Improve the Protective trait???

[kniteowl]

Pre-gunpowder the protective trait is quite underpowered, do people agree with me?

Comparing the Agressive trait to the Protective trait, more units benefit from the Agressive trait compared to the Protective trait Pre-gunpowder

Agg - Spear, Axe, Sword, Mace, Pike
Pro - Archer, Longbow, Crossbow

Solution to improve/balance or increase the power of the protective trait?

Add more Archery Units into the game at least 2 more archery type units to balance out the number of units that benefit the trait compared to Agressive.

What do you think?

Any other Ideas to improve the protective trait?

 

[Sisiutil]

I dunno, man. Protective Longbows fortified in a city on a hill don't seem underpowered to me much at all. They're darn stubborn little buggers--Civ IV's version of cockroaches.

 

[sveint]

I think protective is just fine.

Just because something doesn't fit most peoples' playstyle doesn't mean it's weak.

 

[Eggolas]

I think protective is just fine.

Just because something doesn't fit most peoples' playstyle doesn't mean it's weak.

Also, if you play a "trade route" game, the cheap castles can be quite nice.

 

[Anthraxus899]

Protective trait does not need to be improved, toned down maybe, but not improved, archers re really good at defending, with the free CG promotion, they can advance easier, and really make their cities a pain to take down. Comparing to agressive, it gives a free combat 1 (+10% effectiveness) whereas protective gives City Garrison (+20% when defending a city). Imo, if you use your archers for city defense, which I honestly hope you do, protective is more than good enough.

 

[kniteowl]

I rarely ever defend, I'm more of the aggressive attacking type, The only time I defend a city is when I'm defending a city I recently captured from the AI. I guess the protective trait would be great for peaceful builder games as long as you can keep your tiles from being pillaged especially cottaged towns.

 

[Sisiutil]

I have yet to play as a protective leader, but I don't think it means you have to play turtle.

Even when I'm warmongering and capturing cities, I still have to garrison them in order to keep them. Protective might mean I need fewer city garrison troops, especially since I can quickly build walls and castles there, meaning I can build more aggressive units instead. Also, some units I use aggressively (such as Grenadiers) would be able to do double duty as city defenders. And those free initial promotions open up a few mid-level promotions. Nifty!

I don't know if that bears out in practice, but the first time I play protective, that's what I'll probably be trying.

 

[Powerslave]

Pre-gunpowder the protective trait is quite underpowered, do people agree with me?

I'd say it's pretty much hopeless. Protective was a very bad idea to start with, and making every Asian civilization protective was even stupider. Mansa Musa was lucky to escape being saddled with Protective.

Why not just give the Cho-Ko-Nu a free drill promotion, then get rid of the Protective trait entirely, and replace it with something more useful, such as a trait that gives a bonus to diplomacy (unfortunately not very useful outside of single player games), an extra trade route, or even +1 movement to all your mounted units? Maybe a free promotion to your siege engines (not that they need it, being so overpowered already).

Almost anything would be better than Protective. Once a war becomes defensive, you've already lost it. Your opponent is guaranteed to have overwhelming numbers.

 

[abuaftab]

Protective is very powerful and it doesn't need to be spiced up. With a barracks, a protective civ can make extrememly powerful city defenders, without a second thought. No. It's strong, but it doesn't need changing. I think game play testing proved it.

 

[Thedrin]

Mansa Musa was unlucky to escape being blessed with Protective.

Fixed.

Protective skirmishers! Wow!

 

[Elandal]

The only fix to protective that I see is that Machine Gun for all purposes is a pure defensive unit, even moreso than Longbow (mg can't attack however much you'd want to, longbow can). It should get the same protective bonus (free CG1 + Drill1).

Other than that, protective is fine. Maybe the leader traits could be reviewed to see if protective is the best for all that have it, or maybe add non-protective leaders to China and Japan.

Note that not all Asian leaders have the protective trait. Only all Chinese, Korean and Japanese leaders - there are some other Asian civilizations in cIV as well.

( protective Skirmishers would be nice indeed )

 

[Mr. Civtastic]

I think Protective needs a buff (so do Imperialist and Industrious imo). The archers are still easily run over by axe/sword attacks. And the vaunted longbowmen will melt in the face of a treb attack. Walls are nice...until siege weapons, then they arent there. And of course they are also pointless once you get gunpowder, which current threads have shown to be something quickly accomplished. Same with Castles. Someone mentioned the trade from Castles, which is nice...but dont forget they go obsolete. Does any other buildings that traits get a construction bonus on go obsolete? And iirc, promotions dont increase your power score...so the ai still sees the same # of archers.

So the only peacetime benefits are Castle's some bonuses to trade and culture, but this building goes obsolete. Defensively, the archery units arent much better, while walls and castles are easily overcome. The saving grace of this trait are the first strike...especially for Redcoats (churchill) and Chokonu(China).

