MOD: Patch suggestion MOD

[alexman]

Originally posted by player1

In order to balance out increased Stl. Fighters bombard efficiency (compared to Stl. Bombers), Stl. Bombers get reduced cost of 200 shields (was 240).

This makes Stl. Fighters much more [Edit: less] cost-effective than Stl. bombers. With the new stats, two fighters are the same as one bomber for a defender of strength 10. But now they cost less [Edit: more] than half of one bomber.

With all your changes, the two units are equally effective for a defender of strength 1!

By the way, the two units should have this quantity the same to be equivalent:

(ROF/Cost)*Strength/(Strength+DefStrength)

[player1]

Originally posted by alexman
This makes Stl. Fighters much more cost-effective than Stl. bombers. With the new stats, two fighters are the same as one bomber for a defender of strength 10. But now they cost less than half of one bomber.

With all your changes, the two units are equally effective for a defender of strength 1!

By the way, the two units should have this quantity the same to be equivalent:

(ROF/Cost)*Strength/(Strength+DefStrength)

???

Stl. Fighter cost is 120 (as always).
Stl. Bomber cost is 200 (was 240).
(also has range of 8)


F-15 cost is 100 (they are UU).

[alexman]

Sorry, I meant Stl. Bombers are much more effective now.

With your new stats they are equal for a defender of strength 1. Anything more than that for the defender, and bombers are better.

[player1]

Originally posted by alexman
Sorry, I meant Stl. Bombers are much more effective now.

As it should be!

Stl. Fighters speciality is stealth lethal bombing.

Not RAW bombing power.
(leave that to bombers)

[alexman]

OK, if that's what you want, but I would never build fighters just for the lethal bombard ability. I just thought I would let you know that this statement is not true if you reduce the cost of bombers:

Originally posted by player1

On the other hand Stl. Fighters are better for bombing less then 10defsense targets.

[player1]

It depends if you need tactical bombards.

If you need Stealth lethal land bombing (to take out Carrier full of jet-fighters):
-you can use Cruise Missile
-or several Stl Fighters

And they are better in lethal land them Jets anyway (for just 20% higher cost).

[player1]

Small strike force of 4-5 Stl Fighters could be used:

-to take out 1hp units, in area covered by enemy Jets
-for racon in area covered by enemy Jets
-to terrorize obsolete units (like Pikemen)

P.S.
Same applies to Jets, exept that they have air supperiority use too.

[alexman]

I will provide you with some facts, and you can decide what to do.

Here are three tables. The original values, your MOD, and what I propose:

[B]ORIGINAL[/B]
Unit       Str  ROF  Cost Dmg(HP) Value(%Bbr)
-------------------------------------------------------
Fighter     2    1     8   0.17     16
Bomber      8    3    10   1.33    100
Jet Ftr     2    1    10   0.17     13
F-15        4    2    10   0.57     43 
St. Ftr     4    2    12   0.57     36
St. Bbr     8    3    24   1.33     42

[B]Patch Suggestion[/B]
Unit       Str  ROF  Cost Dmg(HP) Value(%Bbr)
-------------------------------------------------------
Fighter     2    2     8   0.33     31
Bomber      8    3    10   1.33    100
Jet Ftr     3    2    10   0.46     35*
F-15        5    2    10   0.67     50*
St. Ftr     5    2    12   0.67     42*
St. Bbr     8    3    20   1.33     50

[B]Proposed[/B]
Unit       Str  ROF  Cost Dmg(HP) Value(%Bbr)
-------------------------------------------------------
Fighter     2    2     8   0.33     31
Bomber      8    3    10   1.33    100
Jet Ftr     3    2    10   0.46     35
F-15        6    2    10   0.75     56*
St. Ftr     6    2    12   0.75     47*
St. Bbr     8    3    20   1.33     50

Values assume a 10-strength defender
Str = Bombard Strength
ROF = Rate of fire
Cost = shield cost / 10
Dmg = expected damage in HP
Value = Percentage of cost-effectiveness of bomber.
* = lethal land bombard

Comments:

• The stealth fighter has more upkeep than the stealth bomber but also has lethal bombard. So these two should be the same in cost-effectiveness. St.Bombers are better against battleships, St.Fighters better against Destroyers.
• The F-15 should be more cost-effective than the stealth units, exactly because it's not stealth. Also because it's a UU!
• The Jet figher should be less cost-effective than the fighter, because its attack and defense stats are much better.

[alexman]

Hey, I liked that format so much, I'll do it again for naval units!

