Protective Trait-- Underrated?

[Tephros]

A weakness I forgot about is protective does much less for you in terms of dealing with pillagers. As pillagers are often mounted, they’re often immune to first strikes. If your cities are ridiculously well-defended, that also encourages a foe to simply destroy the countryside.

First strikes are not necessarily inferior to combat promos. I agree that Drill I in particular, and to a lesser extent Drill II and III are weak, but Drill IV just as strong, if not stronger than Combat 4.

If I recall correctly, a 1:1 strength ratio is the point at which two first strikes would give you the same odds of survival as an extra combat promo. While actual survival percent is what I consider most important, I do acknowledge there are other factors like health upon winning.

A reminder that generally Drill promotions are earned at a faster rate than combat promotions. I don't mean this loosely. PRO drill units reach Drill IV very quickly if you use them for attacking (remember attacking is twice as xp profitable as defending). It might take 3 battles for a unit to reach Drill IV, but 6 battles for a unit to reach Combat 4, so in all fairness the two promotion lines should not be compared promotion for promotion anyway.

Yeah that's true - I had forgotten about that.

The faster xp earning ability of drill units is usually ignored however, because people do not use drill troops to attack. It's very easy to regularly take 3xp from very safe battles with Drill IV units (I'm talking odds in the high 90s), whereas CR3 units or C4 or C5 units will earn typically 1 xp, sometimes 2xp for the same battle odds.

Just below 99%, like 98.7% is common, will give you 2 exp for a non-drill unit - that's the "sweet spot" for me.

See it seems you are going back to assumptions again. You say "combat I is always useful, not only in cities." It seems by that you are implying that Drill promotions are not useful outside cities? Perhaps you were referring to the CG promotion.

Yeah I was referring to the CG. Drill I seems inconsequential to me in inself, though it does lead to other promos.

Did you forget CG promotions work in forts? Try building a fort in an important strategic location in a MP game then chuck CG3/D1 (that's only two promos for a PRO leader) units in there and see what a human player tries to do to it. That little tactic will establish control of the immediate area. It can be argued that area control like this is much more important in MP than SP. The forts 25% defense cannot be bombarded like a city's.

No I didn't forget, though I don't use forts very much. If I have forests outside all BFCs, I generally checkerboard preserves. I have heard a fort could make a good decoy for the stupid AI, but haven't tried it because I'm afraid they'll just go around and pillage or take a city that could have been better defended.

IMHO, the point here is more that the AI is not very effective in war. If the AI had the smallest amount of extra intelligence to not have its SoD wiped out so easily, this probably wouldn't be a criticism of PRO.

Yeah that's true. I don't play multiplayer but I've heard PRO is stronger there.

I agree that IMP and especially CHA are nice traits. I don't believe IMP outdoes PRO though. You may have more settled generals but they only give 2xp each, and only in one city.

Well that's just it, that city will constantly produce military units only stopping to produce things like forges and factories. It will produce about 2/3 of my military units. The other 1/3 will be built by production-rich, commerce-poor cities. One will build a stable and focus on mounted. Another will build extra siege. The main military city pumps out CG III defenders and CR III attackers.

You seem to make a leap of faith here. I could have said, with just as much justification, having more rounds before battle to deal free damage to the other combatant means first strikes dwarf other promos.

That's not the case though if you're talking about strengths that are comparable, and they are more likely to be since drill doesn't add to strength. My understanding is that the strength ratio determines not only how hard a foe will be hit per round, but also how likely you are to hit instead of them.

Are you forgetting siege? I and most people (I assume) usually use siege at the beginning of the round of atacks on a city. A few people round here (like TMIT) argue that often the strongest CR units should be used before the siege units.

Siege is the usual. If the city has a small number of strong defenders it may make more sense to use a flanking cavalry or guerrilla gunpowder, but putting your strongest CR unit sounds like something you might do on a quick game. I play marathon, so I couldn't stomach doing that to my level 8 uber raiders, lol.

In any case assuming you use siege first or somewhere near first, you can ensure Drill IV units have a very easy time taking down cities. You said a couple times Drill units are only strong when there is a tech lead. They are in fact very strong when the units are slightly damaged. Having the defenders slightly damaged (from a few siege units) makes those drill units have an easy time taking down those defenders without taking a single hit. So in this way medics are pretty much unnecessary. I admit I use CR troops along with these drill units, sometimes using the CR ones directly after the siege, then using the drill troops. But only a fool would blindly choose drill over CR for attacking cities.

