Why Are Praets The Best?

[ori]

Moderator Action: Discuss the topic - not each other
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[PieceOfMind]

They don't "slightly bolster". You can start building them in the ancient era so your assault units are ready when you get siege, and they are also 25% cheaper than macemen, and they make so you can completely avoid a certain path on the tech tree (possibly making up for all economic losses, and then some, for having had researched IW).

I don't know what you mean by "equivalent". Swordsmen with city raider has 8.1, with city raider II it has 9.6. Praet with city raider has 10, with city raider 2 it has 12. And your stack is also much less vulnerable. Since you need to mix axes in with your swords usually, that reduces the average city raider value of your units to maybe 7-7.5. With Romans you can just use praets, so the average stays at near 10.

But yes, the very early rush is often the most powerful thing in the game, so on deity where teching is so difficult, in those isolated cases where economy becomes primary for any war, chariot UUs are often better, also because those civs have better economy traits. Although if you have gold in your cap you can still do the praet rush.

The poster shall remain nameless but the above fiddling with numbers was very misleading as none of it took into account the way combat actually works.

First of all, city raider promotions will absolutely never be applied to the unit itself. The ONLY promotions that ever affect the attacker directly are Combat promotions (technically I should say any bonus that is situataional is always applied to the defender). All other bonuses and promotions are added or subtracted from the bonuses to the defender. So talk about a sword having 8.1 str with the city raider promotion is plain wrong (even if you were adding 30% onto 6 it would be 7.8 not 8.1 but that doesn't matter).

As people have already said, praetorians having a high base strength relative to swords means praets can pretty much just rely on Combat promotions rather than having to use city raider promotions.

For example, a praet attacking an archer with +185% defense bonus (not unreasonable when you consider the several ways archers get defensive modifiers) will improve his chances better by picking Combat 1 over City Raider 1. In this specific situation, even Combat 2 is better than CR2. Only CR3 would have the edge over Combat 3.

I don't wish to argue for or against praets being overpowered but I do want to make sure the evidence used to support either argument is correct.

 

[FidelZandro]

No one here has said that the Romans are unbeatable, only that the Praetorian is an extremely powerful unit.

Exactly.
That's all there is to it.
You just have to deal with them.

By the way, i was thinking about this and i guess i can even appreciate the power of preats, considering the impact of the Roman legionaries in real life.
But that has nothing to do with the stats

 

[Woodreaux]

I disagree about Praets being the best unit. Modern Armor is way stronger.

 

[Joshua368]

I disagree about Praets being the best unit. Modern Armor is way stronger.

And only a few turns later if beelined properly!

 

[Tephros]

And only a few turns later if beelined properly!

lol, maybe on quick speed. Game starts... Click on Robotics... alright no more thinking about what to research.

It honestly surprises me people don't think the praet is overpowered based upon the idea that it is possible to counter them. Overpowered does not mean that they absolutely and certainly determine the game, though that would indicate a greater degree of being overpowered. Aside from rushing them before iron, what counters them? Shock axes? Shock praets are better than shock axes... And the war chariot nonsense, lol... um, build a spearman? That's a gambit rush if there ever was one. Praets are no gambit. You will rape them. It's not quite the same as saying: Hm there's England, lets destroy them before they have redcoats. At least they balanced the red coats and cossacks. There's a lot less to complain about now than there was in vanilla so that's why we get to hear about the more glaring ones all the time.

 

[AfterShafter]

And the war chariot nonsense, lol... um, build a spearman? That's a gambit rush if there ever was one. Praets are no gambit. You will rape them. It's not quite the same as saying: Hm there's England, lets destroy them before they have redcoats.

I'm just going to assume you didn't even read my case for war chariots and against Praets, because your treatment is stupidly superficial and ignoring pretty much every point I made. "Build a spearman"... That's like my saying "Oh, praets are nothing - pillage his iron." Which, I might add, war chariots make *VERY* easy.

I'm done here. Not arguing this point for the fifth time.

