Unit Healing rates

[Thunderbrd]

I'm a little confused here.

The purpose of criminals, scoundrels and strike teams is to have units that can enter enemy lands with or without a RoP. They aren't coming invited and they also aren't announcing their national affiliation. That's the point. That's not 'breaking' RoP, its giving a tool to violate it by design. If you want to remove that feature then I would say doing so through a modmod or option would be the only way to do it properly since I don't think I'm alone in saying its one of my favorite features of C2C.

(And they DO cost a nation a lot to staff a significant amount of them already! Not against intensifying this depending on how easy gold is to manage at the moment but they do cost a lot more than basic units last I knew.)

If a unit cannot attack, what combat class violates this and changes it so it isn't placed in the same category? This is exactly why scouting units aren't supposed to be able to attack, more this than any other reason. Why change that?

How else exactly do multiple combat classes affect anything about a unit's ability to use or not use a right of passage? I'm not seeing where multiple combat classes have any impact on RoP whatsoever.

 

[Toffer90]

I'm a little confused here.

we were talking about recons.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Yeah but it got way out of the playing field in the discussion. I agree with DH that recons cannot be given the ability to attack without screwing up some basic RoP intentions but I don't agree that we need to worry about criminals and combat classes - the first of those were intended to break border restrictions and I haven't seen where combat classes has anything to do with it. If we go that far we might as well also remove spies from the game. They've always violated such restrictions as well.

I WOULD like to see something cleverly done to emulate the spy sometimes revealing his national identity when caught phenomenon for criminal, scoundrel and strike team units though. Just a project I had not looked into very far but for a coder would be easier than all the other suggestions here.

 

[Toffer90]

Yeah but it got way out of the playing field in the discussion. I agree with DH that recons cannot be given the ability to attack without screwing up some basic RoP intentions but I don't agree that we need to worry about criminals and combat classes - the first of those were intended to break border restrictions and I haven't seen where combat classes has anything to do with it. If we go that far we might as well also remove spies from the game. They've always violated such restrictions as well.

On this issue we are on the same page, I would hate to see criminals removed.

I was only relying on that what DH said was correct:

Right of Passage agreement is broken. Two things broke it
1) Criminal Units

2) multiple combat classes for units
Perhaps we should get rid of Right of Passage!

And that Albert insinuated that right now only criminal units can enter foreign border with RoP (and without)

RoP lets UnitsOnlyDefensive or with zero base Combat strenght enter so maybe it should be expanded
to just don't let Units with certain combat classes like UNITCOMBAT_CRIMINAL enter

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

The problem is not just that changing the recon to attack means that they can't enter RoP.

There is a deeper issue with RoP - your criminals and hidden nationality units units in your territory can negate the RoP with no consequences to you. You get the diplomatic benefit of RoP without letting the other nation in the deal actually have RoP as you can kill every unit they send in.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I dunno, DH. I don't see a problem with that. Those units can kill the same units anywhere, not just your own territory. Scouts are tough to kill though since they can very effectively retreat a battle - on ForF anyhow. And for whatever reason, merchants don't even need an RoP.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I dunno, DH. I don't see a problem with that. Those units can kill the same units anywhere, not just your own territory. Scouts are tough to kill though since they can very effectively retreat a battle - on ForF anyhow. And for whatever reason, merchants don't even need an RoP.

I don't find my recon tough. They always get killed by criminal/hidden nationality units when they enter RoP territory.

Missionaries, workers, merchants, diplomats and great people on the other hand are easily killed. These are also those that can and should enter with RoP.

 

[alberts8]

There is a deeper issue with RoP - your criminals and hidden nationality units units in your territory can negate the RoP with no consequences to you. You get the diplomatic benefit of RoP without letting the other nation in the deal actually have RoP as you can kill every unit they send in.

Exactly!

RoP should at least stop any criminals without hidden nationality if they try to enter. As for those hidden nationality units i don't like them and if they stay in the mod they should at least be changed to cost more gold per turn.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I don't find my recon tough. They always get killed by criminal/hidden nationality units when they enter RoP territory.

Missionaries, workers, merchants, diplomats and great people on the other hand are easily killed. These are also those that can and should enter with RoP.

Not playing on ForF I can see why.

Interesting perspective. Since I won't ever accept an embassy, I never accept RoP's. So I've not tried to really utilize them.

I realize, particularly with missionaries, this would be tough to do because you'd want to enable automation to determine the destination but Law Enforcement units still can't attack right? So they CAN still be acceptable escorts for any units that would want to go trapsing about inside someone else's lands. That makes a lot of historical sense too.

We may want to either work on the user interface of letting a specified unit control a stack with its automation. There was a failed attempt to do this in AND... maybe it should be debugged. That MIGHT help.

Law Enforcement would be quite good at this role since most of what would attack it would be something they'd be very good at fighting.

But I get the Pain in the Arse this represents for a player who cares to try to send missionaries and such into opponent lands via a RoP.

Within my own borders I've militarized enough to have canine visibility on nearly all spaces and a standby unit ready to attack if criminals approach. If I leave any blind spots, that's my fault they got in and they should have SOME ability to be effective now and then I think.

