The question has never been is it "Overpowered". The thread title is "Protective Trait - Underrated?" and the answer to that is yes definitely! Many players can't see the many benefits and arguments for Protective and they underrate it. That is not saying it is the best trait. It might even be the worst trait - if that actually made sense and I don't think it does - and still it would be true that people underrate it.
Protective Trait-- Underrated?
- Thread starter PreLynMax
- Start date
Yes, the whole use of longbows as attack units with Drill IV has blown out of proportion.
Originally all I wanted to demonstrate was that Drill IV could be used even on offense, and even with a unit as unlikely as a longbow.
The use of longbows is actually strongest, like with almost every unit in the game, when it is leading edge in technology. Before anyone has maces, longbows are very competitive even as attack units, but particularly as defenders.
I may have put too much emphasis on the drill promotions. There are many cases where combat beats them by a small or moderate margin, but I just remind myself PRO has other bonuses which can be taken advantage of...
I still maintain in the vast majority of games, PRO is the only trait that makes the drill line worth trying at all.
What I will leave finally in this post, is this picture from a game many months ago. After I had captured an American city, I found Washington kept sending waves of units at me. I had two longbows defending the new city, and one of them had CG1, Drill IV and C1 (in the picture the C2 came from an upgrade on the current turn). Facing this attack wave, it single-handedly took down 5 catapults, 2 swordsmen and 1 horse archer. It must have taken a hit or two from the horse archer because after that the next longbow stood up and took place in defending the city. The next one was less promoted I think, and it died to the next horse archer.
In this example, the advantage in strength coupled with the first strikes made that longbow an unbelievable cit defender. Also, note how much xp it has now.
Originally all I wanted to demonstrate was that Drill IV could be used even on offense, and even with a unit as unlikely as a longbow.
The use of longbows is actually strongest, like with almost every unit in the game, when it is leading edge in technology. Before anyone has maces, longbows are very competitive even as attack units, but particularly as defenders.
I may have put too much emphasis on the drill promotions. There are many cases where combat beats them by a small or moderate margin, but I just remind myself PRO has other bonuses which can be taken advantage of...
I still maintain in the vast majority of games, PRO is the only trait that makes the drill line worth trying at all.
What I will leave finally in this post, is this picture from a game many months ago. After I had captured an American city, I found Washington kept sending waves of units at me. I had two longbows defending the new city, and one of them had CG1, Drill IV and C1 (in the picture the C2 came from an upgrade on the current turn). Facing this attack wave, it single-handedly took down 5 catapults, 2 swordsmen and 1 horse archer. It must have taken a hit or two from the horse archer because after that the next longbow stood up and took place in defending the city. The next one was less promoted I think, and it died to the next horse archer.
In this example, the advantage in strength coupled with the first strikes made that longbow an unbelievable cit defender. Also, note how much xp it has now.
CornPlanter
Emperor
Depends on:
1. Map (type, resources, etc)
2. neighbours
3. Overall situation (What time is it? Am I at war? what are my short term and long term goals? What techs do I have? Am I leading in techs? etc.)
4. My other trait
5. My UU
6. My UB
7. My prefered playing style in that particular game.
And all of these are valid for any other trait, not just protective. E.g. I would definitely change creative for something else in a mid-late game. Or Aggressive into something else once I conquered enough land and want to rush towards space ship (finnancial e.g. would be nice
).Yes, the whole use of longbows as attack units with Drill IV has blown out of proportion.
Originally all I wanted to demonstrate was that Drill IV could be used even on offense, and even with a unit as unlikely as a longbow.
The use of longbows is actually strongest, like with almost every unit in the game, when it is leading edge in technology. Before anyone has maces, longbows are very competitive even as attack units, but particularly as defenders.
I may have put too much emphasis on the drill promotions. There are many cases where combat beats them by a small or moderate margin, but I just remind myself PRO has other bonuses which can be taken advantage of...
I still maintain in the vast majority of games, PRO is the only trait that makes the drill line worth trying at all.
What I will leave finally in this post, is this picture from a game many months ago. After I had captured an American city, I found Washington kept sending waves of units at me. I had two longbows defending the new city, and one of them had CG1, Drill IV and C1 (in the picture the C2 came from an upgrade on the current turn). Facing this attack wave, it single-handedly took down 5 catapults, 2 swordsmen and 1 horse archer. It must have taken a hit or two from the horse archer because after that the next longbow stood up and took place in defending the city. The next one was less promoted I think, and it died to the next horse archer.
