Cats ftw

Ecofarm

Deity
Joined
Mar 12, 2007
Messages
15,370
Location
Univ. Florida
I have noticed a rather boring trend in warmongering, especially in MP. No matter what Civilization you are, early warmongering consists of 2 phases.

Phase 1 – Luck

In the beginning the game is just like the beginning of real life: there are haves and have-nots. Whether you are in either category is decided by geography. Being born in the US, rather than in a 3rd world hell-hole, is a matter of luck (please excuse the omitting of karma, Hindi based people) - just like being born with a military resource (or not) is a matter of luck. If you are a “have” and your neighbor is a have-not, there existence is an unnecessary nuisance. If you are a have not, you can only pray that your neighbor is also a have not, or is so newbie that they fail to leverage this tremendous advantage. If your neighbor does, however, choose to exercise their god-given rights over your existence, you can only build archers and watch them use your BFC as a playground – until construction.

If you are a have-not, but can work seafood (or someone declares on your RNG-appointed overlord), you may be able to bust out with catapults, but this is a sorry example of catapult use because it is probably not for the win, you lost long ago. This brings us to the second phase, which I call “Cats for the win”.

Phase 2 – Cats ftw

Assuming that you are a “have”, your neighbor is a newbie, or you are playing SP, you may proceed to Phase 2. This phase is also the same for all Civs: 1st to cats wins. I think most people will agree - cats are overpowered. If you get construction before your neighbor, that civ is now a resource. A stack of cats protected slightly will crunch an even numbered and diverse combination of classic troops, whether in the field or at a city. The collateral is overwhelming.

As far as defending with catapults pre-chemistry (guilds?) goes, it’s simply not fair! :mad: A stack of equivalent size decimates a diverse group of attackers: in home territory they move 2 on roads - invasion over; even archers can mop up the scraps. Once you have a stack of cats, you can continue to tech away without fear of being invaded until grenadiers (maybe knights) - except by an even larger stack of cats! If you have a couple of turns before the enemy gets to you, then you can whip a million of them before the enemy arrives – just to make sure. Perhaps that ‘cat-lady’ down the street is a civ player driven mad by this :lol: .

I have found that Hannibal is so efficient at exploiting this “strategy” (I use the term loosely), that I may stop playing him. Here is why:

Starting tech – Mining (see Phase 1)

UU – Nums - they kill any ancient/classic era troop – Praets and spears? No problem with shock. Throw in a medic and a sentry, and they are a force to be reckoned with. You only need to fear elephants, and they aren't until Phase 2 realm.

Trait - Financial - allows quick research to construction (Phase 2).

Starting tech - Fishing - even faster research to construction because you can work 2-3 commerce water and build a boat right away.

Trait – Charismatic - any barracks*catapult that withdraws [1 xp] can be promoted and hit again next turn. This limits the number of occasional siege rejections that result from failing to produce an overwhelming number of cats (silly n00b :p ).



How I would Nerf Cats:

1) Make them a 2 in the field, and a 4 vs. cities (like trebs, they will require significant protection). This also allows an archer unit to attack and kill them, which is realistic. Four guys with a big wooden machine are not going to survive four guys launching arrows at them, unless their slow firing catapult kills the entire archer (read: sniper) squad in one shot – come on, that’s not realistic (the archers would not be standing shoulder-to-shoulder). They might be able to hide behind the machine for awhile, but to kill the entire archer squad?

2) Force them to defend FIRST vs. archery units. I have often found that my city would be better defended if my archers lost fortification, but killed the enemy cats. This makes sense anyway, since archery units have range and should attack the most threatening element of a siege. Consider it moving to a more exposed position in order to get a shot at the cats and their scurrying crew. With heavy arrows, even the machine could be damaged by a thick deluge.

3) Reduce collateral damage.

4) Unlock the anti-siege promotion with combat 1 (or have no pre-requirements), for all units. Any unit could realistically concentrate attacks at a fixed point (why not ranged weapons??). The promotion name “Charge” would need to be changed though, since that is not the only way to concentrate fire on a fixed point. Heck, ranged weapons should have an easier time against a slow moving machine, compared to a fast moving horse, anyway! If it is because arrows cannot kill a machine, then how do horse archers (or swords, for that matter) do it? Do they hack away at the catapult until it breaks and there is nothing to hide behind? Come on, they kill the crew. Since when can you operate a catapult in total cover?

5) They should suffer collateral damage. Where the heck did this change come from anyway!? Who felt the need to buff cats!? Perhaps it was because having a stack of cats defending is almost total safety for the city because they wreak incoming forces. The way it is now, the attacking cats (at least one type of unit) can still attack after a cat defensive-strike.


In SP with high difficulty / standard + size map, the game can continue after construction - if there are enemies not close enough to destroy in Phase 2; but no MP Pangea / TBG / Inland Lake warmonger worth his salt ever encounters this, unless the map (and thus number of players and amount of playtime required!) is HUGE. Eight + people sticking around for 3-4 hours? Not likely.

With these 2 cents, I believe I have spent my allowance for the week (I must be up to a dollar fifty by now). Sorry for posting a lot, there is almost no-one to talk about the game with IRL.
 
MP does get a little boring with all the cat spam. I think the way to nerf them would be to increase the maintenance cost of them, I don't like the idea of changing its stats around at all.
 