I'll have to try that next time I randomly get a protective leader.

Combat 1 doesn't make a CR3 unit much better so AGG doesn't really do much if this is your city attack strategy.

Combat 1 makes it significantly easier to get pinch or formation CRIII units. I typically do a mixture of pure combat after CR and unit specific counters, then I use the one that has the highest odds of winning, though I typically use siege until they have a 95%+ chance. Now that siege doesn't get combat promos, they're even more expendable.

Main point to take away from this: Use drill troops when the defenders have taken at least a little bit of damage from siege or CR units. They won't have the problem of defenders popping up that ignore the counter promos, since nothing counters drill promos (yes I know most mounted units do but mounted don't receive defense bonuses either).

Makes sense to have a few units like that when you start with drill I anyway, but probably not otherwise... I can't imagine how that could be decisive, but I'll have to try it.

I don't know where you pulled the 2:1 from. Even as little as about 1:1 can be reasonable sometimes.

I recall trying to find the strength ratio at which a first strike was equal to a +10% strength in terms of victory odds and I recall it was somewhere around there.

I doubt I'll come to share your drill obsession, but there's got to be more to drill than I've used, lol.

 

[Artichoker]

It's easily the weakest, and I find myself suggesting lots of ways to make it better: e.g. improving the drill line so that collateral immunity can be achieved with drill IV, giving walls +1 espionage, and just now suggesting that power ratings take number of promos into account.

That's a very strong argument...and one that's very hard to defend from your standpoint.

If your cities are threatened to be captured, Protective gives your Archery (and Gunpowder) units an extra two promotions that are valuable on defense--this, remember, is in addition to the inherent city bonuses that most archery units get (+50% for Archers and +25% for Longbowmen).

Aggressive's bonus of free Combat I is valuable on offense, no doubt, but on defense it doen't come close to the magnification of fighting strength that Protective offers, especially since the most common Archery unit, the Longbowmen, is already the mainstay defensive unit of standard militias, even without the bonus.


Pillaging can be prevented by fortifying outside tiles with defensive units. Forts provide both extra defense and the opportunity to activate Protective's free City Garrison promotion. If you position those defensive units correctly, it will be difficult, if not impossible, for enemy stacks to maneuver around them, unless they attack the heavily fortified positions occupied by the Longbowmen.

 

[Iranon]

I regard PRO as one of the worse traits because quite often optimal play can render it irrelevant for much of the game. AGG has the same problem for all but the most determined rushers.

For me, a personal quirk makes PRO even less attractive: I like being able to build Warriors for dirt-cheap garrisons that I can upgrade into Axemen when needed. This means no hunting unless I'm running into trouble with mounted units... and therefore no archery units.

***

I grant that it's a very solid trait if one intends to do a lot of warring though... possibly more so than AGG. Stronger melee units are often not very relevant for attacking purposes; on higher levels there are usually enough defenders that leading with siege is more cost-effective... and anything can perform cleanup duty against the damaged units.
While AGG also provides better defense against mounted units in the field, I feel this is less useful than the defensive benefits across the board in cities and on hills.

While I might not build a lot of walls and castles in a typical game, the discounts can be useful. Whipping them for cheap can have the AI's SOD have an extended camping trip, bombarding away and toasting marshmallows until the war is over, they commit suicide or I have my defensive stack ready to shoot them to hell.

PRO is also useful for defensive warfare if I don't even intend to take land. Declare on some techmongering peacenik and they'll waste ressources in a one-sided fight (i.e. mass suicide)... even better if a warmonger asks me to do so for considerable diplomatic benefits.
Sometimes they'll exhaust themselves to the point where a counterattack will be quick and cheap.

***

It's one of my 3 least favourite traits next to CRE and AGG, but certainly not useless. Saving you from an Ooops is useful but certainly not its only application; it can be leveraged actively.

Perhaps I'd rate it a lot more highly if I played the slower difficulties more, but I find they lack the urgency and excitement of normal speed.

 

[PieceOfMind]

Tephros,

Spoiler :

A weakness I forgot about is protective does much less for you in terms of dealing with pillagers. As pillagers are often mounted, they’re often immune to first strikes. If your cities are ridiculously well-defended, that also encourages a foe to simply destroy the countryside.

I think Bandobras Took countered that point fairly effectively...

