Protecting your GG Unit

[lymond]

After playing a long time this may be another quirky thing I learn about the game. Anyway, there's always bizarre things that perplex me now and then about the game, but this recent occurrence I can' t figure out and it peeved me immensely. In this game I got a warrior to woody 3 and actually had an event that gave him the "leadership" promo, which I don't think I've ever seen before. I had already planned on attaching a GG to make him a super medic anyway, but that free leadership promo was great. So I attach the GG and later upgrade him to a spearman. So the highest "non-support" promo this spearman has is combat I (aggressive leader). So he's in a large stack on the attack against good ole Monty.. I take a city and move several healthy units into the city including my spearman deluxe. This stack contains all healthy units - several highly promoted macemen and spears with promos like C2 formation. In other words my super-medic GG spear is the weakest unit in the stack by far. So the very next turn. Monty send a nearby jumbo to meaninglessly attack the city all by itself. Well, the jumbo kills my super-medic. Why in the world is my super-medic picked to fight the elephant vs. the much stronger units? Except for certain UUs like Balistas that can target specific units, it makes no sense for the AI to be able to pick a weak target in my stack. Anyone know the mechanics behind this? Is it a bug or am I just not aware of some mechanic? Whatever it is, it seems quite bogus to me. Funny thing is a few turn prior the another elephant attacked a stack of mace/spears/etc and a maceman was picked to fight it.

Come to think of it, I seem to recall similar situations like an enemy axeman picking off a catapult in a large stack. I'm oblivious to what causes things like this to happen.

[Nurgle84]

Woodsmen 3 brings First Strikes if I am not mistaken. The AI calculates First Strikes at a much higher value then they are truly worth. That could be the reason, why the Spearmen with a 110% Bonus (Spears vs. Mounted + C1) ist taken over a Spearmen with a 145% Bonus (Spears vs. Mounted + C2 + Formation).

Lesson: Do not upgrade your medic unit.

[kazapp]

Originally Posted by lymond

Except for certain UUs like Balistas that can target specific units, it makes no sense for the AI to be able to pick a weak target in my stack.

This is because the enemy didn't pick the target, it was "your" stack AI that chose the defender.

The combat mechanics always choose the strongest defender to defend against any given attack. Let's take an example. The attacker's stack contains 1 Chariot and 1 Spearman. The defender's stack contains 1 Axeman and 1 Spearman.

Now, stacks never actually attack en masse, they always attack as if you picked one attacker at a time.

So if the first attacker is the Chariot, the strongest defender is the Spearman, so it is automatically chosen to defend. And when the Spearman attacks, it will meet the Axeman.

You should quickly see how stacking units generally benefits the defender - in our example, the odds for the attacker will be very bad, because the Axeman never gets to attack the defending Spearman and the Chariot never gets to attack the defending Axeman.

Now, a Spearman is generally the strongest defender vs. mounted units, and doubly so if it has first strikes.

So it wasn't surprising that the computer selected your GG Spearman to face that War Elephant.

So in the end, I can only repeat the lesson that needs to be learned: never upgrade your Medic units. Warriors and Scouts work the best, simply because they will only be chosen to defend when the stack is about to be wiped out anyway.

[bestsss]

>>So I attach the GG and later upgrade him to a spearman.
Yeah, a rookie mistake (unless you are Zulu). Do not upgrade your super medic, simple as that.
Imagine a w3 spearman in the forest is ensured to defend vs mounted unless you have something more than w2/c2/flank spearman. Due to massive defensive bonuses and the way the 1st strikes work.

Use a scout for medic 3 or a chariot, if you want a real super medic w2/m3 try to keep the warrior... Leadership on a medic is a truly poor decision as well. You don't want to attack w/ the dude and you don't want to defend either.

>>The combat mechanics always choose the strongest defender to defend against any given attack.
This is not true, either.