In this example, the advantage in strength coupled with the first strikes made that longbow an unbelievable cit defender. Also, note how much xp it has now.
Picture == 1000 words.
Agreed, longbows can be effective attackers in the early game with the Oracle-Feudalism slingshot. Vassalage and longbows is lethal against weaker cities with archer defenders and 20% culture. If you research Construction then the war can continue with highly promoted longbows and cats and you can take out better defended cities like the enemy capital.
With my preferred way of playing Protective it is usually CG2 that I promote the bulk of my drafted muskets to as they are usually garrison troops.
I think Charismatic can advance a case for drill4 in some circumstances. It only costs 13 exp compared to 10 for Protective and 17 for other traits.
A heroic defence, that longbow deserves a nickname. May I suggest Robin Hood would be appropriate
The reason he did so well was the strong defensive position that boosted his strength. That and the fact that he defended against the cats and so didn't take any collateral and I doubt the cats actually did much damage, unlike the HAs. He was a 7.2 strength longbow, in a city (+45%), on a hill (25% + 25%) with 4-7 FS, no wonder the cats and swords bounced off him. Still 8 kills is impressive and he would have gained at least 8 exp from that.
Hmmm...regarding the wall chop thing, I hate for something to be strong because of what amounts to a gimmick that it enables. Especially a non-transparent gimmick, one that you have to be a real gamer to use. And one that takes a lot of fretting over micromanaging and stuff, and lacks flavor (the decision to wall chop to penny-pinch some gold in an ultra-competitive way is different from the decision to wall chop to protect your city--in other words, play your civ in a fun, flavorable, meaning-filled way.
The wall chop thing may or may not be an unintended "exploit" (the game mechanics of it make sense and are in a sense, necessary). That's not what I'm complaining about. If you happen to do a wall chop, or any other chop, the gold is there for balance reasons. But to have such a petty, non-flavorful aspect of the game driving your decisions is not fun or historically immersive. It would be like, if while playing organized, you could get 100 extra hammers from whipping a city for 3 citizens when your city is a multiple of 3 in population, and while your city's name is an actual number instead of a real city name. So instead of playing with flavorful names like Moscow, Berlin, Kyoto, Carthage, etc., you'd be playing with "City 1," "City 2," etc., and you'd be annoyingly micromanaging your whips to get those extra 100 hammers. So you'd get 100 extra hammers. Woot. I guess that would make organized a more powerful trait, right? Maybe, but it would kill the fun. Or another example would be, imagine everyone thought financial was too weak (ha!), and people wanted to compensate that trait by giving it siege units with free city raider I. Okaaaaaay...would that make financial objectively stronger? Yes. Would it be a fun and flavorful addition to the game? Uh, no.
The problem with weak traits is not that they are weak per se, but that they are frustrating to play, and their unbalance distracts one from the immersive flavor of the game (you are constantly reminded that you are playing some unbalanced game, and not reliving some natural civilizational historical experience). Adding a non-flavorful bonus to help a weak trait doesn't address the core problem.
Protective needs another protective-ish bonus to be balanced with the other traits. A simple solution would be to add a half-priced discount to a modern protective building. Of course, that doesn't help the ancient era, where some people seem to think protective needs the most help. (Why? protective archers and walls at that stage are particularly strong because they basically can't be brought down without siege. The window of weakness for protective is, rather, the window between catapults and longbows).
Or here's another idea: you know how imperialistic gives you +100% great general emergence? What if protective gave like +50% GG emergence within one's cultural borders (like the GW, but less so). Or make it 100%. Or make it 200%. I don't know what would be balanced. Hard to say without a little playtesting. But an addition like that would be *flavorful*. Whereas, relying on the wall-chop gimmick to save protective is not.
