I have been a civilization fanatic for quite some time now, playing vanilla CIV, to Warlords, to BTS. However, I am currently at loss as to how the Drill promotion is even considered a valuable trait to have. Unless you spam charismatic/aggressive leaders, have theocracy, vassalage, barracks, and maybe a GG settled to be an instructor (whew, what a load) to begin the promotion series that starts to reach towards drill IV, then it seems pretty pointless. Plus, the bonuses received from drill are largely dependent on if you are attacking of defending. It just seems to me like this series of promotions are far too weak to be practical and the majority of my units die before being fully promoted to drill IV.

However, the mechanics behind the concept of first strikes is still very interesting, and I believe that I might fail to grasp the specific advantages of them. Anyone who has the ability to explain, it would be most appreciated if they did so...especially about the mechanics part!

So I'm putting it up to the group: Do I still harbor hope that there is some unseen use for the lower-to-middle-end drill promotions, or is my last stand at Acre doomed to fail?

Drill is mainly a defensive promotion, it gets stronger with the terrain bonuses.

Combat gets weaker as the terrain bonuses get bigger.

Drill also gets stronger if you are attacking ridiculously weak enemies, but at that point promotions hardly matter.

@ CrusaderKevin

For a great discussion of drill vs combat, check out this thread:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=301160

But as you and DaveMcW have said, Drill is more for the defense while Combat is more for the attack.

Drill is mainly a defensive promotion, it gets stronger with the terrain bonuses.

Combat gets weaker as the terrain bonuses get bigger.

Drill also gets stronger if you are attacking ridiculously weak enemies, but at that point promotions hardly matter.


hmmm this could be just my inexperience with the promotion, but I wasn't aware that drill gave bonuses to certain terrain types. If so, which ones? I only play BTS these days, so I'm not sure if it's too much different from vanilla CIV or warlords. Plus, if I'm attacking super-weak enemies for drill to get sronger, it seems kinda redundant. I thought drill would be a better promotion to tackkle big bad units, not ones that my longbows could just sneeze away....?

Drill doesn't give terrain bonuses. Terrain bonuses make extra first strikes more effective.

Drill doesn't give terrain bonuses. Terrain bonuses make extra first strikes more effective.

Really? I've never read anything like that in the civilopedia...if you'd be so kind as to elaborate...?

Here is what I have written previously

I would say drill is more of a "niche" promotion than strength.

The thing is, strength improves your damage, and ALSO your chance to hit. So even thought combat doesn't give you additional attack chances like drill, it effectively gives you more hits just like drill, since each of your attacks is more likely to hit. And that can result in you killing off the other unit faster.


So, when do you want drill? These scenarios could apply.

1. You have a very weak unit in comparison to them. This means, that you can get some shots in, before your unit gets annihilated. Or, if there unit has first strikes, your drill cancels out their much stronger first strikes.
2. If you have a much stronger unit, then you can potentially take out out the opposing unit before they get many hits in.
3. You want to get more exp because exp gain depends on the strength ration, so for first strikes you level up faster. This would mean that if you were at an advantage in a war, and were willing to lose more battles in order to gain some higher level units, you could use more first strikes. The later stage first strikes can be quite useful, reducing collateral damage, and drill 4 gives you 2 first strikes and +10% versus mounted, which is rather good.


when units are close to equal, 50-50 odds, drill is almost always less effective than combat promotions I believe, in regards to damage taken, and overall win chances.








Say if after 3 hits your unit dies, because the other unit has very high strength.

So if you attack a unit while having 2 strength promotions, your strength promotions will only apply to say 2-4 attacks.

Now, would you rather have the +20% bonus to 2 attacks, or have a chance of having a WHOLE additional 2 attacks (Drill 1 +2)?

Drill is less effective in longer, more equal combats, because strength applies to the 5-6 combat rounds that could occur. When there are possibly only 2-3 non-FS combat rounds, the drill becomes much more powerful. It can effectively double your average damage output, and adding 20% strength does not do that.

Really? I've never read anything like that in the civilopedia...if you'd be so kind as to elaborate...?

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=137615

Use that. But it's logical ----> extra first strikes are rounds only you can do damage. If your damage is huge due to defense modifiers, then an extra round is worth more than strength...at some point.

[QUOTE=Levgre;7538152]



Say if after 3 hits your unit dies, because the other unit has very high strength.

So if you attack a unit while having 2 strength promotions, your strength promotions will only apply to say 2-4 attacks.

Now, would you rather have the +20% bonus to 2 attacks, or have a chance of having a WHOLE additional 2 attacks (Drill 1 +2)?