[lymond]

Yeah, I probably should have just kept him as a warrior. I just figured if he was in a stack with stronger spearmen he'd be okay. It appears that W3 2 first strikes somehow made the difference in determining the stronger unit - I didn't realize about that bonus at the time.. Generally I use a chariot for a super-medic which tends to work out well. I rarely have a warrior survive to be a W3.

Hmmm...not sure if I agree with the Leadership promo comment. What's wrong with it. You can get some cheap extra XP in mop up situations and gain further non-combat promos like mobility. Anyway, in this case, my warrior received the Leadership promo via an event. However, I usually give the leadership promo to my super medic chariots as long as a I get to medic III first.

[TheMeInTeam]

Great generals should not defend unless they are intended to do so. However, due to poor programming they defend often, making them nigh-useless outside of OBSOLETE units that won't be picked as a defender, where they're ok as medics.

Long story short: Don't attach GG's unless you're screwing around, going for a 5 move galley, or defending in desperation.

[lymond]

Originally Posted by TheMeInTeam

Great generals should not defend unless they are intended to do so. However, due to poor programming they defend often, making them nigh-useless outside of OBSOLETE units that won't be picked as a defender, where they're ok as medics.

Long story short: Don't attach GG's unless you're screwing around, going for a 5 move galley, or defending in desperation.

I'm kinda thinking there's some poor programming involved which kinda is what I was trying to get at originally.

TMIT- I thought I recently read a post of yours in which you said you often attach GG units. I find in the case of medics that chariots work out well since the rarely defend. Plus you get your 4 and 6 level unit quicker.

[bestsss]

The leadership promotion is good if you use it for real.
A few weekends ago I had an AW/OCC/Emperor w/ sitting bull, ended up w/ 3 super heroes with 400+ xp. (and quite a few dudes in 50ish xp range). Oracle->Feudalism and CG3/D4 longbows on a (forested) hill, sitting in a fort can carry the game for you.

There the leadership shines, not just assigning it to use a super medic as clean up, risk and get 2xp instead of one. If you want just a medic3 unit use a scout or a chariot.

[Koning]

Originally Posted by TheMeInTeam

Long story short: Don't attach GG's unless you're screwing around, going for a 5 move galley, or defending in desperation.

Agree. Just use your first GG to enable the heroic epic and later on West Point. Make it preferably a super medic. Attach all others to cities. Unless you're fighting a desperate battle. Once use a general to transform an ancient archer a City Garrison3/Combat1/Pinch Infantry who saved my best commerce city during a surpise sandwich attack

[Artichoker]

I sometimes like to use a GG to get Leadership when I divide the 20 XP among several units. With this kind of plan, the amount of XP going to the warlord unit is large enough to get him an extra promotion, but small enough to give other units enough XP while making Leadership profitable at the same time.

For example, a Catapult unit has 5 XP before attaching a GG. It is in a stack of 4 units total, so that each unit gains 5 XP. After attaching the GG, it has 10 XP. At this point, the warlord Catapult can get 3 promotions. I like to choose them as CR1, Leadership, and Tactics (+30% withdrawal). The unit has very good survival odds when the +30% withdrawal is taken into account.

Meanwhile, a 2nd unit with 5 XP and W2 gains 5 XP, for 10 XP total. This unit gets W3 and acts as the medic unit.

Granted, the healing rate of W3 is slightly less than M3, but here's what you get in exchange:

1) Free upgrades for your warlord Catapult unit (Cannon, Artillery, etc.)...amounting to at least 170 once you get Steel.

2) 3 more units that gain 5 XP in addition to your medic unit

3) A chance for your warlord Catapult unit to gain XP very fast

If you're fighting in hostile territory that has a lot of risk of damage from Airships, Bombers, etc., then this might not be the best choice, but in usual scenarios the healing from W3 alone will be sufficient.

[TheMeInTeam]

Originally Posted by lymond

I'm kinda thinking there's some poor programming involved which kinda is what I was trying to get at originally.

TMIT- I thought I recently read a post of yours in which you said you often attach GG units. I find in the case of medics that chariots work out well since the rarely defend. Plus you get your 4 and 6 level unit quicker.

