1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Are Immortals/Legion Stats Valid?

Discussion in 'Civ3 - General Discussions' started by iron0037, Apr 22, 2004.

  1. iron0037

    iron0037 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    105
    Location:
    Washington DC, USA
    Hi all,
    Ok, I'm sure this was covered many years ago when Civ3 first came out, or am I the only one that finds the stats for the Immortal totally unrealistic?

    The Immortals got their name because no matter how many of them you killed, they kept coming. It was their sheer numbers, not their strength that worried the Persian neighbors.

    At the same time, Roman Legions were the ancient era heavyweights. While effective at waging campaigns, they had a hard time protecting the frontier. If you read the Civolopedia, even it makes some comment about how the Legions are better offensively than defensively.

    Immortals at 4/2/1 and Legions at 3/3/1 just don't seem realistic. I always tweak the stats in my game. Legions are 4/2/1 while Immortals are 3/1/1 cost 20. They're cheap to reflect the mass producability of them but they're also a bit weaker. This makes them basically a super archer with an iron requirement. While it changes your strategy with each civ, it seems to not hurt gameplay.

    Anyone with me on this one?
     
  2. the mormegil

    the mormegil Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,119
    Location:
    Leeds, England
    3/1/1 cost 20 is not very good at all considering it's a UU. What about giving them a HP bonus to reflect the fact that they keep on coming?
     
  3. iron0037

    iron0037 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    105
    Location:
    Washington DC, USA
    Yea, 3/1/1@20 is a pretty drastic change from the typical overbearing Immortal. It obviously weakens Persia. But an archer is 2/1/1 and costs 20 as well. A hitpoint bonus is one way to improve them, or maybe eliminate their iron dependency.

    If nothing else, you could be conservative and just switch the stats on the Legion and Immortal. Even that would be closer to historical truth.
     
  4. Ranos

    Ranos Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    819
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I like the mormegil's idea. If they just kept coming, give them a one or two hp bonus and have their stats be 3/2/1.
     
  5. Jawz II

    Jawz II Oh Dear

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,671
    Location:
    Arizona Bay
    you are wrong

    the immortals where the elite soldiers/bodyguards of the persian king,never numbering anymore or less than 10.000

    that is why they got the name,no matter how many got killed they got the number up to 10.000,that and the fact that they didnt use heavy shields or heavy armour

    im 110 kg,and i wouldnt wanna get into a fight with a 50 kg woman on PCP bent on killing me

    fanatic people not affraid of dying make the scariest opponents:eek:

    ps.legions.. werent they known for the box like shields together formation thing,whats that called?

    also i know legions were both combat engineers and soldiers,they took with them axes and saws and shovels to fields,beside the sword and armour,they could build forts in a week or 2,and they frequently did

    i think the numbers are right on
     
  6. Longasc

    Longasc Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,763
    The turtle formation of the Roman Legions perhaps Jawz.

    I think iron and mormegil have a point: The Immortals were hand-picked Elite Soldiers with little Armor - an Extra HP would reflect the 10.000 always thingy, but 4/2/1 - is okay IMO!

    The Roman Legion fought disciplined against Barbarians and many others, but as 4/3/1 would make them overpowered, 3/3/1 is not a bad choice for them imo.

    The problem is, mostly people favor offensive boni for good reasons.

    I even prefer the Gallic Swordsman over Roman Legionaries, but hum - shall we recreate History and make the Roman Legion vastly superior to all other civs UU's?

    Historical correctness is nice, but playability calls for it to be tweaked.

    The Roman Legions stabbing weapons were better used in a shield formation and close quarter fighting, a more defensive fighting style than running around and swinging huge axes and longswords. So why should 3/3/1 not be a good interpretation of that?

    4/3/1 - hm... very strong!!! Perhaps too strong? This would require the legions to be costly.

    As Militaristic and Commercial are not my favorite trait combo, hm... the question is how much of an Edge a 4/3/1 Legion would give the Romans.


    3-3-1 Legions and 4-2-1 Immortals are fine imo... Civ 4 is waiting and there are more grave issues!!! Submarine Bug e.g.
     
  7. collin_stp

    collin_stp Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2004
    Messages:
    116
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    I like the idea of an extra hitpoint for immortals, and an immortal should not be stronger offensively than a hoplite is defensively as it is now. Legions were still the dominate fighting force at their time. They should be stronger for historical reasons, but it wouldn't be good for gameplay. If you really want strong legions, just play rise of rome to get your fix.
     
  8. the mormegil

    the mormegil Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,119
    Location:
    Leeds, England
    http://www.ancientpersia.net/war/immortal.htm

    The number was always the same so in that way it seemed they kept coming without ever dying since there were always 10,000 of them.

    The Civ team seem to have made a mistake in portraying them with just a sword.

    They were elite so expensive more than likely. They were also very strong and kept coming. So what about 4/2/1 +1HP and costs 40?

    For the Roman Legion - Legions were expensive to upkeep but were also the best troops of ancient times. Maybe 4/3/1 costs 40? You could even add an extra HP considering they were very fit and resilient but then they'd probably be too good.
     
  9. King Alexander

    King Alexander Universe explorer

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2003
    Messages:
    3,421
    Location:
    Thessaloniki, Hellas
    Iron0037, I understand what you mean. Civ3 tries to reflect the "real" facts, but doesn't always succed in doing that. It's a game, after all.