I've never known that catapaults were overpowered, but that's probably because I only play single-player.

I didn't know that catapaults didn't suffer colatteral damage; that's just stupid. You have a whole stack of cats coming at you, and what's the counter to stacks? Colater... Oh wait, nvm! >.<

Why not just up the shield cost of catapaults (50 or 60) like they did with trebs? If it cost 60, then a single catapault would be almost the shield equivalent of 2 axemen. Same unit, less spam.
 
If you wanted to under-power cats not only could you make them vulnerable to collateral you could give them increased vulnerability to collateral damage (bulky things out in the open are just looking to capture stray rounds).
The current counter to cats are horse archers so maybe HAs could stage a comeback.
 
A stack of catapults isn't that deadly. You don't need to wait until knights, horse archers will do the job just great...
 
If a stack of 5 cats hits 5 horse archers, those horses better go home and lick their wounds - or they are sitting ducks. If the horses manage to hit the cats, 1-2 spears in the cat stack makes it a pyric victory. Especially if you calculate by hammers. If the attacking horse archers get unlucky, it's an outright disgrace.
 
2) Force them to defend FIRST vs. archery units. I have often found that my city would be better defended if my archers lost fortification, but killed the enemy cats. This makes sense anyway, since archery units have range and should attack the most threatening element of a siege. Consider it moving to a more exposed position in order to get a shot at the cats and their scurrying crew. With heavy arrows, even the machine could be damaged by a thick deluge.
I like the rest of your ideas, but this one is bad. To defeat an opposing army, all you would have to do is spam archer units! It doesn't really matter how many Axemen or Swordsmen they have if you have CG Archers fortified behind walls, with all your catapults destroyed. Seriously, this would effectively ruin offensive warfare and give the defense too large of an advantage.
 
If a stack of 5 cats hits 5 horse archers, those horses better go home and lick their wounds - or they are sitting ducks. If the horses manage to hit the cats, 1-2 spears in the cat stack makes it a pyric victory. Especially if you calculate by hammers. If the attacking horse archers get unlucky, it's an outright disgrace.

Horse Archers have a move of 2, and so can hit cats before suffering collateral dmg. With a couple of spears in the stack, I would lead with flanking horses, to give better survival chances for those horses. However, shock horses coming out of a stable could probably do the job as well.
 
2 spears counter any number of HAs. If you are in MP, then you should be aggressive. By the time cats come out, you have 5XP coming out of the barracks with theology or Vasselage. Those C2 Formation spears kill everything mounted. Like a hot chainsaw through butter.
 
2 spears counter any number of HAs. If you are in MP, then you should be aggressive. By the time cats come out, you have 5XP coming out of the barracks with theology or Vasselage. Those C2 Formation spears kill everything mounted. Like a hot chainsaw through butter.
Umm... no.

"by the time cats are out," you have Construction. That's it.

1) Theocracy requires Theology, which is not on the path to Construction.
2) Vassalage requires Feudalism, also not on the path to Construction.
3) Without Theocracy or Vassalage, you're not getting Formation.
4) Horse Archers DO get to have Shock, since stables ARE available.

Even if a spear COULD defeat a HA "like a hot chainsaw through butter" (which it can't), how does it defeat the SECOND one? The first combat will leave the spear too damaged to win its second battle.
 
I do agree that catapults are overpowered, however. I think the best solution is to allow them to take collateral damage again.

The "home field advantage" enjoyed by the defender has a lot more to do with road access and first move than anything else. Certainly making siege units immune to collateral damage doesn't address either of these concerns.
 
Why not adopt a different system altogether for artillery, one that more resembles the civ3 system?
 
Why not remove collateral damage from cats altogether? Their ability to knock down walls is good enough for a unit at that stage in the game. They shouldn't be the mainstay of your army. Its ludicrous to imagine that Ghengis Khan would have sent his conquering hordes of ... catapults ... to invade the west.

What was Civ3's system for artillery again? Was it better?
 
If I remember correctly, seige units in Civ 3 had no defense whatsoever. Any attack on them was automatically successful. This made them very vulnerable, so you had to protect them with something good at defense. So a stack of catapults had to be defended by a large enough stack of Phalanxes or Spearmen to cover all the counterattacking enemies that you might be expected to face. Whereas in Civ 4, catapults can fight back so they can be included in the defensive value of the stack.
 
Indeed, catapults had no attack and defense values. Instead, they inflicted damage by bombardment, which put them at no risk when they "attacked" enemy units. They were a useful addition to your army, never the core of your army.
 
Although bombardment was a bit overpowered in itself, in that you could just sit outside a city and bombard it into submission, especially with things like Battleships.
 
Well I dunno Hannibal so I guess yr using warlords so the mechanics may be different. I play mp a lot onlien with regular civ4 and cats arent overpowered, but if your opp has cats and you dont, u cant just try to make huge stacks and outmuscle him, of course. Spread out more, hurt his production, prevent reinforcements. A stack of cats and spearmen is stoll gonna be hurt bad by a couple of swordsmen/axemen and a handful of horse archers. You might lose a city but keep playing, cause early attacks like that are very very expensive financially, and once you wear the other guy out, u have gotten construction by that time yrself and his whole empire will belong to you.
 
Back
Top Bottom