Tech and Unit Lines Comparisons

[Sureshot]

Stirrups, Animal Handling, Poisons, Bowyers, and Iron Working Comparisons
techs for mounted (costs)
agriculture(100)>animalhusbandry(160)>horsebackriding(320)>stirrups(1280)
techs for recon (costs)
exploration(100)>hunting(160)>tracking(320)>animalhandling(640)*
tech for melee (costs)
crafting(100)>mining(160)>bronzeworking(320)>smelting(640)>ironworking(1280)
tech for ranged (costs)
exploration(100)>hunting(160)>archery(320)>bowyers(2560)**
techs for assassins (costs)
exploration(100)>hunting(160)>tracking(320)>poisons(640)
*animalhandling requires animal husbandry
**bowyers also requires bronzeworking

units for those tech lines
tier 0
scouts 1 strength, 2 moves (mounted line)
scouts 1 strength, 2 moves (recon line)
warriors 2 strength, 1 move (melee line)
warriors 2 strength, 1 move (archery line)
scouts 1 strength, 2 moves (assassin line)
tier 1
horsemen 3 strength, 3 moves (requires horse)
hunters 3 strength, 2 moves
axemen 4 strength, 1 move (requires copper)
archers 3 strength, 1 move
hunters 3 strength, 2 moves
tier 2
horsearchers 5 strength, 3 moves (require archery and horses)
rangers 7 strength, 2 moves
macemen 7 strength, 1 move (requires iron)
longbowmen 6 strength, 1 move (requires bronzworking and copper)
assassins 6 strength, 2 moves

the first thing to notice is that while the recon lines (for rangers and assassins) both increase by doubling each tech up, where as every other line doubles the final techs cost (or in like in the melee line doubles and has a tech the same as the recon ones right before it as well; or like longbowmen costs 4 times as much and requires another tech line).
also note the need for resources for all the other lines.
but the simplest thing to notice is the general trend. units with 2 moves have 6 strength, units with 1 move have 7 strength, and units with 3 moves have 5 strength, basically, strength+moves=8.

so from all this what i think should be done is:
bowyers reduced to 1/4 its tech cost, like the recon line
stirrups reduced to 1/2 its tech cost, like the recon line
rangers reduced to 6 strength (though maybe remain 7 for Ljosalfar)

some crazier ideas might be to make rangers require atleast 1 animal resource to build them
in general the mounted line could use some functionality, maybe some buildings that they allow that help in some builder fashion (maybe something related to workhorses, or horse drawn-carriages)



Poisons & Deception
Both Dead End techs.
Both yield 1 unit type alone, nothing else. In the case of Deception this is a world unit (Trojan Horse) which may have already been created so the tech can be even more useless.
Both aptly apply to Assasins.
Assasins can upgrade to Shadows, but the tech requirement for Shadows is Guilds, and Guilds has no dependency on Poisons.

I recommend both those techs be combined into a new tech, maybe even called Poisons&Deception (or maybe Trickery or Intelligence Gathering or Formlessness or Dishonor or Plotting). I also recommend that tech be required for Guilds.

Trade, Currency & Stirrups
Stirrups vs. Trade
Stirrups costs 4 times as much as Trade
Stirrups allows a unit with 5 strength and 3 movement if you have Archery, Stables, and a horse
Trade allows a unit with 6 strength and 3 movement if you have Construction, Siege Workshop, and a horse.
Note: it is still takes less research time to get trade and construction than it does to get stirrups alone, and trade and construction offer many many good things)
Stirrups vs. Currency
Stirrups costs 2 times as much as Currency
Stirrups allows a unit with 5 strength and 3 movement if you have Archery, Stables, and a horse
Currency allows a unit with 5 strength and 3 movement, no other requirements.
Note: The mounted line may go somewhere eventually, but you'll never reach it when your enemies are getting techs that give better units earlier with less trouble that also improve their economy hugely.

I recommend the unit allowed with Trade (Chariots) be removed or placed in a later tech. For currency I recommend that the unit gained through that (Mercenaries) be weakened to either 4 or 3 strength, and possibly only 2 movement. In general Stirrups and that line also needs to gain benefits and have their costs lowered significantly.

Also of note, Honor should be the requirement for Feudalism instead of Trade. That would remove a bit of the deadendness of the Trade offshoots.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

You might want to be sure to make a distinction between Animal Handling (640) and Feral Bond (1280?). Just for the sake of clarity; otherwise the diagram is valid as far as I can tell.

 

[Sureshot]

oops, well i missed that, one sec

weird. i think using > adds random spaces around lol, the spaces arent there when i edit (like in smelt ing)

 

[Gamestation]

horsemen 3 strength, 3 moves (no requirements?)

Horsemen need horses

 

[Sureshot]

ah good point, forgot about that

 

[Kael]

Things that have already been done:

1. Council of Esus has been added to the Deception tech, making it more worthwile.

Im considering:

1. Removing the Mercenary unit.
2. Recosting techs (asked Nikis-Knight to provide some recommendations).
3. Making the Poison tech a requirement to produce Shadows (but not a requirement of Guilds).
4. Having Feudalism require Honor.
5. Raise the production cost of chariots (keep in mind that Horse Archers also have a better withdrawal chance and first strikes than a chariot).
6. Increasing the unit costs of rangers (which I don't see as being as easy to mass produce as macemen or longbowmen).