 

[Tephros]

I'm just going to assume you didn't even read my case for war chariots and against Praets, because your treatment is stupidly superficial and ignoring pretty much every point I made. "Build a spearman"... That's like my saying "Oh, praets are nothing - pillage his iron." Which, I might add, war chariots make *VERY* easy.

I'm done here. Not arguing this point for the fifth time.

Actually I did read your posts but did not find them convincing. I will counter them now.

The spearman comment was mean to illustrate that there's something in the era of chariots that totally puts them down. There is no such thing for praetorians. Pillaging his iron may or may not be easy depending upon if it's right on your border or not. If you're trying to rush them before they can hook up copper you're not going to have a lot of time to look around and make sure you know where his metal is. I certainly know that a war chariot rush can be done, but it's a gambit even as far as rushes go. Praetorians are not a gambit. If you have them. They will conquer. If you don't have them, you're no better or worse off than your neighbors.

Of course people use them on high difficulties - in conjunction with other units. Mainly catapults which, when you have them, make the base strength of the swordsman type unit way less important since the siege units do your heavy lifting for getting cities ready to be taken.

I suppose if you love throwing away hammers it makes no difference. Swordsmen are fine against archers but will occassionally lose. Praetorians much less often. But if they have an axe in there a CR axeman is actually going to do better than a swordsman. However, a CR praetorian is going to be significantly better than either. No matter what classical era unit you're facing, the praetorian can handle it and you won't have to sacrifice as many catapults and are likely to lose fewer hammers by having to sac units including the praetorian. Not to mention the higher likelihood your veterans will survive.

Alternatively, you can go against somewhat mature cities much better even without siege.

The AI loves to beeline feudalism and if you're playing at a challenging difficulty for you they will likely have it before you have macemen or trebuchets. Praets are as good versus longbows as maces, yet cost less than maces. Swords are just pathetic versus longbows. Your catapults are going to have a 1-10% chance of withdrawing versus longbows, and a significant chance of not doing damage to the strongest defender. This gets expensive.

This arrangement is why Praets don't shine, and don't do anything special on deity - because, take away their pre-cat rushing ability and all they are is a stronger unit where a stronger unit isn't needed.

A stronger unit isn't needed when you're about to get the technologies that make a large war-driven empire expansion less economically damaging (code of laws, currency)? Actually saying a stronger unit isn't needed at any time sounds ridiculous, except maybe a stronger mechanized infantry since a domination game would usually end before any civ had them.

As for Levgre, same deal... Why are Praets *so* wonderful if all they really do is slightly bolster an already effective strategy in medieval war? Swordsmen, which are cheaper and have an equivalent 6.6 str attacking a city get the job done when paired with cats.

You should know that's not how CR promos work - they're applied to the defender. And yes, a 33% higher base strength is huge. Whether cats and swords get the job done depends upon how many cities are on hills, how many shock axes are around, etc. If the city has axes your swords will be worse than a CR axe, but then your CR axe would get owned by the archers. Praetorian will do better.

Iron more common than horses... Maybe - but it's much cheaper to see if you have horses than iron. As in, if I decide, on Immortal or Deity that I'm going to Praet Rush or something, I have to commit myself to relatively a lot of teching that may not help me out in that absolutely game-critical early game... Unless you're inundated with jungle OR want swordsmen fast, you don't need iron working right off the bat generally. On the other hand, the wheel and animal husbandry are two basic low level techs that help you establish your early empire. Going for them early is very rarely a waste - it's something you were going to do anyways.

On immortal you need metal or the great wall. Chariots will just die when the barbarian spears come along. Yes, even the "War" Chariots. Sure you can also tech archery and hope the pillagers attack your archer on the hill instead of pillaging your flat land resources. Or you can spend an archer killing the pillagers everytime they do that. I'd rather not have losses where I can avoid them. I'll tech animal husbandry early, but not before bronze working. Normally I'd take animal husbandry before ironworking, even as Rome, but if iron's not in your borders it can normally be stolen via axe warfare or settled upon. If not, just pretend you're America.

I stand by my position... Praets are a cumbersome unit, and Deity - heck, even Immortal - pretty much strips them of their sure-thing pre-cat rush ability. That being the case, their `power game`becomes being a slightly more powerful backbone to an army makeup that works well without them. They`re nice, but they're not by any means game breaking.

