Planning thread for the Blitz Mod: Conquests Version

[korn469]

Techwins,

I don't have that much time tonight so I'll keep this short. How does this work for you

Pikemen 3.4.1 35 (zrb: 4)
Longbowmen 6.1.1 40 (zoc, zrb:2)
Medieval Infantry 7.3.1 50 iron
Knights 8.2.2 75 horses, iron (radar)

[TechWins]

How about...

Pikemen 3.4.1 40 (zrb: 4)
Longbowmen 6.1.1 45 (zoc, zrb:2)
Medieval Infantry 5.4.1 60 iron
Knights 7.2.2 70 horses, iron (radar)

I changed my mind on some things after your last post. I got to thinking that having 3 units with similar values doesn't make for much strategy.

With these values you essentially have a cheap defence unit and a cheap attacking unit. Then you have an expensive defence unit and an expensive attacking unit. Medieval Infantry becomes more of a true infantry unit with it's balanced att/def. Medieval Infantry aren't given a zrb since that would make them too strong imo.

Also, it gives Civs with power (shield production and resources) a chance to use the better units and gain an extra advantage. However, it still doesn't leave the less fortunate Civs out in the dark with the Pikemen and Longbowmen available to all Civs.

Here are my proposed stats for Ancient Cavalry and Crusaders:

Ancient Cavalry 4.2.2 40 (radar)
Crusaders 8.3.1 70 *or* 7.3.1 70 *or* 8.2.1 70

[korn469]

looks good, and I like your idea about making MedInf more of an all around unit, so if we do that lets make the pikeman slightly more specialized as a defender

Pikemen 2.4.1 35 (zrb: 4)
Longbowmen 7.1.1 40 (zoc, zrb:2)
Medieval Infantry 6.4.1 50 iron
Knights 7.2.2 70 horses, iron (radar) {though i still like a 8.2.2 75 knight, but 7.2.2 70 works for me as well)

remember, a 4 defense unit has the following values

6 fortified or in a town
8 fortified and in a town or unfortified in a city
10 fortified and in a city

that's why i'm giving them slightly more offensive power than you are

[korn469]

Ancient Cav look good, and I like
8.3.1 for crusaders

though really does cost have anything to do with them since they're generated at a specific rate? if not, and it only matters when you disband them, i think maybe we should make Ancient Cav cost 25 shields and crusaders cost 40 to close any loopholes

[korn469]

here's what I'm thinking for age 2.5

musketmen 10.8.1 60/1 saltpeter (zrb:8)
cavalry 16.3.3 90/1 horses, saltpeter (radar)
riflemen 12.12.1 80/1 (zrb:12)

If it looks like a huge offensive window opens with the arrival of cavalry it's only partially true. here's what a musketman's defense would look like.

12 fortified or in a town
16 fortifed and in a town or unfortifed in a city
20 fortified and in a city

also zrb would give a fortified musketman in a town better than 50/50 odds of winning against a cavalry of similar experience (reg, vet, elite), while cavalry cost 50% more

the arrival of the rifleman would bring a far more defensive era, especially since the first few metros would pop up during this era

18 fortified or in a town
24 fortified in a town or unfortified in a city
30 fortified in a city or unfortified in a metro
36 fortified in a metro

[TechWins]

Lets go with what you said on these values except I think raise the cost of Medeival Infantry and Longbowmen by 5...

Pikemen 2.4.1 35 (zrb: 4)
Longbowmen 7.1.1 45 (zoc, zrb:2)
Medieval Infantry 6.4.1 55 iron
Knights 8.2.2 75 horses, iron (radar)

For age 2.5...

musketmen 6.6.1 70/1 saltpeter (zrb:6)
They still can come fairly early in the middle ages, so any higher of a defence would cause too much of a defensive stand still.

cavalry 14.4.3 90/1 horses, saltpeter (radar)
I don't like the idea of a Knight being able to come through and utterly destroy Cavalry with a 3 defence, so I say up it to a 4.

riflemen 10.10.1 80/1 (zrb:10)
Has a slightly less of an advantage on defence at 14/10 against a Cavalry than 16/12.

though really does cost have anything to do with them since they're generated at a specific rate? if not, and it only matters when you disband them

No, as far as I know it doesn't matter and would only relate to when you disband a unit. Whatever values you choose is fine by me.

