FriendoftheDork
Keiser
Exactly. Usually, Walls and Castles will reduce this amount, but they're not supposed to apply to gunpowder units.
[UXP] Legends of Revolutions
- Thread starter phungus420
- Start date
Exactly. Usually, Walls and Castles will reduce this amount, but they're not supposed to apply to gunpowder units.
Actually, they do. The effects on reduction to bombardment still exist, the only thing negated is the outright percentage increase to city defense.
![[pimp]](/images/smilies/pimp.gif "Pimp [pimp]")
Roland Johansen
Deity
About bombardment by post-gunpowder units and city walls/castles:
The reduction to bombardment damage is removed. There's no -75% damage by bombardment anymore when a cannon bombards a city with a castle.
When a pre-gunpowder unit is selected, you get to see the defence value of the city with walls/castle and when a post-gunpowder unit is selected, you get to see the cultural defence value of the city (+Chichzen Itza bonus when the wonder is still active).
The weird thing happens when you select a post-gunpowder bombardment unit and bombard a city with walls/castle. The bombardment damage is applied to the highest defence value and then recalculated for a similar relative damage to the cultural defence bonus.
Example: City with walls + castle and 60% defence bonus. The city gets attacked by a cannon for 12% bombardment damage. This damage is applied to the highest defence bonus resulting in a defence reduction from 100% to 88% to pre-gunpowder units. The defence reduction to post-gunpowder units is 60/100*12 = 8% (rounded) resulting in a defence reduction from 60% to 52%.
You'll get the following results when you keep bombarding:
culture defence / castle + walls
60 / 100
52 / 88
45 / 76
38 / 64
31 / 52
24 / 40
16 / 28
9 / 16
2 / 4
0 / 0
You'll see the first value when you select the post-gunpowder units like cannons and the second value when you select pre-gunpowder units like macemen.
This has worked this way in civilization IV since day 1 of the release of the game. It's not a bug in this mod.
The reduction to bombardment damage is removed. There's no -75% damage by bombardment anymore when a cannon bombards a city with a castle.
When a pre-gunpowder unit is selected, you get to see the defence value of the city with walls/castle and when a post-gunpowder unit is selected, you get to see the cultural defence value of the city (+Chichzen Itza bonus when the wonder is still active).
The weird thing happens when you select a post-gunpowder bombardment unit and bombard a city with walls/castle. The bombardment damage is applied to the highest defence value and then recalculated for a similar relative damage to the cultural defence bonus.
Example: City with walls + castle and 60% defence bonus. The city gets attacked by a cannon for 12% bombardment damage. This damage is applied to the highest defence bonus resulting in a defence reduction from 100% to 88% to pre-gunpowder units. The defence reduction to post-gunpowder units is 60/100*12 = 8% (rounded) resulting in a defence reduction from 60% to 52%.
You'll get the following results when you keep bombarding:
culture defence / castle + walls
60 / 100
52 / 88
45 / 76
38 / 64
31 / 52
24 / 40
16 / 28
9 / 16
2 / 4
0 / 0
You'll see the first value when you select the post-gunpowder units like cannons and the second value when you select pre-gunpowder units like macemen.
This has worked this way in civilization IV since day 1 of the release of the game. It's not a bug in this mod.
FriendoftheDork
Keiser
So if a city has 0% defense from culture, and has city walls and castle, how does that compute? 0% bombard rate? Or if the city has 100% from culture and castle, does that mean the unit gets its full bombard rate? i have to test some at least.
See next post.
FriendoftheDork
Keiser
Ok, I tested a bit, it seems bombardment works strange in vanilla bts as well.
Walls and Castles, according to the civilopedia, reduces damage to defenses from non-gunpowder siege weapons, and the defensive bonus is only supposed to apply to "nongunners"
In my test the city had 20% culture and 100% defense from buildings.
Catapult damge was 2%
Trebuchet was doing 4%
Cannon did full 12% only to the walls, the actualy defense from GP weapons was reduced much less. IIRC, it did like 3% damage to the cultural defense. This seems to be in line with your formula.
But what if the City has 80% culture and 100% from buildings? Using arty with 16% bombard, that would mean doing 16% to walls (as always) and 12.8%, rounded to 13% to the culture, thus end result of one bombardment would be
84%/63%. Next round the same arty would do 12% damage to the culture.
What's the point of this system? And doesn't it mean that Walls and Castles are good at reducing bombardment even long after being obsoleted?
Walls and Castles, according to the civilopedia, reduces damage to defenses from non-gunpowder siege weapons, and the defensive bonus is only supposed to apply to "nongunners"
In my test the city had 20% culture and 100% defense from buildings.
