seperate walls and castles giving you 50% city defence each.

Protective is an exceptionally boring and weak trait. The huge flaw in the Protective trait is that if your opponent isn't attacking your cities, Protective effectively does nothing. When are any of the other traits ever not useful? Financial will always earn you extra commerce. Creative will always give extra culture. Organized will always save you money on civic upkeep.

"Well, if I'm never at war, then Aggressive isn't useful."
"Or if I never use specialists, then Philosophical isn't useful."
"If I never build wonders, then Industrial isn't useful."

This is the thing though. Even for those "situational" traits, you can always push their advantages. Aggressive isn't useful if you aren't at war, but you can actively pursue war. Philosophical isn't useful if you don't prioritize great people, but you can if you wanted to. I’ve never really thought of these traits as genuinely situational because I could always play to their advantages. I could even say the same for Imperialistic (a trait I thought would be super broken until I remembered that settler spam doesn’t work in CivIV), but the idea of playing to Protective’s advantages is mind boggling…

“I’m going to wait for my opponent to declare war on me and then sit around in my cities, waiting for him to attack me.”

If you can even call that playing to your advantages. Even supposing you instigated the war, you’d still have to hole up in your cities and wait for your enemy to attack to “benefit” from the trait. Whether or not the trait is useful depends almost entirely on what your opponent chooses to do. The hilarious irony of the Protective trait is that the situations in which it’s most useful are generally the ones that you want to avoid in the first place. Do you really want to fortify in your city while the enemy lays waste to your countryside? Do you really want a trait that shines out when your cities are at risk of being captured?

Now defense is a good thing; I wouldn’t train City Garrison II longbowmen if I didn’t believe that to be true. But actual city defenders are only half (if even that) of an effective defense. City defenders help ensure that only dedicated attacks will take your cities, but you’re in serious trouble if you can’t actually force the attackers off your territory. Walling up in your cities isn’t an ideal strategy, and it’s certainly not something I want to devote a trait to. This is also why Aggressive is just as useful, if not more so, on defense as Protective. Archers and longbowmen don’t have the base strength to fight effectively outside of cities, so melee units are essential even when defending. Aggressive’s free Combat I promotion is useful here, but it’s doubly useful when it provides easy access to promotions like Shock and Pinch. After gunpowder enters play, this disadvantage is somewhat lessened since gunpowder units are good attackers and defenders, but that’s far too long to wait for this glaring shortcoming to go away.

The funny thing is, even if I didn't use specialists or build wonders, I would at least get use out of the building production bonus (university and forge) for the Philosophical and Industrial traits. Protective gets a production bonus for walls and castles, which is bad for a trait because it again relies on a city being attacked to come into play. Aside from that, walls and castles are bad buildings for bonuses because you only want to build them in border cities. As a Creative leader, I could build libraries in most, maybe all, of my cities, if not for the research bonus, then for the culture and scientist slots. How many cities am I going to want to build walls in? Not many, maybe even none. Then to add insult to injury (or maybe the other way around, I forget), THEY GO OBSOLETE. I’m laughing as I’m typing this right now; it’s just reason on top of reason on top of reason why Protective’s fast walls/castles is such a miserable bonus.

So yes, Protective could definitely use a rehaul. Here are some suggestions to improve it (mix and match these as you choose, I don’t mean to say that Protective get all of these bonuses):
• Units receive a small strength bonus (10%-20%) when in combat inside your cultural borders, whether attacking or defending. Archery and gunpowder units get fewer and/or different promotions to balance this effect out (ex: free Combat I instead of City Garrison I or Drill I).
• You can draft a small number of units per turn.
• Units suffer less collateral damage (20%-33% less).
• In addition to +100% production for walls and castles, +100% production for bunkers and bomb shelters.
• +25% production for archery units (NOT gunpowder units).

Actually, Protective really can be an offensive trait. I can't think of why free Drill 1 would not always be useful in a war, even when you're going on the offensive. And the free CG1 would help you hold cities you just conquered, which can make a lot of difference if your opponent is not much weaker than you. Granted, early on, it might not be very applicable unless you're using crossbows (there's not much love for archery units, is there?). Once you hit gunpowder units, however, this trait might be giving practically your entire standing army free promotions.

Although I wouldn't call it one of the better traits, I'm beginning to think that Protective is really underrated.

Although DigitalBoy brings up a solid argument, I am in Aelf's camp--Protective can be used offensively. I agree the building bonus is less than useful, but holding those new cities you just captured, especially with your garrison/drill gunpowder units later in the game, is essential. The AI can counterattack pretty viciously, and I like having that free 20% on all my rifles, grenadiers, and infantrymen (I rarely get to Mech. Infantry), not to mention the first strike chance.

It can make the difference in an offensive war...not as strongly as Aggressive or Charismatic, I think, but it still makes a difference.

So, it's not useless, just the least useful of any trait that could be used...

However, after scrolling down the choose leader screen, most of the protective civs aren't that bad: noone's ever complained about Toku, Churchhill or Wang Kon as being "weaker" civs (tangent - but Toku was SO much better as organized!). The only protective leaders that aren't really good civs, IMO, are Saladin and Mao, and even they aren't that bad. It seems the developers already took into account the lackluster appeal of the trait when pairing them with the leader's other trait, UB + UU, and starting tech.