    Greek Hoplites slained the Immortals when they invaded Greece(twice) and then went on to conquer all Asia and a part of India under Great Alexander's direction(just consider what their numbers were, comparing to the Persians). What do you think their defence/attack stats should have been?At least 4 for defence and 2-3 for attack. They were not only able for solid defence but for attack as well(they went on attack when the enemy had been disordered and wounded from their solid defence- that is what most martial arts doing, anyway: most techniques begin from a guarding position) .

    Civ3 is a fantastic game, but doesn't reflect the reality, if that's what you're looking for(could ever a modern armor lose to a spearman?).
     
  10. Nocturno

    Nocturno Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    33
    Location:
    The cold North,Canada
    Really wish the Legions would switch to a shield and pilum when defending.. just for the neat look. :)
     
  11. alamo

    alamo bang!

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    1,569
    Location:
    Texas
    The immortals are pesky but ok. Jerxes is so pesky because of the UU/Mil/Sci combination. Immortals are mainly a threat to the immediate neighbors.

    The legionaries are too weak - no better than a sword?! True they fought in a defensive formation but they ruled the battlefield.

    Maybe there should be a group bonus for a stack of legionaries, like extra offense or army behavior. Maybe a pilum range attack from the others when one attacks.
     
  12. the mormegil

    the mormegil Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,119
    Location:
    Leeds, England
    Persians are actually Ind/Sci which, IMO, is better than Mil/Sci.
     
  13. iron0037

    iron0037 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    105
    Location:
    Washington DC, USA
    You're right King Alexander, Civ3 is just a game. It's a model of reality and of course will never be perfect. It's just that making the Immortal the most powerful unit in the ancient era (IMO) seems unacceptably unrealistic. The Legion was clearly (again IMO) the most powerful ancient unit. It wouldn't be hard to tweak the stats to fix this discrepancy between the model and reality.

    mormegil: interesting reading about the Immortal. Thanks for the link. In general, I don't like UUs with costs different than the standard. My final suggestion would be
    Legion: 4/2/1 cost 30
    Immortal: 3/2/1 cost 30, +1HP

    Maybe I'll try that setting the next time I play a game.
     
  14. viper275

    viper275 Playing Civ4

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,855
    Location:
    LA
    The problem with 3/2/1 in iron's idea is that it makes Immortals essentially Swordsmen with 1 more health. I think that they should be different than that. Now instead of players that want to win conquest at 300 AD as the Persians, they choose the Romans. Here's an idea: the Immortals replace Spearmen instead of Swordsmen (after all, they mostly defended) and you switch the stats, then make Legionary's cost 40 instead of 30. How's that?

    In other words:

    Immortals: 3/3/1 Replace Spearmen, cost 30
    Legionary: 4/2/1 Replace Swordsmen, cost 40
     
  15. the mormegil

    the mormegil Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,119
    Location:
    Leeds, England
    The Legionary isn't good enough. It's one more attack point than a swordsman but costs 10 more shields. The whole point of a UU is to get something for nothing. Why not just have Legionary as costing 30?
     
  16. Xen

    Xen Magister

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2003
    Messages:
    16,001
    Location:
    Formosa
    I gave th elegions an extra hitpoint, and discontiuned the upgrade path to medieval infatry- dose wonders IMO.

    as for immortals- that the GREEK name of them- in PERSIAN, thier name means "companions"
     
  17. Longasc

    Longasc Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,763
    Companion Infantry and Cavalry were alo known (the Greek ones) to fight in pairs of two, companions, hence the name.

    They were also said to have been lovers, too. So they did not only cover each other in battle, but their tender parts probably, too, in their spare time.

    There were also historians that claimed that the asses of a Spartan army were as wide as open barns.

    This could be an example for modern armies, if it would have caused less raping and cruelties, but... ugh, getting way off-topic. :rolleyes:
     
  18. Blasphemous

    Blasphemous Graulich

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2002
    Messages:
    3,079
    Location:
    Jerusalem, Israel
    Again I will push the revamp of the ancient combat model.
    Spears should be 2.2.1 cost 30. - Spears, like Riflemen and Infantry and Mech Infantry were used offensively as well as defensively.
    Swords 3.2.1 cost 30 + Iron. - No change, this one was good. ;)
    Archers 1.2.1 cost 20. - Archers throughout history were used defensively, or as light artillery support. NEVER alone on offense.

    Immortals replace Spears, get +1 HP and the rest stays the same. - Immortals were elite spearmen, known for the 10000 thingy.
    Legionaries replace Swords and MDI, get 4.3.1 cost 40 + Iron. - Legionaries were superior to their contemporaries, but for game balance can not be as cheap.
    Hoplites replace Spears and Swords (but counts as Spear line), get 3.2.1 and the rest stays the same. - I have heard that what made Hoplites special was an offensive tactic. This makes sense and also allows them to exterminate the Immortals as King Alexander here pointed out.

    These changes are based on discussion in this thread. I think I will make a quick mod to incorporate them in the Epic Game sometime soon. :)
     
  19. the mormegil

    the mormegil Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,119
    Location:
    Leeds, England
    Those sound good but there's just one thing I'm confused about. You mention Archers being used defensively but leave them as 2.1.1. :confused:

    Also, the Hoplite is the same as the Swordsman but counts as a spear. I don't see the UU benefit anywhere.:confused:
     
  20. Blasphemous

    Blasphemous Graulich

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2002
    Messages:
    3,079
    Location:
    Jerusalem, Israel
    Whoops.
    About Archer, I'm quite the opposite of a morning person, posted that a bit too early.
    About Hoplite, no Iron needed, and you get it one tech earlier and for the price of a spear. If that ain't an advantage, I dunno what is.
     

Share This Page