Subdued Animals in C2C discussions

[Taxman66]

Why not? Animals who've survived numerous battles should be pretty fierce, should they not? How can that be bad for gameplay?

Because I'm finding it hard to even get animals with all the other CIVs hunting and the plethora of barbarian cities. To have animals capable of beating a powerful hunter (like a big game hunter) would be far too much for regular joe Rangers and Wardens.

 

[ls612]

Because I'm finding it hard to even get animals with all the other CIVs hunting and the plethora of barbarian cities. To have animals capable of beating a powerful hunter (like a big game hunter) would be far too much for regular joe Rangers and Wardens.

I agree. Rangers need to be able to kill basically anything on defense with very good reliability for things to be balanced. Having +20% strength on an animal though when the Ranger has +300% vs that animal though I don't think makes a huge difference.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Because I'm finding it hard to even get animals with all the other CIVs hunting and the plethora of barbarian cities. To have animals capable of beating a powerful hunter (like a big game hunter) would be far too much for regular joe Rangers and Wardens.

I agree. Rangers need to be able to kill basically anything on defense with very good reliability for things to be balanced. Having +20% strength on an animal though when the Ranger has +300% vs that animal though I don't think makes a huge difference.

So animals range up to what, 6 str? With Combat 6 they have a 75% combat modifier. That's 6 promotions. Then there could be a few more... lets say they really develop it out and get up to about 150% combat modifier against your ranger.

That means the strongest possible animal could end up being about 15 total effective strength.

Compare to the Ranger, I believe is 5 str? (and we're getting nowhere near the game and big game hunters here who are far beyond this.) Plus, as ls612 points out, 300% BASE from simply being a ranger, against animals. Let's say that Ranger is completely non-promoted.

That means the Ranger, unpromoted at all, against a lvl over 7 animal would end up being a strength 20 (5 * 3 + 5).

At 5 pts higher than the strongest animal in a completely unpromoted state... I'm not too worried about giving animals some promotions. It's the human barbs that Rangers and such have to watch out for... they aren't nearly so well suited to fighting people with weapons.

 

[ls612]

So animals range up to what, 6 str? With Combat 6 they have a 75% combat modifier. That's 6 promotions. Then there could be a few more... lets say they really develop it out and get up to about 150% combat modifier against your ranger.

That means the strongest possible animal could end up being about 15 total effective strength.

Compare to the Ranger, I believe is 5 str? (and we're getting nowhere near the game and big game hunters here who are far beyond this.) Plus, as ls612 points out, 300% BASE from simply being a ranger, against animals. Let's say that Ranger is completely non-promoted.

That means the Ranger, unpromoted at all, against a lvl over 7 animal would end up being a strength 20 (5 * 3 + 5).

At 5 pts higher than the strongest animal in a completely unpromoted state... I'm not too worried about giving animals some promotions. It's the human barbs that Rangers and such have to watch out for... they aren't nearly so well suited to fighting people with weapons.

I'd be worried about earlier units (including military ones!) which could get wrecked in early wars from wild Elephants, which isn't really realistic. The Ranger and Explorer don't have much to fear from this, but the Axeman and Speaman would, which isn't good.

 

[AIAndy]

I'd be worried about earlier units (including military ones!) which could get wrecked in early wars from wild Elephants, which isn't really realistic. The Ranger and Explorer don't have much to fear from this, but the Axeman and Speaman would, which isn't good.

Trying to attack an elephant with crude axes or spears is likely a very dangerous business.

 

[DRJ]

You both are right. So what about new "cautious prey" + "evader" promotions for animals providing them strength + withdrawal just against hunting units?

This way the Hunter/Rangers base bonus would be equalized by very experienced animals only - and normal units could have normal chances against them still.
The main reason for using Hunters against them would be the higher subdue chances.

Also, subdueing very highly experienced animals could give benefits (like a "beastmaster" promotion for your Hunter [+15% against dogs + horses] or +1 in nearest city for some turns - "finally the horrible beast terrorizing us for so long is gone")

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

You do know that animals have been getting experience from battles that they win since about v22 or v25 and in all that time we have had only one person comment about land animals and 3 about sea animals having promotions. Animals don't tend to get a chance to win more than one or two battles before getting killed or captured.

 

[DRJ]

Yeah which is why they should get more xp the higher the level of hunting technology is against them.

For example: from 50.000 - 35.000 BC they would get 100% xp for win, from 34.999 to 25.000 BC 300% XP .... and so on - its important that once there are Trackers and Hunters available some strong animals have risen and they can gain a lot of promotions with only a few wins.

To settle some areas which have dangerous beasts roaming around a Siegfried the Dragonslayer might be needed, indeed.

Not to forget the most promotions the beasts would gain would only lower the chances of Hunters/Rangers, not of normal troops (like I suggested in my previous post)

 

[JosEPh_II]

Nobody Expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Now Cardinal Fang! Slay that beast with the Comfy cushion!

What's that you say? Cardinal Fang got eaten? Oh Dear! should've used the Comfy Chair!

How could I've been so stupid! Cardinal Biggles Attack that elephant with the Comfy Chair!


