Praetorian Poll

[thbrown81]

Usually I don't jump into to the monthly overpowered UU debate, but I'm avoiding (ironically) working on a masters degree research paper on the Roman Empire's persecution of Christianity. In order to accurately assess the UU, the poll needs a second question:

If I am Rome and I don't have Iron within a 10 tile radius of my starting site then I:

A) Tough it out.
B) Regenerate the map.
C) Don't know, because I always play with Huayana Capac.

The Roman UU, as do other UU's thrives under certain map conditions, but is useless under other map conditions. However, most people base their opinions on optimal map conditions. Throw Rome in with Hannibal and Willem on an archipelago map and the Praet is not so tough. But, in single player, no one ever does this because they LIKE using the Praet to steam roll through a Pangea map. Other than a small cadre of elite players, no one is going to stack the deck against their Civ for added difficulty, because it isn't as much fun. If the Praet could dominate on every map type the game has to offer, then it would be too overpowered.

The real issue with the Praet/ Quechua/ Immortal UU debate is not that the units are innately overpowered, but that the AI fails to adequately adjust to the strengths of the UU. If the AI were more capable blitzing an Iron tile/ not building archers/ blitzing a horse tile.

Last but not least, I also think that there is a delicate balance between gameplay balance and historical accuracy, and I don't think that the latter should be sacrificed completely for the former. So, if that means that Rome's Praet's are capable of steam rolling a bunch of unprepared Civs so easily that they overexpand and derail their economy, then that's OK with me, because that's what actually happened!

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I assume people who take a position similar to this will be voting "top tier UU, nothing more".

The fact there are other UUs that are just as or more overpowered IMO doesn't make the praetorian ok.

Having said that, I absolutely agree something has to be done about the quechua and/or Terrace. Rome and Inca are the only two civs I ban from multiplayer games I host.

By the way, don't take my post as refuting your point US, but I do wonder what you must have voted.


By the way, Blitzkrieg...
Sorry but your post about the quechua is misinformed. You treat both units like they are the defender (applying their bonuses to both of them). Instead, if the quechua is attacking the archer the various bonuses are added or subtracted from the archer. Given that many of the archer's bonuses come from defense, when it is needed for attacking quechuas that are choking, the math is different to what you posted. The warrior is then the best way to try and handle the invading quechuas, and warriors vs. warriors defending forests is mostly a slaughter and devastating against an AI early. It also is extremely difficult for a human player to realistically handle a fast quechua choke.

I don't get it. You can put warriors of your own on tiles you don't want the choking quechas to operate, eliminating such a thing. Especially given that the choker has to march some distance to make this attempt, it's not going to be easy. Sending enough quechas to reliably choke someone using just warriors could be prohibitive...it might self-destruct both civs.

The combat I is a problem though, but AGG civs could match it easily. Dog soldiers and holkans would have no issue at all. The malinese would be less vulnerable too.

I'd argue that mali should be banned in your games too actually. I haven't seen too many online incan quecha rush/chokes succeeding easily. It isn't easy to do and leaves the incan vulnerable also.

Now, against the AI the unit is completely broken...unless you play on quick on high difficulties .

 

[Iranon]

@ PieceOfMind: With Praetorians and Quechuas out of the way, have Skirmishers ever become truly obnoxious or is the threat of chariot UUs enough?
Resourceless, very hard to kick out of your territory, discouraging attacks on their cities and powerful enough as attack units without creating any weaknesses like Dogs or Vultures do (lack of a good city attacker with just copper and being vulnerable to enemy axes in the open respectively)?

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

Quecha rush in multiplayer doesn't make too much sense since a human knows to build warriors to stop the choke and most players go for BW pretty early (vs. the AI who sometimes prolongs it for a while).

 

[pi-r8]

I'd be interested to see more data on which civs/leaders are most commonly used in competitive multiplayer games for various map types. I suspect that that aggressive leaders will come up most often- few UUs compare to the power of a quick rush of shock promoted axes. If the Roman leaders had the aggressive trait than praets might be overpowered.

 

[TheWilltoAct]

Not to sidetrack things but I agree with Kaytie's earlier point, namely that it is illogical to compare 2 entirely different units (Praetorian and Cossack), regardless of purpose, based solely on their strength relative to the "normal" unit (Swordsman and Cavalry respectively).

I am inherently uninterested in complex mathematical comparisons, but I think it would be safe to say that that the Cossack possessing twice the movement points of the Praetorian is sufficient to make them wholly seperate cases.

 

[r_rolo1]

OSo, what would be a logical comparison to you? Let's assume a ( completely hypotetical ) str 8 1 move HA UU . Would you consider it OP? It would mill anything before War elephants and longbows ( only spears could give some fight ) ...


