Promotion trees

[Craig_Sutter]

Has anyone done research on Civ 6 promotions. I am curious whether they have gone the level/tree organization as in Civ 5 or if it might be technology access based or some sort of hybrid. With a longer space between upgrades, it strikes me that a more tech/civics based method might be better to differentiate tech superiority amongst civs even though units are of the same type.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I don't think we've seen enough. Also, promotions don't look like tree to me.

 

[AriochIV]

They do appear to be trees; the first promotion you are offered two "I" choices, and the second promotion you are offered the same "I" choice and one "II" choice. They appear to be based on unit type.

The ones I have seen thus far are:

Recon promotions:
I Ranger: Faster movement in forest terrain
I Alpine: Faster movement in hilly terrain

Melee promotions:
I Battlecry: +7 when attacking melee and ranged units.
__II Commando: Can scale Cliff walls.
I Tortoise: +10 when defending against ranged attacks.

Spearman promotions:
I Echelon: +5 combat bonus vs. cavalry units.
I Thrust: +10 combat bonus vs. melee units.

Mounted promotions:
I Charge: +10 attack vs. fortified defender.
I Barding: +7 defense vs. ranged attacks.

Ranged promotions:
I Volley: +5 ranged attack vs. land units.
__II Arrow Storm: +7 ranged attack vs. land and naval units
I Garrison: +10 combat bonus when occupying a district or fort.

Siege promotions:
I Grape Shot: +7 combat bonus vs. land units.
I Crew Weapons: +7 combat bonus when defending.

 

[Cyon]

They look a lot more interesting than the promotions in civ 5

Also scouts gets XP from exploring now and can later be upgraded to Rangers

 

[stealth_nsk]

They do appear to be trees

it doesn't look like tree, more like 2 lines.

 

[oddtail]

These look very interesting, and much better than the Civ 5 philosophy, which I personally hated.

I'm a little disappointed there are not more options, at level 1 (three options would hit the sweet spot for me), and on higher ones. I hope more will be added, as this seems like something relatively easy to implement.

 

[stealth_nsk]

These look very interesting, and much better than the Civ 5 philosophy, which I personally hated.

I'm a little disappointed there are not more options, at level 1 (three options would hit the sweet spot for me), and on higher ones. I hope more will be added, as this seems like something relatively easy to implement.

It's still work in progress. So there could be more.

 

[mrwho]

Happy to see that it looks like there won't be redundant promotions after upgrades this time.

 

[Craig_Sutter]

Would "Grape Shot", for instance, only be available to with Gun Powder tech? Despite being in a tree.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Would "Grape Shot", for instance, only be available to with Gun Powder tech? Despite being in a tree.

No, it's available earlier.

 

[AriochIV]

Would "Grape Shot", for instance, only be available to with Gun Powder tech? Despite being in a tree.

Thus far it does not seem that promotions are connected to technologies. "Grape Shot," for example, is available to Catapults.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Interesting that the promotions are an absolute amount rather than a fractional amount. This would suggest that a promotion has a much much stronger impact at the start of the tech tree (when the initial unit strength is much lower) than at the end.

Is this intentional? Is it desirable?

Or else it means combat depends on difference instead of ratio

20 v 40 is like 120 v 140 ...not 120 v 240

 

[stealth_nsk]

Interesting that the promotions are an absolute amount rather than a fractional amount. This would suggest that a promotion has a much much stronger impact at the start of the tech tree (when the initial unit strength is much lower) than at the end.

Is this intentional? Is it desirable?

All bonuses are flat numbers now. The most logical conclusion is - combat formula now takes into account set difference, not fraction.

 

[stealth_nsk]

That seems... very strange and counter intuitive. I'm not sure why, but that is just incredibly odd to me. Having a non-linear, non-scaling combat system... why?

Because it's easier to count. The most simple answer.

 

[masda_gib]

My guess is that internally it is still a percentage but it is just displayed as an absolute amount for the unit the bonus is applied to.

So let a promotion give 50% bonus against cities. On a strength 10 unit it would display as +5 against cities, on a strength 36 unit as +18 against cities.

Did we see the same bonus/effect on units of different strengths yet?

 

[stealth_nsk]

My guess is that internally it is still a percentage but it is just displayed as an absolute amount for the unit the bonus is applied to.

So let a promotion give 50% bonus against cities. On a strength 10 unit it would display as +5 against cities, on a strength 36 unit as +18 against cities.

Did we see the same bonus/effect on units of different strengths yet?

It has the same value on units with different strengths. So, no.

There's nothing wrong with having flat numbers. Have you played board games? It works well with them.

 

[stealth_nsk]

What about corps/armies boosting the strength of units by a fractional amount (40% and 70% respectively iirc)?

If the combat odds depends only on the absolute difference, this means that forming corps and armies is 100% essential in the later eras

We know nothing about how corps/armies work. When they say "roughly 40%" stronger", this could mean corps give +30, for example. Or there's some completely different kind of bonus.

 

[aguliondew]

I think corps will probably be like the siege/trade linking ability I have seen in the previews. With 2 units joining together but increase attack/defense/unit hp by a percentage of the units linked. I expect cultural focused civs will be more organized with low tech unit compared to the science focused civs with higher tech units.

 

[m15a]

That seems... very strange and counter intuitive. I'm not sure why, but that is just incredibly odd to me. Having a non-linear, non-scaling combat system... why?

Even if difference is used instead of ratio, the same underlying system can be represented. It's just a log scale instead of a linear scale, right? A log scale is used a lot just because it's simpler or better represents the underlying system. Like sound level measured in decibels.

 

[stealth_nsk]

You're right, you can map from a ratio to a difference system faithfully. I think this is because the multiplication and addition semigroups are isomorphic over the positives.

Maybe it's because I'm a physicist, but I find ratios more natural.

Everyone seem to find ratios more natural, but differences are easier to calculate. maybe developers are trying to increase customer base with some boardgame players, I'm not sure.