[korn469]

TechWins,

I'm not sure if I'm going to leave tonight or tommorrow morning to spend thanksgiving with my family, but it may be friday or saturday before I respond to any new posts. I hope you have a happy thanksgiving.

your middle age unit stats look good.

i like cavalry's and riflemen's stats, though I think that musketmen are too weak and too expensive. cavalry would have something of a field day with them at 6.6.1 70/1

so i think they should be 7.7.1 60/1, also thinking about things some, i think that both musketmen and riflemen should have a very slight offensive advantage so that in the midst of an ongoing offensive, their would be some incentive to attack. With even attack and defense along with zero range bombard, stacks of defenders would have better than 50/50 odds of fending off an attack (ir their experience was the same). That is before any defense bonuses, which would make any offense without cavalry or cannons basically impossible (or at least very very bloody). So here's what i'm recommending.

musketmen 8.7.1 60/1 saltpeter (zrb:7)
cavalry 14.4.3 90/1 horses, saltpeter (radar)
riflemen 12.10.1 80/1 (zrb:10)

so here's a quick recap of what we've decided on

Warriors 2.1.1 15
Spearmen 2.2.1 20 (zrb: 2)
Archers 3.1.1 20 (zoc, zrb: 1)
Swordsmen 4.2.1 30 iron
Chariots 2.1.2 25 horses (wheeled, radar)
Horsemen 3.1.2 35 horses (radar)
Pikemen 2.4.1 35 (zrb: 4)
Longbowmen 7.1.1 45 (zoc, zrb:2)
Medieval Infantry 6.4.1 55 iron
Knights 8.2.2 75 horses, iron (radar)

Ancient Cavalry 4.2.2 25 (radar)
Crusaders 8.3.1 40

the upgrade chain looks like this

Warriors --> Swordsmen --> Medieval Infantry -->?
Spearmen --> Pikemen --> Musketmen --> Riflemen
Archers --> Longbowmen -->?
Chariots --> Horsemen --> Knights --> Cavalry

So should MI and Longbows upgrade to Musketmen or Riflemen? I'm leaning towards Musketmen, but I'd like to get your imput on this.

Also do you still support fifty shield three population settlers? I do.

Well have a wonderful holiday and we'll work more on this soon.

one other thing.

Industrial Age
Infantry (rubber??) --> Tow Infantry
Marine (rubber) -->?
Paratrooper (rubber, oil?) --> Modern Paratrooper
Tank (iron, oil) --> Modern Armor


Modern age
Tow Infantry (no required resources)
Mech Infantry (oil, rubber, aluminum)
Modern Armor (oil, iron, aluminum)
Modern Paratrooper (rubber, oil?)

[TechWins]

I hope you had a great Thanksgiving weekend with your family.

>>musketmen 8.7.1 60/1 saltpeter (zrb:7)
cavalry 14.4.3 90/1 horses, saltpeter (radar)
riflemen 12.10.1 80/1 (zrb:10)<<

I would have to say keep musketmen as
7.7.1 60 saltpeter (zrb: 7) and keep riflemen as
10.10.1 80 (zrb:10)

I don't think the primarily defensive of units should have too high of a attack rating, because it my deter Civs away from even considering building strictly attack units (i.e. cavalry).

I have no comment on units costing population, since I don't have much experience, if any at all, with it.

I think Medieval Infantry upgrading to Musketmen, but I think Longbowmen should be kept as upgrading to Guerillas.

No, I no longer support 50/3 settlers. The reason I initially liked the idea was to prevent the AI from buidling so many cities. However, I realized the AI is still going to try building just as many cities but be penalized even more. I don't think the AI would be able to adapt to the change as would a human be able to. I would be fine with a 40/2 or a 50/2, though.

I have no comments on the Industrial Age and Modern Age units right now.

Well, I hope to hear back from you soon to further work on the units, and possibly try to balance out the units.

Btw, have you thought about the flavor traits yet? I've developed some ideas on them that I'll post later on.