Run Away!!!



JosEPh

 

[ls612]

Trying to attack an elephant with crude axes or spears is likely a very dangerous business.

Do you mean a regiment of soldiers with Bronze axes attacking elephants? I'm talking about the normal Axeman which comes in the late Ancient Era (5 str, +50% vs melee). Sure there'd be some casualties, but unless those elephants are trained and ridden into battle one would expect for the soldiers to win rather easily.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Do you mean a regiment of soldiers with Bronze axes attacking elephants? I'm talking about the normal Axeman which comes in the late Ancient Era (5 str, +50% vs melee). Sure there'd be some casualties, but unless those elephants are trained and ridden into battle one would expect for the soldiers to win rather easily.

I wouldn't say that easy. A rogue elephant is one of the most dangerous animals on earth... and a stampeding herd of them is more likely than not going to trample those axemen right underfoot. You said a spearman would have something to fear but don't spear lines get a hefty bonus against animals as well? I don't think they'd have much to worry about there.

 

[Yudishtira]

It's early ancient and I get my first Subdued Sealion back from the uncharted Antarctic wastes. It tells me that building the myth will give me negative research because I've already got Harpoon Making.

Seriously???!!!

I understand that the myth might be counterproductive to 'science' at this point, but I do have the actual animal fgs!

Anyway [/rant] it's just frustrating getting the chance to build something rare, only to find it's worse than useless. (I don't even have menageries yet). Sorry but constructively speaking, it's a killjoy element imho and I'm sure you don't want those.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

It's early ancient and I get my first Subdued Sealion back from the uncharted Antarctic wastes. It tells me that building the myth will give me negative research because I've already got Harpoon Making.

Seriously???!!!

I understand that the myth might be counterproductive to 'science' at this point, but I do have the actual animal fgs!

Anyway [/rant] it's just frustrating getting the chance to build something rare, only to find it's worse than useless. (I don't even have menageries yet). Sorry but constructively speaking, it's a killjoy element imho and I'm sure you don't want those.

The actual is wrong +1 plus expires = -1 or even -1.7 in one game I played when the actual should just be saying zero after the science bit expires. This is one reason I want to split the myth buildings into two one that gives science but expires and the other that gives boosts to other buildings. If you build the first you get the second or you can build the second when the first expires if you have not already built it.

 

[Koshling]

The actual is wrong +1 plus expires = -1 or even -1.7 in one game I played when the actual should just be saying zero after the science bit expires. This is one reason I want to split the myth buildings into two one that gives science but expires and the other that gives boosts to other buildings. If you build the first you get the second or you can build the second when the first expires if you have not already built it.

It's just an error in the hover text. I think (haven't checked - will sometime) it displays the actual with your research modifiers only applied to the negative part of the equation (so +base -(<tech based negative change>*<modifier>)). In reality I'm pretty sure it gives 0.

 

[Yudishtira]

Thanks and good to know. However, 0 still = pointless = killjoy is it not? If the myth is basically obsolete, could it not be replaced by something else? Surely we can still learn from this (live!) animal (even) after we know how to harpoon it. I suppose uses for it come along later, but I'm saying there should never be a time when its utility actually goes backwards.

 

[Koshling]

Thanks and good to know. However, 0 still = pointless = killjoy is it not? If the myth is basically obsolete, could it not be replaced by something else? Surely we can still learn from this (live!) animal (even) after we know how to harpoon it. I suppose uses for it come along later, but I'm saying there should never be a time when its utility actually goes backwards.

DH can probably comment better, but I think some of them (though a minority) have other values (gold, culture) or get bonuses from techs later, so this was adopted just to make a uniform approach. In effect though, for most myths, it is going obsolete.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Thanks and good to know. However, 0 still = pointless = killjoy is it not? If the myth is basically obsolete, could it not be replaced by something else? Surely we can still learn from this (live!) animal (even) after we know how to harpoon it. I suppose uses for it come along later, but I'm saying there should never be a time when its utility actually goes backwards.

The point of the Myth buildings was to simulate the Neolithic burst in knowledge. No that we have better balances tech learning, they perhaps have served their usefulness and should be removed.

DH can probably comment better, but I think some of them (though a minority) have other values (gold, culture) or get bonuses from techs later, so this was adopted just to make a uniform approach. In effect though, for most myths, it is going obsolete.

This is the reason I said I wanted to split them. Many of the Myth buildings give some science and reduced costs to buildings eg Myth of Horse also reduces the cost of the Tengrii buildings.

 

[Koshling]

The point of the Myth buildings was to simulate the Neolithic burst in knowledge. No that we have better balances tech learning, they perhaps have served their usefulness and should be removed.

Don't do that. Their impact on prehistoric strategy through the drive to hunt is a definite plus in gameplay terms.

 

[JosEPh_II]

+1

JosEPh

 

[Yudishtira]

+1 from me too. But obsoletions that cause you to go backwards are a bug wherever they occur. I know they abound in vanilla Civ/BtS, but that's its problem.

If this is not so, tell me how they reflect a real-world phenomenon.