(3-VT) Ancient & Classical Bottom Tech Shakeup

Status
Not open for further replies.
This may kill swordsman. Iron working isn't a glamorous tech as is (directly competing with early cultural necessities), now one has to research iron working AND settle for iron AND improve the iron AND build the swordsman if they want to go for any kind of offensive. Might as well wait for steel.
 
Swords are the kings of classical era combat and they can be gotten in 5 techs with a good iron placement, or no iron placement if you are Iroquois. They have more than a full era to make their presence felt, and the closest thing to a counter against them -- CBows -- arrives 1 tier later and requires 13 tech unlocks. I will continue to stand by my assertion that swords are doing fine, and are more than a match for anything in their era, and that this proposal does little to hamper that.

In fact, the sword rush may even be more dangerous with this change, because the iron working is further modified by access to a decent :c5gold: gold wonder, and earlier forges that can set your empire-wide production up while you wait for the iron working tech unlock. You might find the later reveal of iron is more than made up for by the economic base that this new bottom line strengthens.

Apologies for double post but missed this and disagree as comp bows are excellent against swords. As you note, they are only 1 tier later and in a more favourable tech position. Additionally comps can be upgraded from the useful archer for speedy defence while swordsmen have to be manufactured (and with this proposed change, will not even be ready for construction instantly)
 
No way this kills swordsman. Slightly slower? Maybe. But also, possibly faster. There's already plenty of competing changes that this proposal introduces: faster forges during a time when you aren't even building the swordsman, more reliable science, the fact that everyone else can't make use of iron until they catch up with your tech; any guess as to whether it actually ends up worse, better, or the same is just that: a guess. As mentioned before, if the delay in iron reveal becomes such a big problem, you can always time out a settler and plant it right on top of a deposit for the rush.
 
Brazil will probably want to avoid this, because their UI places a resource which would overwrite the hidden Hardwood. They could have had a stronger lumbermill improvement AND a brazilwood camp if they revealed them in time.
Not my experience with Brazil getting Banana reveals, back form when it was on Calendar. And the current Brazil has it harder due to the UI requiring no fresh water. Chances are that Brazil gets a few more spots due to hardwood replacing some banana/deer and not being on the tech path to Calendar. Overall, a Brazil player will likely avoid Mining for as long as possible just for the prospect of the extra brazilwood camps, who outweigh hardwood in yields quantity and quality. Overall a buff to Brazil.

On the other hand, putting the resource reveal in iron working hides it from other civs for longer. A sword rusher has asymetric knowledge of iron deposits for a long time while he waits for non-militarist civs to take the bottom techs. He will know about iron later, but it's likely his settling window for iron will actually be bigger. Having the resource so close to the start of the tech tree at Bronze or -- heaven forbid -- Mining would have made it trivial for another civ that isn't invested in iron units to reveal iron and use it as a trade commodity while they focus on other techs.
Swords are the kings of classical era combat and they can be gotten in 5 techs
That assumes the human is playing on warlord difficulty. A human may prioritize on getting to Iron Working, yet arrive there later than all the AIs due to the handicap yields. Not to mention the difficulty of conciliating it with other pressing needs, such as Pottery for settlers, a non-Mining monopoly, possibly need to deviate to Construction for walls, need a certain tech to fulfill their pantheon needs, etc.

At Bronze Working, a human player can at least reveal iron before the AI gets its first secondary city (when the first science handicap boost is triggered); at Iron Working, the AI may already have a considerable technological edge to the point that the AI is the one having the asymmetrical knowledge and gets to deny iron to the bottom-focused human, and do so without even trying.
 
No way this kills swordsman. Slightly slower? Maybe. But also, possibly faster. There's already plenty of competing changes that this proposal introduces: faster forges during a time when you aren't even building the swordsman, more reliable science, the fact that everyone else can't make use of iron until they catch up with your tech; any guess as to whether it actually ends up worse, better, or the same is just that: a guess. As mentioned before, if the delay in iron reveal becomes such a big problem, you can always time out a settler and plant it right on top of a deposit for the rush.
The settler rush is interesting, would be fun to see how this interacts with imperium (?, the free settler policy). If PDan still does their tweaks would be a fun one to play with
 
@ma_kuh Harvesting resources like that is a civ 6 mechanic and would be new code in civ 5.
 
