Discussion in 'Civ4 - Strategy & Tips' started by dinner9001, Apr 20, 2010.
Are trebs good against muskets for attacking? or should I wait until cannons?
They will work fine, just build lots. Attacking the cities trebs have a large bonus. Waiting till you have the perfect weapons may lose you a window of opportunity.
Depends if the muskets are in a city. Targets inside a city trebuchet > catapult, outside cities, catapult > trebuchet. Attacking cities treb's have effectively 8 versus cannons' 12. Muskets inside cities will likely have city garrison I plus fortication bonus, so figure their to effectively be at least 13.5. Meaning you'll likely need to suicide a couple as nutcrackers either way. Their true value (cannons and trebs, both) is not their , but the collateral damage. If you already have a nice stack of trebuchets, I wouldn't wait until cannons.
No, that's not true. Trebs subtract from a defender's strength, just like city raider promotions; they don't add to their own like combat promos.
Some math could prove me wrong, but I usually fear Longbows more than Muskets when I bring Trebuchets to town.
if you have enough trebs to sacrafice for the max amount of collarteral damage and then troops to clean up the left overs. then sacrafice. thats what siege is for. i never expect my siege to live. but ofc if your 1turn away from steel then might as well upgrade few of ur highest promo trebs (lvl4+)
This is mostly due to:
-Longbows can be upgraded from Archers and retain their promotions
-Longbows have a large window of use and usually gain more exp
-Nothing upgrades into Muskets so they start from scratch
-Longbows usually have their full fortified bonus while muskets arrive late at the party
-Longbows on hills get an extra 25% that Muskets don't
^ Longbows also have an innate 25% City Defense, making vanilla LBs relatively better compared to vanilla Muskets for defending a hill city.
And indeed LBs are usually more dangerous than Muskets for Trebs. A huge part of this is the free First Strike LBs get - with their bonuses they are often favored for that match (if undamaged) and as we all know having First Strikes is a big "win more" ability.
An example fight,
0XP Treb vs 0XP LB in a hill city: 4 vs 6/(1-(75%-100%)) = 4.8 + FS
0XP Treb vs 0XP Musket in a hill city: 4 vs 9/(1-(25%-100%)) = 5.14
provided I got combat math right once in my life - don't count on it.
This is often approximately the case since CR and CG tend to cancel each other out. The First Strike of the LB makes it much better than the Musket in this scenario, even without most of the perks kossin listed above.
Hmm, this would suggest there is some value in getting FS for Trebs, which IIRC is an option. That'll cancel the FS the defending LB gets, and if you have 5 exp Trebs (Barracks + Vas/Theo/settled GG so this is likely) you can still afford CR 1 to start with.
Does that make sense?
Sadly, no, since the strength you'd lose from not picking CR would be a bigger loss than offsetting the first strike (which doesn't even happen just with Drill1) - especially since CR2 is more powerful than CR1 I can't fathom a situation where something else than CR or Accuracy would make sense for Trebs.
CRIII is where its at for trebs. That will eat longbows. Just figure out a way to get CRIII on a few trebs and you are good to go. You won't need to waste to many on suicide runs.
Ah, gotcha. So much for that idea...
Assuming no City Raider or City Garrison for either side, is that to say for a city assault (where defenders just arrived no fortification and cultural defense is 0%):
Catapult vs Musket --> 5 vs 9 = 5:9
Trebuchet vs Musket --> 4 vs (9 - 4) = 4:5
Cannon vs Musket --> 12 vs 9 = 12:9
CR promos are subtracted from the total modifiers of the defender and then you divide by the difference.
Formula for counting CR combat odds:
Defender strength * [(1 + positive difference)/(1-negative difference)]
Where positive difference means the defender has more bonuses and negative means the attacker has the better bonuses.
For example Trebuchet vs Musket in city (no promos for either, no hill, no fortify, no river)
Trebuchet has 100% against city
Musket has 0% in a city
Difference is -1 (0-1) so the modifier goes under.
4 vs 9 * ( 1 / (1+1)) = 4.5
4 vs 4.5
Now take a CGI Musket vs a Trebuchet
Difference is (0.2-1) = -0.8 so it goes under as well
4 vs 9 * ( 1 / (1+0.8)) = 5
4 vs 5
Let's not omit the fact they're only 5/8 (almost half) times as expensive as muskets in terms hammer cost. Of course, the muskets could be drafted, but then it'd still be a waste of a bureaucracy bonus and several thousand beakers for Nationhood and Gunpowder.
With the same promotion, musket is almost always better than longbow, on a hill or not. Longbow is a cheap defence unit to help you survive medieval, while musket could be used in both defence and offence.
I almost never build musket, because at early medieval, there are much better techs to research than gunpowder, and many buildings to be built.
Muskets are the worst unit in the game by far.
Drafted muskets are very good along with cannons because they can clean up and serve as garrison. They're on the same path as well.
17 xp ----> NOW it's ok to consider drill .
Sorry, but this distinction probably goes to explorers or ironclads (though the latter have limited use) rather than muskets. Given proper promos muskets are solid stack D in the field. Their window is smallish so they are better on slower speeds however.
Trebuchets are good against everything.*
* Some restrictions may apply.
Separate names with a comma.