I mess around a lot.

The time I'm most likely to use attached GG's is with a lot of mounted, which can get to lvl 3 w/o much effort anyway. It requires 2 settled GG in addition to theocracy to get lvl 4 mounted, and unless you're going for something like amphibious it doesn't seem worth the effort very often, leading me to attach them to get a couple strong super units with some oomph because the war will end before anything else really contributes something meaningful.

Later in the game I'm a fan of military academies, as those can help a lot with more expensive builds like nukes or advanced naval units. 4-5 military academy nuke cities is just FUN.

The problem with super units is that it only takes 1-3 same type units to kill them for the vast majority of the game, if that. They are at consistent risk of getting worn down by collateral too.

[kazapp]

I would say that giving 20 xp to one unit is overall much weaker than giving +2 xp to a whole lotta units.

I'm thinking a unit with a GG attached should behave like discovered spies when they are attacked (and lose the fight) - they "respawn" in your capital.

(Perhaps with a 10-20% risk of your GG actually dying still. You could be restricted to having 3 GGs at any one time just like "national units")

As it is now, people only use attached GGs for non-violent uses (such as super medics) - even if your GG have a 97-99% chance of winning all his combats, those few %% is still enough of a risk making it not worthwhile to attach that GG, compared to settling him.

[6K Man]

I can see the merit in Super Medics, even if I seldom get around to building one.

For me, the problem with dropping 20 xp on a super unit and using it in combat is a marginal utility one. Would I rather have one unit with 2-3 more promos (going from about 10 XP to 30 XP) or a bunch more level 3 units (Barracks + settled GG) limited only by how fast my unit pump can crank out units?

IMO, the problem with the one super unit is that it takes progressively more and more experience to get to higher levels. Even with your xp doubled. You have 2 approaches to take - use your super unit only when the odds are 99% or better (when just about any unit would do), or use it in high-leverage situations (and probably never see 60 xp).

I don't build 'em anymore - they're more of a novelty.

[fed1943]

To the OP:
Your medic died because he fought; you want him not to fight,right?
Then,Leadership is useless.
Instead your warrior should get Morale to be faster, a great quality to a medic.

[King Pluto]

Originally Posted by fed1943

To the OP:
Your medic died because he fought; you want him not to fight,right?
Then,Leadership is useless.
Instead your warrior should get Morale to be faster, a great quality to a medic.

He said he got Leadership from an event, so he couldn't really help it. Regardless, this is true if you want protect a Medic. Give him the Medic promos, Morale, and leave him as an obsolete unit so he won't defend.

[lymond]

Originally Posted by fed1943

To the OP:
Your medic died because he fought; you want him not to fight,right?
Then,Leadership is useless.
Instead your warrior should get Morale to be faster, a great quality to a medic.

The whole point of my post was that my super-medic deluxe spear was picked off in a stack. I did not lose him on the offensive. Leadership was earned via an event. While my initial question/point was not regarding what promos to give this unit or the Leadership promo itself, it is interesting to discuss as I usually do give the Leadership promo to my medic if there is enough points. The reasoning behind this is that with a few easy victories the unit will gain xp for more "support" promos like morale/tactics/etc.. However, I do agree that ultimately something like morale would be better first since really the opportunities for this unit to gain more xp is rather rare regardless of the xp bonus. "Leadership" promo is likely better on a some super offensive unit or great UU.

Interestingly, some folks have mentioned settling GGs in cities as if I never do that. In fact, besides creating a medic with my first of second GG, my favorite thing to do with a GG is settle in my unit pump cities. I find, if I have this setup, that spreading the GGs among cities is more effective. I will settle a second GG in a main unit pump if I get enough of them, but unless you are in theo/vass it doesn't seem as effective as spreading the wealth since it's not enough to achieve that extra level - mounties seem to benefit most.

