Why not Protective?

[Iranon]

Protective is a solid warmongering trait, the problem is that it doesn't allow you to do something unfair in the early game.

CRE, EXP and IMP allow a crucial speed advantage for the initial landgrab.
AGG can also translate into more land by strengthening your rush.
FIN and ORG allow more vigorous expansion without crashing your economy.
PHI allows gamebreaking gambits.
IND saves more crucial early hammers than anything else if you rely on wonders.

This leaves SPI, CHA and PRO as the only traits with no associated high-impact early strategy. The first two are universally useful and great support traits for pretty much everyone, PRO isn't.

China can dominate warfare for centuries with Cho-Ko-Nus, and Protective supports that just fine... but that really rests more on the sheer power of their UU than traits.

 

[The Almighty dF]

Protective is a solid warmongering trait, the problem is that it doesn't allow you to do something unfair in the early game.

CRE, EXP and IMP allow a crucial speed advantage for the initial landgrab.
AGG can also translate into more land by strengthening your rush.
FIN and ORG allow more vigorous expansion without crashing your economy.
PHI allows gamebreaking gambits.
IND saves more crucial early hammers than anything else if you rely on wonders.

This leaves SPI, CHA and PRO as the only traits with no associated high-impact early strategy. The first two are universally useful and great support traits for pretty much everyone, PRO isn't.

China can dominate warfare for centuries with Cho-Ko-Nus, and Protective supports that just fine... but that really rests more on the sheer power of their UU than traits.

Actually cha really helps with early expansion.
On Noble that means that with a warrior and before happiness-generating buildings, you can get your cities up to size seven.

 

[AfterShafter]

Protective is a solid warmongering trait, the problem is that it doesn't allow you to do something unfair in the early game.

Actually, while it doesn't allow you to do something "unfair" in the sense of an early rush of a bolstered economy, it does give you a notable early advantage. As a non-protective Civ, I am simply not confident using archers to defend against axemen/swordsmen/horse archers. With a protective Civ, I am quite comfortable doing this. The early advantage? Not needing to chase resources, and not being in deep trouble if I don't have them. Oftentimes I find myself overstretching to get vital resources I know I can't do without... With protective, I feel I can, and I choose prime economic and production spots ahead of horses, or even iron/copper... Not to say I won't put some effort into getting my hands on these powerful resources, but I don't feel I *have* to.

A stack of protective archers is formidable, to say the least, and cheap to produce - and prior to macemen, takes *significant* resources to deal with. Non-protective archers? Not nearly so much. I'd argue this early advantage rivals that of aggressive, at least... And when longbowmen come into the picture, protective really hits is stride.

 

[TravellingHat]

Though I'm a fan of Aggressive, I've come to value Protective. It's more versatile IMO, as you can have defenders follow the CG line, but have the bonus of Drill I; and attackers follow the Drill line and have CG I as a bonus. Thus, you're defenders are more resiliant, and your attackers are harder to dislodge.

True, those attackers won't have access to CR, but you can't have everything in life! As already mentioned, any stack should have the right mix of units, so a few CR melee, catapults etc still have their role, but fighting in the field I'd put my money on Drill, except against cavalry (damn them! must order some new spears). Those Drill attackers are also excellent at wiping up the mess left by your siege engines while taking minimal damage, and will shrug off enemy collateral.

Of course, you could play Tokugawa, and boom out your most maniacal fools-fools-I'll-destroy-them-all laugh when you reach gunpowder.

 

[The Snug]

Upgraded Samurai are the best. Make them MG's and laugh at the world.

 

[killmeplease]

played sitting bull recently and found that protective is just great trait
CR promotions can be given to siege units. anyway i use all the stack of catapults to get XP for them, more GG points and to weaken defenders to their possible minimum. catapult with cr3 is just like axeman with cr3, except for it can retreat, and has not bonus vs meelee (this is not essential because defenders are usually archers). after catapults weakened defenders, drill-promoted crossbows/longbows entering city for easy kill. and then they can effectively defend it.

castles are good for their trade bonus and espionage. full-espionage economy can be established with castles+nationalism. you have to build only a cheap castles in your commerce cities, instead of building libraries and especially universities that can take forever. strategy of beelining for engineering and then for nationalism can be used for isabella, for conquistador unit tech is somewhere near nationalism.

also castles are useful against unexpected attacks from the sea. you can bring reinforcements from the other side of the continent, while enemy bombards your walls.