Obviously, if you build only one type of unit, you can only do one type of thing. Are a protective player's mounted/siege units somehow worse than a non-protective player's? Do you have some sort of handicap on all your other units because your ranged/gunpowder units are strong?

Being PRO doesn't stop you from building pikemen or spearmen, and letting them venture outside your cities. I think it's usually well accepted that these units are very cost effective for dealing with mounted units. With those forts you have protected by your strong PRO troops, you can station your pikes in there and stab the horses before they get a chance to go far. Hopefully you aren't developing your towns on a border are you? If the enemy wants to pillage a farm for the loss of his mounted unit that's up to him. He won't be pillaging mines unless you give him more than one turn to do so. Keshiks OTOH are an exception since they ignore the terrain cost of hills.

Why do you think PRO leaders would turtle up in their cities and not build counters to pillaging units?

If I recall correctly, a 1:1 strength ratio is the point at which two first strikes would give you the same odds of survival as an extra combat promo. While actual survival percent is what I consider most important, I do acknowledge there are other factors like health upon winning.

That is fairly accurate. However you're talking odds of about 63 - 67%. How often do you attack at those odds anyway? As the odds go up, first strikes obviously get better and better. So comparing 2 first strikes with Combat 1 is not a good way to go about it IMO. In fact, 2 first strikes gives even less increase in odds than Combat 1.

Just below 99%, like 98.7% is common, will give you 2 exp for a non-drill unit - that's the "sweet spot" for me.

It's kind of fun to experiment with Drill IV units to see where their "sweet spots" are. As I've said, 3xp is somewhere around 98% I think, and 4xp about 91% or so. I forget the actual numbers, and these do change when the unit being attacked is damaged. When the unit is damaged, the sweet spots are at even safer odds IIRC.

No I didn't forget, though I don't use forts very much. If I have forests outside all BFCs, I generally checkerboard preserves. I have heard a fort could make a good decoy for the stupid AI, but haven't tried it because I'm afraid they'll just go around and pillage or take a city that could have been better defended.

Not really a reply to the quoted bit above, but here's a fun fact. If you put a CG3/D1 longbow on a forest hill fort, and let him fortify to 25%, that grants you a modified (defender) strength of 19.5, and with the 1-2 first strikes, not many units are going to dare touch it. Even a CR3 maceman is only going to bring that down to 15. If my calculations are correct, that mace has less than a 0.2% chance of killing that longbow. By the way, this is still true if the fort is in your enemy's territory!

That's not the case though if you're talking about strengths that are comparable, and they are more likely to be since drill doesn't add to strength. My understanding is that the strength ratio determines not only how hard a foe will be hit per round, but also how likely you are to hit instead of them.

You are right, but just because combat 1 affects 2 different numbers in the combat doesn't make it better because Drill only changes 1 thing (the free strikes). For undamaged units with equal modified strengths, drill is not very powerful, but as I said before, you're not likely to attack in this situation anyway.

I'll have to try that next time I randomly get a protective leader.

Please do. And take particular note at the xp your drill troops take away from battle. Try to find the sweet spots for the Drill IV units especially.

Makes sense to have a few units like that when you start with drill I anyway, but probably not otherwise... I can't imagine how that could be decisive, but I'll have to try it.

Yeah I wouldn't bother shooting for Drill IV as a non-PRO leader. Possibly as a CHA leader if you're game. I wouldn't call it decisive either, but neither is a single Combat I promotion for AGG.

I recall trying to find the strength ratio at which a first strike was equal to a +10% strength in terms of victory odds and I recall it was somewhere around there.

You are right that that spot is around about 2:1, but it doesn't tell you much. The odds at 2:1 for the combat 1 guy are about 99.43% vs. 99.48% for the 1FS guy. If you're going to be doing many attacks at these odds you may as well go with the FS, since at least then you'll get xp nearly twice as fast.

I doubt I'll come to share your drill obsession, but there's got to be more to drill than I've used, lol.

I guess if I were to summarise the three main things I think makes the drill line strong, at least on the attack:

• Only PRO leaders
• Drill IV specifically
• Rapid xp rate, especially at Drill IV

 

[TheMeInTeam]

PRO remains a bad trait even with the overflow whip glitch.

