Useless Praetorians
- Thread starter Kurgan
- Start date
Soviet casualties were due largely to the ineptitude of the high command and poor equipment, not the individual merits, discipline or bravery of the single Red Army soldier, and not necessarily the superiority of the Wehrmacht. Also, that figure includes "collateral" deaths and those not directly involved in combat - the true figure will never be known.
Anyway, my point is that the hypothetical one million v one million can't be used as an example of Axis superiority, and definitely not post-1942 (which seems an odd timeframe to demonstrate how effective the Wehrmacht was). If you pointed to equipment, training or tactical know-how as reasons why the Wehrmacht were superior, I would have no argument whatsoever. My post was in response to the phrasing of the comment above.
largedarryl
Prince
I still can't believe that you are serious about buffing the praets. The fact that swordman come after axes doesn't mean they are superior. The swordman come later because they are a specialized unit (to take cities).
I, along with many people on these forums, have been hoping that the praet should get nerfed. Basically looking at the numbers (someone correct me if I'm wrong)
The praet has a str 8
The axemen has a str 5
In a battle with no defensive bonuses (eliminating the promotions as well)
Praet has 8 no bonus
Axeman 5 + 50% = 7.5
This battle is better for the praet, and the hammer cost is (45 vs 35). So during the praets time period, they have no real counter because they are stronger than the supposed counter to them. So a UU that has no counter is considered overpowered IMHO.
This isn't even where the praet shines, if you start showind the CR promotion line against units housed in city (because the CR bonus is subtracted from the defenders strength, so it gets stronger with time.
As was mentioned the praet is basically a CR axemen for almost half the cost.
I, along with many people on these forums, have been hoping that the praet should get nerfed. Basically looking at the numbers (someone correct me if I'm wrong)
The praet has a str 8
The axemen has a str 5
In a battle with no defensive bonuses (eliminating the promotions as well)
Praet has 8 no bonus
Axeman 5 + 50% = 7.5
This battle is better for the praet, and the hammer cost is (45 vs 35). So during the praets time period, they have no real counter because they are stronger than the supposed counter to them. So a UU that has no counter is considered overpowered IMHO.
This isn't even where the praet shines, if you start showind the CR promotion line against units housed in city (because the CR bonus is subtracted from the defenders strength, so it gets stronger with time.
As was mentioned the praet is basically a CR axemen for almost half the cost.
Gyprsn
Warlord
I really wish something would be done about Praets :/ I don't know exactly what, but unless I have copper in one of my first two cities, or get iron in one of them in time, I'm basically doomed by praetorians in multiplayer games. I don't appreciate starting a game only to lose it in 1600 BC just because Rome was my neighbor, archers were useless against them, and metal was out of reach.
The only truly effective units against praets come many turns after a person can achieve iron working. Catapults can only do so much, x-bows and macemen come even later, and elephants are always a gamble for ivory. I realize that Rome's "praetorians" we're so "magnificent" and "powerful," however it makes for a broken game much of the time, and I'm all for praets being strong...just not game breakingly so.
The only truly effective units against praets come many turns after a person can achieve iron working. Catapults can only do so much, x-bows and macemen come even later, and elephants are always a gamble for ivory. I realize that Rome's "praetorians" we're so "magnificent" and "powerful," however it makes for a broken game much of the time, and I'm all for praets being strong...just not game breakingly so.
As I have said after my first post, I agree with you, praetorians are great. But I do not know if I have been cursed by the axemen sorcerer or something like that, 90% of the time I attack an axeman with my praetorians (in equality of terrain, upgrades etc) I lose, yesterday it happened the same. But in the basics I agree with you, talking about game balance. Historically speaking as Firaxis tries to reflect the historical "skills" of the different units I think that it is weird that praetorians are so vulnerable to axemen, I would have chosen instead horse archers as their nemesis, to reflect the disaster of Carras and the cavalry based army of the Partians, the only roman enemy that stod the test of time. Anyway, maybe I always get the bad odds in battles against axemen, and someone in this Forum is taking away my share of good ones. Another point is that I never attack them unless I have 80% or more chances, but it makes no difference, as I said I am cursed
Grohan
Bug-hunter
Maybe Praetorians should get -25% against horse archers? Praets would still be very powerful but at least they would't be invincible anymore.
