Defending on clear tiles is a DEATH sentence

[Sonereal]

Facepalm.

So now we're changing the Ranged Units, too? It sounds less like you have a problem with game elements and more like you want an entirely different game altogether. That's well and good, but let's not parse it as if the current system is problematic. You just prefer something entirely different.

And no, promotions do NOT cancel out, because defenders and attacks don't all have the same promotions! A defender with Shock against an attacker with Drill is an entirely different proposition from having both units be blank.

Don't bother arguing with him. He's so set on the changes and trying to make the game appeal to the casual turtle player that he ignores all criticism by deflecting it instead of actually addressing it. He wants to make the defender's job even easier even though defending is the easiest thing you can do in Civ5.

Seriously. It's gotten to the point where the AI is so predictable, like always, that smashing them in wars is as simple as the examples I've given. A human player is smart enough to realize that in open terrain, tanks, horses, and artillery are meant to battle it out. Not slow moving infantry.

He's just making changes for changes sake without any real realistic justification for it besides "stopping 1cpc" but the problem with that is that 1cpc can be stopped far more effectively by improving AI (which the AI has in the patch).

So, don't use his silly mod. A good mod to use is the BattleAI mod and the More Units mod. It makes wars a LOT better.

 

[Roxlimn]

Let's not be like that. I mean, I know he wants a different game, but calling it appealing to "casual turtle players" sounds like a bit of a low blow to me. He can want what he wants, and we can want what we want, but let's just clarify that Mongollia Jones here isn't just about the open terrain bonus - he appears to want the change the combat game wholesale.

 

[Sonereal]

Let's not be like that. I mean, I know he wants a different game, but calling it appealing to "casual turtle players" sounds like a bit of a low blow to me. He can want what he wants, and we can want what we want, but let's just clarify that Mongollia Jones here isn't just about the open terrain bonus - he appears to want the change the combat game wholesale.

A 20% defensive modifier for open terrain is meant for a casual turtle player. 0% is no big deal. But 20%?

He wants to change the combat game wholesale to something that it already is. It's already tactical. The only, and I mean only, problems with the combat is the AI, horseman strength, and the fact mobile units like horses and tanks don't seem to get a penalty for attacking rough terrain.

Right now, I believe that spears are the same strength as warriors and even with a 100% bonus are only evenly matched. Reducing horseman strength to 11 will make them pray to spear men. If mobile units (mounted units and the like) receive a penalty for attacking rough terrain, then the defender with a low production base will actually have an easier time to defending because

A.) The invader more than likely has a production base that allows for tanks and powerful units to control most open terrain

B.) Therefore, the invader will be forced to use his "frontline" troops to force the defenders from the forests and hills. Because the defenders get a defensive bonus for defending, they have the advantage.

These three would make for a more interesting combat system that makes sense and the game still has a tactical feel because with a 20% defensive modifier, it is for turtles who don't want to learn proper tactics.

 

[Mongolia Jones]

Facepalm.

So now we're changing the Ranged Units, too?

No I'm not changing ranged units... but the fact my mod does not allow the slaughtering wholesale of units in clear terrain by any attacker (including attacking ranged units) is a good thing.

It sounds less like you have a problem with game elements and more like you want an entirely different game altogether.

No, I just want to change the clear terrain penalty. That does not mean changing the whole game, sheesh.

Roxlimn, you and Sonereal have this habit of over-exaggerating my position, it's getting quite tiresome.

And no, promotions do NOT cancel out, because defenders and attacks don't all have the same promotions! A defender with Shock against an attacker with Drill is an entirely different proposition from having both units be blank.

Again my point was missed (I thought I was clear).

Promotions do cancel out because units (of the same class) have access to the same promotions if chosen.

Terrain penalty:
Defender has access to the -33% defense penalty; the attacker does not

Promotions:
Attacker has access to drill; so does the defender
Attacker has access to shock; so does the defender
Therefore promotions cancel out and are therefore irrelevant in terrain balance discussions.

Was that clear enough for you?

 

[Mongolia Jones]

Don't bother arguing with him (Mongolia Jones).

Sometimes it's best to take your own advice.

He's so set on the changes and trying to make the game appeal to the casual turtle player that he ignores all criticism by deflecting it instead of actually addressing it. He wants to make the defender's job even easier even though defending is the easiest thing you can do in Civ5.