I disagree quite a bit as far as the stack bonus for a GG. I find this to be a waste. Most units will gain maybe a level if at that and often just die soon anyway. Settling GGs is permanent. To me the stack option might only be a luxury if I fighting a lot and just getting tons of GGs - plus the IMP trait. I do like military academies later and will try to get one or two if I can.

[bestsss]

basically you need a 4 lvl unit (like cr3 siege, cg3 defenders) and the rest of promos don't matter, you will be cleaning up w/ them. so i'd take one city (the heroic epic one) being able to pump lvl4 units off the gate and the rest of the troops are irrelevant as long as they come in good numbers.

[PieceOfMind]

Originally Posted by kazapp

The combat mechanics always choose the strongest defender to defend against any given attack.

(emphasis added by me)

Without qualification, the word "strongest" here is meaningless.

Sometimes there are "wtf" moments when a weaker unit defends (typically involving first strikes).

While the game supposedly picks the best defender for any given situation, you should never assume that it is necessarily the defender you think is best.

To the OP,

There is a modcomp called "Lead From Behind" that attempts to address the issue. Great generals and other units like medics become less likely to defend.

[Bostock]

Originally Posted by kazapp

I would say that giving 20 xp to one unit is overall much weaker than giving +2 xp to a whole lotta units.

I'm surprised people don't talk about this option more often. Maybe part of the problem is that the ideal scenario for delivering 10 packages of 2 XP (which is something that takes a lot of downtime on those 10 recipients in order to organize) is when you're not going to be warring for a while - but if you just got a GG that's unlikely, and even if you ARE at the end of the war, then that just means that a settled GG quickly becomes superior to the immediate 10 * +2.

So maybe I'm not so surprised people don't talk about this option more often.

Maybe 4*5 or 5*4 is a more competitive option.

In all these cases, you still end up with one unit that's more valuable than normal (since you can upgrade it for free and can give it uber promos) but it's less heartbreaking to lose than the +20 variant. Also, I guess you could say that it gets more than usual out of taking Leadership if it chooses to take it (since Leadership doesn't multiply the XP from the GG itself).

[lymond]

Originally Posted by Bostock

I'm surprised people don't talk about this option more often. Maybe part of the problem is that the ideal scenario for delivering 10 packages of 2 XP (which is something that takes a lot of downtime on those 10 recipients in order to organize) is when you're not going to be warring for a while - but if you just got a GG that's unlikely, and even if you ARE at the end of the war, then that just means that a settled GG quickly becomes superior to the immediate 10 * +2.

So maybe I'm not so surprised people don't talk about this option more often.

Maybe 4*5 or 5*4 is a more competitive option.

In all these cases, you still end up with one unit that's more valuable than normal (since you can upgrade it for free and can give it uber promos) but it's less heartbreaking to lose than the +20 variant. Also, I guess you could say that it gets more than usual out of taking Leadership if it chooses to take it (since Leadership doesn't multiply the XP from the GG itself).

I can't recall where exactly - article?random post? - but I've read some stuff regarding the optimal stack size for attaching a GG. I think your 4*5 or 5*4 was discussed or variants around the same. I guess that could be effective short term in going to war or even upgrading say a few swords to take out barb cities or a close AI that's ripe for the picking. I'd be inclined not to do it on chariots since they die so often regardless of promos. You could get a few CR3 swords quickly which are highly effective and durable. Oh...and CHAR leaders would do nicely like Boudi with her G3 GWs. However, I still think settling a few first is overall more optimal in the long-term. I guess, like most everything about CIV, it's situational. Do you really need to take out someone quick? OR Prepare for say the middle age war or some highly promoted Curraissers out of the gate?

On another note and back to my original post, another interesting thing about my situation is why the AI is designed to suicide a single unit (jumbo) against a stack in a conquered city. What's the thinking behind the computer doing this action. Yeah, the phant killed my super medic but had no chance of success. It completely defies the logic of what a human player would do in that situation (run like heck to the nearest defensive position) The only logic I can think of is that it assumes the unit will die next turn, but I doubt that it's coded that way. The phant could have easily escaped.