QUOTE]

hmmm good point. Mentally, I'd want to pick the 2 extra attacks. The game made it appear as if you were doing combat damage efore combat actually started, not after. Then after the initial weakening, the real battle occurs (this made sense to me because of the concept of archers shooting forst to deal initial damage before the fight). However, with the math that you've just explained, then Drill promotions seem almost pointless, the the whole "First Strike" gambit usless, because I can mop up with combat-heavy units anyway.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=137615

Use that. But it's logical ----> extra first strikes are rounds only you can do damage. If your damage is huge due to defense modifiers, then an extra round is worth more than strength...at some point.

Hmmm... interesting. It looks to me with the way that you've presented this, early and medieval units such as longbow men would be better raiders, rather than straight-up combat units; running through the hills and forests while wreaking havoc. What do you think?

I've had a dream over the last thirty mins. To try raiding and pin-pricking an enemy's economy with some archers and longbows... any suggestions?

I prefer pillaging with Mounted Units. They can pillage a Copper Mine and the road in the same turn.

5 exp longbowmen are some of the best early game pillagers. Give them guerilla 1 + 2, so they have a total of +65% hill defense, and double movement in hills. Very hard to get rid of, usually takes 2-3 units to take one longbowmen, so if you have 4-5 guerilla longbowmen, they are nearly impossible to get rid of at times. If all the hills are connected, you can wander around their empire destroying all the mines. And obviously, you can move then pillage.

5 exp longbowmen are some of the best early game pillagers. Give them guerilla 1 + 2, so they have a total of +65% hill defense, and double movement in hills. Very hard to get rid of, usually takes 2-3 units to take one longbowmen, so if you have 4-5 guerilla longbowmen, they are nearly impossible to get rid of at times. If all the hills are connected, you can wander around their empire destroying all the mines. And obviously, you can move then pillage as long as you stick to hills.

When I promote CG units after CG1 I go the drill line. Otherwise I avoid.

5 exp longbowmen are some of the best early game pillagers. Give them guerilla 1 + 2, so they have a total of +65% hill defense, and double movement in hills. Very hard to get rid of, usually takes 2-3 units to take one longbowmen, so if you have 4-5 guerilla longbowmen, they are nearly impossible to get rid of at times. If all the hills are connected, you can wander around their empire destroying all the mines. And obviously, you can move then pillage as long as you stick to hills.

Awesome idea! I think that your hills plan would go well with the Celtic leader, Brennus. With his UB (Dun, giving Guerilla I to all units made in that city) and his charismatic trait, I think that it's work worth trying.

Brennus/budica definitely are the best leaders for that, but you can easily do it with any leader if you want. Well, if you are okay with restricting yourself to the vassalage trait (which comes with longbowmen+feudalism, it can be a good military tech from the oracle).

The Gallic swordsmen could carry out the same tactic too, although if your opponent has axemen they won't especially long. the 50% from axemen vs. melee negates the 40% from the two hills promotions. But if you take out their metal, the Gallic swordsmen is almost as strong...

Brennus/budica definitely are the best leaders for that, but you can easily do it with any leader if you want. Well, if you are okay with restricting yourself to the vassalage trait (which comes with longbowmen+feudalism, it can be a good military tech from the oracle).

The Gallic swordsmen could carry out the same tactic too, although if your opponent has axemen they won't especially long. the 50% from axemen vs. melee negates the 40% from the two hills promotions. But if you take out their metal, the Gallic swordsmen is almost as strong...

That's why I feel like I'm going to stick with longbows. Far less the risk, and a nice first srike just for kicks and giggles. Plus, I feel as though they're more versitile.

Use for pillaging is few and far between.

Although I've used guerilla II longbows to pillage then camp top of mined hills. That's pretty fun, the AI won't touch them normally.

True. The AI, magically all knowing, never attacks your stacks if it appears that it won't win. The AI is usually holed up in cities whenever I play.

However, on the higher difficulties, it seems as though they will send a few suicidal catapults at you.

It seems I'm fast becoming the Defender of Drill. Threads like these I feel are begging for my comment, because IMO drill is far better than most people here give credit.


ncbman earlier linked the poll I started not long ago where I attempted to compare directly the two promotions Drill 4 and Combat 4. It's worth a look and there was some good discussion in response.

Drill is mainly a defensive promotion, it gets stronger with the terrain bonuses.

Combat gets weaker as the terrain bonuses get bigger.

Drill also gets stronger if you are attacking ridiculously weak enemies, but at that point promotions hardly matter.

I never thought I'd be disagreeing with you Dave but here I disagree almost 100%. Drill is not just for defense. Drill is definitely a very good promotion when you have a good defense modifier but in attacking situations the promotion has some merit too.