[B]ORIGINAL[/B]
Unit       Str  ROF  Cost Dmg(HP) Value(%BB)
-------------------------------------------------------
Frigate     2    2     6   0.33    125
Man-O-War   3    2     6   0.46    173
Ironclad    4    2     8   0.57    161
Destroyer   6    2    12   0.75    141 
Battleship  8    2    20   0.89    100
AEGIS       4    2    16   0.57     80

[B]Patch Suggestion[/B]
Unit       Str  ROF  Cost Dmg(HP) Value(%BB)
-------------------------------------------------------
Frigate     2    2     6   0.33     92
Man-O-War   3    2     6   0.46    127
Ironclad    4    2    10   0.57     94
Destroyer   6    2    12   0.75    103 
Battleship  8    3    22   1.33    100
AEGIS       4    3    16   0.86     88

[B]AU[/B]
Unit       Str  ROF  Cost Dmg(HP) Value(%BB)
-------------------------------------------------------
Frigate     2    2     6   0.33     83
Man-O-War   3    2     6   0.46    115
Ironclad    4    2     9   0.57     95
Destroyer   6    2    12   0.75     94 
Battleship  8    3    20   1.33    100
AEGIS       4    3    16   0.86     80

Values assume a 10-strength defender
Value = percentage of cost-effectiveness of battleship

[player1]

Originally posted by alexman

Comments:

• The stealth fighter has more upkeep than the stealth bomber but also has lethal bombard. So these two should be the same in cost-effectiveness. St.Bombers are better against battleships, St.Fighters better against Destroyers.
• The F-15 should be more cost-effective than the stealth units, exactly because it's not stealth. Also because it's a UU!

There is an eror in tables.
Fighter bombard Strenght is 2, not 3.

F-15 doesn't need to make Stl. units obsolete, since he can do one thing which stealth units can't.
And that is: Air superiority
From lethal bombard persperctive, it is better then Stl. Fighter (more cost effecive), if not used against defended positions (enemy air superiority).

Stl. Fighter is tactical bomber, and in order to make him most effective, you need to use him like that.

So bomb that Detroyer with Bombers and Stl. Bombers and then attack it with Stl. Fighter when he is low at hp.

EDIT:
And don't foget that there are rounding errers too:

City with prod. of 100 shileds would make Stl. Fighter in 2 turns, and Stl. Bomber in 3 turns. (good for bomber)

City with prod. of 120 shileds would make Stl. Fighter in 1 turns, and Stl. Bomber in 2 turns. (good for fighter)

City with prod. of 60 shileds would make Stl. Fighter in 2 turns, and Stl. Bomber in 4 turns. (good for fighter)

[*]The Jet figher should be less cost-effective than the fighter, because its attack and defense stats are much better.

Hmm, like that Tank is more cost effecvive then Modern Armor?
Not likely.
Jets make Fighters obsolete.
If they would be cost-effecive, then they would not be obsolete.

[lockstep]

Good job on balancing air units, player1!

[player1]

Version 1.33 is now posted at www.civ3.com too.

[player1]

Wow!

200 downloads for 18 days.

[player1]

Civ3: PtW and several "What if" questions.

Civ3: PtW and several "What if" questions.

This small "What if" discussion will not apply to this build of PS mod.
It's about possbile build for Civ3: PtW version.

First,
I'll assume that exept adding new units, base units are left the way they are in v1.29

Second,
Current (I assume that Firaxis is still playbalancing) version of Medivial Infantry has stats of 4/2/1. I assume that they will give it the cost of 50 (since orignal Longbowmen has cost of 40).

Now, since Longbowmen from this this MOD, has cost of 30 (becasue 40 was to much), what do you think that should be done with Med. Infantry? Since extra 20 shileds cost for 1 extra attack just doesn't seam like good trade (Knights will just take them out easlity).

Option 1, give them cost of 40. Could work.

Option 2, give them defense of 3, and keep 50 cost. Could also work. Will also make Immortals and Legionares upgarde more "normall". They would have defense of Pikemen, but would be much more expensive (anyway, nobody used Swordmen for defense, when Spermen is available).


Third,
Screenshots reveled that Guerrila have stats of 6/6/1 and that it would be chepr unit. I assume that it's unit at Infanrty tech. level, so less expensive would porbably be 70 (sice 80shields is rely not "less expensive").

Now, since our modded infantry has attack of 8, what should we do with Guerrila.

Option1, give it attack of 8, like Infantry.

Option2, give it attack of 7, but lower a cost to 60shileds. Could give more guierrila feel.


Fourth,
If Guerrila does NOT need resources, what if we give Riflemen a preq. of Saltpeter?
I could remove "no Saltpeter, I have Riflemen, but no Cavalry" problem.

Fifth,
I would not discuss now, about upgrade paths, since that could be lot of confising with new UUs (for example, it would be bad for gameplay if that Galic Swordsmen uprades to slow Med. Inanfty, and upgrade to some mounted unit would look more resonable).


As I said, all this is one big "what if" discussion. But I would be interested in other optinions.

.

P.S.
Anyway, I would probably play base PtW for some time (often in MP, and a little bit in SP), before I make PtW version of my MOD anyway.

[lockstep]

Just a small note: If Civfanatics is right about PtW's Viking UU, the 'Berserk' a 6/2/1 amphibious unit that replaces the Longbowman (http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3infocenter.shtml#ptw), I take that as a hint that the Longbowman's stats have been tweaked (e.g. to 5/1/1). Otherwise, the Berserk would be a UU with an ADM bonus of +3, instead of +2 like the Numidian Mercenary (the Carhaginian replacement of the Spearman) or +1 like nearly every other UU.