 

[kniteowl]

What's so special about a little 10% bonus? I can't see it.

It's not the 10% increase in strenght it's the Promotions available after combat 1, eg- Cover, Shock Formation etc... as you require less XP then a non-agg leader.

Yes Protective can also do the same but pre-gunpowder, they're limited to only using Crossbows for those Counter Promotions as most people tend to prefer to promote Archer/Longbows down the CG line. While the Agg Leader can mix up the Counter Promotions, like Formation Spears if you're up against War Elephants, or Shock Axeman if you up against Prats or etc....

btw i dunno how crazy or desperate your game was with Shaka vs Gligamesh but I would've attack once I had Construction for Catapults and probably would've checked the Diplomacy to see if any of the 3rd Party leaders were willing to attack Gligamesh if I bribred them.

 

[SJN]

So, I have never, *ever* played a protective leader, but it seems to me that a lot of the complaints about it being weak because its advantages are only for cities is offset somewhat by forts.

Given most maps I've played on, there are choke points. It seems like you could very carefully place some forts and some defending units and suddenly the protective trait helps keep invaders from coming in and pillaging.

I know that when I've been on the defensive, I'll keep the enemy-facing sides of my border cities undeveloped. I can make use of forests or hills if that's all I've got, or forts if I have the technology. A few good defenders means they can't get into my heartland.

But again, I'm not the most experienced player... am I missing something?

 

[zenspiderz]

So, I have never, *ever* played a protective leader, but it seems to me that a lot of the complaints about it being weak because its advantages are only for cities is offset somewhat by forts.

Given most maps I've played on, there are choke points. It seems like you could very carefully place some forts and some defending units and suddenly the protective trait helps keep invaders from coming in and pillaging.

I know that when I've been on the defensive, I'll keep the enemy-facing sides of my border cities undeveloped. I can make use of forests or hills if that's all I've got, or forts if I have the technology. A few good defenders means they can't get into my heartland.

But again, I'm not the most experienced player... am I missing something?

Just so. Protective makes forts a very viable option for all sorts of tricks.

And when it comes to countering pillagers protective is no worse than any other trait, military or otherwise. This is because the best way to counter small stacks of combined arms pillagers is with massed withdrawing troops such as horse archers, knights, cavalry, gunships. Even charismatic is not better than protective for this this function as mounted troops only need 2 promos flanking 1 & 2 which is available to anyone with just a barracks and a stable.

In fact becuase of forts the smart protective player can use mounted in-territory counter attacks to kill pillagers MORE effectivley than non-protective civs by using forts guarded by protective units as safe havens for his mounted units to stage attacks from and withdraw to.

For example consider the aggressive player sending in the standard 2spear,2axe, 1 horse pillager stack into the protective domain chortling with the glee at prospect of easy plunder. But to get to the glittering towns of the heartland he must pass by a fort gaurded by 2 CG/DR promoted archers... He laughs, he sure isn't going to attack it becuase that would be suicide but he thinks the archers aren't going to attack him either becuase that would also be suicide so he just moves past it. Hit the big red button and uh oh.. 7 flanking promoted horsarchers move into the fort and then sally forth into the pillagers... Any surviving pillagers now find they can't mop up the remaining horsearchers because that would be suiciding into a protective defended fort and they are too weak to continue their pillaging mission and are obliged to retreat in disgrace...

 

[mattkaru]

Hey there..I'm terrible at lurking and not giving my two cents but I figured I'd try it for once!

I haven't played a Protective civ yet, and I still suck at the game in general and haven't progessed beyond Warlord.. I do better when I go for a culture or diplomacy win and turtle but lately I've been trying to go the more conventional "best defense is a good offense" route and it just doesn't really work for me. I get behind in tech and culture scores and it just bothers me.

So I'm going to have to try this trait out. In theory it sounds like an awesome trait for me to play. I've been changing it up a lot lately trying to get a feel for who I like.

