AU mod: The Enkidu Warrior

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by joncnunn

I believe the whole point of the AU mod is to make things easier for the AI and not the human.

Not entirely. Changes that work slightly in the human's favor can be acceptable if they make the strategic choices the human faces enough more interesting to outweigh the change in balance. Giving Sumeria the ability to build warriors would bring back the question of whether to build offensive forces from scratch or to build and upgrade warriors, a choice that's missing from Sumeria in the stock rules. It would also, somewhat in connection with that, add the interesting question of how to balance Enkidus against warriors when building MPs, since they would cost the same but Enkidus would be better defensively while warriors would be upgradable to offensive units. I'm not ready to take sides on the proposal yet, but I don't dismiss it as clearly incompatible with the goals of the AU Mod.

[alexman]

I think that the proper way to fix the Enkidu is as stated in the initial post of this thread. It balances this strong unit without really weakening the civ, it adds choice to the human, and it helps the AI compared to stock.

The current change was voted in because it was more conservative.

[pvzh]

*reads initial post*

Ups.. I toataly forgot about it. I remember reading discussion about the flag change

[Dominae]

Originally posted by alexman
It balances this strong unit without really weakening the civ

It balances the unit both the human and the AI, but strengthens the civ for the human player only. So essentially the AI gets nothing out of the deal: its Enkidus cost more to build, and it's forced to build Warriors that may or may not be upgraded.

...it adds choice to the human...

True enough, but as I stated above I doubt Sumeria really needs all that much help.

In stock, the Enkidu can be used in two ways: as a deterrent, or as an offensive tool. It does both these things extremely well (better than the Greeks, for sure, and they're not even Agricultural). The price to pay for being offensive is a lost GA, but the gains are potentially drastic. Does Sumeria have game after Enkidus? Well, unlike the Zulus that have absolutely nothing to back up their Impi jump-start, Sumeria can benefit from cheap Libraries (and all the other Scientific freebies) and continue exploiting the Agricultural trait. So I'm not really seeing how Sumeria's available strategic options are so narrow that it needs the Warrior-Swordsmen upgrade. Nor do I see how it's available strategies options are not powerful enough as is.

Personally I do not feel that removing an ability granted by a standard unit in order to balance a UU is such a bad thing (like the Hittites, for instance).

...and it helps the AI compared to stock.

How?

The current change was voted in because it was more conservative.

And because the stock version is not so broken (some would argue it's not broken at all) that it requires attention.

[Modo44]

I have succesfully used the Enkidus to form lines of defenders, whereas with any other civ, I'd have to make offensive units to keep the enemy at bay. This unit (along with the Swiss Mercenary) is the much needed exception to the rule, that offense is more efficient than defense in Civ3. If it would become more expensive, that strategic possibility would cease to exist. Granted it's only a choice when selecting the civ to play, but it's still an interesting one.

And, of course, the mass upgrade strategy is used only by humans, so taking it away doesn't hurt the AI at all. Even better, the AI is forced to build the better unit (Enkidu: 1/2/1, not Warrior: 1/1/1), while paying the same shield price. I think the current fix the AU Mod has (adding AI offense flag to the Enkidu) was the right way to go here. Why change it again?

[alexman]

Originally posted by Dominae
It balances the unit both the human and the AI, but strengthens the civ for the human player only. So essentially the AI gets nothing out of the deal: its Enkidus cost more to build, and it's forced to build Warriors that may or may not be upgraded.

First of all, I don't agree that a human Sumerian civ is strengthened if you increase the cost of its UU by 50%. With the increased upgrade costs in C3C, the Swordsman upgrade path is not going to make up for it, IMO.

The AI does get a benefit compared to stock and compared to the human, because they get to start with a bunch of Warriors in the beginning of the game at the higher levels. In stock, Sumerians start with only defensive units, because they don't have an offensive unit.

Compared to the current version of the AU mod, the AI gets an advantage because it will not be building offensive units with a strength of 1 that cannot be upgraded until the Middle Ages.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by alexman
Compared to the current version of the AU mod, the AI gets an advantage because it will not be building offensive units with a strength of 1 that cannot be upgraded until the Middle Ages.

