Jaguar Warrior: Would this be balanced?

[Aeson]

ErikM,

Mathmatically 10 shield Jags are overpowered because they are the only civ which can take such a gambit and make it work (and it works a high percentage of the time for them in the situation you'd use it). If the situation is such that you don't want to use the gambit, then you don't. It's rather simple.

As for SP, the Jags aren't as powerful as they were, sure. They cost more. The Aztecs are more powerful though.

15 shields makes Jags less useful as a direct attack unit, but that was never really their strongpoint except for in very specific settings. Their strongpoint is you build a few to target an AI (2 Jags can incapacitate the first target, you need a few more for any subsequent ones), and your neighbor might as well not even exist. They won't be able to expand, won't have any terrain improvements, and you can just run their SOD around in circles until you are built up and ready to take their cities.

The cost at 15 shields isn't prohibitive at all, as you only need a handful of them to effectively destroy an AI, and adding in the Agricultural trait easily makes up for the added expenditure. Making the Aztecs an overall more powerful civ in C3C than they were in Civ/PtW.

[vmxa1]

What if your neighbor is Zulu?

[Aeson]

They are still AI... and all their free Impi can be drawn one way while you pillage another if it comes to that. The additional speed is something you have to take into account, but even if you let them attack you, paying 15 shields for 1 (+terrain) defense against 20 shields for 1 offense is good odds. Also they won't have many cause you hit so fast and they don't start with BW, so they don't get Impi as their free starting units. They'll use their first Impi as defenders for their cities giving you more time.

Then you just lead them around. Since they won't have roads, you move just as fast as they do, and unless you screw up they should never catch you.

[ErikM]

Originally posted by Aeson
Mathmatically 10 shield Jags are overpowered because they are the only civ which can take such a gambit and make it work (and it works a high percentage of the time for them in the situation you'd use it). If the situation is such that you don't want to use the gambit, then you don't. It's rather simple.

If enemy is close, than Sumerians probably can pull it off, too.

Would you conclude that Dromons are overpowered, too? With a rate of fire of 2, they are basically a super-mobile artillery, that also serves as a troop transport and an exploration unit. There is simply no other unit like that.

A mathematic measure of UU usefulness would be something like
(Expected score conditional on UU) - (Expected score without UU).

While it is difficult to calculate these expected values, with a large enough database one might get an estimate by averaging game scores for different civs. Of course Civ game score is a rather poor measurement of a true power, but it is better than nothing.

So if it is true that more than a fair share of top civ scores are obtained using Aztecs, I will readily agree that "There is something about Jags". I, however, doubt that this is the case except for very particular game settings (tiny/small Pangea maps, difficulty<=Demi).

[player1]

If Impi is:
1.2.2, cost 20
and Jaguar Warrior is:
1.1.2, cost 15

I think that extra +1hp for JW would be ok.

[Shades]

Originally posted by ErikM

If enemy is close, than Sumerians probably can pull it off, too.

Or, what if the Sumerians ARE your nearest neighbor? Poor Aztecs are gonna have a heck of a time trying to rush over what are essentially spearmen that cost 10 shields.

So if it is true that more than a fair share of top civ scores are obtained using Aztecs, I will readily agree that "There is something about Jags". I, however, doubt that this is the case except for very particular game settings (tiny/small Pangea maps, difficulty<=Demi). End of the Jag rush if you ask me.

That's the trouble with their test. It used parameters that prejudiced the test. A tiny map. I almost never play on that size map myself. The larger size maps have a great amount of effect on the success of Jag rushing. Target civs are farther away and often bad terrain can help to negate the Jaguar movement advantages. I have often seen a lot of jungle near a Aztec starting location.

[Shades]

Originally posted by player1
If Impi is:
1.2.2, cost 20
and Jaguar Warrior is:
1.1.2, cost 15

I think that extra +1hp for JW would be ok.

Adding something to the Jags sure seems necessary when you look at the cost for the Impi, doesn't it? The Jaguar Warrior simply isn't as good a value of the Impi now with the change in Jaguar costs.

[Shades]

Originally posted by Aeson

Then you just lead them around. Since they won't have roads, you move just as fast as they do, and unless you screw up they should never catch you.

