New Beta Version - Feb. 9th (2-9)

[pineappledan]

Formation I isn't being given to spear units as intended. I noticed that Caroleans were given their formation promotion in a different file, and it is working there.

It looks like there is a syntax error in meleeunits.sql that is causing the updates to abort.

EDIT: The Mehal Sefari is getting its formation I promotion, but Hoplites are not, so the error is somewhere between lines 185 and 188.

• I'm not liking how axemen and archers a practically the same unit, except for 1 RCS point.
• I'm not liking how I can't catch barbs anymore. I used to be able to run them down with archers that could hit something 3 tiles away in a turn, but now the barbarian movement bonuses mean that, short of horsemen/chariots, they can literally just wander off and I'll never catch them. It's pretty tedious
• I'm not liking how Egypt can still reliably archer rush with their war chariots by moving in/out of range and firing, but now everyone else is so constrained by maybe the 2-4 horses and the turn time is requires to connect them that archer rushing is now basically a civ-exclusive bonus

 

[CrazyG]

I think city states are getting embassies when a player improves their luxury resource through diplomatic actions...

I was wondering how Siam had 17 votes in the first world congress.

 

[crdvis16]

A thought occured to me regarding the archer line. One of their strongest aspects is that when they attack they take no damage and when they get attacked by melee they do damage to the attacker. It creates a 2 for 1 ratio even when going toe to toe with melee units (which should be their worst case scenario).

What if they didn't do damage when being attacked by melee? It somewhat makes sense from a realism perspective. What line of archers is going to be able to stand their ground and return fire once people with melee weapons have closed the distance and are on top of them? Groups of ranged units were typically kept behind protection to avoid just that.

It might be better for gameplay as well. The archer line often does too well against contemporary melee units even when melee has manoeuvred to close on them.

I'd apply this mechanic to siege units as well for the same reasons.

You could have the mechanic expire at gatling or machine guns perhaps as their rapid fire/reload might mean they stand their ground better than more clunky bows/muskets. That's also roughly when melee units get their new default anti range promotions anyway. You could keep it for siege units because they weren't typically designed around firing at things at close range.

I wonder if it might be AI unfriendly, though. It would mean unit placement is even more important- keeping ranged units protected behind melee or via ZoC.

 

[Randomized]

As others, including you, have said, reducing archer RCS but keeping them at range 2 simply extends the duration of a siege, but doesn't alter the outcome.

Doesn't extending the siege mean the AI has time to build some units? Or even walls.

 

[Gazebo]

Formation I isn't being given to spear units as intended. I noticed that Caroleans were given their formation promotion in a different file, and it is working there.

It looks like there is a syntax error in meleeunits.sql that is causing the updates to abort.

EDIT: The Mehal Sefari is getting its formation I promotion, but Hoplites are not, so the error is somewhere between lines 185 and 188.
View attachment 545945

• I'm not liking how axemen and archers a practically the same unit, except for 1 RCS point.
• I'm not liking how I can't catch barbs anymore. I used to be able to run them down with archers that could hit something 3 tiles away in a turn, but now the barbarian movement bonuses mean that, short of horsemen/chariots, they can literally just wander off and I'll never catch them. It's pretty tedious
• I'm not liking how Egypt can still reliably archer rush with their war chariots by moving in/out of range and firing, but now everyone else is so constrained by maybe the 2-4 horses and the turn time is requires to connect them that archer rushing is now basically a civ-exclusive bonus

Wait didn't you say earlier that your Nubia was designed around the archer rush?

 

[Voremonger]

I played a few games on the new patch (Immortal, standard speed).

The first game was with Persia.
I started with Gems and rushed Immortals.
I was able to kill 3 AI players before the Medieval Era (Napoleon, Majah Gada, Pacal).
I think Immortals are currently overpowered; I might need to play some more to make a better judgement.

The second game was with Spain.
I started with Salt.
After building Pyramids I built an army of Archers and Spearmen (I had a Scout from Ancient Ruins).
I killed a City State and then used the leveled-up Units to kill an AI (Washington, he had Warriors and Archers when I attacked).
I think the Archers I built were useful, but I don't think I would have been successful without the Spearmen.
It is currently relatively dangerous to attack a City with an Archer.
If a Warrior spawns on the enemy turn that can easily cause your Archer to die if it's next to the City.
I think that Spearmen are in a very good position right now.
Because Archers now only have 1 range and because they are getting defensive bonuses in open terrain their survivability is much better compared to the previous patch.
I think the best generic strategy for Ancient Era aggression is now to research Bronze Working early on and to build Spearmen with Archers as support.

Other thoughts:

• The cost of Archers feels a little high compared to how useful they currently are. I agree with the proposal to reduce their cost to that of Warriors.
• Rushing Iron Working and building Swordsmen + Catapults might be a good strategy right now.
• I think the minimum amount of Units and Technologies necessary for defense has gone up. Previously you could defend relatively easily with just Archers and Walls. I think you will now also need either Spearmen or Horsemen. With the right terrain Chariot Archers would probably also work.

 

[Gazebo]

Formation I isn't being given to spear units as intended. I noticed that Caroleans were given their formation promotion in a different file, and it is working there.

It looks like there is a syntax error in meleeunits.sql that is causing the updates to abort.

