AU mod: Cavalry

[alexman]

The problem:

A large proportion of Civ3 games effectively end when the human player gets Military Tradition. Cavalry not only has a movement of 3, but also an attack factor 50% better than the best defender of the time. Such a powerful unit makes it hard for the human to resist the temptation to beeline for Military Traditionand roll over his neighbors for an easy domination victory over AI, which often has been researching the upper branch of the tech tree and does not even have Gunpowder.

Proposed Solution:

Reduce Attack factor for Cavalry to 5. Create new "Improved Cavalry", available at Nationalism, with old Cavalry stats.

The way this modification works is that with the advent of Nationalism, you can "upgrade" your Cavalry to Improved Cavalry at no cost (say that nationalistic sentiment makes them more effective in battle). A nice side effect is that this change should give some incentive for the human player to research or trade for Nationalism.

Please discuss, or share your own ideas!

[Harovan]

It has been discussed and agreed. I think it is a good change. Just name the 5.3.3 unit "Light Cavalry" and leave the name "Cavalry" for the 6.3.3 unit coming with Nationalism.

[geniemalin]

I'm not sure that I see the attack rating as a problem so much as the supreme mobility. IMHO in the Cavalry era Speed 3 is too much, and I would prefer to see a 6.3.2 Cavalry (and arguably change Riders and Ansars to Speed 2 and compensate in some other way.)

Speed 3 units are much harder to counterattack, and given the 'weakness' of Cav is the low Defence rating, a slower Cav would be more 'killable' although still a powerful offensive unit.

[ZargonX]

Has it been tested how the AI handles a 0 cost upgrade?

[Dominae]

Yes, I also agree that this is a good change.

It's either nerf the Cavalry's mobility or its offensive power. IMO the definitive trait of Cavalry is its 3 movement. Therefore, in aims of keeping as close to stock as possible I think it's best to reduce its Attack to 5. The only thing we'll really notice is that it's harder to end the game at Military Tradition. And conveniently that's the goal of the change!

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Just name the 5.3.3 unit "Light Cavalry" and leave the name "Cavalry" for the 6.3.3 unit coming with Nationalism.

No! The 5/3/3 version must be 'Cavalry', and 6/3/3 one 'Improved Cavalry'.

Just kidding, I actually prefer your names.


Dominae

[MrWhereItsAt]

Either of these sounds excellent, although keeping in mind Dom's point about the 3 moves being Cav's defining attribute the reduced attack would seem the better option. However, would this mean we see ANY significant advantage to having Cav instead of Knights? Every unit I can think of has an upgrade worth doing. When you are on 3 defence, 4 is worth the upgrade. But when you are on 10 defence, the next worth it is 18 and this jump is justified IMO. Does Cav come at a time that an increase of 1 attack point conveys effectively no noticeable benefit? Admittedly, benefit from an aextra attack factor relates strongly to the defnese you come up against, but 5 attack may just not be enough to be worth it, even with 3 moves.

And what about Dom's statement about the AI not being able to put much of an effort up against 3 move units?

[Thoth]

MrWIA: I'd upgrade Knights to Light Cav even if they only had a 4 attack. The extra movement is well worth the cost to upgrade.

ZargonX: The AI would upgrade it's Gallic Swordsmen to Med Inf in PTW (IIRC this was a zero cost upgrade)

[Mountain Sage]

I was thinking about the zero-cost of the (Improved) Cavalry. Since all upgrades cost something, why not make it cheap (10 gold) but still put a cost to it. It would not break the logic behind upgrading (nothing comes for free, you get better units but you have to pay something in exchange).

[Stuie]

MS - I would keep the free upgrade so as not to hobble the AI.

I've been using this mod since we discussed it in the old AU Mod thread, and I definitely like it. My Middle Era tech tree strategy has undergone a complete revision; there are times when the beeline is still in order, but it's not a given any more.

However, I would also like to see the Military Academy modded so that it does not require a victorious army. That way, even if the weaker cavalry is not absolutely necessary to a player's strategy, there is still great incentive for researching Military Tradition... especially given the new power of armies. Thus there are decisions that have to be made regarding research strategy, instead of a set formula.

[Mountain Sage]

Originally posted by Stuie
MS - I would keep the free upgrade so as not to hobble the AI.

But will the AI then upgrade all units automatically, to the latest standard?
In one of my latest PtW game a German battleship escorted a galley and Germany declared war by landing 2 MI...

If it's possible, I would mod the game in a way that the AI MUST update all obsolete units. Then, if so, why not for free?

[alexman]

Just to clarify the AI unit upgrade situation:

The AI upgrades its units as long as they are in a city with barracks (or harbor) and there is cash available. The AI often has a lack of cash, and that's why you often see obsolete AI units. The zero-cost upgrade removes one of the obstacles for the AI to upgrade its light cavalry.

By the way, another reason to have a zero-cost cavalry upgrade is to change as little as possible. You still have your old cavalry unit, but it just doesn't get its full attack strength until Nationalism. I at least get the feeling of one unit instead of two separate ones, if that makes any sense...

