Worst Leader?

[feralminded]

They may not understand them, but they're every bit as effective as Keshiks. Keshiks get an inherent First Strike and Mobility. Numidians get free Flanking I and a CHA leader. I've never unleashed a Numidian onslaught like TMIT's notorious Keshik Tornados, but I'm very tempted now; could be fun.

If Keshiks didn't have mobility and that FS they would be tied imho. With mobility and FS the edge goes to Keshik. Regardless both are complete worth rushing HBR for if you see an enemy with no Ivory. Neither can be stopped until Feudalism which could be a LONG ways off with an HBR rush. People talk up Praets ... methinks they are missing the boat here.

 

[The Almighty dF]

I'd probably go for Saladin.
Crappy traits, crappy UU. His UB is nice, but not nice for -him-.

 

[Antilogic]

Neither can be stopped until Feudalism which could be a LONG ways off with an HBR rush. People talk up Praets ... methinks they are missing the boat here.

Bingo! It works even better against humans, because they tend to build fewer archers and more axes.

 

[assass1n]

I dont know I played with Meow Zedong and found him weak though I didn't use those CKNs so I messed up there but Expansive and Protective doesn't look great
I feel that the Chinese are weaker than Salad as atleast he has the Spiritual trait which outclasses most of the traits and the Camel Archer is a nice enough resourceless unique combined with the Madrassa giving 4 specialists without caste early in the game

 

[Tephros]

Numidian must have changed at some point. They were always 5 strength, but I think they used to have a higher base withdrawal than other horse archers. I actually used them then. In my last game as Carthage I had no situation in which they would have been as useful as a horse archer. It's nice to save a few to upgrade to cavalry later due to the free promo, though.

And I repeat, Toker sucks.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

They may not understand them, but they're every bit as effective as Keshiks. Keshiks get an inherent First Strike and Mobility. Numidians get free Flanking I and a CHA leader. I've never unleashed a Numidian onslaught like TMIT's notorious Keshik Tornados, but I'm very tempted now; could be fun.

I've been meaning to try the Numidians. Ironically one of my highest scoring games ever was a mass horse archer rush as germany (freddy), and the of the first 3 civs I fought 2 were native america and rome. That was on emperor with epic to tilt things in my favor a bit, but it was still fun. Stock horse archers are pretty stout, and with the first strike/insane mobility the keshiks are top flight. Numidians gain access to similar mobility though and while a little gimped vs archers not too terribly. Powering through the tough spear cities would probably be a little easier. I doubt they hold up to keshiks but probably are better than HAs...soon I'll know .

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Just think of Numidians as a 2 move axeman that can't get city raider but has withdrawal chances intead. Oh, and axemen don't counter them.

 

[killmeplease]

Just think of Numidians as a 2 move axeman that can't get city raider but has withdrawal chances intead. Oh, and axemen don't counter them.

but spearmen do

 

[ParadigmShifter]

It's not so bad though as with other mounted units. With shock they are better than spears I think, plus withdrawal can soften up a few. War chariots with withdrawal can soften up spears no probs.

 

[bestbrian]

It's not so bad though as with other mounted units. With shock they are better than spears I think, plus withdrawal can soften up a few. War chariots with withdrawal can soften up spears no probs.

Not only that, they are relatively cheap. If you look at TMIT's Keshik game he suffered almost 50% losses, but still won (lost something like 100 of 200 total); even though it was Monarch. And remember that Numidians get Flank I free to start, so the withdrawal (survivial) chance is better. Barracks and Stable give 5 xp to start with a CHA leader; Shock Numidians shouldn't have too much trouble with Spears. I'd be interested in seeing what TMIT has done with this. Knowing his speed, he's probably played 3 games already since his last post.

 

[Phoenician]

It seems the consensus here, from the looks of it is that Saladin is the worst leader.
A shame really, in vanilla he was the best leader along with Elizabeth.
Worst things about BTS, Saladin getting super-over-nerfed and my preciously loved Redcoats getting nerfed. Redcoats still rock, but they were so cool in vanilla--damn you churchill and your stupid traits that forced them to nerf redcoats--you should die and go to hell.

I also want to add that I think Tokugawa is getting a bad rap here. He is a solid mean-green-war-mongering machine in the hands of a player with good eco skills in which he lacks. He has an awesome Unique unit with all his units getting free promotions-I think he is a very underrated leader. I would also rank Samurais in the top 5 best UU too. Japan's starting techs are pretty good and the UB is ok.

 

[Antilogic]

but spearmen do

Go into World Builder, give yourself a Combat I/Shock Numidian, and attack a Combat I spear. Look at the odds and retreat chances. It's a little more of a tossup than you might think.

 

[feralminded]

but spearmen do

No they don't.

Numidans start with 20% withdrawal and immunity to FS, and Flanking I so effectively 30%. You have a CHA leader so you are born with 2 more promotions. C1/Shock puts your effective strength to 9.25 w/ 30% withdrawal. A base spear with C1 has an effective strength of 8.4. A C2 spear is 8.8. A C2 spear w/formation is 9.8 but your 30% withdraw probably yields higher than 50% success. Of course you still likely face 25% fortify (A Fortified spear is still only 9 strength, 9.4 with C1). A wall certainly helps but your C1/Flanking II Numidans will still be facing a 65-70% or so survival rate in this case.