The wall chop thing may or may not be an unintended "exploit" (the game mechanics of it make sense and are in a sense, necessary). That's not what I'm complaining about. If you happen to do a wall chop, or any other chop, the gold is there for balance reasons. But to have such a petty, non-flavorful aspect of the game driving your decisions is not fun or historically immersive. It would be like, if while playing organized, you could get 100 extra hammers from whipping a city for 3 citizens when your city is a multiple of 3 in population, and while your city's name is an actual number instead of a real city name. So instead of playing with flavorful names like Moscow, Berlin, Kyoto, Carthage, etc., you'd be playing with "City 1," "City 2," etc., and you'd be annoyingly micromanaging your whips to get those extra 100 hammers. So you'd get 100 extra hammers. Woot. I guess that would make organized a more powerful trait, right? Maybe, but it would kill the fun. Or another example would be, imagine everyone thought financial was too weak (ha!), and people wanted to compensate that trait by giving it siege units with free city raider I. Okaaaaaay...would that make financial objectively stronger? Yes. Would it be a fun and flavorful addition to the game? Uh, no.
The problem with weak traits is not that they are weak per se, but that they are frustrating to play, and their unbalance distracts one from the immersive flavor of the game (you are constantly reminded that you are playing some unbalanced game, and not reliving some natural civilizational historical experience). Adding a non-flavorful bonus to help a weak trait doesn't address the core problem.
Protective needs another protective-ish bonus to be balanced with the other traits. A simple solution would be to add a half-priced discount to a modern protective building. Of course, that doesn't help the ancient era, where some people seem to think protective needs the most help. (Why? protective archers and walls at that stage are particularly strong because they basically can't be brought down without siege. The window of weakness for protective is, rather, the window between catapults and longbows).
Or here's another idea: you know how imperialistic gives you +100% great general emergence? What if protective gave like +50% GG emergence within one's cultural borders (like the GW, but less so). Or make it 100%. Or make it 200%. I don't know what would be balanced. Hard to say without a little playtesting. But an addition like that would be *flavorful*. Whereas, relying on the wall-chop gimmick to save protective is not.
I agree with what you said, but not in describing the longbow as 7.2 str. Writing it that way may give the false impression that the other modifiers then affect the strength of 7.2 which is not the case. The Combat modifiers are still added to the other modifiers, but you probably know this anyway.
Actually it's wrong anyway because keep in mind it didn't have C2 when it won those battles - I mentioned that. I think it only had C1.
So it had 50% from hill, 45% from city, +10% from C1, and the first strikes. Oh and it also had +10% fortify on that turn.
The reason he did so well was the strong defended position in combination with the first strikes. First strikes are always most beneficial when the modified strength ratios are greater (in favour of the first striker).
SnowlyWhite
Emperor
no stone, few forests, not mao(expansive) - 20% chance to gain another trait;
no stone, forests - 33% chance to gain another trait;
stone, forests - over 66% if you allow me to pick. Otherwise, I'd keep pro. If you give me imp. or agg. or whatever crap, eventually imp. after I've settled all I had to settle...
Lower the % needed in order to make picking the change worthy for normal speed(on marathon, if you use your brain when chopping - mostly chopping when having 2-3 forests around horizontally/vertically, they actually regrow quite often, since it's chance to grow/turn).
Yes, the whole use of longbows as attack units with Drill IV has blown out of proportion.
Originally all I wanted to demonstrate was that Drill IV could be used even on offense, and even with a unit as unlikely as a longbow.
The use of longbows is actually strongest, like with almost every unit in the game, when it is leading edge in technology. Before anyone has maces, longbows are very competitive even as attack units, but particularly as defenders.
I may have put too much emphasis on the drill promotions. There are many cases where combat beats them by a small or moderate margin, but I just remind myself PRO has other bonuses which can be taken advantage of...
I still maintain in the vast majority of games, PRO is the only trait that makes the drill line worth trying at all.
What I will leave finally in this post, is this picture from a game many months ago. After I had captured an American city, I found Washington kept sending waves of units at me. I had two longbows defending the new city, and one of them had CG1, Drill IV and C1 (in the picture the C2 came from an upgrade on the current turn). Facing this attack wave, it single-handedly took down 5 catapults, 2 swordsmen and 1 horse archer. It must have taken a hit or two from the horse archer because after that the next longbow stood up and took place in defending the city. The next one was less promoted I think, and it died to the next horse archer.
In this example, the advantage in strength coupled with the first strikes made that longbow an unbelievable cit defender. Also, note how much xp it has now.