EDIT: The Mehal Sefari is getting its formation I promotion, but Hoplites are not, so the error is somewhere between lines 185 and 188.
View attachment 545945

• I'm not liking how axemen and archers a practically the same unit, except for 1 RCS point.
• I'm not liking how I can't catch barbs anymore. I used to be able to run them down with archers that could hit something 3 tiles away in a turn, but now the barbarian movement bonuses mean that, short of horsemen/chariots, they can literally just wander off and I'll never catch them. It's pretty tedious
• I'm not liking how Egypt can still reliably archer rush with their war chariots by moving in/out of range and firing, but now everyone else is so constrained by maybe the 2-4 horses and the turn time is requires to connect them that archer rushing is now basically a civ-exclusive bonus

SQLite looks fine to me...

"UNIT_OTTOMAN_SIPAHI"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_SWEDISH_HAKKAPELIITTA"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_POLISH_WINGED_HUSSAR"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_FRENCH_MUSKETEER"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_SWEDISH_CAROLEAN"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_RIFLEMAN"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_ETHIOPIAN_MEHAL_SEFARI"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_SPEARMAN"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_PIKEMAN"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_BARBARIAN_SPEARMAN"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_GREEK_HOPLITE"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_PERSIAN_IMMORTAL"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_GERMAN_LANDSKNECHT"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_SPANISH_TERCIO"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_ZULU_IMPI"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_FRENCH_MUSKETEER"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"
"UNIT_SWEDISH_CAROLEAN"    "PROMOTION_FORMATION_1"

 

[pineappledan]

There's a duplicated line giving formation I to pikemen twice. line 185 is missing its 'AND EXISTS (SELECT * FROM COMMUNITY WHERE Type='COMMUNITY_CORE_BALANCE_UNITS' AND Value= 1 )'

These are the only units I am getting with free formation I. Everything else has anti mounted 1

UNIT_OTTOMAN_SIPAHI PROMOTION_FORMATION_1
UNIT_POLISH_WINGED_HUSSAR PROMOTION_FORMATION_1
UNIT_FRENCH_MUSKETEER PROMOTION_FORMATION_1
UNIT_SWEDISH_CAROLEAN PROMOTION_FORMATION_1
UNIT_RIFLEMAN PROMOTION_FORMATION_1
UNIT_ETHIOPIAN_MEHAL_SEFARI PROMOTION_FORMATION_1
UNIT_AUSTRIA_LANDWEHR PROMOTION_FORMATION_1

strange. I will redownload

 

[civplayer33]

It looks like there is a syntax error in meleeunits.sql that is causing the updates to abort.

You need to update to the latest hotfix.

I also support reducing Archer Production cost if Range 1 is kept.

 

[pineappledan]

Yeah, I was on 2b rather than 3b. downloading now

 

[tothePAIN]

Gazebo can say - hey, don't assume what I did and did not test. Sure.

But, given the resistance to the change, it would seem that it would be easy enough for Gazebo to simply state that he did test the alternative changes. In the absence of that statement, Gazebo's reply is simply a deflection.

So simply - yes or no? Did you test 2 range archers with a city malus and reduced RCS? Because if the power is reduced enough, the AI gets walls up and the siege ends.

 

[Guynemer]

DID YOU ORDER THE CODE RED, GAZEBO?

 

[Gazebo]

DID YOU ORDER THE CODE RED, GAZEBO?

You can't handle the truth.

 

[crdvis16]

Gazebo can say - hey, don't assume what I did and did not test. Sure.

But, given the resistance to the change, it would seem that it would be easy enough for Gazebo to simply state that he did test the alternative changes. In the absence of that statement, Gazebo's reply is simply a deflection.

So simply - yes or no? Did you test 2 range archers with a city malus and reduced RCS? Because if the power is reduced enough, the AI gets walls up and the siege ends.

If the AI didn't have a reason to go for Construction early then it can be quite a while before it gets walls. They might not prioritize it very highly without quarry resources. The rush is happening very early, remember.

 

[Gazebo]

Yeah, I was on 2b rather than 3b. downloading now

Wait, were you on 2b...or not 2b?

 

[Guynemer]

That is the question.
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous one tile range,

 

[pineappledan]

3b fixed it.

Why are Berserkers 20 and Maori Warriors 21 still?
With longswords up to 22, these UUs strike me as pretty pathetic now.

Indian War Elephant still has Anti-mounted I instead of the Siamese war elephant.

 

[Gazebo]

3b fixed it.

Why are Berserkers 20 and Maori Warriors 21 still?
With longswords up to 22, these UUs strike me as pretty pathetic now.

Both come earlier than their counterparts.

G

 

[pineappledan]

Both come earlier than their counterparts.

Maori warrior comes at chivalry, the same tech level as Steel.
Even if that were true, when everyone else gets steel and you are stuck with a longsword with lower CS than the base unit. In the berserker's case, it's a full 2CS lower.

Berserker CS wasn't changed from 19 up to 20 when the swordsman and longsword both got stronger. You're arguing this was intentional, but it's pretty obviously just an oversight. Just like Indian war elephants getting anti-mounted now instead of siamese war elephants.

 

[Gazebo]

Maori warrior comes at chivalry, the same tech level as Steel.
Even if that were true, when everyone else gets steel and you are stuck with a longsword with lower CS than the base unit. In the berserker's case, it's a full 2CS lower.

Their CS wasn't changed from 19 up to 20 when the swordsman and longsword both got stronger. You're arguing this was intentional, but it's pretty obviously just an oversight.

It was intentional, in that I chose not to boost their CS relative to the base unit. Whether or not that makes them too weak needs to be playtested.

G