Navies

I agree that it's pretty historically inaccurate to have frigates dominating land units on the coast, but it does actually make the game more fun. I find myself investing in my navy for the first time ever in a civ game. I only wish the AI was a little better at defending their coast.
 
I agree that it's pretty historically inaccurate to have frigates dominating land units on the coast, but it does actually make the game more fun. I find myself investing in my navy for the first time ever in a civ game. I only wish the AI was a little better at defending their coast.

The problem is not with the AI - ships now don't have anything that counters them. How do you actually beat 2 early caravels? They're very easy to beeline to (library, NC and university are along the way), so you probably won't be close to having your own caravels. Archers, crossbows and triremes just die. Siege units need to set up and won't get more than 1 shot off before they die (and you may not have iron). Your city will never be in range. Basically, there's nothing you can do to stop them blocking your ocean tiles and shooting stray units.

That's more annoying than dangerous (and not too different from vanilla), but caravels have 15 ranged attack now, instead of 7. They will actually kill those stray units, and with a few more, they can actually take your city. And since they only cost 120 hammers, that doesn't take very long. Basically, once those two caravels show up, you're going to die and there's nothing you can do about it.

Caravels are now essentially trebuchets with 6 moves and immunity to melee attack, at 2/3 the price and no resource requirement. How is that fair?
 
There's several ways to beat early caravels with land units, depending on whose territory we're in.

Defeating caravels in friendly territory is easy because the caravel can't hit units in cities, and ships can't heal in enemy/neutral territory until the supply promotion, which is difficult to get before the industrial era.

When fighting caravels in enemy land, the caravel must eventually stop fighting to heal, and we can also heal ourselves. With equal numbers it's a stalemate broken when our siege & melee units capture the city the caravels are defending, and then it falls into the "friendly territory" scenario.

A significant disadvantage of pre-modern ships is they have to move around the perimeter of a continent, while land units can cut across it. Ships do have a modest advantage while moving in enemy territory, but can't heal there. Land units have an advantage moving through friendly territory on defense or from one warzone to another.

  • 4 :c5moves: on water: classical ships
  • 4-8 :c5moves: on roads: classical land
  • 4-6 :c5moves: on water: renaissance ships
  • 6-12:c5moves: on roads: renaissance land

Crossbows and Trebuchets are stronger than Caravels, and an earlier tech level:

Caravel
15 * (1 + 0.2) = 18 :c5strength: vs units and cities
6 :c5moves: on water
Renaissance era.
No resource.
Must circumnavigate land.
Cannot attack more than 2 tiles inland.

Trebuchet
19 * (1 + 0.4 + 0.2 - 0.5) = 21 :c5strength: vs units
19 * (1 + 0.35 + 0.2 + 0.5) = 39 :c5strength: vs cities
1-6 :c5moves:
Medieval era.
No resource.

Crossbow
14 * (1 + 0.4 + 0.2) = 23 :c5strength: vs units
14 * (1 + 0.35 + 0.2) = 22 :c5strength: vs cities
1-6 :c5moves:
Medieval era.
No resource.

Since strength is also non-linear, trebuchets/crossbows have a significantly higher damage potential than the advantages indicated by strength alone.
 
I agree that it's pretty historically inaccurate to have frigates dominating land units on the coast, but it does actually make the game more fun.

Considering how many cannon was on a typical frigate, why wouldn't' they dominate land units?
 
I just tried a game as a proof-of-concept. Deity, islands, standard size/speed. Picked Rome so that I wouldn't be getting any unique bonuses.

First thing I did was delete my warrior for 1gpt. With no ruins/CSes and very late luxuries (had to wait for AIs to find me), I was still able to pump out 10 triremes and upgrade them all to caravels when astronomy finished around turn 100. Sent them all to my nearest neighbour with an embarked scout following.

There was no resistance. Cities and archers do 1 damage to caravels, trebuchets and triremes do 2-3. Caravels do 10 damage to a trireme, and 2-3 to a trebuchet or city. (Capitals are harder, but there's only one per enemy.) And with 7 speed (+1 from commerce), they never die, you just retreat back once it gets hurt. City falls to 1hp in 2-3 turns of bombardment, depending on how much coast is available to actually hit it, and I was mostly just waiting for my embarked scout to catch up. Once scout gets there and takes the city, injured caravels can now heal. A few cities later, navigation finishes, and they can upgrade to frigates. Game over.

This strategy is silly. The AI has absolutely no way to hold it off - and neither would a human player (unless he was doing the same strategy). And this was playing as Rome, with no bonuses whatsoever. Doing it with England would be ridiculous.