If you had used the Protective trait to it's fullest advantage you would not have lost the 2nd Longbow. From the screen shot I can see that you are producing units with 9xp straight from the barracks(the unpromoted cats have 9xp) This means that the LB's could have 10xp each if they did the mop up on the final 2 defenders when you took the city. Promoting them to CG3Drill1Guerrilla1 would have been much better. Step 2 is whipping the walls for 1pop just as the enemy cats arrive. Yes the cats will drop the defenses from the walls, but this allows the longbows the time to get the full 25% fortify bonus.
After the cats drop the walls the Longbows will be +75%(CG3)+45%(hills+guerilla1)+25%(fortify)+25%(unit city defense ability)
That is strength 16.2. Even if the other LB suffers maximum collateral damage, it will have a base strength of3 or modified to 8.1 vs the HA's and 8.4 vs the swords.
I have had pairs of CG3D1 longbows butcher more troops than that even without the hill. And against higher quality troops as well. And both of them survivied.
The strength of the LB's in the screen shot isn't from Drill4. It is from the fact that you have longbows when your enemy is using HA's and swords in 1120A.D. I am surprised at that. Usually by that date I am facing maces and knights. Without a hill, the Cg1Drill4 Longbow is dead meat to a knight. proof of that is the 2nd longbow you lost in it's first fight against an HA.
You might think that's a great analysis but you have made wrong assumptions about how the longbows got there. If you knew the circumstances of the war, and how the rest of my stack was doing elsewhere, you may be able to comment on how I'm making best use of the trait. The longbows had only arrived shortly before the battle, and only had 10% fortify, not 25% like you calculated.
Those longbows were used for other things before I put them in that city. A CG3 G1 longbow wouldn't have been all that good while I was using them to kill Korean cities on my mainland. As I was attacking Korea (I still haven't vassalized him yet because he's so stubbon, plus America declared war on me while I was in war with Korea), my longbows were cleaning the floor of his axemen and archers and occasional swords. With cats, I was capturing cities using a range of units, but including longbows when the odds meant I could nab 2 or 3xp.
In my other newly captured city which was more heavily threatened, was not on a hill, is probably where I was putting my CG longbows. The situation in Los Angeles was not critical and so my "less optimal" longbows (though still very strong) were being employed. Later on in the war, if I needed to once again use those longbows for a role other than city defense, they'd be ready. Because it was a war I was drawn into - not one that I prepared for, building specialised garrison troops is not something I had time for, especially when I could make drill IV longbows fill the roles of both attackers and defenders, even if defending was a little bit less efficient than if I'd taken CG.
And something you may not have considered, drill promotions can substantially increase the odds of surviving unharmed - that played a huge role here. I imagine the longbow probably experienced some luck, but I put the luck in my favour. If surviving each cat with 100HP had 90% probability with Drill IV, but 50% with another combination of promotions, then the drill promotions contributed to the unit surviving so many battles not hurt. I can't confirm those odds exactly but if you wanted I could run the numbers. EDIT I did run the numbers, and you can see them in the next post.
"Without a hill, the Cg1Drill4 Longbow is dead meat to a knight. proof of that is the 2nd longbow you lost in it's first fight against an HA."
It cannot be seen in the screenshot, but I had a naval invasion force further east of that city, capturing the holy city of America's. In that stack is where I had my spears. Obviously if I was at the age where I was facing knights I would have pikemen ready, so your point that my D4 longbow would die to the knight is irrelevant, because the pike would defend against the knight.
" The strength of the LB's in the screen shot isn't from Drill4. It is from the fact that you have longbows when your enemy is using HA's and swords in 1120A.D."
Firstly, America declared war on me and this was a fairly long way into the war. I suspect their research may have been slowed due to all the unit building, trying to attack me where I had taken his cities. I can't remember the game settings exaclty, but it may have been Agg AI too.
I ran the numbers, CivCorpse. Against a city raider 1 catapult (that is probably what the five catapults were, if not worse)...
If I had used a CG3 G1 D1 longbow as you suggested, the odds would have been ~99.98% with a probability of maintaining 100HP of 42.1%.
With the CG1 D4 (I removed the C1 bonus for fairer comparison) that I used, the odds were ~99.97% with a probability of maintaining 100HP of 80.53%.
Against CR2 swords (I'm only guessing here), the odds change to
99.52% for the CG3D1G1, with 29.6% chance of keeping 100HP.
