Questions about stratocracy

[1HammerCitizen]

Hi everyone!

I'm new here, but I've been playing the mod for a while now. I of course need to begin by thanking Leoreth for the amazing mod he has created!


I have a few questions in general regarding stratocracy, arising from my recent attempts at the Australian civ, particularly for the 2nd goal: my initial plan was to get Totalitarianism + Fanaticism, which along with the barracks, would grant me 8XP right off the gate. I assumed it would be enough to get to level 4, since stratocracy is described as requiring -25%XP for promoting (same as the Charismatic trait in the base game), with the math for that being:

Experience Required per Level

LEVEL	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	N
XP Charismatic leaders	2	4	8	13	20	28	37	48	61	75	91	108
XP Others	2	5	10	17	26	37	50	65	82	101	122	145

​

However, I see you need 9XP instead of 8XP with stratocracy to get to level 4, so I've run a test to see the XP required up to level 12 in the mod and the results are:


Experience Required per Level

LEVEL	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	N
XP Stratocracy	2	5	9	14	21	29	39	50	63	77	93	110
XP Others	2	5	10	17	26	37	50	65	82	101	122	145

​

While I am sure of the results, I'm not sure if the formula is correct. Is this how the math is done? If so, why?

This means you still need Totalitarianism + Fanaticism + Great General regardless to pump lvl 4 units, so the only real benefit of stratocracy for the Australians seems to be the +100% GG, since I don't think you have time to train 30 8XP units, transport them, and leave it to RNGesus to not get screwed in 30 battles for that 1 extra XP

It would seem that for a civic that is meant to be a boost to your troops quality, for which you have to sacrifice the much better options (in general) of Constitution or Bureaucracy, + a turn of anarchy, + additional instability from civics incompatibility, + reduction in commerce compared to the alternatives, the benefits are a bit lackluster.

As of the current iteration of the mod, the only civilizations I can think of would even consider stratocracy to achieve its goals would be:

- Germany: only if going full totalitarian for civic compatibility stability, the XP savings are negligible, the +100% GG nice but unnecessary, and considering you are still very much in a tech race, by the time you can consider switching to it is probably too late to even notice the benefits
- Argentina: 100% GG might be good to get the golden ages, but I don't think is worth the turn of anarchy (you already are really tight in turns and much to do for that), + losing either a free specialist or +35% hammers/commerce.
- Mexico: Probably the only civ where it could make more sense than the alternatives, as you have no tech or commerce goals, and need the 3 GG.
- Australia: seems to be a must just for the GG emergence, with the -25% XP required looking rather pointless.

So only 4 civs would consider this civic (others that might consider it like Ottomans are done way before it becomes available), and none of them benefit at all from the -25%XP.

Could you please let me know if there's something I'm missing and share your thoughts?

Thanks!

 

[Zalfos]

My understanding of Stratocracy is that it reduces the cost of each "level" from its base cost from the precedent level, though I'm quite unsure of the rounding — but there might be something more complex at play.

I agree the weird XP calculation is kind of underwhelming, and it does not make a good case for the civic.
The +4 Production for settled Great Generals is solid, you should not discount it, it stacks with everything that comes afterwards.
The biggest issue of Stratocracy is its position game-wise. It's late, very late, at Journalism. It's so late that you'll get Constitution before it, and Constitution is so much stronger that you can hardly make the case for then switching back to Stratocracy. I would never consider it outside of needing these Great Generals really badly.

Although ! For the Australians, you can "top off" units starting with 8XP by fighting the Aboriginal spawns, which is very, very useful. It gets 3 of your units past the 9XP post safely each time, and generates some extra Great General points along the way.

 

[Dracosolon]

The biggest issue of Stratocracy is its position game-wise. It's late, very late, at Journalism. It's so late that you'll get Constitution before it, and Constitution is so much stronger that you can hardly make the case for then switching back to Stratocracy. I would never consider it outside of needing these Great Generals really badly.

What would be a good tech for it, Sociology? Maybe Journalism could gain Defensive Pacts then.

 

[1HammerCitizen]

My understanding of Stratocracy is that it reduces the cost of each "level" from its base cost from the precedent level, though I'm quite unsure of the rounding — but there might be something more complex at play.

I agree the weird XP calculation is kind of underwhelming, and it does not make a good case for the civic.
The +4 Production for settled Great Generals is solid, you should not discount it, it stacks with everything that comes afterwards.
The biggest issue of Stratocracy is its position game-wise. It's late, very late, at Journalism. It's so late that you'll get Constitution before it, and Constitution is so much stronger that you can hardly make the case for then switching back to Stratocracy. I would never consider it outside of needing these Great Generals really badly.

Although ! For the Australians, you can "top off" units starting with 8XP by fighting the Aboriginal spawns, which is very, very useful. It gets 3 of your units past the 9XP post safely each time, and generates some extra Great General points along the way.

I don't entirely discount the +4 hammers from the GG, but kind of... if I'm running Constitution, I can get a free engineer which is already +2 hammers, plus some GP points which, along with Democracy, can get you a Great Engineer rather quickly with whom you can rush a big chunk of a wonder, or get a manufactory (haven't done the math, but I think it would be more hammers overall with this).

In fact, my original idea was to try to get a Great Engineer ASAP, rush Chapultepec Castle and run the culture slider a bit to increase culture level + help new cities reach the mines (saving enough to get electricity in time) but it always came too late and the wonder was gone, so I tried rushing National College instead to help with the tech goal, until I noticed the 9XP issue.

