Promotion trees

[Growth]

After reading a few posts, I am not sure if you can see the promotions tree in the UI. Do you have to run it without EUI? Is it included in VP or I need to download from another source?

Thanks

 

[Funak]

Agreed. I'd suggest leaving Range's RCS penalty at -20% and bumping Logistic's to -25% or -30%. Or making Logistics harder to obtain (e.g., requires Slipstream), as you suggest.

Honestly feel like the existing 20% penalty on logistics makes the promotion close to useless, slingers hit like spitballs for example. A lot of the time you have to move anyways at which point the promotion becomes a pure liability.

This is purely out of an archery line point of view however, I would definitely pick Logistics up for boats or artillery either way.


Also worth mentioning that I really don't think March needed a nerf, march needed both medic promotions and now cover to be at all a benefit. In general I don't think any of the melee-promotions needed a penalty.

 

[Moi Magnus]

After reading a few posts, I am not sure if you can see the promotions tree in the UI. Do you have to run it without EUI? Is it included in VP or I need to download from another source?

Thanks

Its WHoward's UI - Promotion Tree (http://www.picknmixmods.com/mods/CivV/UI/Promotion Tree.html)
It is NOT compatible with EUI. Moreover, some link are missing in the tree, so it is probably not completly compatible with VP, but it works.

 

[ExpiredReign]

After reading a few posts, I am not sure if you can see the promotions tree in the UI. Do you have to run it without EUI? Is it included in VP or I need to download from another source?

Thanks

Yes to both questions.

EDIT:
Only after I posted this did I actually see @Moi Magnus had already answered it.

 

[pandasnail]

Added Indirect Fire.

 

[Gidoza]

I had a question for Gazebo regarding a different manner of handling Range, Logistics, and Indirect Fire, but I don't know if it's possible.

Rather than just having the unit have the damage penalty to all attacks, why not just apply the penalty to attacks that are directly using the ability? Thus...

Range only gets a penalty if the ship is firing 3 tiles away (you could make the penalty as large or small as you wanted in this case).

Indirect Fire only gets a penalty if you're actually shooting somewhere you normally couldn't shoot.

Logistics only gets a penalty on one of the two attacks.



This way, you can combine all three abilities, attack normally much of the time, and for exceptional circumstances your unit can participate to do extra damage, but it'll be less damage than usual. Just a thought.

 

[Gazebo]

I had a question for Gazebo regarding a different manner of handling Range, Logistics, and Indirect Fire, but I don't know if it's possible.

Rather than just having the unit have the damage penalty to all attacks, why not just apply the penalty to attacks that are directly using the ability? Thus...

Range only gets a penalty if the ship is firing 3 tiles away (you could make the penalty as large or small as you wanted in this case).

Indirect Fire only gets a penalty if you're actually shooting somewhere you normally couldn't shoot.

Logistics only gets a penalty on one of the two attacks.



This way, you can combine all three abilities, attack normally much of the time, and for exceptional circumstances your unit can participate to do extra damage, but it'll be less damage than usual. Just a thought.

Too expensive for the DLL – combat is already 75% of the DLL's CPU load.

G

 

[BliTTzZ]

So currently all the info about promotions on CBP wikia or in-game civilopedia is up to date?

 

[ExpiredReign]

So currently all the info about promotions on CBP wikia or in-game civilopedia is up to date?

Policies page on the wiki was last touched on August 5th.

 

[pandasnail]

So currently all the info about promotions on CBP wikia or in-game civilopedia is up to date?

Looks like I have the Promotions wiki a little behind, but the OP here should be correct, and the same as the civpedia. I just keep forgetting to change the update date when they're aren't promotion changes, fixed now.

 

[Der_Zorn_gottes]

Is it intentional that for archery units 3 times the bonus against cities unlocks a heavy bonus against wounded units, whereas 3 times bonus against wounded units unlocks something else (I think free pillage)? Shouldn't it be the other way around?

 

[Stalker0]

On promotion, does anyone else find the submarine "wolfpack" promotion a bit lacking?

At wolfpack 3 (which is common around the time I start looking hard at submarines I can either have:

1) +60% attack CS.
2) +30% offensive and defensive CS (increased to 75% against wounded units).

I find the core ranged promotion (number 2) gives more offense in most cases, and gives a much stronger defensive benefits, preventing subs from being complete glass cannons.

 

[Funak]

By the way, the Bomber unit only have one promotion path(city attack), is that really intentional?

 

[Rolepgeek]

On promotion, does anyone else find the submarine "wolfpack" promotion a bit lacking?

At wolfpack 3 (which is common around the time I start looking hard at submarines I can either have:

1) +60% attack CS.
2) +30% offensive and defensive CS (increased to 75% against wounded units).

I find the core ranged promotion (number 2) gives more offense in most cases, and gives a much stronger defensive benefits, preventing subs from being complete glass cannons.

I think part of the point of Wolfpack is that subs aren't really meant to be used in a battle line. Hitting a fresh ship will probably be really common for that reason. If you can control the field, then you could maybe use a pair with a Wolfpack and a Targeting Sub that hit 1-2 torp to kill units and slink away.


Well, that, and also if you take another look at the promotions in the OP, Wolfpack helps against cities a lot more than Targeting, even though Targeting is better for overall field battles, so to speak. Wolfpack lets you hit harder against all targets, albeit without the gold of Coastal Raider or the sheer force of Targeting.