1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Rating the c3c Civs by DocT

Discussion in 'Civ3 Strategy Articles' started by Doc Tsiolkovski, Nov 11, 2004.

  1. Doc Tsiolkovski

    Doc Tsiolkovski Deity

    Joined:
    May 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,032
    Location:
    Köln, Cologne, Colonia. Finally.
    Thanks for summing this up, SJ_Frank!

    Trait Synergy is weighted twice by me; so

    Incans:
    Traits 2x +2
    UU -1
    Trait/UU Synergy +1
    AGR +1
    =======
    5

    I would apply the followíng changes

    *AGR +2 (like you did)
    *remove MP (same)
    *remove trait synergy from MIL/COM and EXP/COM (but not AGR/COM, that helps insanely for early expansion)
    *Keep the JT as 3rd tier (which UU did you move down instead?)
    *give +1 for fast UUs (Chasqi, Jaguar, Impi, War Chariot, MW, 3MC, Celtic, Ansar, Rider, Samurai, Jumbo, Keshik, Conquistador, Cossack, Sipahi, Panzer; and Berserks - in the hands of the Human those are fast units)
    *give +1 for the 3 best Civs for HoF (Mayans, Celts, Iros? I'm no expert here)

    Did I miss something?
     
  2. Jopedamus I

    Jopedamus I Immortality is reality

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Messages:
    67
    Location:
    Menzoberranzan
    @DocT: JT is better than Dromon or Musketeer. Still not enough value for agriculture trait, it should be at least +3. I know that you hate me, because you have not made any comment for my suggestions since beginning, but believe it or not I can play this game. Problem is that agriculture trait is just so freaking good comparing all the others. That's why all agriculture civs should be in the 1 tier. And I still think you over-emphasize the power of UU..1 category should be enough, but MAYBE you shoyuld then give more value for best UU's, for example Ansar +3.. Anyways, it's been nice to read this thread and comments from all good/great players. And RaR is great.. :goodjob:
     
  3. Tomoyo

    Tomoyo Fate

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    9,698
    Location:
    Boston, Mass
    I think it is fairly clear that he thinks the Dromon and Musketeer are better than the Javelin Thrower, and I agree.
     
  4. SJ Frank

    SJ Frank Spamalot Co-court

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    717
    Location:
    The hill tile S-SE of San Francisco
    Aye, but why would the Dromon be rated higher than the JT. Both are dominating UU's when used correctly in a game setting that suits them, and average to useless otherwise. JT's have a draw back due to lack of 20 shield archers, but they are useful later into the game. I think they are even.

    On a completely different topic, does Inca really have a +2 synergy with AGR and EXP. It really has only half a EXP.

    Really? I thought COM only helps with Rank related corruption, and you don't get into those in the early expansion stage.
     
  5. punkbass2000

    punkbass2000 Des An artiste

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2002
    Messages:
    7,230
    Location:
    A(sia) Minor
    Maybe if you're comments consisted of more than 'This is completely wrong' and were constructive instead...
     
  6. Provolution

    Provolution Sage of Quatronia

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    10,102
    Location:
    London
    Punkbass2000

    Some people have issues real life, and they bring that into the Civ-world, unfortunately, I also have the problem with people not being constructive just to sate their swollen gamer pride and false sense of "professionalism" (as if they were paid to play Civ).

    But I agree with you, I prefer people coming with constructive inputs, I save my destroying for hostile units in game, not ideas :)
     
  7. Doc Tsiolkovski

    Doc Tsiolkovski Deity

    Joined:
    May 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,032
    Location:
    Köln, Cologne, Colonia. Finally.
    The JT is by no means superior to the c3c Musketeer! No way.
    Dromons...hard to tell. On Pelagos, no question.
    I rather see the Cossack as 3rd tier.
     
  8. Tomoyo

    Tomoyo Fate

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    9,698
    Location:
    Boston, Mass
    @DocT: What if you don't have saltpeter?
     
  9. scoutsout

    scoutsout Minstrel Boy

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    4,263
    Location:
    Check Six!
    Oh come on...that's too easy. You go out and "acquire it'. :D
     
  10. Sandman2003

    Sandman2003 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    597
    Location:
    Australia
    Would you devalue the mighty Sipahi if you didn't have saltpeter? Or any other resource requiring UU for that matter .....
     