So what would I do to buff it? I think one addition styled after the way Organized, Creative, and Expansive were buffed would take this trait from ok at best to good in any situation. Some ideas...

1. Add a modern defense building (or making bunkers give 25% defense to all attacks) and give it to protective for 1/2
2. Add a persistent bonus, maybe like -25% maintainence on soldiers
3. Give a hammer discount on defensive units...longbowmen, machinegun, sam infantry, pikemen, spearmen

 

[Arlborn]

HAHA, Protective is the best trait for me so far! (specially playing against those monster dagger stacks with Better AI)

Hah, it fits on me so well! I'm always one of the last in the power graph, because I prefer to invest more in research and culture, and protective trait is excellent for that! 90% of my wars starts defensively(later depending of the war I may take some cities) and man, a defensive unit with a protective trait + barracks is a pain!
a longbow inside a city ni a hill with protective trait is insane! He can take down knights without losing much hp if you get lucky!

I dont think the trait is broken sorry, it rocks!

 

[Watiggi]

As an aggressor/expander, I like Protective. I think most people who have the Aggressive dependance (soooo used to cheap Barracks) will find it a breeze as you can build nice promoted defensive units without having to even worry about a Barracks. It's great for the early expansion.

(I have a really hard time with the idea of defending my city with Archers with no promotions. The Protective trait cuts out that issue entirely.)

 

[sooooo]

Problem with protective is the AI's battle tactics. Humans go after cities, so it's an annoying trait in the hands of an AI to have to face. Also it's good in MP I imagine. But when AIs attack they focus on pillaging, where protective aint so great. It doesn't matter if you can defend you cities well or what the odds of knights vs longbows are if their knights/cavs/gunships pillage all of your cottages. You've still lost. Ironically, aggressive is a much better defensive trait than protective. Your melee units are much closer to formation, shock or pinch to take out pillagers. IMO, protective is fairly useless in the hands of a human vs the AI.

 

[Mr. Civtastic]

Ironically, aggressive is a much better defensive trait than protective. Your melee units are much closer to formation, shock or pinch to take out pillagers

Exactly, and they are also better for going on the offensive.

 

[Dnomal]

Protective needs beefing up? Am i hearing correctly, with a simple barracks a civ can produce archers with 25 + 30% city garrison, combined with the 50% bonus that is inhernet with archers you can get an archer with 6.05 strength easy peasy, and thats before you get the cheap walls.

Personally when i play an offensive game i put protective civ's at the top of my to kill list, simply because the longer they survive the harder it is too conquer them. Especially Tokuawa, who starts out with combat I, drill I, city garrsion I and more than likely another promotion for every gunpowder unit .

 

[ds61514]

Protective is weak because it's usefulness is for a large part dependant on what the OPPONENT does. As sooooo said, who cares if you have CG2 defenders if the enemy doesn't try and attack your cities?

Not to mention you can't even get a Medic I right off the bat with a rax. Talk about being protective huh

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Protective serves it's purpose.
It is supposed to be useless to aggressive players who don't allow the enemy to attack their cities, just like Industrious is useless to a player who doesn't build wonders.
The advantage in the early game is that you can have an Archer with 2-3 first strikes from a barracks to hunt down barbarian warriors without taking much damage. When there are no more barbarians he will still be useful with his drill promotions and the city defense bonus.

 

[gdgrimm]

Pre-gunpowder the protective trait is quite underpowered, do people agree with me?

Comparing the Agressive trait to the Protective trait, more units benefit from the Agressive trait compared to the Protective trait Pre-gunpowder

Agg - Spear, Axe, Sword, Mace, Pike
Pro - Archer, Longbow, Crossbow

Solution to improve/balance or increase the power of the protective trait?

Add more Archery Units into the game at least 2 more archery type units to balance out the number of units that benefit the trait compared to Agressive.

What do you think?

Any other Ideas to improve the protective trait?

Honestly, my military is usually 50%+ Archery units, unless I'm going to warmonger. And often, it doesn't contain any melee units until the Classical Age (i.e. Chariots and Archers are plenty good until enemy Swordsmen can show up).

Combine that with only having to build a barracks in one city (which builds Chariots), since your Archers really don't need a promotion to be good. And for a protective play style, the Protective Trait gives a LOT more value than the Aggressive Trait.

Of course, if your going to build an army and conquer, the analysis tilts completely and the Aggressive Trait becomes way more useful than the Protective Trait.

But what about that needs to be fixed?

Maybe the only tweak would be one that makes the Protective Trait (which is focused primarily on City protection) more useful for Empire Protection (i.e. Pillage protection, as well. Perhaps an Attack bonus when attacking in one's own cultural tile? That would keep it as a Trait that's not overly attractive for warmongers to have themselves, but would make them take notice if their war target had it.