Hwach'a

[Karhgath]

I don't know if it's a bug or not, but I'v been playing as Korea with the latest patches (Civup v2.3.2, Gem v1.12.2) and I've found something strange with their UU compared to G+K:

Trebuchet
Base STR: 21
VS City: 31.5
VS Units: 10.5

Hwach'a
Base STR: 30
VS Cbbity: 30
vs Units: 15

The Hwach'a is a bit better against units (but weaker than crossbowman), and a tad less powerful against cities. What is the Hwach'a role again? For now it's only a weaker trebuchet/crossbowman hybrid, with a maintenance of 10.

This means the unit is worthless unless you want to conquer cities (and it's weaker than trebuchet for that) because I'd rather have crossbows for defensive wars and city protection, 2 for the price of 1 hwach'a.

I know it is overpowered in G+K, but it now feels worthless.

 

[Ahriman]

The high base strength means that promotions and modifiers (great general, etc.) are really effective. So I don't think it's fair to just compare the unmodified stats.

Basically: it's very good vs both cities and units, which neither the trebuchet or crossbow are.

 

[mystikx21]

I'd rather see it be the same against cities and units, and be the same strength as a regular trebuchet, with access to siege promotions that the xbow doesn't get (and no city penalty either) so it retains some offensive potential.

I'd also agree that right now it's really powerful as an offensive unit against both cities and units (more so than regular trebs). I'm not sure this was intended. I think it's intended to be a largely "defensive" unit as a sort of hermit kingdom role for Korea but its current design isn't anywhere near that.

 

[Karhgath]

@Ahriman

That's a good point about promotions. However, my point stands about it's role. If you play a warmonger with barracks/armory (lots of promotions) and conquer city, the Hwach'a is awesome as a VS city unit.

I didn't get one upgraded much, but does it get archery promotions or siege ones? Siege doesn't have much VS units promotions, and accentuates the VS city role.

Either way, if you play defensively/peacefully, it's not better than a crossbow against units and costs double maintenance.

Personally I'd lower it's power between crossbow/trebuchet, remove the -% vs units and +% vs city and give a bonus in friendly territory (that would stick with upgrades). You'd build them to garrison cities and the maintenance would be offset by the Tradition garrison policy. You could also use it more effectively than trebuchet on offense, but it would be much less powerful VS city unless upgraded.

 

[mystikx21]

It gets siege promos, but it will also get the "archery" promos versus terrain. So it ends up once you have +30-45% on the terrain type, it's better than the crossbow even with the unit penalty AND it's way better against cities (crossbow gets penalties and hwacha will get bonuses). That's probably worth higher upkeep. (Agreed the role should shift as a result of that).

 

[Ahriman]

Perhaps it should have high base strength, no penalty vs units (or a modest penalty), but a penalty vs cities (or just no bonus)? What if it were base ranged strength ~25 with no penalty vs units or bonus vs cities?

It gets a defensive role from being weak vs cities and needing to setup, and it would be much more effective vs units than crossbows would.

All siege units have access to vs terrain bonuses, so I don't really understand this issue.

If it's double maintenance cost, I think this is another example of the problems in a blind strength-> maintenance cost system. In my opinion, UUs should all have the same maintenance cost as the unit they replace, unless low maintenance is a specific bonus of the UU. UUs should not be punished for having higher strength, particularly in this siege unit case where there are large modifers.

 

[mystikx21]

I'm pretty sure the unit upkeep costs were shifting to base only on production costs (other than things like naval or air unit discounts), which should benefit (most) UUs, but we haven't seen this actually happen yet.

I don't object to it being stronger than crossbows against units, indeed, I think that's the goal. My own issue would be that it's also better against cities than regular trebuchets too.

 

[Karhgath]

If we keep it at 21 STR, no +% city/-% vs units, without buffing the power, it's 5 better than a crossbow, weaker vs city but it can get siege promotions to help.

However it's pretty lackluster as a UU. In real-life it was deployed at defensive positions and cities, so I'd really vote for a +25% bonus in friendly territory(keep on upgrade) but STR 19-20, without the usual +%/-% for siege weapons.

That would offset half of the -50% VS unit for upgraded canon/artillery as a defesnsive unit, which is decent but not OP.

 

[Ahriman]

so I'd really vote for a +25% bonus in friendly territory(keep on upgrade)

This sounds interesting, and I like the idea of having some thematic benefit that sticks for upgrades, but that becomes really powerful on cannon and artillery - effectively a 50% bonus, because it changes those units from -50% vs units to -25% vs units. I think that really does get OP, because those units are balanced around the 50% penalty.