It's not an extra source, but it's a more reliable source. replacing 1 source for another was exactly the intent: A guaranteed +1 :c5science: for all cities to replace the lottery of an iron reveal. I specifically made this proposal so that it does NOT add more science to the early game overall, so the overall pace of the game will not be disrupted. What this does is make the bottom tech line Safer.

And there is no need to emphasize the production cost (which is now lower) and maintenance on a building you were going to build in every city anyways. It takes turns to move a worker and build a mine on top of an iron source too.
Er, you had wrote that "Players should be able to reach iron working faster as a result", so the conclusion was that the Forge was intended to be a science boost somehow. And the worker can improve multiple mines for the maintenance of one unit and then proceed to work on something else, the science from each mine is practically maintenance free. The Forge's science isn't, and it's not going to be cost effective without a mine-based monopoly around you.
 
That assumes the human is playing on warlord difficulty. A human may prioritize on getting to Iron Working, yet arrive there later than all the AIs due to the handicap yields. Not to mention the difficulty of conciliating it with other pressing needs, such as Pottery for settlers, a non-Mining monopoly, possibly need to deviate to Construction for walls, need a certain tech to fulfill their pantheon needs, etc.

At Bronze Working, a human player can at least reveal iron before the AI gets its first secondary city (when the first science handicap boost is triggered); at Iron Working, the AI may already have a considerable technological edge to the point that the AI is the one having the asymmetrical knowledge and gets to deny iron to the bottom-focused human, and do so without even trying.
You keep opening up new fronts. Of course any arguments have to assume some parity in players; you can’t reasonably expect any proposal to balance to the handicaps, unless it’s specifically a proposal to change the handicaps. Why even bring that up? Should high-difficulty player playing against AIs with handicap advantages still be able to wipe out AIs with a sword rush? Is that the bar being set? Those handicaps exist specifically to prevent easy wins.

The mod has never been balanced around deity play. It’s well-understood that the AI cheats on higher difficulties.
Er, you had wrote that "Players should be able to reach iron working faster as a result", so the conclusion was that the Forge was intended to be a science boost somehow. And the worker can improve multiple mines for the maintenance of one unit and then proceed to work on something else, the science from each mine is practically maintenance free. The Forge's science isn't, and it's not going to be cost effective without a mine-based monopoly around you.
there is no need to emphasize the production cost (which is now lower) and maintenance on a building you were going to build in every city anyways
 
Last edited:
You keep opening up new fronts. Of course any arguments have to assume some parity in players; you can’t reasonably expect any proposal to balance to the handicaps, unless it’s specifically a proposal to change the handicaps. Why even bring that up?
I'm responding to your argument of asymmetric knowledge, which wasn't part of the original rationale. I'm pointing out that the move of Iron Working won't result in the asymmetrical knowledge play you're envisioning for a portion of the players, as higher difficulties can have an AI with 7 or more techs than the human in the opening Ancient-Classical part.

Handicap discussion played a big role in the past when discussing beliefs like Cooperation and the (then) Goddess of Love, those two had to be nerfed to the point of being too weak for humans because the AI handicaps made both overpowered in AI hands at higher difficulties. Since we're discussing how to make the bottom tech line more attractive to the players, it makes sense to discuss what we will consider about them, and handicap does play a role here. Similar to how handicap plays when discussing wonders.
 
But You’re shifting the scope of this discussion. And you did it twice in that post.

First bringing up that this should also satisfy some need to make sword rushing viable against high difficulty AI. That’s never a reasonable ask.

You also bring up the pressures of needing other techs in ancient. That has always been true, and will continue to be true, and it is at that point that we aren’t talking about the needs of military rushers, but just all-round players. So you’ve jumped to another matter entirely. If people are investing into other techs then they aren’t rushing for swords or military power early, and they are not in the scope of our concern here.

The point of this proposal is NOT to make the bottom tech self-sufficient and overpowered to the detriment of the rest of the ancient era techs, unlike your counter proposal which aims to increase overall gold and science.
 
