MOD: Patch suggestion MOD (PtW version)

[alexman]

As you know, ancient-age units fit well in the curve:
Cost/10 = (MajorStrength - 1) + 0.5 * (MinorStrength - 1) + Movement - UU
Where UU is 1 if the unit is a UU or 0 if it's not.

Gallic swordsmen would have a cost of 35 according to this curve.

But before you change the cost of this unit, you have to be very careful not to unbalance the unit. Firaxis' playtesters chose a cost of 50 for a reason, and I suspect that the reason was that a warrior upgrade was too powerful with a lower cost Gallic Swordsman.

What about giving the Gauls both Swordsmen and Gallic Swordsmen, but with the UU in its own branch of the upgrade chain?

Warrior->Swordsman->Med. Infantry->Riflemen
Gallic Swordsman->Rifleman

That way players would have to build Gallic Swordsmen from scratch, and at cost of 40 this would not be unbalancing because they will not be able to build many of them. Otherwise, with a cost of 40 you would need just 10 warriors and 600 gold to mount a virtually invincible force (at least against the AI).

[player1]

Hmm...

My reason mainly comes from "Gallic Swordsman: Is it overpriced?" thread (PtW forum).

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?threadid=77147

Even Warpstorm (who was betatester) agrees its overpriced.


As for seperate upgarde chain, I don't know.
I never liked adding such changes.
(unique unit is suppsed to be replacement for basic unit)


Actualy, if they would have both versions of Swordsmen, then it would be better to keep old price of 50, since otherwise I doubt that anybody would build basic Swordsmen if price difference is just 10 shields.



P.S.
Hmm...
10 Warriors plus 400gp makes Persians...
10 Warriors plus 400gp makes Romans...

[Ewald]

Go for 40.

[alexman]

Originally posted by player1
Actualy, if they would have both versions of Swordsmen, then it would be better to keep old price of 50, since otherwise I doubt that anybody would build basic Swordsmen if price difference is just 10 shields.

Yes, but people would upgrade warriors. And that's the point of the UU. It's supposed to make you want to build it instead of other normal units. How often do Egyptians build horsemen, or even swordsmen for that matter?

10 Warriors plus 400gp makes Persians...
10 Warriors plus 400gp makes Romans...

Quite strong, but not invincible. Don't underestimate the power of movement. Many believe that the best UU in the game is the Mounted Warrior, despite having just 3 attack and 1 defense.

[player1]

And MWs cost 30 shields, not 40 or 50.
I would rather have 5 MWs then 3 Galic Swordsmen.

10 chariots and 200gp could make fine MW army too.


As for GS, somehow I don't think that 200gp discount could make them unbalanced, especily if you still need to pay 600gp (instead of 800).



P.S.
No I don't like weird upgarde chains.

P.P.S.
As for Egyptians, Swordsmen can be useful, especily if they are upgarded Warriors or you are battling Hoplites.

[player1]

Knight to Cavalry upgrade looks pretty cheap.

And devastating if done early in renessance age.


So what do you think about changing Cavalry cost to 90 shields?

Good or bad?


P.S.
Siphai would in that case stay with price of 100.

[player1]

In that case, I would consider keeping Cossaks with cost of 80, since their higher defense is not impressive on its own (defense is not best ability for mobile unit).


Also I would think about changing Keshik to price of 50, since comparing it to Ansar Warrior, Keshik looks much weaker.




P.S.
So sum up things planned:

Removing Explore command from Tactical Nukes (stupid bug).
Removing Airlift from Cruise Missiles

Galic Swordsmen with price of 40
Keshik with price of 50
Conquistadors with price of 50
Cavalry with price of 90
Cossaks and Shipai keep prices of 80 and 100.

If there is good reson of not doing some of these changes, speak NOW, before I make new MOD version in several days.

[player1]

Another thing.
After some consideration, I don't think anymore that Great Wall needs to give free walls anymore.
(since it already gives bonus to walled cities)
And could be overpowering in MP.

So I'll probably remove it.
What do you think?

[player1]

Version 1.14 is OUT!

Comments to changes in v1.14

Explore command removed from Tactical Nukes, since it doesn't make sense.

Observation showed that AI, despite having airlift flag, was unable to airlift Cruise Missiles. So to fix this imbalance I removed airlift flag from Cruise Missiles.

I reduced price of Galic Swordsmen to 40, since original price of 50 was too expensive for a unique unit (Mounted Warrior has just one defense point less and costs 30 shields).

When comparing Keshik and Ansar Warrior, Keshik's benefits looks much weaker. To fix that I decreased cost of Keshik to 50 shields.