My changes will make it harder for the casual player by making it more difficult to steamroll the AI and making domination more difficult.

Just now I did not ignore your criticism.
I showed how the game under my mod makes it harder for casual gamers.
See how I did that?

He's just making changes for changes sake without any real realistic justification for it besides "stopping 1cpc" but the problem with that is that 1cpc can be stopped far more effectively by improving AI (which the AI has in the patch).

1. I have given justification which you have ignored.
2. So since the patch has 1cpc been solved?
3. In my mod 1cpc seems to have been solved.

So, don't use his silly mod

Another good piece of advice: you don't have to use my mod (which will be out shortly).

As a matter of fact you don't need to post here anymore since you are not adding anything more useful to the discussion.

I mean:
-Turtle, casual, idiotic, completely change game. I think I got your arguements.

 

[Roxlimn]

Mongolia Jones:

No I'm not changing ranged units... but the fact my mod does not allow the slaughtering wholesale of units in clear terrain by any attacker (including attacking ranged units) is a good thing.

Alright. You're not changing ranged units. Now account for ranged units in your criticism of the open terrain penalty. Why, exactly, would I want to put my unit in an open terrain tile at all, when I can just use my Ranged Unit and not expose any unit to attack?

Was this not the core of your objection? That melee units would wipe each other out on open terrain in "checkers" fashion? Well, with Ranged Units, that doesn't happen. Won't happen with Mounted Units either, but that's already beside the point.

Again my point was missed (I thought I was clear).

Promotions do cancel out because units (of the same class) have access to the same promotions if chosen.

Terrain penalty:
Defender has access to the -33% defense penalty; the attacker does not

Promotions:
Attacker has access to drill; so does the defender
Attacker has access to shock; so does the defender
Therefore promotions cancel out and are therefore irrelevant in terrain balance discussions.

Was that clear enough for you?

No.

The fact that all units have access to similar promotions doesn't mean that they will all be promoted the same way. That just doesn't make any kind of sense. If I'm going to send out a unit in open terrain, it will have Shock, and it will slaughter any units that don't have Shock. If the opposing unit does have Shock, then I think I'm just going to sit right here on this here Forest Tile where that Shock promotion is going to be useless and allow my Ranged Units to reduce the attackers to mincemeat.

If my highly promoted Shock unit attacks and is forced to defend, then he will have Shock promotions protecting him, and there's no guarantee that counter-attackers will also have Shock or Accuracy, particularly since Archers are highly encouraged to get Barrage, since they do crap damage to units in rough terrain.

In a perfectly controlled scenario all units are going to have equal amounts of promos and all those promos are going to be the same. The game, however, rarely progresses in just that fashion.

 

[Krieger66]

It truly is a massive difference. I'm not sure why they felt the need to make it so large, much larger than the +defense for rough terrain.

It also feels a little badly designed and overly complex...you really only have 2 terrains: open or rough. When they both give a bonus in either direction, it implies a "neutral" terrain...which doesn't exist! I guess cities? Anyways it does seem weird.

I'm also not sure why it would give this bonus to melee attacks. It does make sense in a way for ranged attacks, but when you're running up to a guy with a sword, a flat plain is equal ground.

Actually, in a way it means a "rough" terrain gives a 53% defensive bonus

I'm guessing it means a unit moving off somewhere is vulnerable to attack due to stretched defensive lines(think of the romans' Varian Disaster, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Teutoburg_Forest), which ironically was in a forest.
The attacking units can clearly make out your concentrated areas and bring greater force to bear against any weaker spots. Thats how I see it anyway. Units in cities don't actually "fight" in the standard sense.

About the steam-rolling cities, I was attacking a city strength 17 with one archer vs my 2 spearmen and archer(city surrounded by rough terrain). My troops had to fall back and heal twice because the ai had gotten my troops down to 3-4 hit points whereas I had barely taken the city down to a quarter health. I eventually brought in a catapult and I still nearly lost a few units.
Cities can't stall for time for reinforcements to arrive...m'kay

 

[Mongolia Jones]

Alright. You're not changing ranged units. Now account for ranged units in your criticism of the open terrain penalty.

