bribing non-barb units

[debeest]

I've seen quite a few posts from folks who rely on diplomats for defense against AI invaders. One of the host of things I've learned from this forum is that barbarian units (and cities) can be bribed very cheaply, especially considering that they'll be NON units if they're far enough from your own cities. But my invariable experience has been that bribing any AI unit costs many hundreds of gold pieces, roughly as much as bribing a size-5 AI city with 2-5 units and 2-5 improvements in it. I decided long ago that bribing a lone enemy unit is almost never worth the money -- only when I really need that particular unit out of the way (e.g., it's in a mountain fortress I want to get past, or it's poised on the doorstep of my undefended city).

Am I missing something, or is it really only in pretty rare cases that it's worth bribing a non-barbarian enemy unit?

The AI often seems to find it worthwhile to bribe MY units, though. I'd like to see what effect that has on its bank accounts....

[finbar]

Barbarian bribe cost relates to the unit you're bribing. They're set prices, so to speak. Horsemen, from memory, cost 20-something, and so on up the scale, with chariots, archers, etc, costing more. From memory, barb Legion cost about 110 gold. I'm sure someone will remember the exact figures. Barb units become NON units if, when you bribe them, they're closer to another civ's city (or a barb city) than one of your own cities. The real value in bribing 2-movement barb units is your opportunity to chase the barb leader who is usually nearby.

------------------
Founder, ACS Pedantry Institute
Founder, ACS Gourmet Recipe Exchange
Troll & Hydey Wrangler
Mono Rules!
#33984591

[tonic]

The issues have been treated at the Scrolls of Wisdom site. finbar has covered the Barb side well (as always )- I think from memory the formula for the cost of bribing a Barb unit is something like:

(Number of shields required to build unit) * 2 + n

where
n=0 for shields =< 20
n=1 for shields =<30
n=2 for shields > 30

So a Barb Horseman would cost 41 g and a Legion 82 g.

The AI unit costs are more complicated so the given link would be worth while following up. Variables are distance of the AI unit from its capital and the size of the AI civ's coffers, among other things.

Edit: One of the best AI units to bribe is the Caravan particularly from a distant AI civ about to establish a trade route with your city. In OCC or for your SSC the extra potential science bonus is sizeable. I usually put my upper limit at about 200g although it depends on the punt you take on whether the (to be revealed) commodity is in high demand or not.
[This message has been edited by tonic (edited November 07, 2000).]

[debeest]

My question is about NON-barbarian units, units from other civilizations. My experience is that they cost hundreds of gold pieces to bribe. I consider them too expensive to bribe as a standard form of defense, but lots of people seem to do exactly that. What am I missing?

I'll reiterate my frequent observation: the Scrolls of Wisdom are wrong, wrong, wrong. The formulas are not correct and not even really close to correct.

[tonic]

You can check and test some aspects of bribing AI units yourself by just loading an appropriate game and using the cheat menu. A complete study will certainly be complex but you can get some ideas by using the Scrolls scheme as a starting point (sure I'm not surprised there are holes in the stated scheme). For starters look at

1. Distance of AI unit from its capital
2. The amount of gold the civ has in its coffers
3. Of course the shield-cost to build the unit

By varying each of these in turn you'd gradually build some picture. It would be helpful for discussion and feedback too if you could elaborate on where the Scrolls forumula are amiss.

[East Street Trader]

In general I share your experience and, as a result, rarely bribe AI units.

I can add to the exceptional cases though.

Sometimes a unit is found wandering far from home and can then be a cheap buy. (A point that may play a part in Tonic's preference for caravan heisting ).

If you have Leo's, and there is a very small backward civ around, it's antique units will be cheap and will soon turn into something more useful. In fact, in the extreme case of a civ still producing warriors in the midst of armour/howies/mobile infantry (which I've seem two or three times) you can work a variation of the recruiting station outside a barbarian city tactic. Warriors are always a cheap buy as compared to riflemen (so I am sure that Tonic is right to think that, like the bribe cost of a barb, initial unit price is part of the formula). In fact, even without Leo's the price is worth it if the units are always "none" because you can use them in the cases where you occupy choke points and have need of a second unit to double up as protection against bribery. I often find myself tying down diplos and spies that way and an antique "none" warrior will free those units up.

Warships are good tagets. No doubt that's partly because they are often far from home but can also be because a single powerful warship can decisively change the balance of power in a particular theatre. I've cheerfully paid a good four figure sum for a battleship before now - and picked up several cities to expand a tenuous beachhead as an immediate result. This is particularly true if you are a democracy, don't have Shakespeare's Theatre and the nearest coastal town to the bribe site belongs to the AI. Once bribed the ship will be a "none" and that's very valuable in such conditions. On some maps a merchant ship is worth paying a high price for in such a case.

Sometimes an antique explorer will turn up in a remote location late in the game when his ability to work well with alpines makes him a good buy.

Lastly, there are cases where the fact that the bribed ex-AI unit gets to move in the turn it's bribed (a familiar point in the context of bribing barbs of course) can be enough to decide an otherwise close battle and thereby prevent a potentially costly counter attack.

