Why not Protective?

[The Snug]

I keep reading that this trait sucks. Why do ppl think this?

I used to only play with financial/philosophical leaders (and for a while only played as Lizzy), but now I've begun a series of monarch/marathon/huge pangea games where I'm playing every leader.

I gotta say, two of my most succesful games were with protective leaders. They rock! Played with Japan and after a couple of GG's was producing cg3's with fs1, and cg1 with fs3 tandems out the gate. Unkillable bastards they were. I upgraded a cg3 fs1 unit to a mg and he gained over 100 xp's defending a city. I ran out of promotions to give him. The entire world declared war on me and I was able to hold them all off with a minimal defensive force, which allowed me to play my builder style.

This trait permitted me to build to my hearts content, while the rest of the world continued to build huge suicide stacks to throw upon my impregnable defenses.

And Native America. Oh my. That's just sick. Their archers start with like 18 promotions (exaggeration), and their UU kills all melee units.

I've actually found this trait to be too overpowered. For builder ppl like me, this trait makes the game easy. In most games I struggle protecting myself bcz I just won't stop building buildings, but this trait makes it so I don't have to build an army. But, lol, with this trait, war became so fun I actually did start building an army.

Hell, the two best units I've ever built came from this trait.

 

[Genv [FP]]

Because people can't grasp the concept that all the traits are situational.

 

[The Snug]

Because people can't grasp the concept that all the traits are situational.

I think it's just a matter of learning to leverage the potential power of each trait.

 

[frekk]

I think it's mainly because you're a builder ... and that means you need good defence. For an aggressive player, defensive capabilities generally don't help much, they're more in need of things like gold and happiness.

 

[The Snug]

I think it's mainly because you're a builder ... and that means you need good defence. For an aggressive player, defensive capabilities generally don't help much, they're more in need of things like gold and happiness.

And for the aggressive player they also need the commando promotion. See my other thread regarding this unstoppable first strike tactic.

 

[AfterShafter]

Eh, it's probably my favorite trait. Argued about it plenty of times in the forums. Have fun, and don't get Bhruic started on it

 

[frekk]

And for the aggressive player they also need the commando promotion.

Nice, but comes a little late - my critical wars (the ones that give me an unbreakable foothold) come earlier. Barrage and City Raider are the ones I use most.

 

[pxpdoo]

Simply Playstyle. However you're feeling after a hard day's work, Attack or Relax?

 

[The Snug]

Eh, it's probably my favorite trait. Argued about it plenty of times in the forums. Have fun, and don't get Bhruic started on it

Eh? What's he say about it? And is his word infallible?

 

[AfterShafter]

He just gets very up in arms about it... He's in the camp of "best defence is an offence," "pillaging makes it useless," and a few other nasty (and only situationally accurate) things about the trait. I think his playstyle just doesn't match it, and he doesn't give credit to people who play in a manner that stresses the incredible defensive strength while leveraging the notable offensive power of Drill IV (oh, he has a lots of odds calculations for drill VS combat line - but he doesn't really factor in its health saving properties or its siege resistance).

And of course I don't think his word is infallible - he thinks my favorite trait sucks Protective ain't for everyone, but with myself as the only example I really need to name for myself, some people make the trait work for its money.

 

[The Snug]

Yes, I noticed that when I stack of mixed cg3 and d4 in a city, it was impenetrable. The cg3 units took care of mismatches, and the d4 could survive siege attacks relatively unscathed for the actuay battle.

In all of the protective games I've played, I noticed that the trait permitted me to simply build to my hearts content, while the AI wasted itself on wars and paying for its armies. I simply out-teched them until I gained a significant tech lead and could walk over them (paratroopers versus cavalry armies).

I'm really rather excited to take this trait to the immortal level and see how it goes. That's the hardest part of that level, is surviving with a tiny army while trying to build. This might just enable me to do that without any problems now.

I stepped down from immortal just to try out the other civs and other traits and experience more aspects of the game (and for a more relaxed game), and really fell in love with this trait. When I first started both the NA and Japanese games I didn't really expect much from the trait and thought it would be useless, but over the course of the two games I became greatly impressed with it.

I think the Natives might be my favorite civ now.

I don't think there's a financial/protective combo, but I'd love it if there were.

 

[AfterShafter]

Yes, I noticed that when I stack of mixed cg3 and d4 in a city, it was impenetrable. The cg3 units took care of mismatches, and the d4 could survive siege attacks relatively unscathed for the actuay battle.

In all of the protective games I've played, I noticed that the trait permitted me to simply build to my hearts content, while the AI wasted itself on wars and paying for its armies. I simply out-teched them until I gained a significant tech lead and could walk over them (paratroopers versus cavalry armies).

I'm really rather excited to take this trait to the immortal level and see how it goes. That's the hardest part of that level, is surviving with a tiny army while trying to build. This might just enable me to do that without any problems now.