I agree that, on paper, when isolating the trait, it doesn't stand up to most others. But leaders with the trait are OK, so I guess it's fine. Still, if we impulsively need to balance every aspect of the game, even those that are made up for elsewhere, my ideas would be either:
1.)land inside of a protective civ's cultural borders cannot be pillaged by other civs, or
2.) Protective civ's units don't take collateral damage - WHAT? But half of my stack in EVERY SINGLE GAME are catapults? What will I ever do? - Gee, you may have to actually implement a strategy rather than following the same recipe every single time...

Sorry, had to vent :)

1.)land inside of a protective civ's cultural borders cannot be pillaged by other civs, or

I like this idea but we shouldn't forbid pillaging as it will be too overpowered and it will remove an effective strategy off the game. But we can have it to take two turns to pillage instead of one. Pillage is still a viable strategy but it can now be easier countered .

One problem though , Ranged units aren't the faster so the protective player won't be using the unit's that are boosted by his trait. Still i like this idea.

Also Walls should give a 20% production boost to archery units and that is good enough i believe.

Chu-ku-nu (spelling) , Crossbowmen don't have anything to be jealous from other units really . So Protective can be used effectively with offensive troops . With no(reduced) pillaging and with faster production the protective civilization can easier prepare for war and fight war on his own territory.

Idea 3) Taken from a mod . Add an archery unit with the ability marksmanship . These units can select to attack the weaker unit from the enemy's stack.

WHAT? But half of my stack in EVERY SINGLE GAME are catapults? What will I ever do? - Gee, you may have to actually implement a strategy rather than following the same recipe every single time...

Sorry, had to vent :)

Not that collateral damage isn't extremely annoying sometimes, but if you buy what the game developers say, collateral damage is a necessary aspect of CivIV's combat. The stack of doom is powerful enough even with its implementation (is that even a word?). Reduction in collateral damage sure, but eliminate it entirely, even for a single trait?

The "build forts faster" comment was awesome. Way too many people don't see humour when it's there.

About the walls and castles thing: how about a free wall in every city that was founded (as in, not captured)? If they decide to give Far Eastern civs protective, well, are there Asian cities without walls?

on his own territory.

Idea 3) Taken from a mod . Add an archery unit with the ability marksmanship . These units can select to attack the weaker unit from the enemy's stack.

which mod?

which mod?
Fall from Heaven.

I think immunity from collateral damage is questionable...and, in fact, the free drill promotion puts you closer to Drill 2 that reduces collateral damage. Instead of this, I could see a reduction in collateral damage taken, but not its elimination completely.

what if protective trait stayed as it is but included something like forts having a -1 to enemy adjacent square's movement? effectively making forts useful only for them and rare circumstances? maybe this could be applied to ANY fort a protective leader builds, including allied and enemy territory, and determined by who controls it? THAT would be scary, but useful, and make a protective leader essential for teamwork, even if not on front.

maybe take out the cheap walls, for balance. Protective seems useless unless you can also "protect" your land. maybe make forts barrage-able at the same time, and the city garrison promo working in forts. Also, a full depletion of barrage destroys the improvement altogether.

I can imagine nasty games where all the protective leader's units are protecting the perimeter of their fat crosses and not stacking in their cities.

Maybe the great wall wonder turns into a line of forts just outside of the current borders, but dissolves when in a enemies' territory? Perhaps that's too much. But, certainly more great wall-like.

ALSO:
I see a lot of posts about improving seige for protective, but no posts refuting this and mentioning that Firaxis DID think of that. If you look back at the Warlords previews, you'll find that Firaxis was advertising this as a Protective trait, but mysteriously axed it 6 weeks or so before Gold. My guess is they tested it in beta and found too many players were using it to attack with cata stacks, and not be "protective".

Protective trait does not need to be improved, toned down maybe, but not improved, archers re really good at defending, with the free CG promotion, they can advance easier, and really make their cities a pain to take down. Comparing to agressive, it gives a free combat 1 (+10% effectiveness) whereas protective gives City Garrison (+20% when defending a city). Imo, if you use your archers for city defense, which I honestly hope you do, protective is more than good enough.

What's wrong with that lone warrier defending my 5 cities until 1500AD :confused:

Alright, I've done some thinkings, watch out.

I'm in the camp that thinks Protective is in need of a little boost. If I was in charge of improving the protective trait here's what I'd consider:

1. The spirit/context of protective. This has led me to consider a couple new things that I don't think have been suggested so far. I'm no history buff by any means, but it seems that protective nations could have some sort of bonus regarding vassal states or diplomatic bonuses. Protective maybe should extend beyond defending one's own land, to protecting neighbors or vassals (think Churchill). If procective is about defense, why should promotions be given that increase seige units? (Other than machine guns, which I agree should be included w/ protective bonuses) or other promotions which could be used offensively? Recon could be used to better anticipate attacks; line of sight improvements for explorers? Decreasing draft penalties would help you better prepare but that's very specific, you have to be in a certain civic, etc.