TheLastOne36
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 14,045
I just played as Augustas to see if he can still rush well, i rushed the mongols and the Preatorians were useless! They destroyed my army, then went to kill me with the evil Keshiks. I didn't stand a chance.
Innawerkz
I'm the other white meat.
Grohan said:
The problem, unfortunately, runs a little deeper than that. Even if you were to beeline for Horse Archers the technologies are more expensive than the path to the Praetorians.
Hunting - Animal Husbandry - Archery - Horseback Riding = 450
Mining - Bronze Working - Iron Working = 370
To add insult: Rome starts with Mining and Horse Archers are more expensive to build.
Suspiria
Warlord
lol my latest game i have unrestricted leaders turned on and im playing boudica with rome, and i have praets with combat 1 and charismatic giving them early promotion. Right now i have so mnay level 5 and level 6 praets taking over the world 
The problem, unfortunately, runs a little deeper than that. Even if you were to beeline for Horse Archers the technologies are more expensive than the path to the Praetorians.
Hunting - Animal Husbandry - Archery - Horseback Riding = 450
Mining - Bronze Working - Iron Working = 370
To add insult: Rome starts with Mining and Horse Archers are more expensive to build.
True, but this is offset by the fact that you can only begin looking for Iron after you got Iron Working. You can begin looking for horses with Animal Husbandry.
Anyway, I don't think giving Praetorians a special mali would help. They are fine as they are. Since Rome is not Aggressive you can defeat them by using axemen as an aggressive leader. If you go for them in the field City Raider is useless. It's not easy, but the UU is almost all that Rome has going for it IMO.
ConanDBarbarian
Chieftain
IGNORANT STATEMENT OF THE YEAR ALERT!!!! BASED ON WHAT? THEIR COOL GREY UNIFORMS? THEIR RESPECT FOR LIFE? FEAR OF DEFENDING THE HOMELAND? (being the invaders, they werent worried about their families getting killed). How silly.
"I remember very vividly a conversation I had with a published author on Soviet history. He told me that the Germans respected the British/ANZAC soldier, that they treated the US soldier as a worthy foe, but that they feared the Soviets with every fibre in their being, partly because of their supernatural insistence on self-destruction, but also because they were motivated by an unchecked, bitter and potent need for revenge. When this was coupled with some half decent hardware and a strategic command not based on the ego of one delusional man, they were the finest soldiers in WWII in terms of discipline and effectiveness, and history bears this out. (Again, in my opinion)."
EXACTLY
I think Praetorians should have at least 50 strenght, they should have the ability to act as naval units as well land, their models should be 3 times bigger than normal unit models, lazers from eyes or some sort of breath weapon would be good... oh and don't forget +300% bonus when attacking Tokyo and a classic Akira Ifukube theme when they are fighting. I guess they would raze any city they capture.
Gyprsn
Warlord
I would like to see this, but rather -25% against horse archers, I'd say it should apply to all mounted units. Even with a penalty like this, praets would still be strong, just not as significantly so.
Another idea might be to lower the strength to a 7 (so an axemen would then be stronger than a praet in combat) and throw in a free CR promotion, or something to that effect.
Also, to those people saying that "aggressive civ axemen can beat praets," please understand that not every civ is aggressive (obviously) and if being an aggressive or charismatic leader is a necessity when fighting Rome...That's just ridiculous. It's really annoying how 2/3 of multiplayers always choose Rome because of the UU, and then can just mass praetorians early game where there are no counters. It really doesn't take much skill to wield a praetorian army in the beginning, and is unfair to the other players who aren't looking for a game where it takes pure luck to score considerable hits on a Roman player.