I *can* say that I played a game recently with Hatty where I took out Isabella early because I REALLY didn't feel like dealing with her Buddhist fervor, but the other neighbor on my continent was Wang Kon. As someone already said, Wang is pro/fin and although I didn't think about it at the time, it makes much more sense to me why I was dragged into a 1000+ year war. I had to quit that game because by the time I was finished I was so behind that it wasn't worth the trouble. That could be my fault for not sending big enough stacks with the right promotions, but I'm sort of a novice at all the lingo and technical jargon. I felt like someone from the 17th century trying to understand how a TV works reading some of your posts.

I know the AI usually pillages and avoids attacking a city outright but the fort theory makes a lot of sense. I did manage to wear Wang down until he capitulated to me but it drained my treasury and all. So protective is, at least, a pain to conquer for a player whose strongest suit isn't conquering.

Looks like I finally have a reason to try Sitting Bull out! I was never enthralled by him, he seemed kind of a pushover and in most games I play he usually falls into last place around mid-game.

That's my rather long two cents!

-- Matt

 

[GooglyBoogly]

It WOULD be nice if PRO could gain some advantage in later ages to make up for their obsolete walls and castles.

My suggestion:

Fast bunkers

 

[killmeplease]

It WOULD be nice if PRO could gain some advantage in later ages to make up for their obsolete walls and castles.

My suggestion:

Fast bunkers

i think domestic general + 100% would be nice as well

 

[The Snug]

Looks like I finally have a reason to try Sitting Bull out! I was never enthralled by him, he seemed kind of a pushover and in most games I play he usually falls into last place around mid-game.

That's my rather long two cents!

-- Matt

Lol. The reason he falls behind is because he forgets that's he's protective (defensive) rather than aggressive (offensive). He does nothing but spam units until his economy crashes, and then decides to invade some technologically superior neighbor so that he can become their vassal.

 

[CHEESE!]

I personally LOVE protective. It makes it SO much easier to deal with barbs before/if you dont get the Great Wall.

 

[mattkaru]

Lol. The reason he falls behind is because he forgets that's he's protective (defensive) rather than aggressive (offensive). He does nothing but spam units until his economy crashes, and then decides to invade some technologically superior neighbor so that he can become their vassal.

I thought the AI was designed to play on the leader's traits. I mean, I've never seen any sort of REAL evidence of this, just what I've experienced and what I assume about the game's design.

Why else would Monty be a warmonger (aggressive), Hatty be a huge culture freak (creative), and Mansa be all about the techs (financial, which boosts science)?

Not to say that Protective is any less valuable to a human player, but when the AI plays it, in *my* observations, they seem to do little more than build decent-sized empires of great mediocrity when surrounded by other civs. Wang Kon usually fares better because of his financial trait but Sitting Bull, when played by the AI, just doesn't seem to live up to potential.

And I've never seen Sitting Bull in an offensive war with anyone, though I haven't played that many games with him on the map. I could be wrong though.

 

[SJN]

I thought the AI was designed to play on the leader's traits. I mean, I've never seen any sort of REAL evidence of this, just what I've experienced and what I assume about the game's design.

... but Sitting Bull, when played by the AI, just doesn't seem to live up to potential.

And I've never seen Sitting Bull in an offensive war with anyone, though I haven't played that many games with him on the map. I could be wrong though.

Again, preface this with I'm not a good player.

I played a game on a fractal map as Boudica. The Continent I was on housed a number of civs... mine, the spanish, the Babylonians and Sitting Bull's native americans. There was another civ, but Sitting Bull wiped him out. I can't remember which one (this was months ago), but I believe the wiped out civ was an agressive one.

Sitting Bull and I were on opposite sides of the continent. By the time we met half way, we were both "empires". He had dominated his side, and I had dominated mine.

I, obviously, didn't get to see how he had become so powerful. My guess is the neighboring civ went on the attack, broke on the walls of native american cities and suffered in the counter-attack.

Regardless, I found him a formidable opponent at the time.

-- SJN

 

[Stoney the I]

thanks to this thread i tried some prot leaders.

found a new love for korea: prot allows you to build less defence units to survive and fin allows you to tech well. strong combo if you play it peacefully!

 

[The Snug]

thanks to this thread i tried some prot leaders.

found a new love for korea: prot allows you to build less defence units to survive and fin allows you to tech well. strong combo if you play it peacefully!

Japan is great for warmongers. Both aggressive and protective, comes with tons of promos. Each gunpowder unit starts with c1, cg1, and d1 which allows you to pick any promotion line and start with some pretty tough units.