2. Any bonus should be minimal and simple. Many of the suggestions in this thread would probably flip Protective from being a less-useful trait to the strongest. If you want some balance, you probably don't have to do much. Also it can't be too complex, or outside of the context of other traits. It might be cool to have a cheap hospital that heals units twice as fast but that would give protective leaders essential a unique building. No other traits grants all those civs a unique building, so it should be avoided. Tinkering with specific combat mechanics for protective civs does even more; it changes the whole mechanics of combat. It takes me about 2 seconds to think of ways to exploit it; Increase combat odds in my borders, exp gained in my borders, no pillaging, etc I think it would change the dynamics of the game too much. Plus I don't think it's the spirit of the procective leaders of the world to just lure people into fighing wars on their home turf.

3. Pillage problem. I've made a point to play at least one game with each leader. I think protective can be used nicely and agree that they give you some nice military flexibility, but I've run into this frustration several times. My cities are so nicely defended that any wars I get into result exclusively in countryside plunder. "Please, just come attack my cities" I find myself pleeding, but they don't. (Please no lecture on repelling pillagers b/c I can do it) I find myself feeling like I've defend my cities but not my civilization, and I don't like it. I do like the idea of giving protective 100% vs barbarians (or limited to 100% within cultural borders). This seems to be totally in like with the spirit of protective (and may be why China ended up with two protective leaders, thinking historically).

4. Indirectly improving. If you improved castles/walls that would indirectly improve protective traits. If I polled how many people build castles I'm guessing it would be pretty low, but if you improved them for everyone, well you get the point. How to do that? Probably subject for another thread, but I wish they didn't go obsolete so quick. What do castles give to their civs today? Tourism, commerce, culture? What if you couldn't build them anymore, but the effect of that one trade route remained? Bet a lot more people would build them then.

So that's what I think, sorry it was in so many words. Summary:

+100% vs barbs (testing to show if it should only be within cultural borders)
Improve castles for everyone
Possibly some vassal bonus

I just don't think they need much to level the playing field.

Whatever people say, it is underpowered. That's said, I really don't think protective trait need a major overhaul. My suggestions:

Direct improvement:

+10% bonus (both attack and defence) fighting within cultural border. This compensates for the lack of ability to "protect" your people from pillaging.


Indirect improvements (choose one or more):

Boost up wall by giving a +1 happiness (people feeling more secure, that's reasonable).
Boost up castle by taking away that extra trade route (castle improves trade? I just scratch my head) but giving +2 commerce at the city tile (symbolize increased tax). This bonus will not expire even after gunpowder discovery (castles attract tourists, right?). +2 culture instead of +1. Another possibility is +15% GPP production.
Increase the cost of catapults. They are currently too cheap to produce. Seige weapons were very expensive to produce, and they wore out very easily.

To: Quetzal513

Some of your ideas for improvements are interesting, but I perfer something not to exclusive or specific (Eg - decreased drafting penalty) and I'd like something that wouln't obsolete too qucikly, like 100% vs Barbs, I wonder if Players would exploit this by capturing/Razing Barb Cites easily, Imagine yourself with an axeman attack an archer defended City.

You basically have 10 Str vs 3 Str + Promotions & Fortify and Culture Defence. It would be good on Raging Barbarians I guess.

The Vassal Bonus is again maybe too Specific and more likely to better represent the Imperialist trait. I Mean how many times have you gotten a Peaceful Vassal?

To: gettingfat

The +1 Happiness from Walls to the Protective Leader appears too similar to the Charismatic Traits, I personally like to keep all the traits Unique and different. Maybe -25% Warweariness to a Protective Leader who builds Walls in their Cities but I've already included that in my improved Imperialist Trait Improvemnt Mod... :S ah well..

About the cost of Catapults, thats a History vs Game Balance Arguement, I personally think Cats are at a balanced cost already

If Either of you guys are interested

There's already a Protective Trait Improvement Mod loaded onto this thread, it's on Post number 114, the Imrpovements are Castles give +2XP to Seige units (never obsoletes) Gunpowder units can promote down the Drill Promotion line (only available to Protective leaders)

I Might Change that Mod a little and make Castles Obsolete with Artillery, Doesn't make sense that Artillery are gaining experience from a Castle :S...

Cannons get the bonus for game balance purposes, it'd be stupid if it obsoleted with Steel because then whats the point when only Treb and Cats benefit with a later middle age tech? it'd be a waste of hammers to build, even for a Protective leader with Stone.

After I made the post I quickly rethought my suggestions and decided that I didn't really like any of them. In fact, with all respects, I'm not sure that present suggestions do all that much to satisfy me either. But I don't understand why all gunpowder units couldn't promote down the drill line.

I like the 100% vs. barbs b/c it feels like it works nicely historically. kniteowl you're right about it being used for attack, and that doesn't sit with me well. But I also thought if it was only in you're cultural borders that it steals a little thunder from the Great Wall; maybe that's okay, I dunno. It also probably doesn't matter much until you go a little higher in difficulty.