AU mod: Balancing Naval Bombardment

[Catt]

Originally posted by alexman
By the way, AI target selection is weird, to say the least: the first targets are cities with ships, then cities or tiles with Workers, then defended cities, and then cities or tiles with bombard units (!). Resources are never targeted unless they are under something else (like a worker or catapult).

Yes, I've seen this in epic games -- it is really frustrating. An AI had marines which meant I was protecting my coastal cities. I left resources totally uncovered -- several sole-source luxuries or strategics were within range, but never targeted until (i) an arty took position in the tile to bombard a naval unit, or (ii) workers entered the tile to clean pollution, and then the tile was bombarded to craters.

I absolutely refuse to place 0 A/D units on resources just to induce an attack by the AI, but watching ships and planes bombard cities defended with infantry or mech infantry (without a follow-up amphib invasion) instead of a nearby single source, unguarded rubber, oil, or luxury is maddening to no end, especially since a barracks in the city means the units are healthy next turn.

Firaxis / Breakaway / Atari - fix bombardment please!

Catt

[lockstep]

Originally posted by alexman
So what if we give Medieval Infantry Amphibious capabilities? ... The cost of Medieval Infantry would probably need to be increased (or the cost of Berzerks reduced) so that the Vikings retain their advantage.

Maybe this deserves a thread of its own ... Anyway, I'd rather make the Longbowman amphibious (and more expensive) because a) an AI without iron still would be able to do amphibious assaults and b) the Berzerk is based on the Longbowman, after all.

[Kuciwalker]

How about Archers too?

[alexman]

Somehow I missed this thread for voting.

AU mod panel, you have 24 hours:

1. Yes/No: Should the bombard defense of Coastal Fortresses be quadrupled?
2. Yes/No: If 1. results in "Yes", should the Coastal Fortress get the ability to build veteran ships?
3. Yes/No: Should battleships have their bombard strength increased to 12?

We will consider the possibility of Medieval amphibious units in another thread.

My vote:
1.Yes
2.No
3.Yes

2 gets a "No", with possible reconsideration if we mess with amphibious units.

[Stuie]

1. Yes
2. No
3. Yes

[Theseus]

1.Yes
2.No
3.Yes

[Catt]

What does increasing the defense of CF's do?

Catt

[alexman]

It makes them harder to get destroyed by naval bombardment. You need to kill a CF before being able to damage anything else in that city (units, population, or improvements) with a ship.

[Catt]

Originally posted by alexman
It makes them harder to get destroyed by naval bombardment. You need to kill a CF before being able to damage anything else in that city (units, population, or improvements) with a ship.

Sorry for my brevity with the question

What does it do (or is it expected to do) with respect to gameplay? I thought that, absent changes by Firaxis to naval bombardment targeting, it will only ever make sense for a human to build one if (i) the AI has amphib abilities and the fear of those amphib abilities induces the human to put defenders in a coastal city; and (ii) the fear induces a human to put a only one (maybe two) defenders in place, meaning a concerted AI bombardment attack against a city might eventually get to the underlying city improvements. WRT the AI, it either will induce the AI to build them more often (is this good?) or it will have no effect on the AI's decision to build them.

IOW, absent a Firaxis tweak to the bombardment targeting algorithms, does making a change to the CF have any expected gameplay changes, and are the expected gameplay changes positive? Based on the panel votes, I assume the answer is "yes" to both questions, but I'm just not divining the specifics from the thread.

Catt

[alexman]

Catt, you are correct in what you say above: if the human leaves his coastal cities empty, the AI won't bombard his cities, so there is no reason to build a CF.

There is now a reason, however, to build a CF, if the city is not empty. For example, if the AI is the Vikings, or if he has Marines, or if you need to garrison your city for military police, or if the coastal city is close to the border with the AI so you fear a ground sneak attack...

Previously, there was no reason to build a CF because it would get destroyed so easily when bombarded.

Edit: with respect to the AI, it's not clear whether the change will induce it to build CFs more often. I doubt it, but if it does, I think the AI will benefit. AI city improvements will be better protected from bombardment (especially from AI bombardment, since AI cities are defended, so they are targets of other AI bombardment).

[Catt]

Originally posted by alexman
Catt, you are correct in what you say above: if the human leaves his coastal cities empty, the AI won't bombard his cities, so there is no reason to build a CF.

There is now a reason, however, to build a CF, if the city is not empty. For example, if the AI is the Vikings, or if he has Marines, or if you need to garrison your city for MP reasons, or if the coastal city is close to the border with the AI so you fear a ground sneak attack...

Previously, there was no reason to build a CF because it would get destroyed so easily when bombarded.

Thanks!

Catt

[lockstep]

1: YES
2: NO
3: YES

Better a city improvement that may be useful on special occasions than a city improvement that is utterly useless.

[alexman]

geniemalin had a brilliant idea to strengthen coastal fortresses and weaken harbors, IMO.

If we add naval defensive strength to harbors, they will be destroyed before units in naval bombardment. Provided the defensive strength is low (like 1), this would make harbors weaker and coastal fortresses stronger at the same time!

By the way, this works even for Wonders. If we add a defensive strength to the Great Lighthouse, for example, the Wonder can be destroyed by naval bombardment. I'm not saying we should do that, but it's kinda cool, and adds another reason to have a strong navy.