If you are attacking ridiculously weak enemies, you should always take Drill. If you gain 2 or 3 times the xp from doing so would you say that "does not matter"? The units do not have to be inferior either - just damaged. This is typical if you are attacking a city first with a few siege units and then a few CR troops.

I feel comfortable sacrificing less than 5% odds of winning when it means I can milk another 1 or 2xp out of the battle, especially if you do so with units that are 2 or 3 xp off the next promotion. In these cases, you sacrifice a little bit of odds so that after the battle you will get the 50% heal and the new promotion. But hey, if you prefer winning at 99% over 97.5% and on average taking more damage, that's up to you.

Here is what I have written previously

I would say drill is more of a "niche" promotion than strength.

The thing is, strength improves your damage, and ALSO your chance to hit. So even thought combat doesn't give you additional attack chances like drill, it effectively gives you more hits just like drill, since each of your attacks is more likely to hit. And that can result in you killing off the other unit faster.


So, when do you want drill? These scenarios could apply.

1. You have a very weak unit in comparison to them. This means, that you can get some shots in, before your unit gets annihilated. Or, if there unit has first strikes, your drill cancels out their much stronger first strikes.
2. If you have a much stronger unit, then you can potentially take out out the opposing unit before they get many hits in.
3. You want to get more exp because exp gain depends on the strength ration, so for first strikes you level up faster. This would mean that if you were at an advantage in a war, and were willing to lose more battles in order to gain some higher level units, you could use more first strikes. The later stage first strikes can be quite useful, reducing collateral damage, and drill 4 gives you 2 first strikes and +10% versus mounted, which is rather good.


when units are close to equal, 50-50 odds, drill is almost always less effective than combat promotions I believe, in regards to damage taken, and overall win chances.








Say if after 3 hits your unit dies, because the other unit has very high strength.

So if you attack a unit while having 2 strength promotions, your strength promotions will only apply to say 2-4 attacks.

Now, would you rather have the +20% bonus to 2 attacks, or have a chance of having a WHOLE additional 2 attacks (Drill 1 +2)?

Drill is less effective in longer, more equal combats, because strength applies to the 5-6 combat rounds that could occur. When there are possibly only 2-3 non-FS combat rounds, the drill becomes much more powerful. It can effectively double your average damage output, and adding 20% strength does not do that.

"I would say drill is more of a "niche" promotion than strength."

That's a nice way to put it actually!

"The thing is, strength improves your damage, and ALSO your chance to hit. So even thought combat doesn't give you additional attack chances like drill, it effectively gives you more hits just like drill, since each of your attacks is more likely to hit. And that can result in you killing off the other unit faster."

While this is all true, you need to bear in mind the increase in strength (and hence damage dealt) and also chance of hitting may not be all that much better than another riskless round of combat. If units fought 100 rounds during battles, a first strike or two would be insignificant. But units typically fight about 6 or 7 rounds (that includes first strike rounds). Having, say, 4-7 (a drill 4 longbow) riskess rounds can be huge.

"1. You have a very weak unit in comparison to them. This means, that you can get some shots in, before your unit gets annihilated. Or, if there unit has first strikes, your drill cancels out their much stronger first strikes."
This is one of the situations where I would strongly reccommend not taking drill. Please remember that even when a unit has first strikes they are not guaranteed to hit. If you are attacking a rifleman with an archer, don't promote it with drill. Increases in the archer's strength or decreases in the rifleman's strength are far more important here. Attacking with weak units is something you should never do unless you are wanting to get rid of some units and are sure you will be able to kill the defender on that turn (you don't want him getting enough xp for another promotion after all), and in these cases do NOT take drill.

"2. If you have a much stronger unit, then you can potentially take out out the opposing unit before they get many hits in."

Remember that "much stronger" can be replaced with much healthier. Your units don't have to be technologically superior - you just need the defender to be damaged.

When attacking severely damaged units (say under 50% health), IMO you should ALWAYS attack with drill units, as they milk for more xp and this is where the drill promotions have their main strength on offense.

"3. You want to get more exp because exp gain depends on the strength ration, so for first strikes you level up faster. This would mean that if you were at an advantage in a war, and were willing to lose more battles in order to gain some higher level units, you could use more first strikes. The later stage first strikes can be quite useful, reducing collateral damage, and drill 4 gives you 2 first strikes and +10% versus mounted, which is rather good."

You are mostlly right again, but describing the situation as losing more battles in order to get higher xp units I don't think is a good way to put it. If you are sacrificing very small amounts of odds (say 2% or so) to ensure higher xp units and faster healing thanks to the instant promotion-heal, it easily makes it worth it.