Maybe strength 21, no modifiers vs units or buildings, +15% strength in friendly territory (which is retained on upgrade)?

 

[Karhgath]

I've modded my game to test this, I'll come back later with results. For now, I agree that maybe a +15% would be good too, but lets run some quick analysis:

Hwach'a 21
vs units: 21
with 25% promo: 26.25
with 15% promo: 24.15

Cannon 30
VS units: 15
with 25% promo : 22.5
with 15% promo : 19.5

You actually lose power when upgrading (but gain a lot vs CITY). You could just choose to not upgrade your Hwach'a (unless you need em to siege).

Another approach to balance the loss would be:

Hwach'a 18
vs units: 18
with 25% promo: 22.5
with 15% promo: 20.7

With a 25% bonus in friendly, you'd retain the same power against units in your territory when you upgrade to cannon.

I'd rather have 18 +25% than 21 +15% as you wouldn't lose defensive power vs units when upgrading. But then promotions on Hwach'a are much less potent at STR 18 vs 21, but even with somehow an hypothetical +100% bonus on offense, it still would be more powerful than a trebuchet against units:

Trebuchet: 21 -50% +100% = 31.5
Hwach'a (outside): 18 + 100% = 36
Hwach'a (friendly): 18 + 25% + 100% = 40.5

However it really sucks vs city:

Trebuchet: 21 +25% +100% = 47.25
Hwach'a: 18 + 100% = 36

We really switched from a "vs city" to "vs units" role (especially in friendly territory).

 

[mystikx21]

You wouldn't lose that much power when upgrading that it needs to be much weaker. Promotions act on the high end effectively. 21 is probably fine as you lose out on the city attack function and it becomes (somewhat) weaker in enemy territory.

Siege units are also only +50% versus cities unless you take another promo to get up to 100%.

 

[Ahriman]

Cannon 30
VS units: 15
with 25% promo : 22.5
with 15% promo : 19.5

You actually lose power when upgrading (but gain a lot vs CITY). You could just choose to not upgrade your Hwach'a (unless you need em to siege).

But add in a 15% modifier from a great general and 15-30% from terrain promotions, and you're not losing power.

I'd rather have 18 +25% than 21 +15% as you wouldn't lose defensive power vs units when upgrading

Right, but that's why I would prefer the 15% model, because I think the 25% when upgrading is too strong a bonus. It means that Korea gets a cannon that is up to 50% stronger vs units.

We really switched from a "vs city" to "vs units" role (

I thought that was the main idea for the unit.

 

[Karhgath]

But add in a 15% modifier from a great general and 15-30% from terrain promotions, and you're not losing power.

This is orthogonal for both units, if you have those bonus with the hwach'a and the cannon, you're still losing power.

I thought that was the main idea for the unit.

Indeed it is, it should have the correct role now.

That said, after some quick testing, the 25% feels a bit strong. The 15% feels better, but there is a big drop when upgraded to cannon. You just have to keep your Hwach'a until artillery, unless you need em for siege.

The only question is, would the AI understand this and not upgrade?

 

[mystikx21]

The promotions act upon the higher raw strength of cannons such that the balance point is achieved with the promotions as outlined. The AI gets free XP I believe enough to counter act any upgrade penalty versus units.

 

[Ahriman]

This is orthogonal for both units, if you have those bonus with the hwach'a and the cannon, you're still losing power.

You're right that it would still lose a small amount of power vs units, but only just. Bonuses have to be around 70% before you aren't losing power vs units. [21*1.7 < 30*1.2.]

The 15% feels better, but there is a big drop when upgraded to cannon.

It's not really a big drop. With only 45% modifier, you're going from 21*1.45 = 30.45 down to 30*.95 = 28.5.

 

[Thalassicus]

In average combat situations Hwach'a are 35% stronger than crossbows vs units, and 15% stronger than trebuchets vs cities. They're like a merger of both units. I like the idea of a friendly lands bonus because it fits Korea's turtling theme. If we do that, I'd want to reduce its other stats to keep it balanced. Here are the average strengths of each unit with typical combat modifiers for their time period (great general, heroic epic, and 2 promotions from an armory):

You can compare unit strengths in typical combat situations on the Units tab of GEM_Details.xls in the mod folder. The table does automatic calculations and presents it in an easy-to-read format.