In light of recent changes to some unique units, I concluded that price reduction to 60 shields is not enough to make Conquistadors worthy. That's why I now reduced their cost to 50 shields.

Knight to Cavalry upgrade looks pretty cheap considering it's benefits (+50% to offense and movement for just 10-20gp). And its devastating if done early in rennaissance age. To make this a little bit more balanced I increased cost of Cavalry to 90 shields.

Despite higher cost of Cavalry, Cossaks will keep their cost of 80 shields, since their higher defense is not much impressive on its own. Siphai would keep price of 100 shields too, since their cost is already high enough considering their benefits.

Also, after some consideration, I think that Great Wall does not need to give free walls anymore (it already gives defense bonus to walled cities). So I removed that ability.

Also, extended version with improved civilopedia and tech screen can be found here.

[Ewald]

Thank you very much! Especially for the upgraded Civilopedia and Tech Tree.

[player1]

Version 1.2 is OUT!

Comments to changes in v1.2

MOD has been made compatible with v1.21f PtW patch. This mostly includes some minor tweaks, like removing Asturias from Spanish city list or fixing explore flag for Tactical Nukes.
I also updated this readme file to include all needed data, so you don't need to refer to non-ptw readme anymore.

Note: Since BIX format is same for both 1.14f and 1.21f PtW patch, you could use this MOD with 1.14f patch too.

[alexman]

Originally posted by player1
I reduced price of Galic Swordsmen to 40, since original price of 50 was too expensive for a unique unit (Mounted Warrior has just one defense point less and costs 30 shields).

If you haven't already, take a look at an AU game played with the Celts, who's purpose was mainly to figure out if the Gallic swordsman is too poweful. Most players thought the unit was fine at 50 cost. The reason is the warrior upgrade path, and the fact that the Celts are militaristic, while Iroquois (and Persians) are not.

When comparing Keshik and Ansar Warrior, Keshik's benefits looks much weaker. To fix that I decreased cost of Keshik to 50 shields.

Again, the UU of a militaristic civ doesn't need to be as powerful, as it gets promoted more often. The extra HP and the increased retreat odds balance the weaker UU.

Knight to Cavalry upgrade looks pretty cheap considering it's benefits (+50% to offense and movement for just 10-20gp). And its devastating if done early in rennaissance age.

Reasonable, but on the other hand Military Tradition is optional, and Cavalry doesn't upgrade any more.

Also, after some consideration, I think that Great Wall does not need to give free walls anymore (it already gives defense bonus to walled cities). So I removed that ability.

This might be a concern in MP, but in MP people tend to build wonders later, so the Wonder has a shorter lifespan.

[player1]

Originally posted by alexman
If you haven't already, take a look at an AU game played with the Celts, who's purpose was mainly to figure out if the Gallic swordsman is too poweful. Most players thought the unit was fine at 50 cost. The reason is the warrior upgrade path, and the fact that the Celts are militaristic, while Iroquois (and Persians) are not.

Now the million dollar question:
If 50 cost feels almost OK, does it make 40 cost too powerful or not compared to other UUs?

I still don't think so.
(and they still don't upgrade to anything more powerful)

Originally posted by alexman
Again, the UU of a militaristic civ doesn't need to be as powerful, as it gets promoted more often. The extra HP and the increased retreat odds balance the weaker UU.

Normally, militaristic or not, your main force will consist of Veteran units. And Militarist would have slighty more elite units.

Now, I played with Monglos recently and they really looked lacking.

Now, true better movment on hills and cheaper cost was nice, but I realy feeled inferior while waging war against Chineese, Arabs or Japanese (like I did not have UU at all).

This might be a concern in MP, but in MP people tend to build wonders later, so the Wonder has a shorter lifespan.

Actually, many MP strategists advise building this Wonder as good option (since in MP Walls are usually more important) .

+100% defense bonus? Good!

Reasonable, but on the other hand Military Tradition is optional, and Cavalry doesn't upgrade any more.

Optional but still pretty powerful.
50% more attack then best defender if done eraly.

[player1]

Now, after reading several threads about this issuse and doing some testing, I think that changing Galic Swordsmen back to 50 shields maybe isn't bad idea at all.

If there is anybody here who thinks that keeping 40 shields cost is better, put your arguments here to help me with decision.

P.S.
But, in any case, Kashik and Conquistador will kepp their new price of 50 shields (since everybody agrees that they were clearly inferior with original stats).

[player1]

Hmm...

It looks that nobody minds changing back Galic Swordsmen to 50 shields.

Then it will be done soon.