Only problem is, the AI seldom upgrades units at all. Even in relatively peaceful games, you can often spot Spearmen sitting in some cities long into the Industrial Age. This means, that the upgrade path is of much less importance in helping the AI. Actually, it seems that losing obsolete units is the way the AI uses to get better ones (making upkeep available again). Yes, I know this sounds silly, but it's just observation of how the AI acts.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by alexman
First of all, I don't agree that a human Sumerian civ is strengthened if you increase the cost of its UU by 50%. With the increased upgrade costs in C3C, the Swordsman upgrade path is not going to make up for it, IMO.

That's why I said that the unit is balanced (i.e. weakened) for both civs, but that the added advantage is only really available to the human player. We may have very different playstyles, but the Swordsmen upgrade is much more important in my games that the cost of early explorers (which I only build a couple of, anyway). Contrast this to the AI that does not make use of the upgrade chain all that effectively, and that does take into account upgrades when selecting units to build. I would rather the AI be stuck with a bunch of Enkidus if it lacks Iron than a smattering of both Warriors and Enkidus.

The AI does get a benefit compared to stock and compared to the human, because they get to start with a bunch of Warriors in the beginning of the game at the higher levels. In stock, Sumerians start with only defensive units, because they don't have an offensive unit.

Compared to the current version of the AU mod, the AI gets an advantage because it will not be building offensive units with a strength of 1 that cannot be upgraded until the Middle Ages.

I agree that adding the Offensive flag to Enkidus was a good idea. But I'm still not convinced that it's better for the AI to have 10 Warriors and 10 Enkidus rather than 20 Enkidus until the Ancient era, given that both cost the same amount but one is strictly superior to the other (some of the Warriors in the first case would actually be Archers, I presume). Again, the only reason Warriors are preferable is if the AI upgrades them, and so my question is: does it do so reliably? In my experience, definitely not.

[alexman]

The AI does fine in upgrading its units, as long as it has the cash, as long as it has the resources, and as long as it has a barracks within range. Trade your cash to an AI with Iron and Warriors, and watch them burn it all for upgrades.

[nbarclay]

At cost 15, the Enkidu would be almost completely uninteresting as a UU in SP play. The "pillaging Enkidu" strategy would lose half its cost advantage over using spearmen as pillagers, and that's before factoring in the fact that pillaging Enkidus are all but certain to trigger an early GA. And Enkidus really don't have that much value for humans in SP play other than through their pillaging potential. They offer no capabilities that standard units don't have; just a cost savings. How many humans (especially among the more highly skilled players) use enough spearmen in SP play for a savings of five shields per spearman-equivalent unit to make much difference?

[alexman]

The Sumerians don't need an uber UU. They are Agricultural. It's more than enough that you have a UU to trigger your GA, and thay it's better than the unit it replaces.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by alexman
Compared to the current version of the AU mod, the AI gets an advantage because it will not be building offensive units with a strength of 1 that cannot be upgraded until the Middle Ages.

1. Stock+Iron: AI builds Swordsmen and Enkidus until Medieval era
2. Stock+Nothing: AI builds Enkidus until Medieval era
3. Proposal+Iron: AI builds some Warriors, but mostly Swordsmen and Enkidus until Medieval era
4. Proposal+Nothing: AI builds (expensive) Enkidus and Warriors until Medieval era

IMO, both 1 and 2 are better than 3 and 4, respectively.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by alexman
The Sumerians don't need an uber UU. They are Agricultural. It's more than enough that you have a UU to trigger your GA, and thay it's better than the unit it replaces.

So why give them the Swordsmen upgrade path? It seems you just want to raise the cost 15 Shields (a big point of contention during the beta, I might add - still not sure how I feel about it...you know, bad memories and all).

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by alexman
The Sumerians don't need an uber UU. They are Agricultural. It's more than enough that you have a UU to trigger your GA, and thay it's better than the unit it replaces.

I don't view it as the AU's Mod's proper role to go around saying, "This civ doesn't need an uber UU, so weakening its UU is fine," or, "That civ needs a good UU, so lets make its UU better." Once we go down that path, the feel of the stock game goes completely out the window - not to mention all the time we'd have to spend trying to choose which civs "ought" to have how powerful UUs.

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Dominae

1. Stock+Iron: AI builds Swordsmen and Enkidus until Medieval era
2. Stock+Nothing: AI builds Enkidus until Medieval era
3. Proposal+Iron: AI builds some Warriors, but mostly Swordsmen and Enkidus until Medieval era
4. Proposal+Nothing: AI builds (expensive) Enkidus and Warriors until Medieval era

Aren't you forgetting about archers???