Catapult damge was 2%
Trebuchet was doing 4%
Cannon did full 12% only to the walls, the actualy defense from GP weapons was reduced much less. IIRC, it did like 3% damage to the cultural defense. This seems to be in line with your formula.
But what if the City has 80% culture and 100% from buildings? Using arty with 16% bombard, that would mean doing 16% to walls (as always) and 12.8%, rounded to 13% to the culture, thus end result of one bombardment would be
84%/63%. Next round the same arty would do 12% damage to the culture.
What's the point of this system? And doesn't it mean that Walls and Castles are good at reducing bombardment even long after being obsoleted?
Roland Johansen
Deity
I can't look into the minds of the designers. Maybe it was a programming error, but it could just as well be working as designed. Walls and castles don't get their damage reducing effect anymore and can be bombed away quickly. But in some way they still exist and thus need to be bombed away. After castles and walls have been obsoleted for the defending party, they won't have to be bombed away anymore.
They are useful when the city has a low culture defence bonus until they are obsolete for the defending party which happens some time after the invention of gunpowder. If the attacking party is more advanced, the defending party will profit from the walls and castles relatively long until they also develop the technologies for obsoleting walls and castles.
It's a bit of a weird system and I wouldn't have designed it this way. Primarily because it is very confusing. I guess only a few percent of the players on this forum know about what I wrote in my previous post and the players on this forum are probably much better informed than more casual players.
I mainly wrote it so that it is clear that it isn't an issue with this mod.
FriendoftheDork
Keiser
I can't look into the minds of the designers. Maybe it was a programming error, but it could just as well be working as designed. Walls and castles don't get their damage reducing effect anymore and can be bombed away quickly. But in some way they still exist and thus need to be bombed away. After castles and walls have been obsoleted for the defending party, they won't have to be bombed away anymore.
They are useful when the city has a low culture defence bonus until they are obsolete for the defending party which happens some time after the invention of gunpowder. If the attacking party is more advanced, the defending party will profit from the walls and castles relatively long until they also develop the technologies for obsoleting walls and castles.
It's a bit of a weird system and I wouldn't have designed it this way. Primarily because it is very confusing. I guess only a few percent of the players on this forum know about what I wrote in my previous post and the players on this forum are probably much better informed than more casual players.
I mainly wrote it so that it is clear that it isn't an issue with this mod.
Thanks for writing it, guess it is one of the secrets of civ you can't find out about without testing yourself or reading here.
Are you saying now that after the defender obsoletes walls and castles, they don't have to be bombed away anymore?
If so, changing obsolesence will affect gameplay. In vanilla this happens at Rifling and Ecconomics, but I'm fairly certain the AIs I played against in the WWW scenario had both of these techs. I know the obsolesence was changed in Wolfshanze mod at least, but can't recall if they are changed in LoR as well. If they are significantly changed then that will explain it.
Roland Johansen
Deity
I agree.
Correct.
I don't have access to the mod from this computer, but I vaguely recall this is the case. The obsolescence was pushed back a little to make the buildings worth a little more. This means that you will encounter this situation more often, during a longer part of the game.
phungus420
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,296
Actually no. The defensive bonus never goes obsolete for buildings. It says that in the civilopedia and I just checked it. So like I said originally this isn't caused by any changes in LoR, as it's bombardment and other combat mechanics are unchanges (though there are some added new combat options from DCM). What FoD might be noticing is the effects of castles in the Scenario he's playing (World War Wolf), cause in that scenario I think most of the old world cities have castles.
FriendoftheDork
Keiser
Yup, according to my testing this is correct, they never obsolete other than not being able to build them at all and the gunpowder units' ability to ignore them when attacking.
Strange how when you read something and you think it's true, even if reality (of civ) is totally different?
And yeah, europe is littered with castles, which is fairly accurate since gun forts, star forts etc. were common in the 18th-19th century, with walls designed to withstand cannon fire.
Some old world cities in the east also have them, especially in the Ottoman Empire, India and China, while the smaller colonies and neutral states doesen't have them.
In any case, even if they are generally though of as a waste of hammers in vanilla civ, I love building them myself since they're cheap with stone and give you more time to get defenses up if an enemy stack shows up. Now even if an enemy stack with 5-6 artillery it will still take time to reduce them.
I've been enjoying your mod so far. It's fun, and doesn't have any of the game-stopping bugs certain other mods have. The performance is also good.
I like the legendary units. They're not overly powerful, but they are very useful in the right situation.