 

[Nikis-Knight]

Things that have already been done:

1. Council of Esus has been added to the Deception tech, making it more worthwile

Looks fun, but it still leaves it as a tech that has a world unit and a world wonder--good for two players at most. how about tying commando promotion to deception?

 

[Sureshot]

Things that have already been done:

1. Council of Esus has been added to the Deception tech, making it more worthwile.

Im considering:

1. Removing the Mercenary unit.
2. Recosting techs (asked Nikis-Knight to provide some recommendations).
3. Making the Poison tech a requirement to produce Shadows (but not a requirement of Guilds).
4. Having Feudalism require Honor.
5. Raise the production cost of chariots (keep in mind that Horse Archers also have a better withdrawal chance and first strikes than a chariot).
6. Increasing the unit costs of rangers (which I don't see as being as easy to mass produce as macemen or longbowmen).

those changes would definately help make the horseback line more viable. for tech costs, itd be nice if animal handling, bowyers, and stirrups all had the same research cost (since the prereq tech for all of them have the same research cost, and the units gained from those techs are all comparable).

 

[Maniac]

6. Increasing the unit costs of rangers (which I don't see as being as easy to mass produce as macemen or longbowmen).

How about giving hunters and rangers -50% city strength?

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Yes, defense as well as attack, if possible.

 

[Sureshot]

personally im a fan of -100% city strength and 6 strength (atleast for the non UU ones), to make it prohibitive to use in relation to cities, so people keep them out in the land to defend things. Atm they're coverall attacker/defenders.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Heh, a tier 3 unit that has 3.5 effective strength isn't going to be exactly the best choice for defending cities. Consider that tier 2 melee units have four strength, and tier 3 ones have seven strength. We don't have to make it impossible for them to defend cities, we just have to make it inefficient to do so.

 

[Sureshot]

ya but their effective strength would still be 12 (?with subdue animal they get 25+75=100%?) against animals, giants, skelettons, which is still more than enough. maybe also give them a promotion thats the reverse of homeland, giving them a bonus to strenght and withdrawing when outside anyones borders. and at the moment, they're easier to get than axemen, so axemen should be able to beat them in cities (but they still wouldn't, since 3.5 is going to be modded by the city defense to be over 4, thats for sure, and the axemens melee bonus does them nothing).

 

[Maniac]

City raider promotions do though.

 

[Sureshot]

im leaving promotions out of it, or else the ranger could have hill defense and the city could be on a hill, or they could have drill promos, or have been upgraded from an archer and have city defense promos

yes, if one has certain promos the balance shifts, but that clouds the issue, the base amount is the important part, because theres many mods through promos, terrain, and buildings possible.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

City defense should still aply to them. Just because they're specialized for the wilderness doesn't mean that they forget how to use a hatchet when they're inside city walls. And axemen are not tougher to get than rangers, unless you happen to be playing a one city challenge and don't start near copper.

Axemen:Crafting=>Mining=>Bronze Working

Rangers:Exploration=>Hunting=>Tracking=> Agriculture=>Animal Husbandry=>Animal Handling

There's a substantial difference. Rangers are overpowered, but let's not be ridiculous here.

Catapults:Crafting=>Masonry=>Construction

I think if the foe has rangers, you're probably going to have catapults to neutralize the % city defense bonus, anyway.

 

[Sureshot]

true, but getting copper really isnt a guarrantee. catapults on the other hand do seem a good bet. is there really no other requirement for construction? i may try a catapult rush early some time, heh

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Don't get your hopes up. They're only strength three. No more artillery rushes like in vanilla Civ. It's better this way.

 

[Sureshot]

unless you're doviello those 6 strength skull-catas are the bane of my existence lol

 

[QES]

Very intriguing discussion.

I like the concepts of minimalizing recon line numbers and city-usefulness (I agree they shouldn't get penalized for defending a city, but perhaps not able to utilized the defenses perfectly either. Maybe -100% city attack -50% city defense. (The chaos of a city in combat may be too much comotion for them)

Also, on deception, the new wonder will go a ways to helping. But what about more tangible diplomatic benefits? One could introduce a unit and/or concept that ties directly into inter-civ relations.

Deception could provide that Trojan Horse, that Wonder, and perhaps a standard "Envoy" unit, that could be used to bribe units in other nations? Perhaps give it "hidden nationality". The price of bribing units could varry based on religion, diplomatic status (friendly or hostile), rank in the world standing, civics of the target nation - etc. Perhaps another function of envoys could be propoganda spread (like a mini-loki). And/or just the presence of them in a foriegn civ would increase diplomatic relations (from the propoganda being spread). Mayhaps powerful envoys (if given a method to gain experiance) could do things like change the civics of other nations. Of course, only ever to YOUR type of civics. Promotions could be made that reflect each "civic" catagory. And as a envoy matured, it'd be able to change opponents civics to your own, one for each "type" it has mastered. This would be very sneaky, and the computer would simply know to use them in "enemy" states. Clearly assassins and shadows should be able to stop them/capture them.

Still, it'd be sneaky, devious and a hell of a lot of fun. Ideas?
-Qes