Pre-cat rushing isn't necessary or always desireable. While early praetorians dominate, they also allow you to continue/commence warfare even with longbows present. The window for chariot domination, in contrast, is slim unless you count on AI stupidity, much like praetorians to a lesser extent. But you can't argue against praetorians based upon AI stupidity without doing the same to chariots.

Well, here's my reasoning. Iron working, and the expensive Praets, are a huge investment in tech and hammers for a monstrous, slow moving unit that, if you don't get iron, is pretty much going to result in a *huge* and possibly unrecoverable setback on higher difficulties.

This is assuming a beeline for ironworking in order to do an ASAP rush. That's not necessary or even always desireable with maint. costs on high levels. For a conventional war, "slow-moving" is totally irrelevant. You have catapults to bring along.

I know some people play with the mindset of "Oh, didn't get iron? I'll just restart" and that artificially inflates the wonderousness of Praets a bit in my eyes.

Which is exactly the same as war chariots, if you're into reloading.

The fact is though, on higher difficulties, Praets are an extremely cumbersome and high-investement unit technologically and resource wise, and going for them pretty much leaved you trapped into either Praet Rush or slow death. And what's more, that rush isn't even guaranteed to work on Immortal +...

You mean on higher speeds, not difficulties per se, unless you're one of those anti-epic elitists. Probably are. Rushing isn't guaranteed to work anyway. You speak as if the only way to play the game or with praetorians is to rush. Unlike chariots, their counter isn't at a comparable tech level. What is their counter? Maces and crossbows I guess. A full era later.

Contrast this to the War Chariot or Immortal. These are cheap, low tech, fast units. Even on Immortal I find I can safely and relatively easily invest the time and resources required to gettings their pre-requisite techs and still be able to change tracks if I don't get horses, if I find Shaka, or something like that.

Actually researching animal husbandry and not getting horses nearby is worse than researching bronze working and not getting copper. At least you can chop forests with BW and adopt slavery. With AH you can... go build a stable for those pigs if you have them. If you have no animals, you mostly wasted your time. Yes, I know praets require IW, but we're not even talking on the same channel here because you assume praets are only an immediate-rush unit. They can be, but they don't need to be.

I also don't see how Shaka makes the difference. He has to hook up copper just like anybody else. His spears are fast... um, cool. It'd be Maya I'd be afraid of.

When I DO get them, they are fast moving, excellent pillagers,

I don't like to destroy a city I want to use myself in the near future or could have been trading with instead.

great city attackers, get reinforced much more easily than Praets (fast movement and such)

Reinforced with no defensive bonuses.

and I find their mobility, paired with their ease to get and logistical superiority to Praets makes them a just all 'round better package when things really get tough. When things aren't so tough (IE - lower difficulty), when you can get away with huge investments with unsure payoffs, when you're playing in scenarios stacked in the Praet's favour (Earth 18 civs), they do seem wonderful... But when the going gets tough, I find Praets just don't stack up.

If you have any jungle nearby at all, IW is going to boost your economy. I don't often play scenarios, especially one modeled after Earth. I only play on immortal lately. I could probably handle deity on a smaller map but only want to play on huge maps.

Let me simplify things a bit. With chariots you're counting on getting horses fast and the opponent not getting copper fast. With praets you're counting on getting iron before neighbors have machinery.

Praets are a death sentence on Deity. Too much investment even if they are a good unit.

They're a disadvantage over regular swords on deity? I'm sure.

Most people who do think they're all that and a bag of chips are playing on lower difficulties where the huge investment of Praets flies a lot better.

Have you done a quantitative study of this?

For me, the true test of something's power is how well it fares under the worst situations... And that's a test that Praets fail pretty badly in my eyes. Praet rushing on Immortal + leaves me restarting much more often than not.

Basically you don't know how to use them and you apparently are addicted to early rushes. I can say with certainty that early rushes are not necessary on huge immortal domination games. The worst situation would be not having horses or iron within reach, in which case both war chariots and praets are screwed. There's just more contingencies for war chariots.