I think machine guns really disrupt the flow of the game, though. The moment I see one in an enemy army, I know I'm in for a long stalemate. Part of the problem is that any effective counters take much longer to research than the machine guns themselves. Unless you've outteched your enemy by a good margin, you'll be stuck with squad infantry and artillery which aren't effective against machine guns. Assuming even tech levels, it'll take quite a bit of time to research and build enough tanks to counter the machine guns. A couple machine guns can completely destroy an overwhelmingly large infantry force. Armor only counters the machine guns if it's in large enough numbers to cut through all of the enemy squad infantry and still manage reduce the machine gun's health significantly. If one machine gun is left intact, your infantry is useless.
I understand that machine guns and trench warfare should be powerful, but I think the combination of 100% bonuses against infantry/cavalry and immunity to collateral damage is too much. Perhaps the infantry bonus should be reduced, and the cavalry bonus reduced or eliminated.
I like the legendary units. They're not overly powerful, but they are very useful in the right situation.
I think machine guns really disrupt the flow of the game, though. The moment I see one in an enemy army, I know I'm in for a long stalemate. Part of the problem is that any effective counters take much longer to research than the machine guns themselves. Unless you've outteched your enemy by a good margin, you'll be stuck with squad infantry and artillery which aren't effective against machine guns. Assuming even tech levels, it'll take quite a bit of time to research and build enough tanks to counter the machine guns. A couple machine guns can completely destroy an overwhelmingly large infantry force. Armor only counters the machine guns if it's in large enough numbers to cut through all of the enemy squad infantry and still manage reduce the machine gun's health significantly. If one machine gun is left intact, your infantry is useless.
I understand that machine guns and trench warfare should be powerful, but I think the combination of 100% bonuses against infantry/cavalry and immunity to collateral damage is too much. Perhaps the infantry bonus should be reduced, and the cavalry bonus reduced or eliminated.
First of all, i love the mod but...
- Certain things make this mod more a "mod" then a "unofficial expansion" like how you call it.
I don't like the a-technical/newbie unfriendly revolution screens.
I'm sure people who mod or people who win at deity level understand all the things on the screen but i don't.
It is because there are parts that aren't worked out properly.
Like; Stable 606 Net 1 (Flat) 1 Good: Bad: Despotism -4, Slavery -1
Please make the Revolution screen and pop up more readable so a non modder understands what it al means. I know how to read certain elements (GREEN) of it but other parts arent always that obvious (RED).
I made a post about this but no one has the proper answer to it. LINK
- Then i have a question;
I have played a game last night where i was the most powerful nation on the globe.
I made war with my neighbor and send some troops to one of his city's.
My troops were all buffed with XP because of barracks and civics.
4 Trebuchets
2 Longbow man
4 Phalanx or Spearman (I think Phalanx but i'm not sure because in normal game Phalanx is Greece only and Immortal, Persia only.)
4 Immortals
2 War Elephants
I bombarded the city while a other pillage group destroyed everything in their lands.
As soon as the city was 0% i wanted to attack.
The city was completely isolated as well a few other city's.
In fact 5 were completely isolated and 3 still had some connections. So his kingdom could no longer be sustained.
The opponent had 3 units in the city,
1 Archer fortified
2 Axeman fortified
The combat odds showed to me 3,20% chance to win?!?
I couldn't believe it and attacked... i died. I lost all of my 16 units and he still had 1 left.
From frustration i shut down the pc without saving the 4 hour session...
I don't know if you people agree with me but i shouldn't have lost this...
My troops had more promotions and were in larger numbers.
Is this a bug????
morchuflex
Emperor
Hello.
Still love the mod.
But I find the Barbarian Nomad too powerful. I would like to edit its properties (to something like 2/2 and 50% retreat chances).
However, I can't find the barbarian units in the UnitsInfo.xml file. Where the heck are they?
Still love the mod.
But I find the Barbarian Nomad too powerful. I would like to edit its properties (to something like 2/2 and 50% retreat chances).
However, I can't find the barbarian units in the UnitsInfo.xml file. Where the heck are they?
First of all, i love the mod but...
- Certain things make this mod more a "mod" then a "unofficial expansion" like how you call it.
I don't like the a-technical/newbie unfriendly revolution screens.
I'm sure people who mod or people who win at deity level understand all the things on the screen but i don't.
It is because there are parts that aren't worked out properly.
Like; Stable 606 Net 1 (Flat) 1 Good: Bad: Despotism -4, Slavery -1
Please make the Revolution screen and pop up more readable so a non modder understands what it al means. I know how to read certain elements (GREEN) of it but other parts arent always that obvious (RED).