[Harovan]

What will be done with Cossacks and Sipahi?

[ZargonX]

What will be done with Cossacks and Sipahi?

I would think in the case of the Sipahai, it would have to be moved back to Nationalism, and have an upgrade cost assigned to it. What that cost would be would have to be determined...

[Stuie]

In the mod I'm currently using, I changed the Sipahi and Cossack to mirror the changes to Cavalry. So I have:

Military Tradition
Cavalry 5.3.3
Cossack 5.3.3 blitz
Sipahi 7.3.3

Nationalism (free upgrades for all)
Cavalry II 6.3.3
Cossack II 6.3.3 blitz
Sipahi II 8.3.3

Both versions of the Cossack and Sipahi are flagged to started a Golden Age.

[alexman]

That's what I was thinking too.

[lockstep]

I agree that the current 6/3/3 Cavalry at Military Tradition normally means 'end of the game'. I also agree that a 5/3/3 unit available with MT is a better solution than a 6/3/2 unit, and that the 'original' Cavalry should be available with Nationalism.

OTOH - and contrary to alexman - I view the two units as distinctly separate. So I'd prefer to

a) name the 5/3/3 unit 'dragoon' rather than 'light cavalry' (IIRC, this was actually proposed by alexman),
b) increase the shield cost of cavalry to 90 (so that it would cost 30 gold to upgrade dragoons),
c) use different graphics for the dragoon, if this is feasible without complicating the use of the AU mod.

As for c), what about using the graphics of the Hussar (the UU of the 'hidden' Austrian civ) for the Dragoon? The files are stored in the directory that is also used for the curragh, destroyer etc., and so it may be possible to use them by simply referencing. And if everything else fails, it must be possible to create a new 5/3/3 'Hussar' unit available for (nearly) every civ.

[Dominae]

I'm not sure I like those ideas, lockstep.

The AU mod should not feel like a mod. The changes we make to the game should be as subtle as possible, while fulfilling the goals they were created for.

Plus, I hate the word 'Dragoon' (sounds like an effeminate dragon to me).

As for Cossacks and Sipahi, Stuie's suggestion sounds fine, except that we should name them 'Light Cossack' and 'Light Sipahi', for consistency (Sipahi MkII sounds too much like Alpha Centauri).


Dominae

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Dominae
(Sipahi MkII sounds too much like Alpha Centauri).

I was just trying to differentiate, not suggest an actual name. I'm fine with "Light" for the Mil. Trad. versions.

[Backpack]

Originally posted by Stuie
In the mod I'm currently using, I changed the Sipahi and Cossack to mirror the changes to Cavalry. So I have:

Military Tradition
Cavalry 5.3.3
Cossack 5.3.3 blitz
Sipahi 7.3.3

Nationalism (free upgrades for all)
Cavalry II 6.3.3
Cossack II 6.3.3 blitz
Sipahi II 8.3.3

Both versions of the Cossack and Sipahi are flagged to started a Golden Age.

I Agree with all of the above, except the Sipahi upgrade from 7 to 8 attack...
Is the Sipahi currently Cav +2 Attack? If so, then I can agree with the above, if it's anything else, i would like to see some discussion on it.

Thanks

Kevin P.

[lockstep]

Originally posted by Dominae
The AU mod should not feel like a mod. The changes we make to the game should be as subtle as possible, while fulfilling the goals they were created for.

But isn't there such a thing as 'too subtle', too?

I view the current consent about Light Cavalry vs. Cavalry - even without the assigned changes to Cossack and Siphai - simply as creation of an additional unit to rebalance the game. Although justified, this is a quite drastic change, and I'm not sure if we should try to conceal it in order to 'not feel like a mod'.

Regarding my suggestions, I don't have hard feelings about the name 'Dragoon' or about zero upgrade costs. But if possible, I'd like to avoid using the same graphics for two different units with different stats, because I want to be able to tell them apart at first glance. (Just like I always wanted to tell apart workers and foreign workers.)

NOTE: If different graphics for light cavalry and cavalry means a complicated install procedure for the AU mod, then I'm against it.

[lockstep]

I did a quick test - besides adding a unit in the bic-file, you only have to add two lines in PediaIcons.txt to get the distinct hussar animation.

BTW, this is the (main game!) civilopedia entry for the Austrian Hussar: 'Light cavalry has been used in warfare since the domestication of horses, but in eastern Europe, Hungarian and Croat scouts earned a reputation for being elite scouts and deadly raiders. Hussars were the result of other European nations' attempts to duplicate this sort of unit. Hussar uniforms are elaborate and dramatically colored, and becoming a hussar is often a great honor or awarded to those of noble birth. They were typically armed with straight cavalry swords, although towards the end of the 18th century hussars often carried pistols as well.'

[Dominae]

Originally posted by lockstep
I view the current consent about Light Cavalry vs. Cavalry - even without the assigned changes to Cossack and Siphai - simply as creation of an additional unit to rebalance the game. Although justified, this is a quite drastic change, and I'm not sure if we should try to conceal it in order to 'not feel like a mod'.