Chariot UU rushing has a much greater success rate, in part because of their lower overhead costs, and in part because they get reinforced more quickly and can switch from a hard to a soft target a lot more easily... If you're plugging along at 1 move per turn with Praets, anywhere you go will be reinforced before you get there - with Chariots, I move from the city with four archers and three spearmen to the one with two archers in a jiffy, and I end up taking a city rather than losing a ton of units.

I'd concede this point for the most part. The best UU is the fast worker actually, but praets >> war chariots.

 

[Roller123]

Wow that is pretty convincing.

 

[Iranon]

Praetorians are good... but for how long is swordsman-driven warfare useful without catapults? I find the time window in which Praetorians are amazing considerably shorter and harder to use than the one of chariot UUs, and much less under your control (as has been said, disconnecting someone's copper before they get relevant numbers of spearmen or simply changing targets is usually not much of a problem).

Having Praetorians dominate the scene on their own pretty much requires teching to Iron Working straight away, which is a considerable gamble. I couldn't honestly recommend that on high levels with a no-reloads policy.

Their usefulness lives on for a long time. They alow you to start hostilities in what will end up being a catapult-drivne war before you get catapults. They remain relevant after you get siege support: On the defense, their high base strength means no counterattack will be truly scary. On the offense, direct attacks with them is more cost-effective than leading with catapults against lightly-defended cities.
Later on they are essentially discount macemen which isn't bad as well. But I find them attractive for their longevity, not for dominating the game reliably at a given point... the early archer killers are far better at that.



Tephros, I think you're missing one point: Checking if you can just 'take over the world muahaha' with war chariots or immortals doesn't carry a big price tag. Since Animal Husbandry is cheap and has 2 immediately visible resources, researching it straight away is often no sacrifice.
I think that's where the comments about reloading or Praetorians being a 'death sentence' come from - someone who teched Animal Husbandry immediately and found no horses for a chariot UU has lost nothing by trying, someone who teched straight to Iron Working and found no iron usually did.

I know you said it's not necessary to make good use of praetorians and I agree... but it means they come online at a time when someone with a chariot UU could have eaten two neighbours and will still have them as a noticable asset into the medieval age, albeit a lesser one than Praetorians.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Egypt starts with the wheel as well and can tech animal husbanry straight off.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Praetorians are good... but for how long is swordsman-driven warfare useful without catapults? I find the time window in which Praetorians are amazing considerably shorter and harder to use than the one of chariot UUs, and much less under your control (as has been said, disconnecting someone's copper before they get relevant numbers of spearmen or simply changing targets is usually not much of a problem).

Having Praetorians dominate the scene on their own pretty much requires teching to Iron Working straight away, which is a considerable gamble. I couldn't honestly recommend that on high levels with a no-reloads policy.

Their usefulness lives on for a long time. They alow you to start hostilities in what will end up being a catapult-drivne war before you get catapults. They remain relevant after you get siege support: On the defense, their high base strength means no counterattack will be truly scary. On the offense, direct attacks with them is more cost-effective than leading with catapults against lightly-defended cities.
Later on they are essentially discount macemen which isn't bad as well. But I find them attractive for their longevity, not for dominating the game reliably at a given point... the early archer killers are far better at that.



Tephros, I think you're missing one point: Checking if you can just 'take over the world muahaha' with war chariots or immortals doesn't carry a big price tag. Since Animal Husbandry is cheap and has 2 immediately visible resources, researching it straight away is often no sacrifice.
I think that's where the comments about reloading or Praetorians being a 'death sentence' come from - someone who teched Animal Husbandry immediately and found no horses for a chariot UU has lost nothing by trying, someone who teched straight to Iron Working and found no iron usually did.

I know you said it's not necessary to make good use of praetorians and I agree... but it means they come online at a time when someone with a chariot UU could have eaten two neighbours and will still have them as a noticable asset into the medieval age, albeit a lesser one than Praetorians.

3 actually: sheep, cow, pig. Opening with AH makes sense with these. Pigs are one of the best yields in the game and cows are really strong too. Persia and Egypt can both research it straight away, making the sacrifice to secure horses if available small indeed.