Considering how many cannon was on a typical frigate, why wouldn't' they dominate land units?
Because you can't actually shoot the land units very well. Perfectly flat shorelines are rare - usually there are sand dunes, trees, buildings, something in the way. It's pretty hard to actually aim at anything, especially considering that by definition, you are at sea level, so you are always shooting upwards. Land cannons, on the other hand, you can usually position on the edge of a hill - even a very small hill (so small it would be considered flat in Civ) presents a huge advantage. Also, waves tend to be larger closer to shore, compounding the aiming difficulty, and you risk running aground.



Edit: Sorry, I somehow managed to miss Thalassicus' reply...
Crossbows and Trebuchets are stronger than Caravels, and an earlier tech level:
I think you are underestimating the power of a caravel's speed. They have 7 moves with no terrain variations (you'd always take the +1 from commerce). In terms of which unit is stronger on offence, there's just no comparison - crossbows and trebuchets have 1-2 moves outside friendly territory, and trebuchets can't move and attack in the same turn. One on one, caravels and trebuchets seem about evenly matched. However, due to their 7 moves, it's very easy to get 5 caravels to instantly kill a trebuchet, and pretty much impossible to get more than 1 trebuchet to hit a caravel in the same turn (they need to set up, and caravels with +2 sight can see them coming). The lack of healing isn't a problem - just take the most exposed city first, and use that as your healing spot.

I also feel that despite being further down the tech tree than trebuchets, caravels are much easier to get. The techs along the way are much more useful in themselves (and they also include all the science techs, so you'll actually get there faster). Also, navigation is only one tech further, and caravels now upgrade into frigates. Finally, trebuchets cost 50% more hammers and require iron.

I don't have any comparison with crossbows, since I didn't encounter any in my game. Lots of trebuchets though, all of which were easily avoided and sniped. Sometimes they hit me, but never more than 1 shot in a turn. I feel crossbows would do slightly better, but not by that much. Longbowmen would probably do well - which makes picking England and ensuring no one else can have them even more powerful. CKN won't be better than regular crossbows since standing on the shoreline gets you sniped, while standing 1 tile back means you won't get that second shot. City+trireme+CKN can do a lot of damage, but by pulling damaged caravels back, you can still take it without losses - and even if you lose one, they're cheap to replace and reinforce quickly.

These units can defend against the 2 caravels I suggested earlier, but they can't defend against 10 caravels. At best you can pick off 1-2 for each city you lose, but you can't stop them taking all your cities, and they reinforce so fast that it doesn't really matter. You only have about 20 turns before they become frigates, making your life even harder. Eventually some will get logistics, and 7 moves + 2 shots + move-after-shoot makes them completely unkillable. They'll even take down artillery just fine (even in vanilla).



I'm going to play a full game as Elizabeth, and report back...
 
Map settings: England, deity, tiny islands, standard size/speed.
Tech order: Philosophy for NC, then luxury techs, then astronomy (should have a great scientist for it).
Build order: Monument, granary, library, NC. Lighthouse and harbour when available. All other hammers make triremes until first wave of caravels are done.
Policy order: Tradition, liberty, free worker, free temple, free manufactory, then to the +1 naval sight/move policy in commerce.

Turns 0-45
Started on a tiny island with 1 silver, 1 cotton, 1 deer, 3 fish. Deleted starting warrior. Worked mostly food tiles to finish buildings exactly when techs for the next building finish (otherwise those hammers are wasted). Worker popped out before any luxury techs, so I built a random farm and sat on the deer waiting for mining to chop it. Stagnated growth for NC, which finished on turn 45.

Turns 45-65
Trireme production starts. I wanted to beeline compass for harbour, but because I got mining/archery/calendar, I had to get theology to hit medieval in time to get commerce. This greatly delays my lighthouse, which means I'm probably 1 population lower than I should have been. It also means I'll miss out on the +15xp from harbour on most of my triremes. The first AI I met already had both my luxuries, and the second had no gold, so the luxuries didn't help at all. I finally get optics on turn 65, and plan on getting 3 scouts to grab all the ruins.

Turns 65-107
Making triremes, exploring, picking up ruins. Pretty boring stuff. I end up with 10 triremes, 2 scouts, 1 scout-archer and 1834 (-9 per turn) gold on turn 107, when astronomy finishes. Upgrading them all brings me to 234 (-20). I'd better pillage some gold quickly or I'm going to go bankrupt. I guess upgrading them to frigates in 20 turns is probably not going to be possible. I also find a bug! English triremes upgraded to caravels lose their +2 movement. I don't think it'll matter too much though.