Since defending ranged units are also subject to the -33% clear terrain penalty they can be slaughtered as well, by all units ->> melee, ranged, siege, tank, air, naval.

There, ranged units accounted for.

Why, exactly, would I want to put my unit in an open terrain tile at all, when I can just use my Ranged Unit and not expose any unit to attack?

For the 4th time: Because sometimes there is no rough terrain around

Was this not the core of your objection? That melee units would wipe each other out on open terrain in "checkers" fashion? Well, with Ranged Units, that doesn't happen. Won't happen with Mounted Units either, but that's already beside the point.

Since ranged units are subject to the penalty they get wiped out just as easily.

Correct: The uber mounted and tank units are not subject to any terrain penalty and are therefore gods on clear terrain. Now we are getting somewhere.

The fact that all units have access to similar promotions doesn't mean that they will all be promoted the same way. That just doesn't make any kind of sense. If I'm going to send out a unit in open terrain, it will have Shock, and it will slaughter any units that don't have Shock.

Scenario 1: both attacker and defender don't have shock.
Attacker attacks defender on clear terrain and slaughters him.

Scenario 2: both attacker and defender do have shock.
Attacker attacks defender on clear terrain and slaughters him.

See they cancel each other.

Promotions are irrelevant in the terrain penalty discussion. Simple f#%*kin logic.

 

[Roxlimn]

Since defending ranged units are also subject to the -33% clear terrain penalty they can be slaughtered as well, by all units ->> melee, ranged, siege, tank, air, naval.

There, ranged units accounted for.

I was referring to using them to attack. Because you know, they can.

For the 4th time: Because sometimes there is no rough terrain around

Alrighty then. I have a screen of melee unit in the open, I use them to Fortify, then use my Ranged units to weaken melee coming in, or pick them off after they attack. My Fortified units get +25% straight off and +50% after one turn. Isn't that sufficient to counter the defensive penalty?

Scenario 1: both attacker and defender don't have shock.
Attacker attacks defender on clear terrain and slaughters him.

Scenario 2: both attacker and defender do have shock.
Attacker attacks defender on clear terrain and slaughters him.

See they cancel each other.

Promotions are irrelevant in the terrain penalty discussion. Simple f#%*kin logic.

Scenario 3: Attacker has no promotions, defender has Shock 2
Scenario 4: Attacker has drill, defender has Shock.
Scenario 5: Attacker has Shock + Medic, defender has Shock 2.

 

[Krieger66]

Scenario 3: Attacker has no promotions, defender has Shock 2
Scenario 4: Attacker has drill, defender has Shock.
Scenario 5: Attacker has Shock + Medic, defender has Shock 2.

I agree with you on most of these things but I don't think you get what Mongolia Jones is saying he didn't mean all units w different promos would balance out evenly:
basically, 2 units with the same promotions are evenly matched
spearman 7 + 20% = 8.4 v spearman 7 + 20% = 8.4

however, if one unit was stronger they would not cancel out(sadly):
spearman 7 + 20% = 8.4 v musketman 16 + 20% = 19.2

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I agree with you on most of these things but I don't think you get what Mongolia Jones is saying he didn't mean all units w different promos would balance out evenly:
basically, 2 units with the same promotions are evenly matched
spearman 7 + 20% = 8.4 v spearman 7 + 20% = 8.4

however, if one unit was stronger they would not cancel out(sadly):
spearman 7 + 20% = 8.4 v musketman 16 + 20% = 19.2

They are still the same ratio

Basic Spear: Basic Spear=7:7 = 1 : 1

Promoted Spear : Promoted Spear=8.4:8.4 = 1 : 1

Basic Spear: Basic Musket=7:16 = 0.4375 : 1

Promoted Spear : Promoted Spear=8.4:19.2 = 0.4375 : 1

In any case, the 33% penalty might be excessive, but there is reason for a solid penalty (melee units can move+fortify if they go slow.. as if they were in rough terrain) I'd say making if 15-25% might be more reasonable.

 

[Nefelia]

Defending on clear tiles is a DEATH sentence

Getting caught in transit on open land is a death sentence, as it should be. Fortifying on open land (+50% to mitigate the terrain modifier, if I recall correctly) allows one to defend just fine. Don't get caught out in the open unprepared.