Well, let's say he is a player instead. He doesn't have to catch you since he is simply trying to stop your rush. His Impi only cost 5 more shields and are quite clearly much more effective defending against your efforts. And, being more effective, the Zulus need even less troops to hold you off. Which is all he has to do for a bit since you sacrificed your expansion for a military strike based on quick successes. You would now be facing an enemy that is every bit as mobile as you, but, able to defend better then you. Advantage Zulu.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by ErikM
Would you conclude that Dromons are overpowered, too? With a rate of fire of 2, they are basically a super-mobile artillery, that also serves as a troop transport and an exploration unit. There is simply no other unit like that.

I was actually going to compare the C3C Jags to the Dromon to make my point about them being game changing (breaking in some cases) 'support' units, but didn't want to clutter the discussion any more than necessary. Dromons are very effective units, which aren't ever going to be the hammer that actually take out an AI. Jags are much the same. You can debilitate an AI with them, and then bring the hammer at your leisure.

A mathematic measure of UU usefulness would be something like
(Expected score conditional on UU) - (Expected score without UU).

Score has very little to do with the UU except in small/tiny fastest conquest games. Even then it's about 10% of score at best. In more standard settings, the best UU's are going to mean less than 5% difference in max possible score.

The mathmatics I was referencing were just how fast you could produce Jags in certain conditions, and what you would expect to face at that point.

While it is difficult to calculate these expected values, with a large enough database one might get an estimate by averaging game scores for different civs. Of course Civ game score is a rather poor measurement of a true power, but it is better than nothing.

Experience is the only good measurement. Play the Aztecs, get good with using Jags (as pillagers first and foremost), and then see if they are underpowered.

Even at 15 shields per Jag, no other civ can incapacitate their neighbors as quickly and efficiently as the Aztecs can.

So if it is true that more than a fair share of top civ scores are obtained using Aztecs, I will readily agree that "There is something about Jags". I, however, doubt that this is the case except for very particular game settings (tiny/small Pangea maps, difficulty<=Demi).

No one said otherwise. The Aztecs in Civ/PtW are the penultimate small landmass pangaea civ. Check the HOF over at Civfanatics. The Civ/PtW Aztecs weren't so hot in games that would be expected to play out longer. In C3C the Aztecs more on par with other civs on most settings. They aren't the manic civ anymore. They are balanced quite nicely.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by Shades
Well, let's say he is a player instead.

If you want to debate my points on use of the Jags in SP, keep your points dealing with SP. Otherwise your points are pointless.

As for your MP points, I'm not very familiar with MP. From a military standpoint I'd say the Aztecs have a narrow window of opportunity to hit the Zulu early on, using disruption tactics, then the Zulu would have the edge later, using much the same disruption tactics. Economically the Aztecs should always have the edge, but military certainly can disrupt economics.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by player1
If Impi is:
1.2.2, cost 20
and Jaguar Warrior is:
1.1.2, cost 15

I think that extra +1hp for JW would be ok.

In SP speed kills. Not just how fast a unit is, but how fast it can be brought to bear. Impi take a while to get to, you need to get BW first. Impi are also on the defender upgrade path, while Jags are on the attacker path.

Jags can be there very early, disrupting an AI to the point of it being irrelevent. Impi take longer to get there, but are less at risk once they do. Both now play the same role, pillaging and restricting an AI from sending out Settlers or Workers. Jags get a headstart in the business, plus they have the option of being upgraded to Swordsmen for the killing blow. Impi remain disruption or protection units through the Ancient Era, while Jags are disruption units then can be finishers.

When looking at unit stats, it's important to bear in mind the role(s) the unit will be playing. The most important role of the Jags and Impi is reliant on their movement rate, not offense or defense. Optimally, the only fighting would be to take out AI Settler/Escort pairs, where both units are only 1 attack with retreat (Archers would be preferable in this regard in most cases to either). Overall, Impi are less efficient IMO, as you shouldn't be getting attacked and they are slower to get out in the field.

[vmxa1]

Shades a rush was not really what was being talked about. It was really a pillage run and kill any targets of opportunity.