Solver's unofficial BtS 3.17 patch

[Wodan]

t's about consistency and simplicity. Consistency in that siege units are the ones to do siege and tanks to fill it's own role.

That's a valid argument.

Doesn't say anything about the negatives, however. It is a negative to take something away; this is indisputable. If it's worth it to incur that negative, then by all means.

Simplicity in that this removes an option which isn't needed, and doesn't unbalance the game by removing it.

That's not a valid argument. Half the things in the game qualify for this.

Wodan

 

[Caboose]

Ok, I see your opinion on that, but Firaxis patched it this way, so I'm gonna go with the general flow.

I don't think half the things in the game are options that are not needed though

 

[Solver]

New version coming up. Changes (I should sometimes document what I change before uploading, not after!):

• Access to the Barrage line removed from armored units. If units with access to Barrage and no inherent collateral damage are modded in, they will work.
• Fixed AI defender bug for newly captured cities.
• Fixed overproduction of transports in land wars courtesy of better BtS AI team.
• Made the AI more likely to use missiles on cruisers/subs to strike against enemy improvements.
• Made AI ships prioritize retreating if docked in a city which is in the danger of imminent capture by enemy.
• Civilopedia and mouseover help for units that cause collateral damage will now show the collateral damage limit (50% for Catapults, etc.)
• Somewhat experimental AI change: Aggressive AI now considerably less likely to want peace if it poses more of an immediate threat to enemy cities than it currently faces itself.

My apologies to those who disagree with the Barrage solution - but hey, what's a patch without controversy. I hope this will keep the majority happy.

The link in the original post should now be pointing to the new version.

 

[SilentHunter]

I'm afraid for the barrage tanks lover that it's a Warlord unit, not a BtS one. Saying that it's not over powered et all is somewhat tricky: look at the facts:

- Artillery cannot kill, it only can reduce oppponants,
- At every period, it's attack power is reduced, comapared to other units, for high cost...

now, the modern tanks:

- Rapid (2),
- Two attacks (blitz),
- No real counter unit,*
- 240h, when mobile Arty is 200, mech infantry 200,
- Highest attack power of the game,
- 1 first strike
and then........
- can use barrage AND KILL UNITS WITH IT

and it's not overpowered???

I'm quite sure Firaxis realised they forgot this unit that was fit in Warlords, with killing-capable arty, but now, their power is just ridiculous. It's a all in one and more unit for what? 20% more in price? I buy this one all the time.


* Tanks counter units:
- anti tank: 14 base + 125% = 32. Waow, against a 40 + barrage, let's die in stacks,
- chopper: 24 base + 50% = 36. Waow again: you need two to kill a tank, but are you ready to spend 320 hammer for that? No no, buy a modern tank. 10 times more versatile.

Compare that to knight counters:
Pikeman: 6 + 100% = 12 against 10. Now that's a counter. Why not give knight barrage? After all their horses can crush opponents

I hope this post doesn't seem too harsh, but let's face it, your cool unit is a game imbalance, and sould have been modified in the same time that they modified arty system for BtS.

Ship are a bit worrying too because they overly favor defence:
Just stay in your harbours, where you are safe and then when his stack arrives, crush it with your barrage unit, when he cannot use his.
On the ground, situation is very different, because attacking cavalry/tanks with arty is quite hard.

BtW saying it's realist that my tank/Battleship makes barrage damage is false and does not correspond to reality:
-> barrage means crushing a small zone of ground with long ago prepared ammunition, in order to launch an hours long shelling. A tank basically has 40 to 60 ammo... nothing enough to shell for hours, especially if you deduce the AP/APFSD ammo (anti tank) that produce no area effect. As for ships, they are made to engage one target by one, just like tanks in anti tank combat and unless if they use nuclear weapon, they have nothing that can do "stack damage".

Now I'll stop because I have made too much enemies for one day.

 

[r_rolo1]

Ok, I see your opinion on that, but Firaxis patched it this way, so I'm gonna go with the general flow.

Well, technically what Firaxis did was to code barrage promos in a way that would make them useless in armoured units. That is not the same that what you said...

 

[oranges]

It's not about it being too strong. It isn't that strong at all if I understood it correctly. It's about consistency and simplicity. Consistency in that siege units are the ones to do siege and tanks to fill it's own role. Simplicity in that this removes an option which isn't needed, and doesn't unbalance the game by removing it.

This makes no sense whatsoever. Let's see. Consistency - tanks do not take away siege ability to bombard city defenses, collateral damage is not just the domain of siege or would you remove it from all other units as well arguing consistency. An option that isn't needed - similarly, one can argue for many different things that they are not needed, but they are in the game. You can remove just about any ability from just about an unit and the game will still be playable, but would it be enjoyable. Using your argument, I could argue that axemen should not have access to city raider, why ruin the simplicity, you have swords for that role and it will force you to use combined arms.