Turns 107-122
My first target, Arabia, has swordsmen and catapults. The first city falls in 2 rounds of caravel fire. The second has 40 strength and takes forever, although it still only does 1-2 damage to caravels. I've never seen a 40 strength city this early... I guess it must be a mod thing. I'm close to taking it when Harun offers me 2646 gold for peace. Given my financial situation and the abundance of people to attack, I take it. Now I have 11 frigates. Unfortunately, I'm losing 40 gold per turn, but I have 726 gold, so it should last a while.

Turns 122-127
Egypt is next. Thebes has 48 defence, as well as a cannon and a frigate of its own! But I have 11 frigates, so I win. The stuff in the city can't kill a frigate in one hit, and because I've already been fighting, the one that gets hit receives enough xp to get +1 range. I capture the city with no losses, but it still has 30 population! It also has the colossus, which will solve my gold problems, and the great lighthouse, which makes my frigates even better. To relieve my happiness problems, I sell the little Arabian city back to Arabia... who pays 2281 gold plus 97 gold per turn. (WTH?!)

I now have 3 frigates with +1 range (so all of them can hit at once), while the other 8 got bombardment 3, and are about 20 xp away from logistics (and Egypt has a carpet of musketmen to provide me that xp). Basically, I can just run around the map, sniping capitals and gifting them away to avoid unhappiness. It doesn't matter even if they have destroyers or artillery - logistics/range ships beat anything. I might finish it later, but I'm pretty sure I've won this game already.

Conclusion
This strategy just isn't fair. With an average start, no strategic resources and only one city, I can wipe out the rest of the world with no risk of failure. It's like the horseman rush from release, but on steroids. Keep in mind that I didn't even get much out of England's bonus - the +2 moves doesn't carry over upon upgrading, and while I did get +15xp, I also lost 15xp on half my fleet due to messing up the timing of my harbour. I also don't see it as being particularly exploitative of the AI - Egypt was pretty smart buying a cannon and a frigate in his city (I was surprised he had the tech for both - vanilla deities sure don't get that far ahead when you open NC). There's just nothing you can do against 11 frigates, unless you already have a comparable fleet of your own.

Suggestions
The buff to renaissance navies consists of three components. The strength buffs (ranged attack 3->7 on triremes, 7->15 on caravels, 15->20 on frigates; defence 15->20 on caravels, 20->25 on frigates) make them effective rather than simply annoying against land units. The consolidated upgrade path and removal of iron requirement on frigates make them easily massable. The speed buffs (frigates 4->6, and much easier to get commerce +1 move policy now) prevents massed units from getting in each other's way (for example, a 10 longsword rush, if you could somehow afford it, isn't much better than the typical 4 longsword rush, but a 10 caravel rush is much stronger than a 4 caravel rush).

I think if you (partly) reverted the strength buffs, but kept the upgrade path / speed buffs, ships would still be useful (actually, I found them useful in vanilla too, just more situational). You can still build 10 caravels and take someone's capital. However, you would take longer to capture the city, and take more damage. You also wouldn't immediately mop up the land units, so they have a chance at retaking the city. Due to the minimum 1 damage per attack, I don't think it's possible to actually prevent the 10 caravel rush, unless you reverted the upgrade path (which would make navies much less attractive). I think it's okay to have some powerful rushes, as long as they have limitations.
 
Unfortunately the AI has always been poor with navies in Civ games. How does this strategy work when playing maps with larger landmasses? It's easy to pump out so many ships when you don't have to worry about a neighbor rushing you since you start isolated.
 
Unfortunately the AI has always been poor with navies in Civ games. How does this strategy work when playing maps with larger landmasses? It's easy to pump out so many ships when you don't have to worry about a neighbor rushing you since you start isolated.

Obviously it won't work as well on a continents/pangaea map. The main issue is that some capitals will be landlocked, so you'll need to either build a land army, or use your conquered cities to go for some other victory condition. However, you can take every single coastal city on the map just fine.

In terms of execution, only the first 2 cities are harder, the rest are the same. Instead of starting off taking any city you want, you need to identify an easy target, because you won't have enough ocean tiles for all your ships to attack at once. Once you have a city, you can heal your ships, which makes the second city much easier, as you can rotate injured ones in and out. After that (assuming you mop up the AI carpet of free xp), your ships will start getting logistics, and then it's no different to an island map because they can all shoot in the same turn.