[korn469]

techwins,

i'm in the middle of finals week here, but thursday is my last day, and I'll be finished with the semester, and have some time to devote civ again :whoohoo:

talk to you then

[korn469]

Techwins,

I'm finished with my classes for the semester, I've done well deserved partying and now, back to civ

I would have to say keep musketmen as
7.7.1 60 saltpeter (zrb: 7) and keep riflemen as
10.10.1 80 (zrb:10)

I don't think the primarily defensive of units should have too high of a attack rating, because it my deter Civs away from even considering building strictly attack units

I agree that we don't want to make units that are primarily defensive in nature have strong an attack rating for the same reasons you discussed, but at the time the only two units you are going to have are either musketmen and cav, or riflemen and cav

There is no danger that an 8 attack musketman will deter anyone from building 14 attack cav. I also don't think that a 12 attack rifleman will deter players from building a 14 attack cav. Discounting the cav's higher movement and ability to retreat the cav still has a better attack rating per sheilds ratio, and it has a higher absolute attack score as well. So they will still fill the attack role better than riflemen.

The reason that I want to give them a slight offensive edge is that just by fortifying two musketmen, they have a defensive strength of 10.5 and two zero range bombardment attacks at 7 strength. So that means two riflemen would be at a disadvantage when attacking them. I want to make sure that it doesn't bog things down completely, and I want some fluidity on the battlefield. Attacking cities is a different beast altogether. Riflemen can have a defense of 30 in a metro, so stravation tactics, armies, bombardment, and superior numbers are all going to have to be part of successful assaults against those targets.

So I am still in favor of
musketmen 8.7.1 60/1 (saltpeter)
riflemen 12.10.1 80/1

I have no comment on units costing population, since I don't have much experience, if any at all, with it.

Units costing pop will slow down the later stages of the game some, but not too much, because till hospital become available many players and most of the AI's lose lots of food on cities that can't grow into metros. This also makes taking horrible losses on the battlefield actually mean something.

No, I no longer support 50/3 settlers. The reason I initially liked the idea was to prevent the AI from buidling so many cities. However, I realized the AI is still going to try building just as many cities but be penalized even more. I don't think the AI would be able to adapt to the change as would a human be able to. I would be fine with a 40/2 or a 50/2, though.

I'm still in favor of 3 pop settlers. The AI will still build many settlers, but afaik the AI only attempts to build settlers until their isn't any places left to settle. Three pop settlers slows down expansion in the form of cities and allows more expansion in the form of cultural borders, which means the AI will build less cities. The only thing is that the AI isn't good at matching up population growth rates against shield production. On a normal irrigated plains or grasslands with some shields map, a city can produce about 80 shields in the time it takes to grow from size 1 to size 4, and about 50 shields in the time it takes to grow from size 1 to size 3. I was trying to keep the shield ratio close to normal civ3, but if you worry about the AI wasting shields on settlers limited by pop making a settler cost 60/3 or even 70/3 would fix this.

I think Medieval Infantry upgrading to Musketmen, but I think Longbowmen should be kept as upgrading to Guerillas.

Guerillas are completely different from normal landunits. They are invisible, hidden nationality, leath land bombard units with a small attack and defense, and fewer hitpoints than normal. So I don't think it'd be a good idea to make longbows upgrade to guerillas.

Ok Industrial age units

Infantry: Are general purpose defenders.
16.14.1 100/1 (zrb: 14)

Marines: Are typical assault units.
24.6.1 100/1 (amphibious, zoc) rubber

Paratroopers: Are deep interdiction units.
22.10.2 130/1 (zrb:10, zoc, airdrop:8) rubber

Tanks: Are shock units.
30.8.3 160/1 (wheeled, blitz, radar) iron, oil

[korn469]

ok i've been looking over the industrial age tech tree and it's really been bothering me so i was thinking about it and here's what i came up with

combine communism and fascism into a tech called totalitarianism, that has communism, fascism, and police stations

move amphib warfare from mass production to combustion

remove motorized transport requirement from advanced flight

remove electronics from motor transport

move mass transit to radio

new optional tech after scientific method that gives museums