1. Early on, defending with metal is better if you have it, and absolutely better on offense (as are horse units).
2. Walls and castles obsolete their defensive bonus with gunpowder, when in reality even rifles wouldn't be able to ignore walls. Walls should considerably delay even cannon bombardment. Buffing durations of these would raise PRO's power, and it's not like that's bad.
3. Why, why...WHY doesn't the drill line open up the same promos as the combat line? Specifically, what the garbage is the reasoning for not allowing drill troops such promotions as amphibious, march, and commando?! Combat is quite frequently the better promotion to begin with (or is equal), so why make the weaker promo line (until drill IV) the one that's unable to get the special promotions?! It's nonsense.

Basically, PRO doesn't share the same versatility as AGG, lacks economy aspects of CHA and IMP, and is widely (and correctly, unlike the nonsensical dike orgy when people vote top UBs) regarded as a bottom trait. It is far from useless (I wished I had it or anything in PYL same start after intentionally taking no traits), but still easily the worst trait in the game.

 

[oyzar]

Signed under.... I would love the day that Firaxis decided to make the AI much more prone to get axes ( or maybe even give some instead of the obscente ammount of archers they got in Emperor/Immortal ).

Protective is underated mainly because most players are in a level that is below their actual skills ( think on this: if the level you're playing is balanced to your skills, you should lose 6/7 of the games in a game with 7 civs and 17/18 if you have 18 . That is definitely not fun and I agree that most of the players simply don't have stomach for that and that they are not playing to surpass themselfes ) and because of that, unless they have Monty, Shaka or other very agressive leader nearby, they will not be attacked. That and the mechanics of civ IV that allow you to have a army bigger than the empire pop ( and because of that, the making of huge SoD ) and that the current AI is very passive in the defense makes that the player in such conditions can simply stockpile units, make a SoD, target the enemy SoD, and after wiping it conquer cities and leave a token defender ( most likely a injured unit ) without fear of reprisals. All of that makes pro to look bad, but that is the same that saying that stock exchange or Mint are bad buildings while you don't have cottages, shrines, corp HQs and didn't hired merchants: you're simply not using it well.

If you want to be convinced of what pro can do for you, just get this settings in a game:
-Pangea
-Agg AI
-Pick the worst backstabbers in game and a Pro leader to you
-play 1 level above of what you are used to

And then make your own conclusions.

I agree that most people playing on these boards play sp and hence way under their skill level. And while pro is indeed somewhat better against good opposition(read MP), it is still by far the worst trait. Or more specifically in the settings i usually play(at least standard map or larger), it is one of the weaker ones. I have actually tried it out though(random leaders and taken over a pitboss game), and both times it have been very close to useless and nowhere near as useful as any other trait... You say that against equal opponents you want to defend your cities, sure, but you want to defend by counter attacking, and all other traits are better at that than protective. On these settings(at least on large and huge) agressive is not that attractive either, but it is at least stronger than protective...

 

[Munch]

I regard PRO as one of the worse traits because quite often optimal play can render it irrelevant for much of the game.

This sentence sums up what for me is the main reason people dislike PRO. If you are playing a game where everything is going well (e.g. metal in capital BFC, multiple gems etc nearby, loads of flood plains) then you won't need it. The thing is, not every game can be played optimally, and if they can, then you're playing on a difficulty that is too easy for you.

 

[PieceOfMind]

TMIT you seem to state a few gameplay facts that don't discredit PRO at all. They seem more a commentary on gameplay features you disagree with, than criticisms of the PRO trait.

1. Early on, defending with metal is better if you have it, and absolutely better on offense (as are horse units).

With PRO leaders, access to metals is permitted. Despite popular opinion, you can still use units other than archers for defense when playing a PRO leader. AGG leaders may get away without archery units, but that doesn't imply that PRO leaders would attempt to get by without melee units.

2. Walls and castles obsolete their defensive bonus with gunpowder, when in reality even rifles wouldn't be able to ignore walls. Walls should considerably delay even cannon bombardment. Buffing durations of these would raise PRO's power, and it's not like that's bad.

Walls and castles obsolete for non-PRO leaders at gunpowder as well. What you're trying to say, I think, is that this part of the trait is wasted. That may be a fair comment, but it's ok; The PRO promotions are where it's at!

3. Why, why...WHY doesn't the drill line open up the same promos as the combat line? Specifically, what the garbage is the reasoning for not allowing drill troops such promotions as amphibious, march, and commando?! Combat is quite frequently the better promotion to begin with (or is equal), so why make the weaker promo line (until drill IV) the one that's unable to get the special promotions?! It's nonsense.

