AU mod: The Statue of Zeus

[alexman]

It would also help the AI who doesn't know to try and trade for Ivory, or not to trade it away before building the Wonder.

The only problem I see is that it increases the randomness of this powerful Wonder even more. If you start next to Ivory, you have basically won the game, as it's not likely that someone else has also started next to Ivory. At least with stock rules the AI might have a chance to get Ivory later by expanding, and then get the Wonder in a core city by a cascade, even if it doesn't start right next to Ivory.

[alexman]

We have the following proposals:

A) No change
B) Require Ivory within city radius.
C) Increase cost to 300, unit interval to 8 turns.
D) Increase cost to 300, remove bonus HP.
E) Reduce attack factor to 2.
F) Move to Construction

Does anybody have any other specific proposal for consideration? If so, I will add it to the above list. The panel will then vote on these proposals by putting them in their order of preference. Voting will begin in one week from now.

[lockstep]

ducki made the proposal to move the SoZ to Construction. This would be rather low on my list of preferred changes, but still higher than 'SoZ requires ivory within city radius'.

[ducki]

The particular tech wasn't as important, if I recall what I was thinking about, as putting the avalailability of the wonder on the cusp of the middle ages. Construction, Currency, Republic - anything that give the minimum time for the ACavs to produce. At lower levels, the player will often get to any desirable tech first anyway. At the higher levels, the farther away you put the tech, I think the better chance the AI has.
Additionally, being so close to Feudalism means the chances of overrunning a foe with woefully inadequate defenses is a bit slimmer(though still possible by luck of the draw).

Construction already has a wonder that's worth building, I only suggested it because Currency and Statue of Zeus just don't mesh well, verbally. Then again, neither does Math and SoZ.



(Here's a thought - instead of gathering _all_ proposed ideas, gather only those that have been "seconded" by someone other than the originator? Like lockstep's post would be considered seconding my "move the wonder to a later tech" proposal. Just an idea to trim down the number of single-supporter, no-votes ideas that might potentially get on the ballot.)

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by alexman
Example of a difficult vote:
Four proposals, A, B, C, D
Five voters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
A and B are similar and can be considered almost the same proposal.
C, D are unique.

Voter 1: ABCD
Voter 2: BACD
Voter 3: CBAD
Voter 4: DABC
Voter 5: CBAD

Note that A and B are always next to each other, as they are almost the same idea.

Under nbarclays system, C would win, even though more panelists prefer the A/B proposal over C.

Actually, my proposal doesn't cope with this situation at all. C can't be declared the winner becuase it didn't get a majority, meaning that there needs to be a runoff election between it and whatever proposal or proposals are in second place. But the fact that all the others are tied for second makes it impossible to reduce the number of options for a runoff election. In such an event, a more complex approach would be needed to narrow down the field.

[ducki]

As promised, here's a sav to see how painful it is to have a neighbor that has the AC and has not been at war yet.
Aztec built SoZ in 290 BC and it's now 340 AD. I don't know how many turns that is, but he's been completely undisturbed for that entire time, though ACs are about all he's got as he has no Iron.
You are one turn from Chivalry, though the insane price of 120g for a Horse->Samurai upgrade means you have to be picky. Unfortunately, I already upgraded the few spears I had to Pikes, so if you want spears, I can get an even older save out.

Oh yeah, please, no feedback about this particular game in this thread - I know it's not well-played/developed - it's sole purpose is to see what it's like to be on the receiving end of AC at around Chivalry. Fortunately, this autosave lets us see pre-chivalry and post-chivalry, though Samurai are rather stronger on defense than knights, but oh well.

It's Monarch level, Byzantines are insane with their Dromon/Settler chains and Azteca are the only folks cranky with us. Lots of RoP and Lux deals, so hopefully we can concentrate solely on the Aztec Horde for testing.

Or not, as you like.

Edit: Just went in with what I had on hand and all I can say is "Ouchies!" I lost all of my first set of Samurai that were in the south and most of a second batch. By turn 2 of the war, I'm having serious WW problems and by turn 3 riots and shutdowns in native cities. Those ACs are tough. And that's with Vet and Elite Sams.
Just Ouch!

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by alexman
We have the following proposals:

A) No change
B) Require Ivory within city radius.
C) Increase cost to 300, unit interval to 8 turns.
D) Increase cost to 300, remove bonus HP.
E) Reduce attack factor to 2.
F) Move to Construction

Well if anyone takes any notice, the idea I would prefer (and thus second) is increasing the cost and removing the bonus hp, increase cost and decreas frequency or no change.