 

[Mongolia Jones]

I was referring to using [ranged units] to attack. Because you know, they can.

Yes Roxlimn, yes. I know ranged units can attack. Re-read my above post you had just quoted.

Alrighty then. I have a screen of melee unit in the open, I use them to Fortify, then use my Ranged units to weaken melee coming in, or pick them off after they attack. My Fortified units get +25% straight off and +50% after one turn. Isn't that sufficient to counter the defensive penalty?

Yes fortifying @50% is enough to counter the penalty. As well is shock 2. But it doesn't change the fact that the -33% penalty is broken.

Scenario 3: Attacker has no promotions, defender has Shock 2
Scenario 4: Attacker has drill, defender has Shock.
Scenario 5: Attacker has Shock + Medic, defender has Shock 2.

Again for the upteenth time, promotions are irrelevant when taking about balancing terrain bonuses/penalties.

If tomorrow the programmers decided to up the penalty on clear terrain to -90% and the penalty on rough -75%, then do we really need to have a discussion on promotions to see that terrain penalties are broken?

Again p-r-o-m-o-t-i-o-n-s are i-r-r-e-l-e-v-a-n-t.

Unfortunately Roxlimn, I have a feeling you are going to continue to beat that dead horse.

 

[Krieger66]

They are still the same ratio

Basic Spear: Basic Spear=7:7 = 1 : 1

Promoted Spear : Promoted Spear=8.4:8.4 = 1 : 1

Basic Spear: Basic Musket=7:16 = 0.4375 : 1

Promoted Spear : Promoted Spear=8.4:19.2 = 0.4375 : 1:

In any case, the 33% penalty might be excessive, but there is reason for a solid penalty (melee units can move+fortify if they go slow.. as if they were in rough terrain) I'd say making if 15-25% might be more reasonable.

you've got me there lol...
but I was mostly commenting on mongolia's promos balance out thing, and they aparently do even with higher powered units, but only with units with the EXACT same promos(he doesn't mean different combos of promos balance out, I least I don't think so)

 

[zimmah]

dude, in real life, massive armies have been killed by smaller and 'weaker' armies. just because of terrian.

i even remember one example (don't exactly know where and when tho) where a huge army with much armor and weapons got slaughtered by a smaller army with nearly no armor and weapons. What happened? the terrian they fought on was muddy, and the heavily armored army was hugely slowed down by the mud (they were sinking to their ankles and could barely walk) while the lightly armored army just killed them off one by one, because they could walk much more easily.

just make sure you'll use the terrian to your advantage, the difference is huge in real life too. try a football match with one goal 10 meters higher then the other. i can allready tell you which side will win.

 

[budweiser]

dude, in real life, massive armies have been killed by smaller and 'weaker' armies. just because of terrian.

i even remember one example (don't exactly know where and when tho) where a huge army with much armor and weapons got slaughtered by a smaller army with nearly no armor and weapons. What happened? the terrian they fought on was muddy, and the heavily armored army was hugely slowed down by the mud (they were sinking to their ankles and could barely walk) while the lightly armored army just killed them off one by one, because they could walk much more easily.

just make sure you'll use the terrian to your advantage, the difference is huge in real life too. try a football match with one goal 10 meters higher then the other. i can allready tell you which side will win.

Agincourt, brother.

 

[Bibor]

As long as human defense is concerned, the key to defense on open terrain is to build forts and stack them with shock I.

Last time I checked it's -33 plus 50 plus 20 for a grand total of plus 37%.

 

[grzybek]

dude, in real life, massive armies have been killed by smaller and 'weaker' armies. just because of terrian.

i even remember one example (don't exactly know where and when tho) where a huge army with much armor and weapons got slaughtered by a smaller army with nearly no armor and weapons. What happened? the terrian they fought on was muddy, and the heavily armored army was hugely slowed down by the mud (they were sinking to their ankles and could barely walk) while the lightly armored army just killed them off one by one, because they could walk much more easily.

just make sure you'll use the terrian to your advantage, the difference is huge in real life too. try a football match with one goal 10 meters higher then the other. i can allready tell you which side will win.

Actually this proves nothing as this game doesn't take into account UnitWeigth/GroundThickness ratio ... and I think it's good. It would be too complicated.

