Improving Protective Trait

[pandamancer]

You could get something workable like that, but the foreign trade modifier builds up to 150% during peace.

Depending on how the SDK implement the trade route formula technically, I think the formula can be:

[(1+F)*(5*MAX(Pop-10,0)+100+Cap)* (Minimum ([T*50%], [D*70%]))*20%/100]

• F is foreign trade route modifier from 0% to 150% (1.5) if it is a Foreign Trade Route, 0 if domestic non protective, <TR percentage buff> if domestic protective
• Pop is the Pop of the city Getting the trade route
• T is the Pop of the City the Trade Route is With
• D is the Distance to the City
• Cap is 25 if one of the cities is connected to the Capital, 0 if not
• MAX is a function returning the maximum value among the two parameters
• [] indicates rounding down

OR it can possibly be (if there are limitations in the XML, IMO):

[(1+(F-FP)+DP)*(5*MAX(Pop-10,0)+100+Cap)* (Minimum ([T*50%], [D*70%]))*20%/100]

• F is foreign trade route modifier from 0% to 150% (1.5) if it is a Foreign Trade Route, 0 if domestic
• DP is <TR percentage buff> if protective, otherwise 0
  [*]FP is <negative TR percentage buff> which is the foreign route penalty for protective (to counter the protective internal TR buff), if non protective the value is 0
• Pop is the Pop of the city Getting the trade route
• T is the Pop of the City the Trade Route is With
• D is the Distance to the City
• Cap is 25 if one of the cities is connected to the Capital, 0 if not
• MAX is a function returning the maximum value among the two parameters
• [] indicates rounding down

note: I really haven't checked the code... So I can be wrong

Plus, it would seem silly to allow situations where domestic routes between tiny cities were all worth more than foreign ones, and in many cases, even without wars it would mean that Opening Borders for foreign routes wouldn't earn you any more commerce......

Correct! That's is why this will give PRO player the incentive to go mercantilism.

It would also be an extremey powerful boost for the early game, even bordering on zomgwtfbroken on isolated or semi isolated starts. At the very least it would make GLH a much higher priority for Pro leaders

I disagree. Now that the internal TR are roughly as strong as foreign TR. Building the GLH for protective will just be as powerful as a non-protective civ having GLH with TR all foreign. Does not break the game whatsoever IMO.

If you insist that it is overpowered, can you give me scenarios?

 

[pandamancer]

Well if you happen to have an understanding of C++, have a go at it. But there's no way that your idea will work without using the SDK, if even then.

Yes, as a consequence we most probably need to tweak the SDK as I mentioned in post #59.

Personally I don't see the point. Increased local trade routes is an economic thing, and doesn't really fit in with Protective IMO. Something like I suggested earlier, or maybe a +1 happiness for having Walls, would be far more appropriate.

We do have different opinions on how protective can be improved right? That's why I did not axe the idea of having +1 happiness for walls. In fact, I summarized the cool ideas so far in post #42

As for the economic thing, TMIT mentioned in 4th paragraph post #45

PRO really needs something on par with the utility it had with overflow to make it viable against other traits in the general sense. Allowing drill II to unlock amphibious and other special promos like AGG would help and should be implemented, but fundamentally PRO needs *something* useful to the development of an empire on a more consistent basis. Heck, even a large bump to internal trade routes might do the trick and actually make merc more usable, but something.

And I definitely support him on that, it just that I am leaning towards economic buff; thus, trade routes pops in my mind. Just a matter of preference.

From a developer standpoint, I do understand the pain of doing the dirty stuff and so if you think some ideas posted here are not implementable or might affect other Mods. Then, there is nothing we can do about it. Peace!

 

[Kid R]

You see protective trait as of the moment is like a "passive war trait" that cannot be utilized effectively. If you push through giving "protective" buff, that problem is still there. Instead, what we need is an "economic" buff or "tactical buff" that can be exploited.