A dedicated axeman spam + machinery beeline (for crossbowmen, and later macemen) is a viable counter.
largedarryl
Prince
It is very unfair (in MP or for the AI) when you select rome and then also select the balanced resources option (almost gauranteed to have iron within spitting distance of your capital).
The thing with every unit in the game is there needs to be a counter (although pre-BtS there was no counter to the panzer), but the praet stands out as being that one unit that cannot be beaten. This is horribly unbalanced, especially since other civs have a swordman replacement that is barely capable of defeating CG archers. I would even suggest that the praet be nerfed down to a str of 6 and given a 25% bonus for attacking. This would still be a very powerful UU, but would also force the roman civs to build another unit (something to defend). Since now, a stack of praets is the only thing that a roman civ needs to conquer cities.
So I propose a praet that is:
str 6
10% bonus city attack
25% bonus for attacking
that means a praet attacking an axemen would be: 7.5 vs 7.5
an axemen attacking a praet would be: 7.5 vs 6
IMHO, the most unbalancing part of a praet stack is when that an entire stack of CR praets can approach on hills or throgh forest. That means that even the proper counter for the praet can't even attack them:
no defensive bonus praet: 8 vs 7.5
hilled praet: 10 vs 7.5
forrested preat: 12 vs 7.5
hilled/forrested preat: 14 vs 7.5
With a nerf in strength, but an attack bonus would still give the praet a good strength, but would only be there for an attacking force of them.
The thing with every unit in the game is there needs to be a counter (although pre-BtS there was no counter to the panzer), but the praet stands out as being that one unit that cannot be beaten. This is horribly unbalanced, especially since other civs have a swordman replacement that is barely capable of defeating CG archers. I would even suggest that the praet be nerfed down to a str of 6 and given a 25% bonus for attacking. This would still be a very powerful UU, but would also force the roman civs to build another unit (something to defend). Since now, a stack of praets is the only thing that a roman civ needs to conquer cities.
So I propose a praet that is:
str 6
10% bonus city attack
25% bonus for attacking
that means a praet attacking an axemen would be: 7.5 vs 7.5
an axemen attacking a praet would be: 7.5 vs 6
IMHO, the most unbalancing part of a praet stack is when that an entire stack of CR praets can approach on hills or throgh forest. That means that even the proper counter for the praet can't even attack them:
no defensive bonus praet: 8 vs 7.5
hilled praet: 10 vs 7.5
forrested preat: 12 vs 7.5
hilled/forrested preat: 14 vs 7.5
With a nerf in strength, but an attack bonus would still give the praet a good strength, but would only be there for an attacking force of them.
Seidrik_The_Gray
Seidrik The Gray
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2006
- Messages
- 1,160
How about a Vampiric Praet that is only as strong as the units it has beaten and assumes the strengths, such as bonuses vs. melee, etc...but none of the weeknesses...So, you could end up with a 24 str Praet with bonus vs. melee, archers, mounted, armor, gunpowder, etc...Unfortunately, you'd only have a movement of 1.
Seidrik_The_Gray
Seidrik The Gray
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2006
- Messages
- 1,160
An Aggressive AI will never get to Crossbowmen unfortunately, as they will have recked their economies suiciding on your Praetorians...but that's another thread
what do beets have to do with this? sure theyre tasty but what relation are they to C4?
Gyprsn
Warlord
I'm sorry, but I really don't think that is a reliable counter. Machinery comes significantly later than iron working, chances are you will die in multiplayer before you come even close to getting machinery. Also, in early game (multiplayer) there really isn't that much production to devote to spamming ax men. The only way either of these strategies stand a viable chance against a praetorian rush in multiplayer is if you get a very good production city, likely with floodplains and hills, or many grassland hills close to a river. Otherwise, neither of these is very dependable without luck.
Similar threads