Why not? What possible harm can come from concealing it as much as possible? As long as it's not confusing, everything should be fine.

By introducing an upgrade cost and changing the unit's art, you're removing all chances for mod to feel even remotely like stock Civ3 at Military Tradition and/or Nationalism.


Dominae

[ducki]

Originally posted by Dominae
By introducing an upgrade cost and changing the unit's art, you're removing all chances for mod to feel even remotely like stock Civ3 at Military Tradition and/or Nationalism.
Dominae

I see both sides of this, as the same quote could be used to make the case against adding a new unit in the spirit of delaying the climax.

I'd like the units to be visibly distinguishable, personally. They are, after all, different units.
On the other hand, in order to not further impair the AI, I agree with the free upgrade.

Honestly, though, how is giving a distinct unit it's own artwork any less "stock" than moving the original unit by an Age and replacing it with a new, weaker unit?

To me, a new unit is a new unit. Trying to hide the fact that we're adding a new unit and moving the original seems like a form of justification. Either we agree that we need a new unit, in which case, I'd like to see a new unit in its entirety, or we don't really feel justified in adding a new unit, in which case, sweeping it under the rug doesn't feel right - especially if there's no need to distribute new artwork, which I could see as a good reason against.

Either way, maybe I misread the debate. It just seems that we are adding a new unit, so I don't see how distinct(yet suitable) artwork is a bigger change than that.

[lockstep]

(EDIT: reply to Dominae)

For me, using the same art for different units is confusing. But maybe we should just agree to disagree.

[alexman]

An attack of 6 versus 5, with all other stats the same, does not really justify the creation of a full new unit, in my opinion.

I think of it more like the boost in stats that the radar towers give (isn't that 20% too?). The art of a unit under radar protection is the same, yet the actual stats are different. So I have no problem with the idea that Nationalism acts as a 'radar tower' for Cavalry!

[ducki]

Put that way, alexman, it makes more sense.
Is there a way to make it happen that way, instead of having two separate units that appear identical?

Maybe the potential for the human to not realize he didn't upgrade his Light Cavalry to Cavalry can be seen as a balancing factor in favor of the AI, but maybe I'm the only one that's that absentminded.

[lockstep]

Originally posted by alexman
I think of it more like the boost in stats that the radar towers give (isn't that 20% too?). The art of a unit under radar protection is the same, yet the actual stats are different.

OTOH, I can tell at first glance if a unit is under radar protection.

[Dominae]

I'm trying to figure out why you guys are having a hard time conceptualizing that the two versions of Cavalry are more or less the same unit.

They have the same cost and require the same resources. They accomplish the same thing on the battlefield. You would never have to choose between the two in a build queue. Functionally, they're identical.

Consider what you propose would be like to someone new to the AU mod: they hit Nationalism, and see a new unit, with a different name, different art, different stats, different Civilopedia entry. The feeling of alienation from stock Civ3 would be unavoidable.


Dominae

[ducki]

Dom - The issue isn't with understanding that the units are almost identical. The problem is that they have different ADM values(they are different units) and will give an absentminded player, like me, no indication that I'm sending an outdated unit against modern defenses - until they start dropping like flies.

To me, it is less stock-Civ3-like to have - admittedly technically - different (unique with a lowercase u) units that look deceptively the same.

Imagine that new AU student downloading the mod and not reading all the changes - much like I originally did - and hitting Mil Trad - he loses more Cavalry than normal and they are named funny, but oh well. Then he hits Nationalism and since (at least for me) Cavalry spend verrrry little time sitting in towns that have barracks, he never sees the little upgrade icon and loses nearly his entire attack force trying to take a town with woefully underpowered units.


That was an awful ramble to simply say, just like Cav and Light Cav are "more or less the same unit", Archers and Longbowmen or Chariots and Horsement are "more or less the same unit" but I can tell by looking that they are not quite the same. I know at a glance that my military is obsolete.


It's not supremely important to the issue at hand, really, though. Some of us feel that unique(small u) military units should be visually diferrent so there's no silly mistakes. Some of us can't imagine making that kind of silly mistake. Our ideas of alienation from stock Civ3 are different - mechanics vs visuals.

If there's a way to make it not only free, but automatic upgrade, like the immediate movement bonus on building the GLighthouse, that would, IMO, be optimal.

I agree (as I think most of us do) with the mechanical change, so maybe the discussion of a visual change using existing C3C graphics should be moved to its own thread.

[alexman]

Originally posted by ducki
...just like Cav and Light Cav are "more or less the same unit", Archers and Longbowmen or Chariots and Horsement are "more or less the same unit" but I can tell by looking that they are not quite the same. I know at a glance that my military is obsolete.

Again, those upgrades for Archers and Chariots have 100% more attack. The upgrade for Light Cavalry has just 20% more attack. That's less than the bonus for fortification, so sending Light Cavalry when you think it's Cavalry (I still think right-clicking to see the actual stats of a unit is easier than counting tiles and searching for radar towers, BTW), should by no means cause your units to 'fall like flies'!