You may be right, perhaps I do see it like that! But I think the problem can be solved still keeping PRO thematically consistent, so of your two options I'd strongly go for "tactical buff". I'd just prefer it if the traits were each clear and easy to understand. E.g. I've never really got a handle on IMP because it just seems a mixed bag really - a little bit of this, a little bit of that. I think people are trying too hard to persuade themselves that the internal trade buff is thematically consistent (PROTECTionism etc. - heh, let's PROTECT our home companies from the increased profit of overseas trade!)

I do understand the attraction of a trait hooking into the trade route mechanics though, even if they are a bit esoteric and would be subtle to get the best out of, especially for new players (see horrendous equation in post above ). Trade routes are "there for the taking" so to speak for a trait to utilise. Having said that I think it would be better done on another trait, not PRO. Either add a new trait altogether or maybe better, "fix" imperialistic at the same time by letting it take some buffed trade and donating its GG thing to protective. Actually that would improve both traits IMO!

But I think there are so many things which could be added to PRO units and buildings still keeping with the basic theme, that I just can't believe one of them won't hit the spot and fill all our requirements here. I think the weird stuff would be too different and is really mod talk. Aren't we talking about the kind simple tweak which might ever have a chance to be implemented and accepted by the bulk of players? (The passive EP thing sounds neat until you think, hmm dang now I will have to start investing EP rather than basically just pretending espionage doesn't exist because it's horrible I think many players would vote against that one for that reason!)

But it doesn't have to be strength buffs! At the risk of spamming random suggestions all over the place I am just browsing the promos list now. There are several tactically interesting ones which could be given free and be comfortably in keeping with the notion of PROTECTing. Just for one, sentry - i.e. see enemies coming sooner. Perhaps on scouts, perhaps only with walls. I'd find that fun to use and it would also be

• Tactically useful for all player levels, not just in war but at peace and preventing or anticipating war
• Not favourable to the AIs (because they can't do tactics )
• Not excessively exploitable by elite human players who already like PRO

Or morale. Or mobility. Or leadership. etc. etc. OK I'll shut up now

 

[Willem]

And I definitely support him on that, it just that I am leaning towards economic buff; thus, trade routes pops in my mind. Just a matter of preference.

Well if you insist on having some sort of trade benefit for Protective civs, an obvious one, which is also very simple to implement, would be to allow them to build a special Castle type which doesn't become obsolete, and doesn't require Walls as a prerequisite. Not only would they get one extra trade route per city, but they would also get that extra Culture for the remainder of the game when all other civs have lost those benefits. It would have no impact on the overall military balance since all units after Gunpowder ignore the defensive aspects of those buildings anyway. It would simply give them a slight economic and cultural advantage in the later part of the game. You could even add +1 Happiness to that Castle type for an extra bonus.

 

[pandamancer]

I think people are trying too hard to persuade themselves that the internal trade buff is thematically consistent (PROTECTionism etc. - heh, let's PROTECT our home companies from the increased profit of overseas trade!)

Now that you mentioned protectionism/isolationism. The more I am convinced this has synergy with the mercantilism civic later on. So far I don't see any game breaking flaws if we apply it. Thematically, some people liked it too. You just have to respect that.

I do understand the attraction of a trait hooking into the trade route mechanics though, even if they are a bit esoteric and would be subtle to get the best out of, especially for new players (see horrendous equation in post above ). Trade routes are "there for the taking" so to speak for a trait to utilise. Having said that I think it would be better done on another trait, not PRO. Either add a new trait altogether or maybe better, "fix" imperialistic at the same time by letting it take some buffed trade and donating its GG thing to protective. Actually that would improve both traits IMO!

For new players, I doubt they will care about the equation. All they need to be aware is internal trade route is roughly as strong as foreign trade route. It is only when they move up difficulty to better learn the game will they try to care. Give it with the same analogy with Organized trait. New players don't really care how much -50% civic upkeep is gonna save them. They just believe the trait do its job behind the scenes. And so I believe they can also have the same mentality here, which how it should be for new players.

I seems that you have issues with the IMP trait. Let's not talk about it as it is irrelevant to the main topic. (Side note: IMO, it makes more sense to give the GG trait to charismatic but there are many balance issues to consider)

I think the weird stuff would be too different and is really mod talk. Aren't we talking about the kind simple tweak which might ever have a chance to be implemented and accepted by the bulk of players? (The passive EP thing sounds neat until you think, hmm dang now I will have to start investing EP rather than basically just pretending espionage doesn't exist because it's horrible I think many players would vote against that one for that reason!)