I made a post about this but no one has the proper answer to it. LINK
- Then i have a question;
I have played a game last night where i was the most powerful nation on the globe.
I made war with my neighbor and send some troops to one of his city's.
My troops were all buffed with XP because of barracks and civics.
4 Trebuchets
2 Longbow man
4 Phalanx or Spearman (I think Phalanx but i'm not sure because in normal game Phalanx is Greece only and Immortal, Persia only.)
4 Immortals
2 War Elephants
I bombarded the city while a other pillage group destroyed everything in their lands.
As soon as the city was 0% i wanted to attack.
The city was completely isolated as well a few other city's.
In fact 5 were completely isolated and 3 still had some connections. So his kingdom could no longer be sustained.
The opponent had 3 units in the city,
1 Archer fortified
2 Axeman fortified
The combat odds showed to me 3,20% chance to win?!?
I couldn't believe it and attacked... i died. I lost all of my 16 units and he still had 1 left.
From frustration i shut down the pc without saving the 4 hour session...
I don't know if you people agree with me but i shouldn't have lost this...
My troops had more promotions and were in larger numbers.
Is this a bug????
What bug? You attacked a city without any city-attacking units. To elaborate, you didn't bring any Swords or Maces. you didn't suicide your siege for collateral on the defenders, and the RNG just plain didn't like you. Suck it up, learn your lessons, and move on.
Hello.
Still love the mod.
But I find the Barbarian Nomad too powerful. I would like to edit its properties (to something like 2/2 and 50% retreat chances).
However, I can't find the barbarian units in the UnitsInfo.xml file. Where the heck are they?
You're at least the second person I've seen refer to a "Barbarian Nomad". I assume this is a translation issue, but what the heck are you referring to?
What bug? You attacked a city without any city-attacking units. To elaborate, you didn't bring any Swords or Maces. you didn't suicide your siege for collateral on the defenders, and the RNG just plain didn't like you. Suck it up, learn your lessons, and move on.
I ask if its a bug not claiming it is a bug.
So i cant attack a city with early units??
RNG? What the hell? Do i need to search what this means? I guess so...
"Random Number Generator" ah i see...
I read about Civ NOT using random numbers anymore. They changed it according to someone i cant remember now. (its here in the forums somewhere.)
But seriously it would be stupid if i cant attack a city with early units.
Thats the same like claiming you need rifleman instead of musketeers to get a city.
And above all how can 3 units survive against the stack i used???
Sorry maybe your right but i still cant believe it...
I conquered many city's but never had something like this until i played this mod...
Is it me or is morchuflex post clear even to me?
At least i know where he is referring to.
He wants to change the statistics from the Barbarian Nomad (horse archer) in the corresponding xml file.
Spoiler :
Open:
CIV4UnitInfos.xml
Search for this class/type:
<Class>UNITCLASS_CHARIOT</Class>
<Type>UNIT_HORSE_ARCHER</Type>
Search for the string under this class/type:
<iCombat>#</iCombat>
And change the # to the strength you like.
And is it me or.....
<iCombat>3</iCombat>
<iCombatLimit>100</iCombatLimit>
A max of 100 strength is high, VERY high.
Does it ever happen that a unit like this can get 100 strength????
Oh and Bestbrain, who are you? You ain't in the development team because you even didn't know about the unit. And you're not credited.
I don't believe you even know what you're talking about...
So maybe you need to suck it up, learn your lessons, and move on instead of me... oh here's your smily;
And if people want to tell me i'm rude, don't. I know i am.
Being around on this forum makes me that way.
JujuLautre
Deity
What bug? You attacked a city without any city-attacking units. To elaborate, you didn't bring any Swords or Maces. you didn't suicide your siege for collateral on the defenders, and the RNG just plain didn't like you. Suck it up, learn your lessons, and move on.
He said he had elephants, longbows, and trebs against archers and an axeman, plus some more That's plenty enough to defeat the defenders.
I see two possible explanations, either you were really badly screwed by the RNG (yes, CIV sill uses random numbers, that's why it says things such as "3.25% of victory) but I find it hard to believe, or there is something you did wrong or did not notice.
He got screwed by the RNG. He stated that he took down the cultural defenses to O with the Trebs. He then attacked fortified defenders (an Archer and two axes). Hill? Protective Civ? Not stated. Anyway, I wouldn't expect much from the Spears and Longbows (heck, even the Immortals), but you'd think suiciding the Trebs would do some collateral and the War Elephants would've cleaned up after that. Chalk the whole thing up to an attack of No Luck, but not an issue with the mod.