I stepped down from immortal just to try out the other civs and other traits and experience more aspects of the game (and for a more relaxed game), and really fell in love with this trait. When I first started both the NA and Japanese games I didn't really expect much from the trait and thought it would be useless, but over the course of the two games I became greatly impressed with it.

I think the Natives might be my favorite civ now.

I don't think there's a financial/protective combo, but I'd love it if there were.

Heh, you're walking down the exact same path I did a while ago - and I'm using Protective very successfully on Immortal as of not long ago.

Keep in mind, drill not only makes units take almost no damage VS siege, they also make units take almost no damage VS units they have an odds advantage against. Longbows with drill IV and CGI oftentimes kill multiple attacking macemen/trebs with hardly getting hurt... Stack a few of them in a city, and it gets just freaky.

And yeah, Sitting Bull has become my favorite leader. Phil is a great trait, and his uber protective game rocks... Also, look up "stasis rush" in the search function - I started a thread on the subject, and it's a great way to leverage a bit of an early game advantage against an Immortal level CPU - and Sitting Bull's UU is incredibly well suited.

Good luck in any case. Enjoy the trait - I sure as heck have! And have a good chuckle when people tell you it is underpowered.


PS - Wang Kon is Financial protective - one of my favorite leaders. His UB is a university that produces 10% more tech (ideal for turtling and teching), and his UU is a catapult with +50% vs melee (ideal for taking out melee units, one of the things heavy drill longbowmen have trouble with - he has a spectacular early-mid game resourceless army). There is no protective organized though

 

[The Snug]

Yeah, I keep hearing about the early game rushes, but it would just violate my conscience to do it. I'm an isolationist, and just let the AI pick my enemies for me.

War makes the game exciting, but I just won't start them until maybe late game when I've got an important reason to do it. Besides, I rather enjoy the 2000 year defensive wars.

I haven't got to Korea yet, they should be fun to try. Looking forward to Sumeria too, I think they're protective.

 

[killmeplease]

I like Charlemagne best of all protective leaders. Playing him my favourite strategy is to spread cities fast, build GW and lauch a couple of endless defensive wars against warmonger freaks like Monty or Shaka. Just beat their countless stacks wave after wave, receive packs of GGs and strengthen your defense.

 

[EweezE]

I think the Natives might be my favorite civ now.

I don't think there's a financial/protective combo, but I'd love it if there were.

Yes, the Natives kick a$$ all too easily . Imo Fin/Pro would be interesting, but weaker than Phi/Pro.

 

[Lone Wolf]

I don't think there's a financial/protective combo

Wang Kon.

XCL.

 

[The Almighty dF]

Prot is weak for me because the AI almost never goes for my city first. They -always- pillage.
A drill'd archer/longbowman isn't going to really help me as much as a land unit would in that case.
For that reason, I find that Aggressive is far superior. Even if you aren't a warmonger. With aggressive your unit is already a bit stronger, and now you're free to give him a speciality against whatever the enemy is tossing at you.

Maybe it's just that I always play on Noble difficulty, and the AI goes more for cities in the higher difficulties.

Personally, I think the trait should give a defensive bonus to all units when they are on their own soil.

 

[EweezE]

Prot is weak for me because the AI almost never goes for my city first. They -always- pillage.
A drill'd archer/longbowman isn't going to really help me as much as a land unit would in that case.
For that reason, I find that Aggressive is far superior. Even if you aren't a warmonger. With aggressive your unit is already a bit stronger, and now you're free to give him a speciality against whatever the enemy is tossing at you.

Maybe it's just that I always play on Noble difficulty, and the AI goes more for cities in the higher difficulties.

Personally, I think the trait should give a defensive bonus to all units when they are on their own soil.

An archer's/longbowman's place is in the city/fort or atop a hill guarding your mine, not taking care of marauding units. Leave that job up to your horse archers and mounted units. Alternatively you could throw some catapults and axemen at the pillagers, but your archers/longbowmen are defenders.

 

[Rhyshaelkan]

I wish Civ IV carried over "zones of control" from Civ II. That way your archer on top of that hill can keep units from rampaging through your turf.

While that archer could be impossible to unseat from that hill, that same archer could not attack and rid the land of raiders.

 

[The Almighty dF]

An archer's/longbowman's place is in the city/fort or atop a hill guarding your mine, not taking care of marauding units. Leave that job up to your horse archers and mounted units. Alternatively you could throw some catapults and axemen at the pillagers, but your archers/longbowmen are defenders.

Archery units are good at defending cities is my point. They're pretty useless at doing anything else.
It's just that whenever I bash Protective, people try to tell me "oh its not just for defending your city"
...Yeah. Yeah it is. The Drill 1 promotion isn't going to make an archery unit suddenly good at defending things from getting pillaged.

That's why I want to make Protective good for defense in general.