And I thought you already needed Ivory in the city radius.... guess I've just been lucky and started on the SoZ before my road network got too far, eh?

I don't know if it's worth as much as just taking Horses from someone if it is dropped to 2 attack, and by Construction is getting a little late, especially since that tech takes longer to get than all other necessary Ancient techs. If I didn't have Horse-type units before then there would have been a number of games I would have just been overrun too early. The SoZ always comes dead at the right time for me, when it does appear as an option.

[ducki]

by Construction is getting a little late

Not as late as it would seem.
Go grab the 380AD save from the "Balancing the Governments" thread that I posted, delcare war with your 10 or so Samurai against the Ironless, SoZ-having Aztec and go on the offensive (I went at the capitol and the two northern towns - the forces are already split for this).

These ACs are much tougher than advertised. I really thought that MI and Samurai would do a ginsu knife impression on them, but not so.

These guys with 3-2-2- and 5hps as vets are much tougher than their stats suggest, thus are useful even into the Musket-phase(Samurai have 4 defense and dropped too easily to these dudes.)

[MrWhereItsAt]

Originally posted by ducki
These guys with 3-2-2- and 5hps as vets are much tougher than their stats suggest, thus are useful even into the Musket-phase(Samurai have 4 defense and dropped too easily to these dudes.)

ducki, it all depends on WHY you found them such trouble. A 2 defense unit is still just that - 2 defense, and so the only thing that they have as a defensive advantage over Spearsis that they have the movement to get themselves to a better defensive position.

You could well have just had a particular run of luck.

[ducki]

Their defense wasn't the big surprise, it was offense, and the regularity with which they were able to take out my Vet Samurai. I think the extra HP combined with mobility makes them far stronger than the numbers suggest. Couple that with the inherent advantages of them being the "defender" nation - 6 moves on roads, healing, ending turns in cities, etc., and in the hands of a defending AI, these ACs perform surprisingly well. Stopping cold an attack of ~10 Vet Samurai only bent on taking a single city was surprising enough, but to follow that up by defeating a combined arms force of 10 more Vet Samurai and 3-4 pikes and 3-4 Med. Inf. (my second wave) tells me it's more than just bad luck. I also lost half a dozen swords/MI in my own borders stopping their attempts at taking slaves/border towns. All this from however many AC were created between 290BC and 380AD.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be that way, I'm just reportiing what happened in my (not so out-of-character) test. Casualties were much higher than expected, so I'm more inclined to think the either the Unit needs a minor tone-down or the total number of produced Units should be adjusted downward. I just don't think the AC should be able to rout ~10 Samurai quite that handily.

[donZappo]

Heh... thanks for that good butt-kicking in your test game, Ducki. I don't know if I learned anything I didn't already know, though! "Wow, Ancient Cavalry are bad in large numbers!" At least it helps to emphasis the point that something has to be done in order to tone these guys down. I'm thinking that (C) might be enough to slow them down, although that extra hitpoint could certainly be removed as well.

-donZappo

[ducki]

Ahh, I'm glad someone else tried it out. Thanks dZ!

[Dominae]

Here's my ranking (despite my dislike of the ranking system!):

1. D, Increase cost to 300, remove bonus HP.
2. C, Increase cost to 300, unit interval to 8 turns.
3. E, Reduce attack factor to 2.
4. A, No change.
5. F, Move to Construction.
6. B, Require Ivory within city radius.


Dominae

[alexman]

OK, it's Friday in much of the World, so let's vote.

My order of preference:
E) Reduce attack factor to 2.
C) Increase cost to 300, unit interval to 8 turns.
D) Increase cost to 300, remove bonus HP.
A) No change
B) Require Ivory within city radius.
F) Move to Construction

I prefer E over C and D because it changes just one thing instead of two.

[lockstep]

(best)

D) Increase cost to 300, remove bonus HP
C) Increase cost to 300, unit interval to 8 turns
A) No change
F) Move to Construction
E) Reduce attack factor to 2
B) Require Ivory within city radius

(worst)

[ZargonX]

BEST

D)
C)
E)
A)
B)
F)

WORST

[Theseus]

ACDBEF

[Stuie]

D) Increase cost to 300, remove bonus HP.
C) Increase cost to 300, unit interval to 8 turns.
A) No change
E) Reduce attack factor to 2.
B) Require Ivory within city radius.
F) Move to Construction

[pvzh]

I played with AU SoZ-AC (3/2/2 no HP bonus and 300 shields). Game (emperor, Pangea, standard size, everything on average, my land mostly flood plains/desert/plains, so low shield count).