A point of technique which this thread has made me realise I have been overlooking is that if the AI's bank balance is a factor in the price then, during the period in the game when it can be done, it would pay to try to extract tribute before sweet-talking the unit. A point which probably applies in the commoner case of bribing cities too.

An oddity that I've noticed is that an approach to bribe settlers produces the most exorbitant prices of all. I've seen some four figure demands. I suspect that partisans are also a premium price. Quite appropriate, I think, that those units should be more loyal.

Bye the bye, I've speculated whether the distance of the bribing diplo/spy from the enemy capital is relevant to the price (as in the case of cities) but haven't been able to demonstrate that it is (but that may be because nearly always being so far from the target's home means that a couple of squares can't make a difference) and also whether the price advantage for a spy over a diplo and a veteran spy over a greenie (again in the case of cities) applies. Anyone know the answer?
[This message has been edited by East Street Trader (edited November 08, 2000).]

[debeest]

East Street, those are all excellent points, many of which I hadn't considered and will have to remember. But I raised this question because so many people seem to take it as a matter of course that they'll bribe any enemy unit that comes around to make trouble, relying on that as a major part of their homeland defense instead of military units. I find that the price is usually in the range of 6-10 gold per shield-cost of the unit, and you can buy your own units a lot cheaper than that. What makes it worthwhile as a standard form of defense? Come on, I know you people are out there! Fill me in!

[N35t0r]

i think the money the AI civ has also affects the cost...
Or is it only with cities?

[Ming]

Against the AI, I very seldom find it worth the money to bribe units. Since the AI cheats and has tons of money, their units can become very expensive.

But, in MP, I love bribing units that are wandering into my turf. They usually don't cost much, and I can keep an opponent from learning more about my territory.
I bribe MANY, MANY, MANY, more units in an MP game

[Mercantile]

yes Ming does, i am one of those stupid players who forgets to stack his troops until too late, either that or my units admire the prosperity of Ming or Flash and *poof* they become solid citizens

[Hawkman]

Against the AI, I typically pay about 90-100 gold for bribing a Horseman unit and about double that for Elephant and naval units; warriors are even cheaper, but I dislike their lack of mobility. Best to approach these units when they are far from home and near another civilization.

The cost may seem high to some but with Leonardo's Workshop these NON-affiliated units will promote to very effective assets, with no maintenance costs. Without LW it's not worth bribing a lot of units, but a few NON-affiliated ships (especially Frigates) are very nice to have.

[Blaupanzer]

Distance from AI capitol does figure in the bribe. Test this by running a spy around a unit and try to bribe it from different squares. (Just as with cities, the game-measured distance that counts is that to the briber, rather than to the target.) I bribe when I need defenders in rather isolated cities and the opponent sends me one, when a rail is blocked by a unit and I have howies to deliver, when the unit can be used effectively in a planned counterattack, and when it's cheap enough because it's far from home. The last criteria means I bribe all the barbs I can. The price shouldn't get in the way of the strategy.

[N35t0r]

quote: Originally posted by Blaupanzer on 11-08-2000 01:13 PM Distance from AI capitol does figure in the bribe

Hmm, and i have noticed that on round worlds, the computer can hardly recognize that the world goes on...


*runs towards his computer at home*

[tonic]

OK I've done a quick run based on the MO I mentioned above. Some preliminary conclusions:

1. There is a minimum distance from the AI's capital beyond which the gold required to bribe a particular unit remains the same (minimum). This is approximately 15 squares from the capital.

2. The bribe-amount is proportional to the gold in the civ's coffers. For the case of the minimum (when the unit is > 15 squares from its capital), it is given by the equation:

G = M*S

Where
G = gold required to bribe
S = shield cost of the unit,
and M is given by

M = 2.05 + 0.0028*C

where C is the amount of gold in the coffers.

So the least you would pay for bribing eg an AI Rifleman (40 shields) would be the same as for a Barb Rifleman when the civ has zero or close to zero gold in the coffers ie 82 g. But when the coffers are at 1000 g say, it would be 194 g.

The effect of distance I've only superficially tested. For an arbitrary treasury of 442 g:
2 squares from capital, bribing Rifleman costs 596 g
16 squares away (the minimum cost) = 132 g

The bribe cost gets greatly inflated when the civ is really rich eg the corresponding figures for a tenfold increse in the treasury (4420 g) are
2584 g, and
574 g


[This message has been edited by tonic (edited November 08, 2000).]

[East Street Trader]

Good work tonic. I am surprised it is the capital - for some reason I would have expected that distance from the home city would be the factor.

From Blaupanzer's post I take it that the number of squares is counted in a line from the spy/diplo through the target to the capital?

Because of the similarity to the position with bribing cities I'm now starting to think the discount in favour of spy over diplo and vet spy over greenie will also hold.

Confirmation that the civ's bank balance is critical to the price will have immediate practical application
It occurs to me that this knowledge increases the value of Marco Polo's and/or the value of establishing an embassy.

Increased sophistication in bribery and corruption will racket up the need for careful stacking in MP I guess.