Second thing that we all seem to forget here is the the scale. In this game single unit is not a plotoon, or company. I would say a regiment, brigade or even higher so looking at the terrain should also not be a situation of 5 guys in the house ... it's more like 5000 guys vs 5000 guys on a field. Noone gets bonuses until they use same class equipment.

Surrounding is also not an option since it's hard for 5000 guys to sorround another 5000 guys. Casualties will differ depending on level of experience but if this is the same the fight should finish equal - this is logic for me.

Now fortification - when one group of 5000 guys have a chance to prepare to defend the other than they have smaller casualties and they win - simple.

Now the question - what if defenders are surprised by attackers. Of course they loose But is this modelled in Civ5? I don't think so, because otherwise we would need to think of every unit in the plain as suprised ... which is hard to accomplish as it is hard to hide 5000 guys in the plain so they will be able to suprise anyone.

My conclusion - neither of those sides should get any bonuses in the clear (except of what they get from their experience and type).

 

[Folket]

I think this is a question of scale. If you think of a unit to be a small group standing in a middle of a field or a division of 18k men standing on a quite large piece of land. A small group can be suprised and will have nowhere to seek cover but the division will have recon detatchment and bhe located at the best place they could find. Even on open ground there are ditches, town and alot of other features that the defender can utilize. Defender on this scale also have the advantage of having thier supply available while the attack needs trucks/mules to bring food and ammunition with him.

I think +20% in open sounds very fine. Just have one more guy next to the opponent would almost negate the bonus which seems fair. I prefer to play with 25 HP myself but it makes boats last way to long but I like how land battles turn out.

 

[Pax Aeterna]

Wargames model the defender as having the advantage in almost EVERY instance regardless of terrain. The defender has the advantage in open terrain and has a bigger advantage in rough.

Games where defender has a automatic default combat advantage:
Risk
Axis and Allies (foot soldiers)
Rise and fall of the Third Reich
Hearts of Iron
Advanced Tactics
Diplomacy


Snip...


Plus my changes reflect combat in the real world.

First off, you're wrong about the last part. I've been a quiet reader for a while around here, but I had to finally jump in.

Combat in the real world is extremely terrain-dependent and while not being as much of an issue in close range vs close range combat in the ancient world, getting caught in open terrain by a more mobile attacker or by a ranged attacker IS a death sentence in real world combat, period. Especially so in modern combat.

As far as the games you mention are concerned, I think you're picking the wrong subset of games to use as examples. Risk and Axis & Allies are extremely high-level strategy oriented games. Their rules are based upon the assumption that commanders in the field are making equally sound tactical decisions. They take the tactical out of the equation in favor of focusing solely on strategy. Now, I've never played the last 4 on your list but I assume the rest are in the same vein.

Look at games with more of a lowl-level strategic or tactical element. Play games where terrain actually matters. Where you have to actually worry about supply lines and the like. Or, study history. You brought up WWII europe in a previous post. Try playing a game like WWII: Barbarossa to Berlin. That game essentially has 2 phases and actually follows history very well. In the first phase, the Soviets are the 'defenders' and are at an EXTREME disadvantage. They start with fewer armies that are at a significantly reduced strength compared to the German Panzer Armies. The reason ghe Sovs eventually held was because they didn't sit there and complain that they got butchered on open land (which they did). They understood the tactical advantages to trading territory for time, to shortened supply lines, and extremely importantly to this discussion, using terrain to their advantage. They didn't try and make their stand on the run in open terrain. They made their stands in forests, at river crossings, in cities.

The fact of the matter is in quality wargames there is no individual battle 'defender advantage'. There's an overall strategic advantage as the defender's supply lines get shorter, yes, but that's just as easy to see in Civ 5. In quality wargames, as in the real world, the advantage, initiative, balance of forces, etc is constantly in flux and good commanders/good wargame players constantly use things like terrain, flanking attacks and artillery to their advantage and their opponents' disadvantage.

The issue here is not a defensive modifier for open terrain, except maybe with short range units prior to gunpowder. I can tell you with 100% certainty that open terrain in the more modern eras is downright brutal. The issue is experienced Civ players know how to use terrain to their advantage and for some reason I can't fathom, the AI simply doesn't.