98.33% for the CG1D4, with 46.0% chance of keeping 100HP.
Note if the longbow took 1 hit from one of the catapults (quite possible), then on the next catapult, your longbow would have had a 37.0% chance of keeping the 86HP he how had, and mine would have had a 75.5% chance of keeping the 86HP he now had.
If I had used a CG3 G1 D1 longbow as you suggested, the odds would have been ~99.98% with a probability of maintaining 100HP of 42.1%.
With the CG1 D4 (I removed the C1 bonus for fairer comparison) that I used, the odds were ~99.97% with a probability of maintaining 100HP of 80.53%.
Against CR2 swords (I'm only guessing here), the odds change to
99.52% for the CG3D1G1, with 29.6% chance of keeping 100HP.
98.33% for the CG1D4, with 46.0% chance of keeping 100HP.
Note if the longbow took 1 hit from one of the catapults (quite possible), then on the next catapult, your longbow would have had a 37.0% chance of keeping the 86HP he how had, and mine would have had a 75.5% chance of keeping the 86HP he now had.
I did something similar here http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=298806 In that game I did not build a single CityRaider melee unit the entire game. I relied strictly on siege units, stack defenders (pikes and x-bows) and hordes of CG3D1 longbows to hold the cities. It was a huge marathon game on monarch where I got a domination win around 1500ad. That is pretty early for a huge map. Final score was about 250k.
Sitting Bull is even better if you plan to bulb your way to Liberalism. The initial rex is much easier to defend with the boosted archers and some dog soldiers. And the extra GPP get you to Lib faster. But I like saladin for this approach as well because of the camel archer. The lack of resources needed is nice but the real strength of a CA is the added 15% retreat. I also play on marathon which means a longbow is a 1popwhip with 11 hammers invested. I little slower than a draft but you get full exp at 1/3 the unhappiness. Beelining fuedalism you start slowbuilding LB's while then going for the metalcasting->machinery->guilds path. Build CA's after HBR while teching(though it is better to steal) construction. You should have CA's well before the enemy has engineering. Even if they do get engineering, a Flanking2 CA has a 50% chance of winning/withdrawl. 10%/40% respectively against even a C2Formation pike. Against a Cg2 longbow fortified for 5 turns in a city the CA has a 60% chance of winning/surviving so you really only need enough cats to drop the defenses and maybe one suicide cat per city. Once the longbows get even a little collateral those odds go way up. That is why I love camel archers. No matter how bad the odds may be, you always have atleast a 45% chance of surviving the fight. And if you want CA's then buddy you are gonna be a protective leader unless you use unrestricted leaders. And it you do, it would serve you right if you had Monty of Rome right next door with iron in his BFC.
@PieceOfMind
Nice analysis of drill IV promo. I've learned quite a bit from you through this discussion so I forgive you for not agreeing with me on Bowmen!
I think Pro is the weakest trait still, but not as weak as I originally though; easier access to drill IV and that wall whip (exploit sort of) make this trait ok.
Nice analysis of drill IV promo. I've learned quite a bit from you through this discussion so I forgive you for not agreeing with me on Bowmen!
I think Pro is the weakest trait still, but not as weak as I originally though; easier access to drill IV and that wall whip (exploit sort of) make this trait ok.
In my posts #210 and #211 I may have given the false impression the longbows could die to catapults (I reported odds like 99.98% etc.). Obviously catapults could not kill the longbows, but the odds of keeping 100HP etc. should still be very accurate. Because the odds of the catapult damaging the longbow severely were so low, it was reasonable to treat the catapult as an ordinary unit (essentially equivalent to an axeman).
Bleys
Deity
I think this is one of the best points of this thread. Its especially effective if you are a "Steel from Lib" kind of player like myself. For the record, I think PRO is the weakest trait, but I dont dislike it one bit, and never cringe when I draw a PRO leader in a random/random. PRO basically relieves some of the urgency about getting to Rifling, and I have found at Emp/Immortal level, thats usually the turning point of the game. Toku's Muskets are practically a 2nd UU, Churchills can become strong very quickly mopping up after Cannon bombarbment/unit softening, and Qins can come early enough to be partnered with Chu's, which are pretty beefy themselves thanks to that extra free First Strike.