Stopping hidden nationality units from entering other lands won't solve that problem.

Exactly!

RoP should at least stop any criminals without hidden nationality if they try to enter. As for those hidden nationality units i don't like them and if they stay in the mod they should at least be changed to cost more gold per turn.

Are there any criminals without hidden nationality?

I just built a few thieves in a single player test game I play a few hours a week and they cost me an arm and a leg as it is. So perhaps they could be made more expensive later but at least at that stage I found the expense was already pretty noteworthy.

If you play more like DH then I can understand your dislike since you can't do much in opponent territory to protect your civil units really. Maybe somehow we should make it so you can't use your own HN units to attack opponent units inside your own borders if you have a RoP or Open Borders agreement. A little tricky and gets back to some of the evaluations of being able to attack a unit thanks to the status of that unit being a problem.

If we're even discussing removing HN units, I can only imagine doing so under a gameoption. I can't believe anyone doesn't deeply love this side of the mod but I've been surprised by other opinions to the point that nothing shocks me anymore. Don't take that as a lack of respect for your opinion at all... I'm just a bit stunned is all. Really goes to show anything about a game that is going to excite and be enjoyed by people is going to push as many people away. Nothing is a universal opinion it seems.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Originally Posted by Dancing Hoskuld View Post
There is a deeper issue with RoP - your criminals and hidden nationality units units in your territory can negate the RoP with no consequences to you. You get the diplomatic benefit of RoP without letting the other nation in the deal actually have RoP as you can kill every unit they send in.

If you will remember DH the AI used Rogues, Thieves, Assassins, etc., same as the player in earlier versions. They were quite adept at taking out your scouts, merchants and even at one time missionaries.

I don't know exactly When or What caused that to change.

Exactly!

RoP should at least stop any criminals without hidden nationality if they try to enter. As for those hidden nationality units i don't like them and if they stay in the mod they should at least be changed to cost more gold per turn.

I don't think I can agree with this alberst2. The HN units need to be reverted back to much earlier versions where they actually worked And they were Intended to be a nuisance.

RoP works, and if as in TB's choice not to use them, so do Embassies. You just need to be really selective with whom you share embassies with. I use both all the time and have No Problems with either and I don't use TB FoF for this to work.

I know DH you've expressed dissatisfaction over Outriggers, Canoes, kayaks, etc. being able to traverse AI coasts but they only follow the vanilla BtS way of Caravels to block them thru RoP makes no sense at all. And if you do block them as well as the HN units then you've removed a great deal of reconnaissance from the mod.

I would personally like to see the HN units return to v20ish form. They really meant something back then. Now, they are mostly afterthoughts because of the newer combat AI(s) that has/have been implemented in the core. And to all those impatient players who cried BooHoo when a Rogue or thieve or assassin got into your city and stayed for awhile, wait them out. They do leave eventually and that is when you eliminate them. And if your lack of vigilance and proper preparedness allows them to get in too bad. You played poorly now reap the consequences. This is when the modding started to kill off the effectiveness of the HN units, giving in to players who didn't use their dog units right as a counter.

Again RoP is not impo broken by HN units and never was.

JosEPh

 

[Toffer90]

I quite like the idea of Right of Passage, but in practice, any civ that signs RoP is also willing to sign OB (and vice versa), so it doesn't mean that much.

This is my only quarrel with RoP; RoP should be available between nation of even some negative netto attitude, while OB should require a quite large positive (green face) attitude.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Has anyone done anything to change the AI underlying HN units? I haven't. Not to say that another set of priorities couldn't be pushing out what they used to do with them. Just saying I've not directly tried to adjust anything about AI use of HN units.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

There is actually an error with the AI for automated missionaries and corporate execs. I used it for Immigrants and it caused an outcry. Koshling persuaded me to not use it before I could explain that it was using an existing AI I was using. The units just go directly towards their destination without requesting help in crossing dangerous areas.

Law Enforcement would be quite good at this role since most of what would attack it would be something they'd be very good at fighting.

But I get the Pain in the Arse this represents for a player who cares to try to send missionaries and such into opponent lands via a RoP.

Alternately all those missionary etc units could get the appropriate stats of law enforcement without the crime fighting ability.

If you play more like DH then I can understand your dislike since you can't do much in opponent territory to protect your civil units really. Maybe somehow we should make it so you can't use your own HN units to attack opponent units inside your own borders if you have a RoP or Open Borders agreement. A little tricky and gets back to some of the evaluations of being able to attack a unit thanks to the status of that unit being a problem.

That is what I have been asking for all along.

I know DH you've expressed dissatisfaction over Outriggers, Canoes, kayaks, etc. being able to traverse AI coasts but they only follow the vanilla BtS way of Caravels to block them thru RoP makes no sense at all. And if you do block them as well as the HN units then you've removed a great deal of reconnaissance from the mod.JosEPh

But a huge amount of reconnaissance has been removed from the mod. There is no way you can explore friendly territory by land, which you could before. Mostly because there is no friendly territory any more as it is populated by HN units which attack and kill your recon and defenseless units.