For land defence, you generate lots of great generals, and don't have much use for them since 1-city golden ages suck. Just spam some citadels and nothing's going to kill you any time soon. I'm assuming that your start location has a reasonable amount of ocean for naval support (otherwise you probably wouldn't choose a naval strat). You might die to an early, sustained attack, but once you have a few ships to defend your city (first trireme pops out around turn 50, and triremes > archers now), nothing can ever get close to it. The AI likes to surround a city before going in for the kill, and if you whittle down all their units around the city, they never gain enough confidence to melee attack it.
 
I balance the game around these settings:

  • Standard/Large size.
  • Standard/Epic speed.
  • Continents.
  • Default advanced settings.
It's important that all units be valuable under these conditions, including ships. Anything significantly far outside of that range (like a tiny islands map script) is a secondary concern. :)

Finally, trebuchets cost 50% more hammers and require iron.
I mentioned earlier that trebuchets don't require iron (haven't since January).

You're not incorrect in your overall assessment however; I'm just pointing out some clarifications. I'd been thinking about reducing Caravel/Frigate strength slightly for an additional reason not mentioned here: Ships of the Line aren't strong enough in comparison to Frigates. :)
 
I balance the game around these settings:
  • Standard/Large size.
  • Standard/Epic speed.
  • Continents.
  • Default advanced settings.
It's important that all units be valuable under these conditions, including ships. Anything significantly far outside of that range (like a tiny islands map script) is a secondary concern. :)
That's fair enough. You certainly won't dominate a continents map with a pure naval opening. I guess what concerns me is that I feel ships should only be situationally useful (as they were in vanilla) on a continents map. If you look at real world geopolitics, for example, only island nations (and the US) maintain large navies; for everyone else, it's acceptable to leave their coasts unguarded.

Currently, in TBC, it's still acceptable to leave your coasts unguarded, but only because the AI has no clue how to launch a naval offense. In the hypothetical scenario of an AI who is competent at naval assault, I feel you'd often find yourself stuck on your continent with no realistic way to get off it.

I mentioned earlier that trebuchets don't require iron (haven't since January).
My mistake. No wonder the AI had so many!
 
Why wouldn't you build a navy of your own?

The human's strength vs the AI lies in defense. The AI can always have a bigger, more promoted force...but the human can widdle down numbers against terrain, pinch points, and using their cities to attack.

In the ocean that's a lot harder to do. The ocean is open, there is nothing to slow and opposing force down or cut there numbers as much as there is on land...and city attacks aren't as strong against ships with the new changes.

That means that numbers count for more in the ocean. On land if I'm fighting 5 units with my 2, I can use my superior tactics to win. In a naval battle, that's a lot harder to do....and since the AI can always field a superior numbered force due to its production advantages....then it gets to the point where I can't build a navy that competes.


Now personally I like the stronger navy currently, and the AI is so inept at naval combat that they don't even build numbers to match the navy I do build. However, should that change in the future I do think its worth revisting the naval discussion.
 
The human's strength vs the AI lies in defense. The AI can always have a bigger, more promoted force...but the human can widdle down numbers against terrain, pinch points, and using their cities to attack.

In the ocean that's a lot harder to do. The ocean is open, there is nothing to slow and opposing force down or cut there numbers as much as there is on land...and city attacks aren't as strong against ships with the new changes.

That means that numbers count for more in the ocean. On land if I'm fighting 5 units with my 2, I can use my superior tactics to win. In a naval battle, that's a lot harder to do....and since the AI can always field a superior numbered force due to its production advantages....then it gets to the point where I can't build a navy that competes.


Now personally I like the stronger navy currently, and the AI is so inept at naval combat that they don't even build numbers to match the navy I do build. However, should that change in the future I do think its worth revisting the naval discussion.

Good point.
 
I just finished my first naval combat heavy game since the improvements to naval units, and I must say, navies are way more fun and useful now. I won a diplo victory, where 4 of the AI's went crazy invading city states (at one point there were not enough city states available to win the UN vote). I was ahead in tech of all the AIs but one (who I was very friendly with), but I neglected the military techs, so my military was useless in defending my city state friends (I was isolated on a weird shaped peninsula, so I didn't have much to worry about for myself). Since most of the city states were coastal, I built a navy, and since most of the naval techs were along the same tech path I was using, my navy was very powerful. So midgame, I went to war with Rome and used frigates and ship of the lines to soften up one of the city states he conquered so I could liberate it with a swordsman. Later, after I got electricity, I built a navy of destroyers and went to war with China and Rome to liberate 3 more city states. China never bothered with a navy, but rome had a decent sized renaissance navy. It was no match for my destroyers, but he did use it well to attack one of my city states (and almost took it). One of the other AI's also had a large navy (also renaissance era at about the same time) and used it to attack city states as well, though I never had to fight him. Unfortunately, I never got a chance to see an evenly matched naval battle that game, but it was nice to see navies actually play a role in the game.