I'm not sure why they made Drill more restrictive. Drill IV troops don't really need march. Amphibious would be useful to them on occasion. Drill troops aren't really the sort of thing to use in commando missions anyway. In the particular situations where using commando troops is strong, Drill doesn't have good synergy for the unit, IMO.
All the other important promos are opened up by Drill at the same levels, I think.

Basically, PRO doesn't share the same versatility as AGG, lacks economy aspects of CHA and IMP, and is widely (and correctly, unlike the nonsensical dike orgy when people vote top UBs) regarded as a bottom trait. It is far from useless (I wished I had it or anything in PYL same start after intentionally taking no traits), but still easily the worst trait in the game.

It's true PRO is lacking in economic features, unless you count the fact that the cheaper castles is a very small boost for an EE. I don't know why you think it's less versatile than AGG though. By that do you mean it limits the variety of strategies available to you, as compared with AGG? Assuming you are a good early rusher TMIT, AGG will almost always serve you better in the early offensives than PRO would. But from the middle game, PRO catches up and IMO passes AGG. Once you can produce units with 10xp or nearly 10xp, your Drill IV units will start to dominate the field, and earn xp at a rate which lets them gain promotions faster than CHA units do, and earning nearly as many great general points as for an IMP leader.

 

[Joshua368]

I find PRO to be very awful as a trait, but I also find AGG about equally poor. AGG becomes virtually a non-issue after the early rush period. Cheap barracks at least are nice, and drydocks aren't terrible. Wish it made Stables cheap instead though.

Now maybe if one of these traits made stronger seige instead...

 

[oyzar]

How does pro pass agg? combat 1 is better on gunpowder units than drill 1 / cg 1 when either attacking or doing active defense...

 

[KingMorgan]

Attack is the best form of defense.

Defending when attacked, is a but tiny part of the overall game that we call Civ. For my play style and i suspect the majority of people it is more effective to leverage another trait. To leverage a trait like Pro, you;d need to play like Toku. We've all seen how that pans out

I'm sure Pro has it's uses, however i've not needed to utilize them as yet.

 

[Artichoker]

It's really hard to prove either way.

The plus and minus of the trait really depends on your choice of units and how you use them in battle.

The naysayers tend to claim that the downside of the bonus promotions is that they primarily apply defensively, and because of this restriction it makes the overall value less than Aggressive (for example).

But I have firsthand experience that defensive bonuses can be effectively employed in battle, even when both attack and defense options are considered together. Counterattacking is not necessarily the optimal strategy in battle that leads to military victory; better kill ratios and overall military success can also be attained with a quasi-passive battle strategy.

By quasi-passive, I mean active in movement but passive in fighting. That is the core of the Caterpillar Defense, which favors the Protective trait.

 

[Belisar]

Some of the more amusing comments so far on the trait follow:

That's nothing -- I rarely make lots of Civics changes and don't pursue religions, so Spiritual is even more worthless than Protective!

And I'm amused if you mix up the strength of spiritual and something like religion

 

[CivCorpse]

The problem with protective is that it locks you to a particular strategy. All other traits allows you to vary your approach to a certain degree.

Your comparison with aggresive is way off. One of the great benefits of aggresive is that it allows you to tailor your troops to a certain role with only a (cheap) barracks.


"AGG gives cheaper barracks. At best, in the early game this might mean getting roughly half of an extra unit from the hammers saved. The cheap barracks is almost irrelevant. If your military cities will build a barracks then 50 military units, the barracks bonus is hugely insignificant. If however your barracks will each only build maybe 5 units (a very quick war to win the game in the BCs) then it is much stronger."

That has got to be one of the strangest paragraphs ever on these boards. So the more troops you build, the less important the free promotions are. Are you serious?

He is refering to the bonus to build the barracks you get with Agg. Not the bonus to experience the barracks grants.

 

[Zeiter]

A big problem with the PRO trait is that its discount buildings go obsolete pretty quickly. What other trait has a handicap like that??? Courthouses help you for the whole game. Forges, ditto. Granaries, ditto. Lighthouses, ditto. Barracks, ditto. I could go on and on.

That's why PRO needs a discount on a late-era building that doesn't obsolete, such as bunkers or security bureaus (or both). I saw one person thought that the security bureau addition would be too powerful, but c'mon, let's face it, PRO needs the help.