We could do the same to the sea by adding in pirate like ships far earlier than they are currently. Although the current set of pirates are no match for most ships of the same time unlike the HN land units which are usually far superior to the recon units.

 

[JosEPh_II]

There is actually an error with the AI for automated missionaries and corporate execs. I used it for Immigrants and it caused an outcry. Koshling persuaded me to not use it before I could explain that it was using an existing AI I was using. The units just go directly towards their destination without requesting help in crossing dangerous areas.



Alternately all those missionary etc units could get the appropriate stats of law enforcement without the crime fighting ability.



That is what I have been asking for all along.



But a huge amount of reconnaissance has been removed from the mod. There is no way you can explore friendly territory by land, which you could before. Mostly because there is no friendly territory any more as it is populated by HN units which attack and kill your recon and defenseless units.

We could do the same to the sea by adding in pirate like ships far earlier than they are currently. Although the current set of pirates are no match for most ships of the same time unlike the HN land units which are usually far superior to the recon units.

That was one time true DH. But the current HN's are so pathetic now that even the AI only builds a few. And as soon as you wipe them out with appropriate countermeasures even the AI stops building them. In the last years worth of play I can only remember 1 time that I saw an AI Assassin. I've killed a couple dozen Rogues and a 1/2 dozen Ambushers. But I have not seen even 1 Thief, not 1.

So to me your argument is based on one (or a combination) of several things:
1. Play styles
2. Options used at game setup.
3. Dated and brought forth from old memories.
4. Assumption.

I'm just not seeing in my games what you say is happening in yours. Since the HN's are so pathetic I don't bother to build them now. I have AI explorers thru my territory all the time, especially with an RoP, because as I've said, the HNs are pathertic shells of what they once were.

JosEPh

 

[Arakhor]

In my game, other than monstrous amounts of siege weapons, the AI likes to build the odd Warlord Captain. I haven't seen any criminals in this game.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

That was one time true DH. But the current HN's are so pathetic now that even the AI only builds a few. And as soon as you wipe them out with appropriate countermeasures even the AI stops building them. In the last years worth of play I can only remember 1 time that I saw an AI Assassin. I've killed a couple dozen Rogues and a 1/2 dozen Ambushers. But I have not seen even 1 Thief, not 1.

So to me your argument is based on one (or a combination) of several things:
1. Play styles
2. Options used at game setup.
3. Dated and brought forth from old memories.
4. Assumption.

I'm just not seeing in my games what you say is happening in yours. Since the HN's are so pathetic I don't bother to build them now. I have AI explorers thru my territory all the time, especially with an RoP, because as I've said, the HNs are pathertic shells of what they once were.

JosEPh

In every game I have played in the last few years my recon and missionaries get killed by assassins or ambushers or Warlords or Bandit Footpads or Bandit Horsemen as soon as they get into the cultural border I have supposedly got a RoP with.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I saw 2 thieves in the game I'm playing now. Well... 4 if you count the 2 I trained. Both of the AI ones were trained by the same AI player. Interesting thing about thieves is that they are also the only unit you can use to see opponent thieves until later. But you don't want them hanging around your nation due to the crime factor so it's very cool to get them out quickly.

I'm playing Snail. On a faster game I find there's never this window of opportunity to get out and mess up your developing neighbors before canines. It also might have to do with an excellent starting city resource giving me a lot of production so I was able to get them into play faster. But as far away as my opponents are, they'd have had canines if the game speed was faster (assuming they are training dogs ok... last time I played I remember they were back to ignoring them.)


Edit:
It's interesting that this RoP thing is so concerning here to some. I learned long ago in my first few games of civ that it was a bad idea to ever let your opponents into your lands because they would pretend to be friends just so they could scout you out before building up and going to war. So whether it works or not it's still a bad idea to grant any AI an RoP. What you gain by knowing more about them is not as valuable as the protection you gain from keeping them in the dark about you.

 

[Arakhor]

In every game I have played in the last few years my recon and missionaries get killed by assassins or ambushers or Warlords or Bandit Footpads or Bandit Horsemen as soon as they get into the cultural border I have supposedly got a RoP with.

That's my experience with my solitary dog unit in my vassal's territory, no less. Bye bye, Fido.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Edit:
It's interesting that this RoP thing is so concerning here to some. I learned long ago in my first few games of civ that it was a bad idea to ever let your opponents into your lands because they would pretend to be friends just so they could scout you out before building up and going to war. So whether it works or not it's still a bad idea to grant any AI an RoP. What you gain by knowing more about them is not as valuable as the protection you gain from keeping them in the dark about you.

My experience is just the opposite. In one game I occupied the lands between Rome and Carthage. They declared war on each other but only had a RoP with me. I gave them both Open Borders and let them have at it. Neither bothered me.

How treacherous they are depends on the leader traits

 

[JosEPh_II]

So it would seem Game Set up Options plus Play styles shape the opposing views over RoP and it's relationship to HNs. Since it runs the full spectrum maybe RoP isn't broken as badly as thought or at all. And maybe it's "just about right".

And why does Toffer's Unit healing thread always seems to get these tangent discussions? Sorry Toffer.

JosEPh