It can be pretty tough to cut copper from AIs on high speed immortal +, but it can be done, especially if it's not in their capitol's BFC (you have a window there). Note that it's possible to tell where it is located w/o bronze unless they settle smack on top of it, by looking at tile yields.

I like all the early UUs though - a stronger offensive to get more territory if boxed in sure is nice. These leaders are all good w/o rush targets too (Mongolia and their god keshiks are less so, though still not awful).

 

[Molybdeus]

Basically you don't know how to use them and you apparently are addicted to early rushes. I can say with certainty that early rushes are not necessary on huge immortal domination games.

But they are the de facto best strategy in the game. Between choosing an early rush and a late classical war of attrition, I would be hard pressed to choose the latter. The only thing in favor of later warfare is the ability team it with worker theft in the very earliest portion of the game.

 

[Earthling]

@ Molybdeus - I'm backing up Tephros' quote 100% (though I don't know about the part about anyone being addicted to rushes). Chariot rushes can be many, many times weaker on larger maps - same thing with worker steals - when the nearest cap is not 15-20 tiles away. Chariots get outdated VERY quickly and if you do succeed you're paying ridiculous maintence costs (+ still carrying barb risks, there's no way to connect the cities) pretty early on. On larger maps later classical warfare is often just as good if not better. Another thing that I think artificially confuses a lot of people is that they pack large/huge maps with extra civs - thus making it so you are closer and can rush early. But I'd encourage people who really are crazy about chariot rushes to just go to play now on a huge map with standard civs (of course higher difficulty is desired too) - just 50 or so turns in you'd see what we mean.

It's good to see a lot of people's thoughts here - differing opinions are great (for that matter I recognize of course that Egypt is good, but spears counter them like nothing does for praets)- and as far as game balance in general goes I do have another one to offer. Namely:

The game should be balanced as if all players were humans (mp) on an equal cost/mechanics footing. Within sp alone difficulty should mean almost nothing for balance. The AI is given ridiculous bonuses and all - so the game should not be balanced to play against a high level AI- it should be as if all players were equal (and then the AI bonuses adapted to this).

The main problem I have with praetorians is that they are not close to balanced between two players of equal standing - the higher level AI may have a chance because of production and tech bonuses, but that's not what the game should be balanced for. (and they are not the ideal exploit against the AI as already pointed out - Quechua rushes top that list). I'd still maintain that out of, 34 civs is it, having about 4 others like Egypt or Persia that could counter the Romans before they got rolling, while against all the rest the Romans are unbeatable, is not balance. Neither is the precept that "All the other civs should gang up on Rome anyway" a good idea in civIV - and this is certainly hopeless against the AI because they determine diplo based on religion and civics and all in the first place. Once again - who here actually thinks the Romans would be underpowered if the Praet (Legion ) was just a regular sword but with str 7?

 

[Molybdeus]

@ Molybdeus - I'm backing up Tephros' quote 100% (though I don't know about the part about anyone being addicted to rushes). Chariot rushes can be many, many times weaker on larger maps - same thing with worker steals - when the nearest cap is not 15-20 tiles away.

Unless you are isolated or playing with a smaller than normal number of civs, Chariot rushes are still very viable. Admittedly I play on large rather than huge maps, though. It would be different with huge. Specifically, your chances of getting a holy city are much lower. But warmongering with any kind of unit -even praetorians- is slightly less effective with huge maps.

Chariots get outdated VERY quickly and if you do succeed you're paying ridiculous maintence costs (+ still carrying barb risks, there's no way to connect the cities) pretty early on.

The important thing to understand is that you don't try to take over the world with a chariot rush. You simply take out your closest and most dangerous enemies and set up the empire you need to win later on. I don't intend to win the game with a chariot rush as Cyrus. I intend to get my first great general, get a couple of free workers, eliminate my closest two rivals and end up with three capitol cities.

You will usually get good territory, a holy city, and possibly a wonder or two to leverage into continued expansion. Of course the same thing is true for axe rushes, and I don't discount those. But horses are more common (on the standard map gen) than copper.