The advantages of PRO may be minimal, and not as easy to keep in perspective, but this is a game of MICRO management, where every tiny bit gets added and added to the greater whole to encompass your Empire. If you wish to play PRO as a money-making (wall trick) way to have good defenders and super Rifleman when the time comes, so be it. Nothing in the rules says you MUST use traits to your advantage whenever possible. Its the biggest reason people see SPI as a "weak" trait.
Personally, I think there should be a "Generic" leader, playable by the Human only, with no traits, no UU, and no UB. I bet many who tried him would think to themselves "Man, I wish he was at least PRO so I could whip a wall or draft better Rifles".
As is common for me, I sort of figured this out because in my current game, I am Willem and have Toku, Qin and Churchill as neighbors, and they are a PITA to grind down much before Assembly Line (Immortal Large Snakey B&S). Its just too many hammers to get that extra edge needed to tackle these PRO leaders. Qin is on the same continent as I am (along with Monty, yeah, its been a hoot, heh) and Churchill is on the next landmass over, galley range. Its a large map, so everyone has had room to plop out a bunch of cities and develop reasonably unrestricted, and these PRO leaders are tough cookies in that situation, especially if I have to transport troops across water.
I often wonder if PRO was created more as an AI trait than a Human one, where the designers realized full well it wasnt as strong as some other traits, but in the hands of the AI, it would be an effective way to increase their quality of war, or at least, defense in a war.
Interesting points. In addition I think that many dislikers of PRO are arguing from the presumption of 'optimal play', where defense never is a serious consideration. Optimal play is fair enough if the situation merits it, but I also feel that if the game is being played 'optimally' then there can't be much of a challenge. In short, if things are going that well you're either playing below your standard or rather lucky.
I am not saying that PRO is one of the strongest traits, as it is certainly amongst the weakest*. However for a start I enjoy PRO as it is not overpowered (I dislike playing easy games and abstain from FIN leaders as I regard FIN to be overpowered), and it allows me to act in a passive aggressive way. If you're not fighting, you're not using PRO as much as possible I feel, and it allows you an additional edge in difficult conquest. You can take a city which is likely to be retaken, and either successfully hold it or at least gain more GG points than normal in its vain defense. However if you are always fighting far weaker opponents, this is less of a consideration. EDIT: I'd also say that this is less of a consideration on smaller maps and faster speeds, as the wars which take place on small/fast games are mostly wars of conquest and capitulation, rather than the to-and-fro wars of larger and slower game speeds brought about by both the sheer effort and time involved in a decisive conquest and the greater quantity of wars in slow games.
*I think any current trait which consists mainly of military bonuses is weak, as in contrast to traits incorporating economic or infrastructural bonuses, the bonuses only apply during combat situations instead of over the entire course of the game; in the latter case economic traits double as military traits in that they allow faster access to higher tech weapons. As such I am mostly convinced that the divide between the efficacy of purely economic and purely military traits is too wide.
Bandobras Took
Emperor
Actually, I find the slower the game speed, the more likely a war is going to be conquest an capitulation, just because my units have so much time to get from one place to another. On quick, your opponent might get through two troop upgrade techs by the time you've conquered half the cities.
blitzkrieg1980
Octobrist
Actually, I find the slower the game speed, the more likely a war is going to be conquest an capitulation, just because my units have so much time to get from one place to another. On quick, your opponent might get through two troop upgrade techs by the time you've conquered half the cities.
Not to mention, on slower speeds, 20 turns might translate to 40 years and you have conquered the entire enemy empire whereas on Normal, those same 20 turns would translate to 100 years speeding the game along. So after 10 turns, you are more likely to take a capitulate so you can move on to the next target.
Wodan
Deity
Good point. But, note that PRO has several benefits which are not defensive.
Totally agreed.
Question: do you discount the Castle bonus, then? Have you tried a early castle / late obsolescence strategy? Most people who think as you do, with a focus on commerce, play much the same way every game, with priority on Liberalism and Economics etc etc.
Hereditary Rule
Warlord
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2007
- Messages
- 294
I have - and to echo this point, castles in every city (especially cheap with stone) is like teching to econ and switching to Free Market all at once (+1 trade routes).
This is also useful if you're on a tech path that is focuses on the upper part of the tree.
Similar threads