From the game balance perspective, it's hard for me to say based on that game how "beatable" navies are from the land. China was smart enough to park cannons in her cities to attack my ships from safety, but cannons don't do much to destroyers. I think the lack of AI navy spam is a good thing, since as stalker0 noted, if the AI had monster navies, they could overwhelm human players much more easily then they can with their ground forces. Navies are very useful for someone focused on the economic half of the tech tree since many of the naval techs are in the same area. I wouldn't consider this a balance issue since it is impossible to conquer more than a few cities using a navy. So its possible to have a very powerful navy for defending a largely coastal empire with relatively weak ground forces. Navies are also potentially useful for a diplo player, as I saw, since city states are so commonly coastal, and they lie along the same tech path (and even SP path since I went commerce for the money).

Another thing to note about that game is that for the first time ever, I actually build the Colossus. It was glorious. Very early on, I was able to get a large number of 3:c5food: 4:c5gold: tiles around my capital, allowing it to grow very fast (size 40 by the end of the game) while still being very productive. For anyone interested in a one city challenge, I would recommend opening by getting the colossus with your great engineer from the tradition tree, then building the great library and using it for compass to get a harbor up and enter the middle ages early. From here, you can go into the commerce and patronage trees. This works well for a one city diplo victory. My previous game was not one city, but my capital ended up doing almost all the work.
 
I just finished my first naval combat heavy game since the improvements to naval units, and I must say, navies are way more fun and useful now.

From the game balance perspective, it's hard for me to say based on that game how "beatable" navies are from the land. China was smart enough to park cannons in her cities to attack my ships from safety, but cannons don't do much to destroyers.

Another thing to note about that game is that for the first time ever, I actually build the Colossus. It was glorious. Very early on, I was able to get a large number of 3:c5food: 4:c5gold: tiles around my capital, allowing it to grow very fast (size 40 by the end of the game) while still being very productive.

All of this was really eye-opening. That's an excellent strat that not only makes use of the same techs, but double use of the Commerce tree as well.

With regard to AI land defense vs naval attack, I've often seen them move artillery to the coast and do serious damage. I figure that if you're ahead enough to have destroyers vs cannon, then you should have an unbeatable edge.

And I look forward to building the Colossus one of these days.
 
I've been thinking about how to adapt Civilization to better represent modern warfare. There's been some rather interesting news in the past year about the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missiles (link to an article).

  • Cost: $1 million
  • Range: 2000 miles
  • Speed: mach 10 (7500 mph)
  • Trajectory: ballistic (into space)
The missile is specifically designed to destroy carriers, and a thousand missiles can be built for the cost of a single $1 billion supercarrier. There's been discussion about how the cost difference will change the future of naval combat.

Some articles I've read discuss shifting the focus of naval power towards destroyers armed with missiles and flights of remotely piloted aircraft (RPAs). It makes sense considering how RPAs have been gaining a larger role in recent years. One possibility in Civ is to replace the stealth bomber with a flight of Reapers. Stealth bombers as massable aircraft have always felt unrealistic to me. Carriers could then have some form of upgrade that handles jet fighters, RPAs, and missiles.
 
1. If there a way to make AI stop promoting only scouting/sentry like promotions to his navy?

2. Also to remove Siege promotion for subs :rolleyes:

3. What do u think of such balance :

Combat then Ranged values

Caravel - 15 10
Frigate - 20 15
SOTLine - 30 20
Ironclad - 40 25
Destro - 40 30

Reasons i reduced Ranged values :

Caravel is fine as it is and same for frigate with is lot stronger then a caravel. Its good support ship yet cant demolish whole coast alone.
As for Ship of the Line, 30 combat means its already way superior to frigate yet cost slightly more aside from fact it needs iron. SOTL's had indeed lot more firepower then frigates. But as it is now they to powerfull, frigates arnt worth building, and SotL that can easly sink destroyer is to much in my eyes.
Ironclads on the other hand, never had much firepower. Actually they were weak and only thx to the fact they were resistant to conventional ship cannons was they so "powerfull". Since SOTL upgrade to them and since we can always look at them as on early dreadnaughts ( sry if i misstyped this one ;) ) i dont mind them having so much firepower. Still this 5 ranged attack reductions seems logical to me. It also means that destroyer have now uper hand over Ironclads. Not huge but still, and that make it feel even better.


I dont req this changes to be in TBC.
We r all free to mod our own game and that much even i can and did.
Still i wish to know what others think.
 
Back
Top Bottom