I agree with you in Stratocracy coming quite late, and the awkward position it is at when compared with Constitution. I would also add that civics that are compatible with it come even later, so if you want to do a double switch with Totalitarianism for instance to save 1 turn of anarchy, it comes effectively even later.

Also, good call on the Aboriginals. I didn't count them because I've noticed their spawn and numbers are a little bit inconsistent, and quite a few of those I have to fight before I had 8XP units so as to not lose my undefended mine cities, but they can certainly help with the goal a bit

 

[Zalfos]

What would be a good tech for it, Sociology? Maybe Journalism could gain Defensive Pacts then.

I don't have a strong opinion, but yes, something like Sociology could fit, it's already quite military-themed.
Maybe the XP effect should be more generous as well, and be a true -25% across the board, so as to really make a dent in that department. Then it would start to be a choice in some cases, like for France or England as they also have a lot to conquer but cannot do it before Journalism.
I'm all for some buff to Stratocracy, right now I'll agree it's a niche pick. Though they might be other avenues to think of instead, perhaps relative to it being a "Military Government", though Totalitarianism already accounts for the War Weariness angle. Maybe something about Stability related to overextension or internal strife ?

I don't entirely discount the +4 hammers from the GG, but kind of... if I'm running Constitution, I can get a free engineer which is already +2 hammers, plus some GP points which, along with Democracy, can get you a Great Engineer rather quickly with whom you can rush a big chunk of a wonder, or get a manufactory (haven't done the math, but I think it would be more hammers overall with this).

Well, indeed, but Engineers are limited, you only get one before the Factory, and then the next one is at Railway Station, which you might delay quite a bit. The settled Great General is always +4, and then you can add as many Engineers as you have on top of it, it basically ups your Production ceiling compared to Constitution. Now I'm not gonna sugarcoat it, yeah, you probably want Constitution unless you're running such a small state that Bureaucracy somehow has the advantage. But Stratocracy has some economical potential.

Also, good call on the Aboriginals. I didn't count them because I've noticed their spawn and numbers are a little bit inconsistent

The aboriginal spawns stop at 1930, but if you play a strong tech game early on, the last two waves should be available after Psychology (and so, Totalitarianism), so it's 6 units done this way. Every little bit counts, at some points I let them pillage mines simply to have them killed by the right units.

 

[1HammerCitizen]

Here's an idea:

Stratocracy:
+3 XP for land units
-25%XP needed for unit promotions (a true -25%, like charismatic in the base game)
+1 happiness from barracks
Available at Sociology

Totalitarianism:
+50% military unit production
+100% GG emergence
No war weariness
Still available at Psychology

That would make Stratocracy:
- An attractive option but not mandatory for England, France and Colombia
- Quite interesting for Thailand (rush Sociology for defensive pacts with SEA nations and better quality to fight colonizers)
- Great for Germany considering their UP
- Still a must have for Australia along with Fanaticism, maintaining the challenge of producing a large amounts of units with suboptimal economic civics while having to pursue the final tech goal.
- A contender with Constitution, being available slightly earlier, depending on your situation.

As for Totalitarianism, it would:
- Give Germany a good reason to push for it and help with their UHV and also make sense historically (Prussian quality during Frederick/Bismarck, mass military during WW2 era)
- Offer an interesting choice to USA between commerce and military.
- Depending on how you play it, and the situation you find yourself in, be something to consider as Mexico and Colombia. I would also say Argentina, although I don't think they can afford to tech to it.

As for balance, I don't think it would be too much, since you only get lvl 3 units (lvl 4 if paired with Fanaticism or GG settled, or Mounted unit with stable), which would probably be demoted upon unit upgrade (except Germany).

I don't know, maybe there's some other balance considerations I'm not taking into account.

 

[Leoreth]

Stratocracy works exactly like the Charismatic trait.

 

[Zalfos]

Stratocracy works exactly like the Charismatic trait.

I don't doubt the line of <iLevelExperienceModifier> to be written the same, but I checked on vanilla BtS, and Charismatic seems to follow another view on the -25% — as in, you do get to level 4 with only 8XP and not 9.
Are we missing something else in DoC that alters how XP works ?

 

[Leoreth]

I don't want to discount this observation, I am just saying that it uses the same logic as the charismatic trait. I already made a note to investigate the behavior.

 

[1HammerCitizen]

For clarification, I'm making a small modification to the tables I included above, since I mistakenly named the top row "Levels" when it should've been "Promotions", as the 1st promotion, gets you level 2, and so on:

For base game:

Experience Required per Level

LEVEL	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13
PROMOTION	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	N
XP Charismatic leaders	2	4	8	13	20	28	37	48	61	75	91	108
XP Others	2	5	10	17	26	37	50	65	82	101	122	145

For the mod, currently:

Experience Required per Level

LEVEL	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13
PROMOTION	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	N
XP Stratocracy	2	5	9	14	21	29	39	50	63	77	93	110
XP Others	2	5	10	17	26	37	50	65	82	101	122	145

Thanks for taking the time to look into this Leoreth

 

[Leoreth]

Turns out that I was half right and half wrong. I did not change the implementation of this effect and used the same code as the Charismatic trait. However the implementation of the Charismatic trait is different between vanilla BtS and the BUG mod, which has been included in DoC. The main difference is that it is implemented in Python in the base game and in C++ in the mod. While the code is the same, the arithmetic works out differently in C++ when it comes to rounding integers. I adjusted the implementation to (almost) mitigate this effect. For higher levels, experience thresholds are sometimes off by 1, but I think that should be acceptable.