So what is the issue if it will need to create another patch or another mod? Pls clarify.

And no, we are not limiting it to simple tweaks so as not to kill other good ideas. The purpose is to make PRO better.

If you like the faster EP buildings, KMod has that already. So even the EP buildings that you like needs a mod after all.

I don't know the passive EP you are talking about, nobody mentioned it. If you have that kind of idea, mind you share it? Edit: somebody mentioned it already, ok got it.

But it doesn't have to be strength buffs! At the risk of spamming random suggestions all over the place I am just browsing the promos list now. There are several tactically interesting ones which could be given free and be comfortably in keeping with the notion of PROTECTing. Just for one, sentry - i.e. see enemies coming sooner. Perhaps on scouts, perhaps only with walls. I'd find that fun to use and it would also be

Your sentry promotion will not have much help on isolated start.

• Tactically useful for all player levels, not just in war but at peace and preventing or anticipating war
• Not favourable to the AIs (because they can't do tactics )
• Not excessively exploitable by elite human players who already like PRO

Or morale. Or mobility. Or leadership. etc. etc. OK I'll shut up now

In your list, I agree on the first and third statement. But we definitely want it to be useful to the AI as well. See TMIT post # 45

 

[kristopherb]

My only buff to PRO would be faster barracks while replacing the barracks with stables for AGG. Simple fix

 

[AdamCrock]

Protective is on the bottom of a wanted list unless You play China (restricted leaders ) !!! (Cho-Ko-Nu rocks !!!) ^^ Anyway Merry X-mas ! :suicide:

for my buff to proctective: simple ! - faster build (25% faster) of archery and gunpowder units (should be enough if not overpowered - but who cares about later game right ? .... right ? )

 

[pandamancer]

Protective is on the bottom of a wanted list unless You play China (restricted leaders ) !!! (Cho-Ko-Nu rocks !!!) ^^ Anyway Merry X-mas ! :suicide:

for my buff to proctective: simple ! - faster build (25% faster) of archery and gunpowder units (should be enough if not overpowered - but who cares about later game right ? .... right ? )

You will be stoned by people who like industrial or modern starts

 

[pandamancer]

My only buff to PRO would be faster barracks while replacing the barracks with stables for AGG. Simple fix

Eh?

 

[kristopherb]

Eh?

Basicly...

AGG
Double production of Stables and Drydock

PRO
Double production of Barracks and Walls

 

[Lennier]

A very minor buff; I doubt that would get it out of "worst trait."

 

[pandamancer]

A very minor buff; I doubt that would get it out of "worst trait."

Are you referring to the suggestion of kristopherb? or other suggestion above?

 

[pandamancer]

Basicly...

AGG
Double production of Stables and Drydock

PRO
Double production of Barracks and Walls

But Shaka will be sad

And the Khans will be laughing hard!

 

[kristopherb]

A very minor buff; I doubt that would get it out of "worst trait."

It would bring the ballance between AGG and PRO

But Shaka will be sad

And the Khans will be laughing hard!

Sacrifices must be made... only shaka whould get hit like it.

 

[pandamancer]

Sacrifices must be made... only shaka whould get hit like it.

I am not sure about that. I am implying that by removing the faster barracks in AGG, you jeopardize their strategies. Look at the AGG civs that will be affected:

• Shaka's Ikhanda is 60 instead of 50. Without the bonus, their build time is slower than non-AGG civ. Kind of counter-intuitive don't you think so?
• Monty's Jaguar Warrior also relies on the promotions by barracks ASAP. By removing that bonus, He can't do a timely woodsman 2 and rush his enemies even with vassalage and theocracy together.
• With faster barracks, Ragnar gains better promoted Berserker. Same is true for Boudicca, Alex, Toku and Hammurabi. All their UU takes advantage of fast barracks.
• Stalin is one of the few AGG with mining as starting tech. This means he can do bronze working immediately (Axe rush). Without fast barracks, the strategy seems lackluster.