  11. Darkness

    Darkness Shadow creature

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Messages:
    6,755
    Location:
    Rotterdam, the Netherlands
    :confused: Why?
    It's a three move UU with increased defense? Increased offense would have been better, but the cossack will give less casualties due to counterstrike than the onrdinary cavalry...

    Maybe that's just my bias towards fast units showing again....
     
  12. Longasc

    Longasc Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2003
    Messages:
    2,763
    Cossacks have no increased defense!

    They replace an already strong Unit (Cavalry), and are not really better - the Immortal e.g. is a much stronger replacement.

    In C3C, they got BLITZ ability, but no longer increased Defense.

    A testament to the fact that giving defensive boni to offensive units is not seen as too strong. Blitz on the other hand can turn Cossacks into Elite/MGL producers. Unfortunately one does not have too often the chance to attack successfully multiple times with a Cossack, that is the difference to the tank.
     
  13. Doc Tsiolkovski

    Doc Tsiolkovski Deity

    Joined:
    May 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,032
    Location:
    Köln, Cologne, Colonia. Finally.
    Yep, the last sentence hits the nail. 'Blitz' seems great - but how often is a Cossack healthy enough to attack twice? Once you have Aris to redline, you'll also face at least Rifles...

    And it's not that I think that unit sucks; it's more like the Keshik - not a bad unit, but there are 20+ superior UUs. And the 2(2).5.1 Musketeer is close to a 1st tier UU. This thing allows you to entirely skip Nationalism without missing a useful defender. Note the defensive bombard is almost as powerful as a HP bonus, the AI often will not attack 2 stacked Musketeers at all; the game seems to subtract one HP from the attacker when calculating the odds. Also, ever thought how great the 'Avoid Education, head for MilTradition and capture the Great Library' works for France?

    A general point: Darkness' post is a good example - I'm talking only about C3C! Nobody will argue the pre-C3C Musketeer is a 3rd tier, and nobody will argue Egypt was among the strongest Civs before. But, to quote punkbass2000: "Things have changed."
    Please keep that in mind; before you disagree with something written here, ask yourself if your point really applies to C3C, and is not something you remember from VC3/PtW.
     
  14. Enkidu_Warrior

    Enkidu_Warrior Shaman

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2004
    Messages:
    310
    Location:
    Australia
    excellent article, doc TS. the discussion throughout the thread has been both interesting and challenging, which as a mid-level player i've appreciated learning from.

    i couldnt help myself, and downloaded the excel file and made a few tweaks. with deference to your above suggestions, and based on some of the other feedback and my reading of ision's civ-review articles (which are also excellent), the changes i've made are:

    * reduced the com/mil and com/exp synergy from 2 to 1
    * added a "fast unit bonus" to the UU tiers. all the fast units listed above get +1 to thier tier. if they are already top tier, there's no extra bonus.
    * eliminated the MP bonus
    * converted the 20k/100k bonuses into a single bonus: 1 if you are amongst the 5 civs listed, 0 if not. (interestingly, this strongly correlates with the REL trait - all 5 are REL and the list includes 5 of 7 REL civs)
    * changed the AGR bonus to +2
    * renamed the +1 alphabet bonus to a COM or SEA bonus (as these are the traits that give you alphabet to start with)
    * added an IND bonus of +1
    * changed the german panzer UU/trait synergy to 1 (instead of 0)
    * changed the mayan JT UU/trait synergy to 1 (instead of 0)

    the rationale behind a number of these changes was to balance trait vs. unit vs. bonus points. for example, adding +1 for fast units makes a whopping 5 points available to units, as opposed to a max of +4 for trait synergy. i doubt we'd want more importance placed on units than traits! similarly, separate bonuses for two kinds of culture wins overstates the importance of this dimension relative to the others.

    the addition of IND as a small bonus is to reflect the exponential way early development can give a long-term edge, no matter what it's paired with. i would suggest that over the long haul this peters out, with most civs on par by the modern age, if not sooner, in terms of development. but that said, early production advantages can be leveraged in any number of ways (faster exploration, faster growth/territory spread, more war units, faster tech, etc.)

    finally, i believe the case is strong from ision's civ reviews that the UU units for germany and the maya are under-represented here. while it's fair to say that the panzer has no real synergy, to put it in the lowest tier, suggesting anti-synergy, is overstating it's weakness. similarly, strong arguments exist that the javelin thrower works well as an early deterrent when growing rapidly as well as a supplemental slave acquirer (tactical considerations of how to implement/balance this aside).