Natives are great for the specialist player who wants to build up his cities while being able to protect them at the same time.

 

[Arms Longfellow]

Chinese Cho Ko Nus are pretty ridiculous. In my opinion the best unique unit in the game. Usually I can skip the Axemen rush and just expand until there's no more room, with a focus on ideal production sites. Then I beeline to Machinery and conquer a huge swath of land. The best part is that you don't even need many catapults, just enough to bombard city defences, because all the collateral damage is taken care of.

 

[PieceOfMind]

No, that's living proof that Protective is a useless trait.

Archery units end up being pretty much worthless unless your city is attacked. Even with Prot, all they can do is stay in the city. So, the player has to build a lot of units that don't get the free boost the player could have gotten (unless you're playing as Tokugawa or... Who is Cha/Prot?)
In the end, your city isn't as well defended as someone who is Aggressive.

Aggressive covers:
-Marauder protection
-Medics
-Invasion forces

Protective covers:
-Archery units that will never leave the city.
-...
-...
-Oh wait, that's it.

So why not instead make a few cheap medic units and a couple of archery units? Sure, they won't start off with Drill and City Defense, but they'll still be pretty damn powerful because you've got medics with them.

It's a broken trait. Protective is in the same group as the espionage nuke, the Qin/Kublai switch, etc.

This post simply shows you are either deliberately excluding information or you are tremendously narrow-minded.

It doesn't even take me half a second to note that gunpowder units get an advantage over non-protective civs' gunpowder units.

Medics... Oh please. Surely it is not a real argument that medics are a strength attributed only to the aggressive trait? In most games I can make my first couple of warriors into medics just by killing some animals and barbarians. Since you only ever need a few medics, and since medics are not hard to get at all anyway, it's not worth mentioning in this context.

I could go on for a while about why your other two strengths of the aggressive trait are also strengths of protective (and pretty much greater strengths for protective too), but I won't right now.

cheap walls and castles are no worse than cheap barracks and drydocks. Barracks are pretty cheap anyway and you don't really need to build them in every city and drydocks hardly need be built at all except in one or two cities.

QFT



I have been a fiarly vocal supporter of the Protective trait. It really is not in need of any boost IMO.

I think much of the dislike of the PRO trait comes from the general belief that each combat promotion is better than a drill promotion. This comes from directly comparing the battle odds when giving units these promotions. The problem is you can't view battle odds when defending against units (except review the combat log afterwards which is tedious). I assure you that your infantry sitting on a hill benefits A LOT more from Drill III than combat III when facing some attackers.

The point of Drill promotions is that they considerably boost a defender's expected hit points after battle when the defender has even the most measly of defensive modifiers. If you are smart and tend to build your cities on hills, it would be near impossible for any attacker to ever take one of your cities once you reach gunpowder.

Forts are also made more useful for PRO leaders, as has been discussed a fair bit already.

Whenever units have access to the drill promotions I more often promote them along that line than the combat line. For memory, the last two or three drill promtions each put -20% collateral damage in them making them EXCELLENT invading-stack defenders (or any stack for that matter). Also, the Drill IV promotion gives a bonus against horses (I think this is right, or is it Drill III?) though I can't comment much on its uses, just as the C4's extra 10% heal in neutral land is pretty much never used either (seriously how much time do Combat IV units spend in NEUTRAL land - the healing doesn't work in friendly land).

Whoever it was who said earlier that human PRO players tend to promote along the CG line instead of Drill line, I strongly disagree. I will never promote a unit to CG until he is in a city and I intend to defend against a stack the next turn. As you might guess, this is a very rare situation except when I'm defending newly conquered cities, where it is much more useful than anything an agressive leader can offer with his mostly damaged stack of units.

It may be true that the protective trait does not give a huge advantage pre gunpowder, but that doesn't make it useless. If you only ever play games where all your deciding wars are fought before gunpowder then you either need to up the difficulty of change map settings because IMO it doesn't sound very interesting. Gunpowder units are the primary units used in war for about half of the game. Melee units are only used in the first half of the game. Aggressive might have a slight edge over protective before gunpowder, but post-gunpowder protective walks all over aggressive with two free promotions (both generally more useful to gunpowder units than combat I) intead of one.

If Protective ever got buffed I'd be rofl'ing.