Last edited:
Er, you had wrote that "Players should be able to reach iron working faster as a result", so the conclusion was that the Forge was intended to be a science boost somehow. And the worker can improve multiple mines for the maintenance of one unit and then proceed to work on something else, the science from each mine is practically maintenance free. The Forge's science isn't, and it's not going to be cost effective without a mine-based monopoly around you.
The Forge is a science boost: in any city without iron. The point of moving it forward to replace iron is that you are guaranteed the science, even if you were unlucky with iron spawns. You pay for that reliability, it's true, but you also get a bunch of benefits for the 110:c5production: investment as well, so I think it's a wash. You also don't need a worker at all to get it going, so your worker can get started on your pastures without sidetracking through hills.
 
I have no concept of what information I would need to give you an answer to that... half?

I've never worked with resource placement before. I would need to consult someone who does know something about that.

Maybe with the addition of a real :c5production: resource in jungle, the addition of jungle deer is redundant with Bananas in jungle with this?
Please do by the Sponsorship Phase or I'll have to veto the proposal. It's specific enough on everything else, so it can stick around for now. :borg:
 
First bringing up that this should also satisfy some need to make sword rushing viable against high difficulty AI. That’s never a reasonable ask.
People were pointing out that Swordsmen were going to be delayed by your change, which you tried to reassure it wasn't. I'm pointing out that the reassurance isn't convincing. I don't see Rome or Indonesia not being slower from iron reveal being delayed, nor I see the the Forge coming earlier making up for it.
You also bring up the pressures of needing other techs in ancient. That has always been true, and will continue to be true, and it is at that point that we aren’t talking about the needs of military rushers, but just all-round players. So you’ve jumped to another matter entirely. If people are investing into other techs then they aren’t rushing for swords or military power early, and they are not in the scope of our concern here.
Not everyone that focus the bottom techs is a swordman rusher. One can prioritize the bottom techs simply because they prefer to open Medieval from the bottom techs (e.g. Celts, Denmark, Japan), or wants a strong defense during Classical (anyone starting next to a warmonger/expansionist civ). Or simply because they want to secure iron despite having a particular need for a tech at the top lines (e.g. Indonesia). Your proposal's name isn't "Swordman rush tweaks", so don't ignore other approaches regarding this tech line.
 
People were pointing out that Swordsmen were going to be delayed by your change, which you tried to reassure it wasn't. I'm pointing out that the reassurance isn't convincing. I don't see Rome or Indonesia not being slower from iron reveal being delayed, nor I see the the Forge coming earlier making up for it.
We will agree to disagree on this for now. Turns will be gained or lost for deploying swords on small enough margins with these changes that is useless to speculate when swords will appear. Too much rests on map rolls to make this point worth discussing further.

A 5-turn margin on how fast legions come online is the least of Rome’s current concerns, as demonstrated by the legion being the only thing left untouched by the recent Rome proposals. Indonesia is doing just fine. Regardless, we do not balance the entire game around the 3 sword UUs.
Not everyone that focus the bottom techs is a swordman rusher. One can prioritize the bottom techs simply because they prefer to open Medieval from the bottom techs (e.g. Celts, Denmark, Japan), or wants a strong defense during Classical (anyone starting next to a warmonger/expansionist civ). Or simply because they want to secure iron despite having a particular need for a tech at the top lines (e.g. Indonesia). Your proposal's name isn't "Swordman rush tweaks", so don't ignore other approaches regarding this tech line.
Those players with more diffuse focus on the bottom techs will benefit from various changes. The consolidation of lumber mill and logging camp onto metal casting, in addition to the shuffling of bonuses in this proposal is more than enough. The bottom techs do not need more than minor changes; anything more than that would be at the expense of the upper techs.
 
First draft of prospective resource placement rules and frequency for Hardwood:

Hardwood is valid in: grassland/plains forest/jungle hills/flat
Hardwood is placed around production-poor starts in non-tundra forest or jungle. Another resource is chosen if the tile does not have jungle/forest already
After starts are finalized, bonus resources are placed on random tiles NOT within 3 tiles of civ/CS starts. Hardwood is placed based on the frequencies listed below.
Hardwood is not placed if feature is not jungle/forest already (unlike deer, which will place forest under itself after the resource is placed on the map).

precise current numbers (expressed as frequency of resource placement):
deer:
1/6 tundra forest (flat or hill)​
1/8 featureless tundra (converted to forest)​
1/25 non-tundra forest (flat or hill)​
1/15 jungle (flat or hill)​
banana:
1/15 flat jungle​
1/20 tropical marsh​

proposed numbers:
deer:

1/6 tundra forest (flat or hill)​
1/8 featureless tundra (converted to forest)​
1/25 non-tundra forest​
1/25 jungle hill​
banana:
1/20 flat jungle​
1/20 tropical marsh​
hardwood:
1/20 non-tundra forest,​
1/25 flat jungle​
1/15 jungle hill​

total resource frequency (New :: Old)
Tundra forest -- no change
Flat non-tundra forest -- 0.04 :: 0.09
Hilly forest -- 0.04 :: 0.09
Flat Jungle -- 0.133 :: 0.09
Hilly Jungle -- 0.667 :: 0.107

I need to consult on these numbers still, but posting it now so it doesn't get lost. Adding a 2nd resource to forest allows us to bring forest frequencies up.
Not sure what the desired level is for these, but roughly 1 bonus resource per 10 valid tiles seemed like a decent starting point.
Keep in mind that, because hardwood's improvement is so delayed, the aim of this is to slightly increase resource density so that hardwood near your start does not hobble your early economy.
I'm not sure why flat jungle frequencies are so high, while forest resource frequencies are so low. I feel like I am missing pertinent information on these, but for now, this would regularize placements of resources until someone can tell me why these are so uneven right now, and why levelling them is wrong/unadvisable.
 
Last edited:
I just think you're underestimating the disruption that point 2 of your proposal (iron reveal moved to Iron Working) can cause on the bottom tech builds. If it were removed, I wouldn't have much of an issue with your proposal.

For instance, on the hardwood, I pointed out what implications I foresee, of which I don't see it as neither good or bad. At most, I think you're overselling its impact. And I like the change on Colossus. And then, if point 2 were removed, the earlier forge would be an interesting addition to Bronze Working, which was argued last month to be a weak and unattractive tech. You get iron reveal alongside a building that takes advantage of that iron, which should be enough to compensate for the science cost of going all the way to Bronze Working for its reveal.
 
Turns will be gained or lost for deploying swords on small enough margins with these changes that is useless to speculate when swords will appear.
This to me suggests you don't do a lot of sword rushing, because I know exactly how this change will impact swords, its not even speculation. Or god forbid you go iron working for swords and then find out there is no iron in your area.....well tough luck buddy.
 
total resource frequency (New :: Old)
Tundra forest -- no change
Flat non-tundra forest -- 0.04 :: 0.09
Hilly forest -- 0.04 :: 0.09
Flat Jungle -- 0.133 :: 0.09
Hilly Jungle -- 0.667 :: 0.107
You left it out because there's no change, but I think it's not insignificant that Tundra forest is 0.166 (from the initial forest spawn), then 0.125 (for the non-hills that weren't already checked, and get converted up to forests (which is itself a double-helping of assistance for naked tundra)), for an average resource frequency somewhere between the two. Just to give people some context for these numbers.
 
Last edited:
For instance, on the hardwood, I pointed out what implications I foresee, of which I don't see it as neither good or bad. At most, I think you're overselling its impact. And I like the change on Colossus. And then, if point 2 were removed, the earlier forge would be an interesting addition to Bronze Working, which was argued last month to be a weak and unattractive tech. You get iron reveal alongside a building that takes advantage of that iron, which should be enough to compensate for the science cost of going all the way to Bronze Working for its reveal.
This to me suggests you don't do a lot of sword rushing, because I know exactly how this change will impact swords, its not even speculation. Or god forbid you go iron working for swords and then find out there is no iron in your area.....well tough luck buddy.
I think it's a good compromise, it would avoid the rush towards a technology which ultimately won't bring you anything for lack of iron.

Another issue I see is the introduction of Hardwood with Mining and the ability to cut jungles with Trapping. I think that it would be necessary to assemble under Mining the possibility of cutting trees (jungle or forest) to avoid a beautiful mess.
 
This to me suggests you don't do a lot of sword rushing, because I know exactly how this change will impact swords, its not even speculation. Or god forbid you go iron working for swords and then find out there is no iron in your area.....well tough luck buddy.
This is why swords would need a buff if this proposal passes, but there's still the annoying fact that you cant plan to rush swords when it's all a matter of luck. I see this as a much bigger problem than the supposed problem of iron becoming available for trade before you can use it (which I think just provides flexibility).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom