3.17 Patch: Impressions Thus Far

[kazapp]

I don't know that this is a 3.17 issue per se, but is this a bug? I'm Gandhi and I get the slave revolt so I switch civics, but the revolt continues? WTH? I've had this happen a few times. Does the unofficial patch fix this? The spiritual trait is compromised if this is the way it's supposed to be.

My guess is that your civics affect whether a revolt starts only, not whether it continues once triggered.

 

[MyOtherName]

The spiritual trait is compromised if this is the way it's supposed to be.

Not really. With spiritual, you're supposed to switch into slavery just as you need to whip, and then switch away before the slaves start revolting.

 

[Gwynnja]

Not really. With spiritual, you're supposed to switch into slavery just as you need to whip, and then switch away before the slaves start revolting.

Thanks for the stellar advice. What I had hoped was that by switching out of slavery, my slaves would stop revolting.

 

[Polobo]

If you get the slaves riled up enough to actually revolt do you really think words are going to calm them down?

Master: Don't kill me, I promise I'll never whip another human again.
Slave: You've just saying that cause I have a knife at your throat.

Spiritual is really strong as it is; implementing your proposed behavior would make both it and slavery even stronger that they currently are - which is really strong.

 

[ICNP]

So maybe I it should be brought to solver to have Galley's get +25% vs. Barbs?

 

[Bandobras Took]

You can still get wiped out by the Barbarian Horde event if you research Archery. I got 5 archers on the borders of my capital. Wasn't expecting that . . .

 

[Sisiutil]

You can still get wiped out by the Barbarian Horde event if you research Archery. I got 5 archers on the borders of my capital. Wasn't expecting that . . .

Well, they way that random event works now is you won't get it until and unless you can build a counter unit. I guess the counter to Archers is more Archers...

 

[Sisiutil]

On another note, I've been playing a 3.17 off-line game through to the end and I think I can say that the Sirian Doctrine is, indeed, officially dead. Not being able to use siege weapons from aboard ship made amphibious invasions extraordinarily difficult, even with Marines; you can lower the city's defenses with either Frigates and later ships or with spies, but your unit attacking amphibiously will still get very bad odds. Yes, you can still give Tanks Barrage promotions, but those expensive units will die in hordes if you use them this way; remember that unlike siege weapons, Tanks don't have withdrawal capabilities, unless you also give them Flanking promotions.

I myself abandoned attacking from aboard ship. I returned to landing my units before attacking, Marines included--they were needed ashore to protect the more vulnerable City Raider Infantry and siege weapons. So much for using Marines amphibiously, unless the city's defenders are so obsolete that Marines are overkill.

You really need Flight and Radio for Bombers to soften up the defenders, and of course, if it's an inter-continental invasion, it may not be possible to bring Bombers to bear, at least not for that crucial initial attack.

Frankly, this change almost feels like too much of a nerf to me, because it seems to have indirectly nerfed Marines as well. Or maybe I'm just whining because it seems specifically targeted to eliminate one of my favourite late-game military tactics. The thing is, the Sirian Doctrine wasn't just a winning tactic, it was a game saving one; it didn't just help me win, it also accelerated the win. We all know that the late game can become boring, and fast-moving amphibious invasions often helped push the game faster toward a conclusion. Now, domination and conquest wins won't just be tougher--which I think was the designers' intent--they'll be more tedious, too. And we needed more of that in the late game like a hole in the head.

I think this change should have been balanced out by giving ships some sort of collateral damage attack--not as much as Cannon or Artillery, but something.

 

[CivCorpse]

Now there is actually a reason to build carriers. 3 carriers with 3 fighters each can help a bit.

 

[Bandobras Took]

Well, they way that random event works now is you won't get it until and unless you can build a counter unit. I guess the counter to Archers is more Archers...

That's the thing; I thought I had time, but I got unlucky with the event and it happened before I could have had two archers.

 

[Mesousa]

I think the main problem is that the barbarians from the event don't always go after the civilization that triggered it, but a neighbour, and there's no guarantee he'll have a counter unit.

 

[DanF5771]

... Tanks don't have withdrawal capabilities, unless you also give them Flanking promotions...

That also wouldn't work when going Sirian, as with 3.17 there is no withdrawal of land units to the sea!

int CvUnit::withdrawalProbability() const
{
	if (getDomainType() == DOMAIN_LAND && plot()->isWater())
	{
		return 0;
	}
...

IMHO all these changes are now in 3.17 to prevent cheap "raze HC's coastal legendary culture city" missions...

 

[kazapp]

I thought amphibious assaults ignored city defenses?

I thought the real reason amphibious assaults sucketh is that your Riflemen/Marines still have to go up against fully healed Grenadiers/Infantry with +25% fortify and possibly +25% hill bonus?

 

[Daedal]

So I guess no more conquest/domination on continent maps?

 

[r_rolo1]

^^Not necessarily... but landings now are bloodier and it is highly advisable to not try to open a beachead without some help from someone there