I wouldn't say that PRO is useless. Far from it. Playing PRO can definitely be fun, especially with the free promos that give you can excuse to play with the drill line. (And how would 80% resistance to siege be overpowered? If you are going the route of holing-up, taking the siege damage, and then defending, you are still going to get your improvements pillaged. I feel like that's a pretty good tradeoff for units almost invulnerable to siege).

But PRO is definitely the weakest trait (although not much worse than aggressive, which is similarly weak). Both could use some help. (If aggressive gave combat I to mounted units as well, then that would give some much needed help to that trait. It would also provide better synergy for the Mongols, who are aggressive but have a mounted-UU, so there's less incentive to leverage their UU's since they can build a mounted UU that's a little better than the regular one, or they can build melee units that are a little better than the regular ones. Meh.)

For warring, CHA beats out both PRO and AGG so bad, it's not even funny. And overall, the financial traits are usually so much more appealing.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I like AGG slightly more than CHA for pure war (but CHA helps economy more so I value it much higher). AGG opens up annoying counter promos instantly, and with 5 xp even things like formation and amphibious (!). I love amphibious rifles or infantry in the LHC series. The cheap buildings are ok too. You also get a lot more power out of the early rush should that open up. Combat I CR seems a lot more formidable than just CR. I fought an AI that had a C II shock sword. Those beat non AGG axes . More useful is the CR II CI sword, which can lay hurt down quite nicely, easily smoking most city defenders.

Pro can do none of the above. I do like some things obsolete alludes to with pro, like pillbox usage of gunpowder to let the AI shred itself, and the basic strength added to gunpowder. Ultimately, though, it remains the weakest trait.

Maybe pro stone wall garbage can be considered its "economy" .

 

[Woodreaux]

FTW!!

Pillaging can be prevented by fortifying outside tiles with defensive units. Forts provide both extra defense and the opportunity to activate Protective's free City Garrison promotion. If you position those defensive units correctly, it will be difficult, if not impossible, for enemy stacks to maneuver around them, unless they attack the heavily fortified positions occupied by the Longbowmen.

Once I read the fine print in the Civ-Pedia/SevoPedia about forts being treated as cities for defensive purposes, the lightbulb in my head clicked on. If you're playing a Protective leader and end up with Monty, Shaka or Cathy as a neighbor, build a nice contingent of workers and have build a wall of forts along a line hilltops in your (krajina) military frontier facing hostile rival. Stock those badboys with a few CityGar II's and they'll be CityGar III's in no time.

Or for extra bonus, build the Great Wall.

Yo' dawg! I heard you like Great Generals, so I put a great wall* inside your Great Wall**.

* (of CG2 longbows in forts)
** (the wonder).

Couldn't resist.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

FTW!!



Once I read the fine print in the Civ-Pedia/SevoPedia about forts being treated as cities for defensive purposes, the lightbulb in my head clicked on. If you're playing a Protective leader and end up with Monty, Shaka or Cathy as a neighbor, build a nice contingent of workers and have build a wall of forts along a line hilltops in your (krajina) military frontier facing hostile rival. Stock those badboys with a few CityGar II's and they'll be CityGar III's in no time.

Or for extra bonus, build the Great Wall.

Yo' dawg! I heard you like Great Generals, so I put a great wall* inside your Great Wall**.

* (of CG2 longbows in forts)
** (the wonder).

Couldn't resist.

Too complicated. Do the following with ANY trait with a bad neighbor:

1. Know the area the AI will send its stack (usually obvious).
2. Stick a fort in its way. These stacks will path over defensive terrain if possible, so stick it on a hill, forest, or preferably a hill forest.
3. If the AI shreds itself on the fort, great. If not, use your stack to WTFown it on flatlands, since that's where it has to go to get past the fort.

 

[blitzkrieg1980]

I've utilized several Drill III/CGI x-bowmen to protect my medieval stacks. Bringing along a few CGIII/DrillI longbows aren't a bad idea either. Those 1st strikes really help when the AI starts suiciding siege units into your stack. You'll still have fairly strong x-bows to protect them all. That's not usually an issue, but the AI seems to think twice about attacking my stack when I have drill promoted x-bows.

You can use PRO in an offensive war in such a way. Drill is a great promotion line for defense against just about all types of units EXCEPT mounted. But then, you have pikes for that.

 

[assass1n]

Protective is good but not as good as the others so comparatively the worst