Instead what we get is stronger chariots and horse archers? Good for Mongolia, not sure for the rest.

On the other hand, if you give protective the barracks buff. You are simply encouraging them to go for early axe rush. Sound like very "Aggressive" of them to do that (think of Qin, Mao, Churchill, Wang with Mining as starting tech).

 

[Kid R]

So what is the issue if it will need to create another patch or another mod? ... not limiting it to simple tweaks

Well a patch and a mod are completely different things. A patch is something which would become the new standard game, like BTS 3.19 is now. That would of necessity be pretty much the same as the current standard game but with bug fixes and perhaps if we're lucky a few balance tweaks. With a mod the sky's the limit in terms of changing the game - maybe for the better you might say with something like KMOD, but it won't be the standard.

I have been thinking in my posts in this thread about PRO as it could be tweaked in a possible Firaxis patch. Perhaps you are thinking about it in some kind of mod which would feature a stronger PRO trait among other more significant changes?

...[trade routes idea] ... Thematically, some people liked it too. You just have to respect that.

Absolutely agree - I was just trying to make an alternative case for something I see as more thematically consistent, as well as being a smaller and less balance-disrupting tweak. I think it would be really good if Firaxis solicited player opinion, even some kind of voting on various issues, if they ever did make a new patch, but I can't really see that happening can you?

Your sentry promotion will not have much help on isolated start.

Lots of traits struggle on isolated starts. But having a 7x7 fogbuster unit on a hilltop would be useful in any kind of start, perhaps even more on isolated actually. Or if sentry isn't good enough, give them e.g. free medic 1 (PROTECT by healing!) I mean some combo of promos could be made "about right" in balance terms.

If you're against the idea of more promos, you should say that, and why. Not just shoot down the suggested one (sentry) in one kind of minority-interest map type, as if that covers all promo-related ideas across a range of typical games

But we definitely want it to be useful to the AI as well.

Hmm, I thought it was generally agreed that PRO is already a decent trait for the AIs, both against humans and other AIs.

 

[maurcus]

What if you were to make higher level cottages count as cities for combat purposes (so that city garrison would help defending them) and make forts better to have on your borders (say +1 visibility for units in forts) and double production speed of forts for workers.

 

[Lennier]

Are you referring to the suggestion of kristopherb? or other suggestion above?

kristopherb's.

It would bring the ballance between AGG and PRO

The problem with PRO isn't that it's worse than AGG, it's that it's significantly worse than the mid-level traits. Balancing PRO with the second-worst trait isn't going to substantially improve it.

What if you were to make higher level cottages count as cities for combat purposes (so that city garrison would help defending them) and make forts better to have on your borders (say +1 visibility for units in forts) and double production speed of forts for workers.

Again, a minor buff that doesn't get to the root of the problem with PRO--PRO doesn't help you expand your empire, only defend it.

 

[maurcus]

kristopherb's.

Again, a minor buff that doesn't get to the root of the problem with PRO--PRO doesn't help you expand your empire, only defend it.

The thing is tho that pro isn't about expansion, it is about defense. philosophical and industrious aren't about expansion but they are deemed too powerful to have together. While yes it is a minor buff I think we can all agree it is thematically consistent and a step in the right direction.

 

[Kid R]

^ Defence from cottages is a really neat idea! It makes logical "real-world" sense in that soldiers would hide in local buildings they knew well. In Civ 4 gameplay terms I'm not so sure - wouldn't it be crazy to park a defensive stack on a hamlet/whatever instead of in the city to accrue fortify bonus?

The visibility buff for the (currently underused) fort improvement sounds much better - and also realistic! Especially if a fort also counted as a hill - I mean you would generally build a lookout tower on a real-world fort as high as it needed to be to see all around.

My main problem with that is it doesn't seem enough of a buff to PRO specifically. Unless only PRO workers could build the special forts? Maybe it would just be simpler to say PRO civs can see a tile more than normal outside their culture everywhere. Hmm, that would be pretty useful on attack too....!