So unless you are facing a pile of formation spears (I'd love to see that with an HBR rush ... you can go HBR after AH if you are really crazy about it) ... you will not be stopped by spears. Also archers really don't slow you down much, specially if you bring a couple of Flanking II/C1 Numidans who can very easily and safely soften them up. You will lose a couple of Numidans per city but the survivors are all promoting up at CHA speed and it isn't hard to disconnect the AI from metal with fast units like that who can withstand an attack by a spear mid-field.

They really are unstoppable until Feudalism and they carry that base flanking promotion with them when you eventually upgrade them. You do need to mix it up promotion wise but CHA gives you that flexibility.

 

[UWHabs]

Well, you need to look how bonuses are applied. Assume your C1/shock NC attacks a C1 spear:

You get 5 * 1.1 = 5.5
They get: 4 * (1 + 1 + 0.1 - 0.75) = 5.4

So yeah, a C1/shock NC will beat a C1 spear on open land, although not by much. Throw on defense bonus/fortify and the spear wins, but it's certainly a better base strength than your standard horse archer.

 

[feralminded]

Well, you need to look how bonuses are applied. Assume your C1/shock NC attacks a C1 spear:

You get 5 * 1.1 = 5.5
They get: 4 * (1 + 1 + 0.1 - 0.75) = 5.4

So yeah, a C1/shock NC will beat a C1 spear on open land, although not by much. Throw on defense bonus/fortify and the spear wins, but it's certainly a better base strength than your standard horse archer.

How is this math working? I think your numbers are incorrect here because the above implies a spear attacking any mounted unit reduces it's strength to 0.

Spear: 4 * (1) = 4
Mounted unit: 4 * (1 - 1) = 0

I maintain a C1/Shock Numidan is vs any melee: 5 * (1 + .1 + .75) = 9.25
And the C1 Spear vs any mounted is: 4 * (1 + 1+ .1) = 8.4

If that's not the case then the developers are really bad at math (i.e. morons).

 

[UWHabs]

How is this math working? I think your numbers are incorrect here because the above implies a spear attacking any mounted unit reduces it's strength to 0.

It's how combat works. Combat (ie. Combat 1, 2, etc...) bonuses are applied to whichever units hold them. Special (ie. vs Melee) are applied on the defense. If there's more bonuses for the attacker, then you divide by them.

So for a C1 spear attacking a C1/shock NC, you get:

Spear: 4 * 1.1 = 4.4
NC: bonuses are +85% (+10% C1, +75% vs Melee),-100%, so a net -15%, and thus:
5 / (1+0.15) = 4.34

So in this case, the spear gets a very slight edge in attacking.

 

[feralminded]

It's how combat works. Combat (ie. Combat 1, 2, etc...) bonuses are applied to whichever units hold them. Special (ie. vs Melee) are applied on the defense. If there's more bonuses for the attacker, then you divide by them.

So for a C1 spear attacking a C1/shock NC, you get:

Spear: 4 * 1.1 = 4.4
NC: bonuses are +85% (+10% C1, +75% vs Melee),-100%, so a net -15%, and thus:
5 / (1+0.15) = 4.34

So in this case, the spear gets a very slight edge in attacking.

Again ... by that logic a base spear attacking a stock calvary will win 100% of the time.

Spear : 4 * (1) = 4
Calvary: 15 * (1 -1) = 0

It doesn't work like that. It may not work as I described but you're definitely missing something.

 

[UWHabs]

Again ... by that logic a base spear attacking a stock calvary will win 100% of the time.

Spear : 4 * (1) = 4
Calvary: 15 * (1 -1) = 0

It doesn't work like that.

In that case, it will be:
Spear: 4 * 1 = 4
Cavalry = 15 / (1+1) = 7.5

It works out in math as the same as 4 *2 vs 15 * 1, but it's the way the game combat mechanics work. So if you have an excess of attacker bonuses, you end up dividing it off on the defender.

Strategy article about it: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=137615

 

[feralminded]

hmm ... interesting. What amazes me is that they went into floating point numbers at all when they could have easily stuck to integer math for this but I guess they didn't feel like optimizing. Their little algorithm there produces a kind of strange defense curve and doesn't retain symmetry for offense and defense which is the weirdest part. Seems inelegant but this isn't the first video game with questionable math in it that I've played.

Regardless this changes a lot of the ways I perceive some match ups, I thank you for having the patience to set me straight.

 

[UWHabs]

Yeah, it's a bit confusing. In general, it doesn't change a lot, but it does create some interesting cases. Mainly in cases like Praetorian vs archer in a city, C1 is better odds than CR1, since C1 is applied to the 8 base strength, and the CR is applied against the defender. You'd get similar cases where you have something like tank vs. anything rifleman or less, where combat will actually be very similar to CR.