Apolyton University Mod (Thread II)

[Tassadar500]

It depends, Dom. I have seen longbowman in the modern age.

[alexman]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Will the AI do a free upgrade? Or will it just think, it costs the same so it's not worth upgrading? Anyone ran a test?

The AI definitely upgrades. Just watch the Celts "upgrade" their Gallic Swordsmen to Med. Infantry after they have triggered their GA!

When you see the AI not upgrading units in a barracks city, it's because it doesn't have enough extra cash, not because it doesn't want or know how to do so.

By the way, what would happen with the Russian and Ottoman UU's? We should take away one attack factor and give it back with Nationalism as well, right? (So they would really have two UU).

[Stuie]

Originally posted by alexman
By the way, what would happen with the Russian and Ottoman UU's? We should take away one attack factor and give it back with Nationalism as well, right? (So they would really have two UU).

That's what I was thinking...

Cossack 5.4.3 with Mil. Trad.
Cossack II 6.4.3 with Nationalism

Sipahi 7.3.3 w/Mil. Trad.
Sipahi II 8.3.3 w/Nationalism

Any more thoughts on ship movement? I usually play on large/huge maps, and I modded ship movement as follows, but it does have the "disappear into the FOW" effect once you get to modern navies:

First I changed the movement costs for water squares as follows:
Coast = 1
Sea = 2
Ocean = 3 - "wheeled" units cannot enter.

Then I changed all sea going vessels like this:

Galley: Move = 6 and flagged as "wheeled". I'm not a suicide galley fan.
Caravel: Move = 6
Galleon: Move = 8
Privateer: Move = 6
Frigate: Move = 8
Man-O-War: Move = 8
Ironclad: Move = 8 and "wheeled"

Everything else (post-Ironclad) retains their original movement points, but I flagged them as "treat all terrain as roads"... so once you start building a modern navy, the ships REALLY move.

[Dominae]

There's no need to create to new UUs for the Russians and Ottomans, IMO:

Cossack: 6/4/3, 80 Shields, available at Military Tradition
Sipahi: 7/3/3, 90 Shields, available at Military Tradition

Each of these civs cannot build the "Cavalry II". Does this work in the editor. I suspect so...

This makes the Russian UU a little better than it used to be. The Ottoman UU remains quite powerful.


Dominae

[alexman]

The only thing is that this way Sipahi lose some of their advantage in continuing warfare into the industrial age, and that upgrades are not quite so expensive for the Ottomans. Perhaps adding a second UU for them is actually a smaller change...

[alexman]

Stuie, doesn't the ship movement you propose make it very difficult to intercept invasion and raiding ships? (i.e. no need to have a navy for defense, only for attack)

[Dominae]

Originally posted by alexman
The only thing is that this way Sipahi lose some of their advantage in continuing warfare into the industrial age, and that upgrades are not quite so expensive for the Ottomans.

These two factors counter-balance each other, no?


Dominae

[alexman]

Sure they do. But why make two counter-balancing changes, if the unit is OK with no changes?
[Edit: no additional changes other than those we make to the generic cavalry unit, that is.]

By the way, I'm fine either way. This is a very minor detail compared to the Cavalry change we are considering.

[Dominae]

If we're going to reduce the Attack of all Cavalry, it makes sense to reduce it for Sipahi as well. Rather than introduce yet another new unit to Nationalism, it's simpler to reduce the cost of the Sipahi outright. Compare to the standard Cavalry versions:

Military Tradition 5/3/3 for 80: the Siphai gets a +2 Attack for 10 Shields. A little strong, if you ask me, but nothing crazy.

Nationalism 6/3/3 for 80: the Sipahi gets +1 Attack for 10 Shields. A little weaker, nicely counter-balancing the power of the MT version.

Alternatively we could just leave the Sipahi at 100 Shields. The Sipahi would then be great in a Cavalry beeline, but "very average" afterward. This would be fine with me, too.

Creating new units is big change...creating new UUs is worse!


Dominae

[Harovan]

There's nothing wrong with having 2 new different UUs within the lifespan of the old one. I have done this in my ByeByePtW mod (see this post) and I'm up to playtest it.

[Stuie]

I like the idea of keeping the UUs consistent with the changes to cavalry; -1 attack at Mil. Trad., full value at Nationalism.

Originally posted by alexman
Stuie, doesn't the ship movement you propose make it very difficult to intercept invasion and raiding ships? (i.e. no need to have a navy for defense, only for attack)

I tend to use some ships as "pickets" to keep back the FOW, and thus maintain some intercept ability when hostile forces appear to be gathering.

Anyway, it's definitely not perfect. I was just hoping to stimulate some further discussion of naval movement. Then again, that might be an area for which we want to wait for C3C since they supposedly focused a lot of attention on naval warfare.

[Nor Me]

Dominae, the change currently on offer looks like the most conservative of those with extra units. The only real problem with new units is dealing with the graphics. In PTW that'd mean a new folder for each scenario. 3 units is no more difficult than 1. The change you're suggesting would change Ottoman strategy more.

With this change, I would definately skip Military Tradition more often and Nationalism less. However, buying Nationalism off the AI will probaly remain expensive and the AI is very likely to get it first. The AI should gain a military advantage over a builder trying to get tech as fast as possible. That complements the disavantage oif warmongers bee-lining to MT nicely..

On the ship movement, we should definately wait and see what seafaring is like in practice. Any change increasing the base movement of ships is likely to make the trait worse.

If a seafaring AI can use suicide galleys better thean a non-seafaring human, then we lose most of the justification for the changes we've already got. Suicide galleys would no longer be such an exploit and stopping them would just make seafaring much worse. World contact may be unlikely until Printing Press anyway.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Nor Me
Dominae, the change currently on offer looks like the most conservative of those with extra units. The only real problem with new units is dealing with the graphics. In PTW that'd mean a new folder for each scenario. 3 units is no more difficult than 1. The change you're suggesting would change Ottoman strategy more.

Trying to preserve the feel of unmodded Civ3 is important both at a conceptual and a gameplay level. When a new player reads over the documentation for the AU mod, you bet it's going to be daunting to see entries for new UUs, and annoying to have to play with graphics folders just to get everything right. We want the mod to be simple and accessible.

Regardless, I'm not sure why Ottoman strategy would change that much in my version of the Cavalry proposal. The Ottomans retain a strong unit in both eras, i.e. the only 7-power Cavalry unit. I'm willing to accept the slight change in that the Ottomans could not use their Sipahi to continue to dominate a large chunk of the early Industrial era, as they currently do. Let's all be honest and admit that the Sipahi is a bit too powerful as is. It could therefore use some balancing.

Ottoman "strategy" will not be affected, only its relative potency. Again, I would much rather do this by playing with ADM values and cost than creating a new unit.


Dominae

[alexman]

The documentation doesn't have to say anything other than "Removed one attack factor from all cavalry-level units. This attack factor is restored at Nationalism with a free upgrade." or something like that. Simpler to explain and remember than having special cases for the UU, no?

[Dominae]

I admit, that does sound good.

We would use the same art for both Military Tradition and Nationalism units, right?

Now, what about naming? We need some adjective that gets the idea across that the Nationalism Cavalry are just slightly better. 'Advanced'

'Advanced'
'Superior'
'Zealous'

?


Dominae