And I stress it again, Solver states he wants to go in the general direction of Firaxis, so deal with it or find another guy to patch it

Solver invited people to state their opinions and that's what we are doing. Obviously, the final decision is up to him and he said he was inclined to removing it altogether, but why do YOU have the need to shut up people who feel differently. I for one am perfectly aware that if the patch removes the collateral for armored units, I'll need to either stick to 3.13 or find the way to change what I want myself. I'm sure others have the same common sense.

@SilentHunter You cannot use modern armor as a case in point. Look at those anti-tanks vs tanks, which is what they are intended for. They come up better even without any defense bonuses. Modern armor is indisputably a very strong unit, but the game is pretty much over by the time you get them. If the no-barrage affected only them, I would be utterly unconcerned by it, both due to the time when it occurs and an abundance of other units I can use as effectively to achieve the same.

 

[Solver]

I for one am perfectly aware that if the patch removes the collateral for armored units, I'll need to either stick to 3.13 or find the way to change what I want myself. I'm sure others have the same common sense.

If you don't use the Civ4PromotionInfos.xml included in the unofficial patch and continue using the original one, it will keep Barrage on Tanks.

 

[jkp1187]

Where would the fun in that be?

Still feeling that way?

After sorting through these posts as best as I can, I'm going to come down on the side of removing barrage completely from Tanks and Modern Armor. They are already somewhat über units to begin with, and doing so will encourage more use of combined arms (which the game doesn't have enough).

(If I had my way, City Raider would also be eliminated from tanks/armor and instead given to infantry/mech infantry. But that probably wouldn't be too popular, so that's fine.)

Concerning the impact of this change on naval units, am I correct in stating that, under basic 3.17, barrage currently does not work for ANY non-siege unit (therefore, not for battleships either?) It, too, is something of an über unit, so if it loses the ability, too, I won't care that much. Although I see nothing wrong with leaving Solver's fix in place for other units, but specifically removing barrage from tanks/modern armor.

And, of course, changing barrage on or off for a specific unit is a simple XML edit. If you can use notepad, you can make this change yourself.

 

[Wodan]

Ok, I see your opinion on that, but Firaxis patched it this way, so I'm gonna go with the general flow.

I don't think half the things in the game are options that are not needed though

Hello, espionage?

Anyway I don't really care much either way, myself. I do, however, fully support Katiekat's right to care.

Wodan

 

[Caboose]

Swords are for attacking archers and axes for attacking axes. So your example doesn't work.

Why I feel the need to shut people up? Hmm, really, I think some people here are investing far more energy than there is a point to here. No need in writing an entire bachelor degree when Solver, I'd say pretty clearly, states that he isn't going to make the change that you ask for.

 

[Kloreep]

If you don't use the Civ4PromotionInfos.xml included in the unofficial patch and continue using the original one, it will keep Barrage on Tanks.

...and with your patch modded to make Barrage have an effect on 0 Collateral Strength units, that will enable something akin to 3.13 behavior, right? Looks like your patch has something for everyone, then.

I personally favor taking the Barrage promo off armor, simply because it sounds like that's what Firaxis will do come the next patch, but options are always good.

 

[Solver]

Take it easy Caboose, there's never a problem with people expressing their opinions about these things

 

[Solver]

...and with your patch modded to make Barrage have an effect on 0 Collateral Strength units, that will enable something akin to 3.13 behavior, right? Looks like your patch has something for everyone, then.

Feel free to try it, Barrage Tanks will do little damage there. The code was changed by Firaxis without taking Tanks into account and I haven't redone anything big there.

 

[Wolfshanze]

Solver, you might want to try using some sort of "v1.0" or "v1.1" or whatever with your unofficial patch release(s), so we know if we have the most current version or not... that would be helpful I think.

 

[DrJambo]

Do you ever envisage doing anything to help Paratroopers and/or Guided Missiles? Or leave that to the modders?

 

[Caboose]

On topic: Thanks for the patch, Solver!

 

[Wolfshanze]

Do you ever envisage doing anything to help Paratroopers and/or Guided Missiles? Or leave that to the modders?

I'm pretty sure solver is working on fixing problems/bugs, not modding the game.

 

[DrJambo]

Also, a select all icon for bombers would be real handy. Why isn't that icon present for air unts by the way?

 

[DanF5771]

I still don't understand what kind of a problem it is to change 3.5 lines of code to make it work in an acceptable way and I don't understand at all that decreasing flexibility makes (almost) everybody scream YEAH!

I do know that dragging wheelchair artillery around will make my human WW skyrocket--alright I'll go for culture then...

 

[Kloreep]

Feel free to try it, Barrage Tanks will do little damage there. The code was changed by Firaxis without taking Tanks into account and I haven't redone anything big there.

I'm confused then...

*Barrage promotions made working again on Tanks and other units with no base collateral ability

I take your post above, then, simply to mean that they will do poor collateral damage with the latest patch (and without the new unit promotions file), not that they will do none at all like in the official 3.17 patch?