    as a result, of all this, i've come up with a ranking list that credits:

    * from 0 to 4 points for trait synergy
    * from -1 to 4 points for UU/UU synergy
    * from 0 to 3 points for specific traits (2 for agr, 1 each for ind/com/sea)
    * from 0 to 1 points for cultural superiority (it is perhaps worthy considering whether this should be a straight +1 for REL)

    because these last two areas are actually partially mutually exclusive, the scores range from a minimum of -1 to a maximum of 11.

    the result:

    1st Tier
    10 Celts, Iroquios
    9 Greece, China, France
    8 Aztecs, Netherlands, Sumeria, Byzantium, Maya

    2nd Tier
    7 England, Inca
    6 Arabs, India, Japan, Rome, Spain, Carthage, Egypt, Ottomans, Persia

    3rd Tier
    5 Scandinavians, Hittites, Germany, Korea, America
    4 Babylon, Russia
    3 Mongols
    2 Zulu
    1 Portugal

    notably, this list reflects the general derision towards the expansionist trait, with 6 of the 8 EXP civs being the bottom six, and none making the top tier. i wonder if this is fair, since EXP can lead to a number of early advantages. OTOH, this requires a fair bit of luck! :shrug:

    For anyone interested, the modified Excel file, based on Doc TS's original on the first page is attached below. Although I've tried to build on ideas presented here and elsewhere, all judgements, and therefore errors, are my own.

    EW
     
  15. Jopedamus I

    Jopedamus I Immortality is reality

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Messages:
    67
    Location:
    Menzoberranzan
    That is a much better ranking. Seems to be much closer to the truth than the original, at least I think so. Good work "Enkidu Warrior"! :goodjob:
     
  16. Doc Tsiolkovski

    Doc Tsiolkovski Deity

    Joined:
    May 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,032
    Location:
    Köln, Cologne, Colonia. Finally.
    Good work!
    However, I do not agree with a bonus for IND. This simply isn't more powerful than any of the other traits. Not worse, but also not better. No way ;)

    Without that, I can really agree with the revised list.
     
  17. Enkidu_Warrior

    Enkidu_Warrior Shaman

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2004
    Messages:
    310
    Location:
    Australia
    no worries, doc. it's all subjective.

    in defense, consider the way the rankings are built without the adjustment:

    +2 for AGR
    +1 for COM/SEA/REL (or nearly all religious)
    0 for IND/EXP/MIL

    expansionist deserves a zero because so much of its benefit comes down to luck (and/or particular planet parameters).

    militaristic deserves a zero because it is a specialised trait (or, to look at it another way, this ranking defers to flexibility over speciality)

    industrious has neither of these problems. it is generally useful, and only requires the player to take advantage. in this sense, it is no different to the COM/SEA bonus of starting with alphabet - in and of itself alphabet is neither here nor there, but if you use the tactic of pursuing the early free tech, it can be a bonus.

    as such, i dont believe giving IND +1 is out of line with what you are saying: this does NOT score it as more powerful than the other traits, just on par with the other generalist ones (ie COM/SEA/REL)

    regardless, it's been a useful thought exercise, and probably one that is worth the civ 4 developers considering, in the name of game balance. :)
     
  18. Beamup

    Beamup Higgs boson

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2001
    Messages:
    1,318
    Location:
    Boston
    One thing that really bothers me about DocT's system is that it seems to me that Commercial is SO heavily weighted compared to anything else. Commercial is virtually an automatic +5 - the Indians and Spanish are the only Commercial civs that don't get +5 from that alone, since Religious is the ONLY thing it's NOT considered synergistic with! Plus Alphabet is an other +1, for a total of 5 points just for being Commercial.

    Even Agricultural doesn't perform that well, being worth only 4 points on average (synergy with 1/2 the traits +1).

    And then when half the COM civs end up being granted trait/UU synergy as well, all but one of the original COM civs (India) get a total of +7 from their traits. Seems VERY excessive to me.

    Commercial is certainly a nice trait. It's not that nice, though.
     
  19. punkbass2000

    punkbass2000 Des An artiste

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2002
    Messages:
    7,230
    Location:
    A(sia) Minor
    Spanish aren't Commercial.
     
  20. Beamup

    Beamup Higgs boson

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2001
    Messages:
    1,318
    Location:
    Boston
    Well, then the Civilization Intelligence Center is wrong. I stand corrected.

    But, that only makes my point stronger.
     

Share This Page