...but even then it would be a weaker unit than the preatorian ( because it wouldn't get defensive bonuses or CR promos... it would also need a more costly tech to get )

 

[TheWilltoAct]

I'm not qualified to say much, I'm more lurker than player (so not very experienced).
With that out of the way, my point is just that the additional movement range of a mounted unit (the Cossack in this case) seems like a big point to weigh regarding which units are "OP". If you can accept that as just one key difference it quickly leads (me at least) to realize that a proper comparison between UU (particularly those from different eras) would be wildly complex as we attempt to consider an increasingly large amount of factors.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

Not to sidetrack things but I agree with Kaytie's earlier point, namely that it is illogical to compare 2 entirely different units (Praetorian and Cossack), regardless of purpose, based solely on their strength relative to the "normal" unit (Swordsman and Cavalry respectively).

I am inherently uninterested in complex mathematical comparisons, but I think it would be safe to say that that the Cossack possessing twice the movement points of the Praetorian is sufficient to make them wholly seperate cases.

Actually, what you are saying in your second paragraph underlines the importance of comparing UUs 'based solely on their strength relative to the "normal" unit'. Since you can't compare a 2 movement flanking unit with a 1 movement city raider/support (mainly) unit. However, you can compare the Cossack to the cavalry & Praet to swordsman to see how much of an improvement there is, then compare the UU bonuses to each other. Really, it's the only way I can see of comparing the power of UUs. Their utility is separate from the discussion of which UU is "better" or more versatile.

For example, a musketeer gets a movement bonus over the standard musket man. Some players prefer wars of pillaging and destabilizing to be more usefull than city capture based war. These players will feel that the musketeer is better than the vulture or praetorian since their bonus is movement based instead of power based and you can stack them with mounted units to pillage twice the # of improvements in the same time it would take a standard mounted/stack protector stack.

 

[TheWilltoAct]

@blitzkrieg

All I would like to be taken from my comments is the thought that we have to be careful in making that comparison to the normal unit in a vacuum, without bringing in the complicating factors (availability of counter units being one key consideration). But I do admit rolo clearly has a point with the Praet being majorly boosted in strength compared to other unique units.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

I see what your saying. How I like to judge a UU is to take it's basic version (IE swordsman in this case) with likely upgrades (combat 1 or CR1) pit it against the strongest likely opponent (axe with combat bonus) and then compare that to the UU pitted against its strongest likely opponent (axe with combat bonus) given the same promotions.

In this case, the Praetorian provides a massive increase in survivability and combat %.

 

[TheWilltoAct]

I see what your saying. How I like to judge a UU is to take it's basic version (IE swordsman in this case) with likely upgrades (combat 1 or CR1) pit it against the strongest likely opponent (axe with combat bonus) and then compare that to the UU pitted against its strongest likely opponent (axe with combat bonus) given the same promotions.

In this case, the Praetorian provides a massive increase in survivability and combat %.

Agree 100%

 

[Öjevind Lång]

Agree 100%

I'm tired of the talk about "overpowered" units. Personally, I'd like to see the Redcoat restored to its former glory. It only appears in midgame, so I don't think it could even be accused of being "gamebreaking".

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

??? Ojevind Lang, I'm not sure why you quoted TheWilltoAct. We weren't talking about how the units are overpowered or gamebreaking. We were discussing how to judge UUs relative to the units they replace and each other.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

??? Ojevind Lang, I'm not sure why you quoted TheWilltoAct. We weren't talking about how the units are overpowered or gamebreaking. We were discussing how to judge UUs relative to the units they replace and each other.

I apologize. I thought we were basically on the same side, enjoying the fact that there are UU's with varying strengths and weaknesses. That's why I included the quote, which I probaby shouldn't have done.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

it's all gravy brotha

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I'm tired of the talk about "overpowered" units. Personally, I'd like to see the Redcoat restored to its former glory. It only appears in midgame, so I don't think it could even be accused of being "gamebreaking".

This is the other direction one could go. Rather than nerfing the prat because it's stronger than a sword compared to other UUs, it's also logical to boost other UUs so that each one is truly a strong advantage in its era. 5 STR impi, str 10 musketeers, 18 str cossacks again (maybe a little less such that they are at least countered), samurai with 4 built-in first strikes, etc etc. Units that command an incredible respect in their era and are all difficult (but not quite impossible) to counter.

The reason people complain about prat/quecha/immortals/etc. is that they're stronger than their base unit than other UUs by so much, and they come so early. If other UUs were balanced to be similarly dominating, then rather than discussion about UUs being overpowered it would be a question of matchups and how to use them against other UUs.

USA and Germany would be quite shafted then though .

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

LoL.

USA and Germany would be quite shafted then though

Too true, too true. India as well. Unless they gave the fast worker a 1 strength and 50% withdrawal possibility. That's a little crazy though

I like the idea of giving all the UUs an extra strength boost (like in Civ3). For some reason, I think the developers were trying to exemplify Rome's strength at that particular era by giving them such a boosted unit. The problem with that kind of thinking is that a human player isn't going to allow barbs to overrun their big empire after Praet warring is done therefore a permanent strong empire is founded on the swords of the praets.

 

[deanej]

Or making it so that the fast worker actually builds improvements faster. The extra movement point only means that they can start work when moving onto a hill or a forest (but not a forested hill, as those cost 4 moves), or move an extra tile to get to the next place to improve.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

I think you'll find that plenty of people like the extra movement point. It saves hundreds of worker turns over the course of the game.