I must say I am not impressed at all with this wonder. It is the only wonder I was able to get (Thanks to ivory requirement). By the time of AI knights rolling around I had 8 AC produced. AI knights put a stop to any sensible use of 3/2/2 unit (beside some rear guard mobile force).

3/2/2 +1 HP makes this unit slightly worser than a knight on combat. (I compared odds using Civ calculator agains vet and reg spears fortified on grass or hill). So, it is safe to assume a cost of 70 shield for unit. Would I have these 300 shield would be a right price.

However, with 3/2/2 no HP bonus it is galic swordsman that worth 40! It means that by the time of knights I got only my invested shields back, but with a great delay. That is no good at all.

I think, it is good to leave AC with no HP bonus, but it require the old cost of 200 shields, and probably, make them upgradable to Knights. This would require to lower they cost in the editor to 40 (they have the same stats as gallic swordsmen), so an upgrade will cost 90 without Leo.

[alexman]

Thanks for the feedback, but keep in mind that it's a bad idea to generalize from just one game.

A Pangaea map has a faster tech rate than other types, so you get fewer AC before Knights.

Also, unless you were the Celts, there is no 3-2-2 Ancient unit, so you don't usually have the alternative to build 3-2-2 units instead of the ToZ.

However, we'll continue to monitor the SoZ in AU games to see if the change we made needs to be revised.

[sabrewolf]

for MP, the ancient cavalry stats are being reduced by 1 defensive point. so 3|1|2... basicly a +1HP mounted warrior instead of a +1HP gallic swordsman.

i don't think this is a better solution for the AU mod, but we could keep it in mind...

[pvzh]

I did not pretended for complete analysis. I just put it because I wanted to show that AU SoZ/AC in fact expire at the time of AI chivalry not at the time of metalurgy like stock AC. This fact was not thought out when the change was made.

[nbarclay]

Keep in mind that in this game, the need to launch a naval invasion of Japan before ivory became available limited how early the Statue of Zeus could be built (especially without a prebuild). Also, I strongly disagree with the idea that Ancient Cavalry lose their value when enemies start to get pikemen and knights. They can deal with enemy offensive slow-movers, and can finish off more powerful enemies that have been injured through bombardment or in earlier fights. Even in the cavalry era, Ancient Cavalry can accompany the cavalry and help deal with enemy counterattacks so the cavalry can focus more on pushing ahead to conquer additional territory. Only when enemies upgrade their MedInfs and longbowmen to guerillas do Ancient Cavalry fully lose their relevance as anything more than MPs.

We deliberately intended that there be some question of whether a civ is better off building the SoZ in order to get more return on its shields in the long run or building units instead to get a strong punch earlier. So if it is not clear that building the SoZ is better in all situations, I would say that our changes are doing what they were supposed to.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Thanks for the thoughts and analysis, pvzh. It is appreciated.

However in the case of that game it does sound like you had a situation where AC would not have made much of a difference whatever their stats (within reason). In most of my games where I have built the SoZ it has been my only source of Horses for a long time, and many of those around me have not had Horses either, tipping the balance significantly. It would be a game with a situation like this that would be best for testing purposes - perhaps a custom map with only one or two civs around with Horses?

[nbarclay]

Pvzh and Theseus have brought up something that I consider a good idea. I'm going to go ahead and officially put it under consideration, and we'll probably have an emergency vote to accept it on a provisional basis for the upcoming game (at least if no one strongly opposes the idea).

The problem: AIs don't seem to make a special effort to build barracks in cities where the Statue of Zeus or the Knights Templar is located. As a result, they sometimes don't get as much advantage out of the wonders as human players do (since we do recognize the special importance of barracks in those cities).

Proposed solution (now under consideration): Add the "Veteran ground units" flag to the Knights Templar and Statue of Zeus.

[Theseus]

and thanks to pvzh for bringing it up.

[nbarclay]

Okay, let's go ahead and vote on this so we can get it in the game if it passes. Since we aren't allowing our normal one-week lead time between when changes are placed under consideration and when we vote, we'll go ahead and go with people's initial votes for the upcoming game, but panelists can change their votes any time up to eight days from the time of this post if new thoughts cause them to change their minds. The change will not be considered a permanent part of the Mod until that time has elapsed. That way we can decide for the upcoming game quickly whiile still leaving the normal time for consideration before the change becomes permanent.

Yes/No: Add the "Veteran ground units" flag to the Statue of Zeus and the Knights Templar.

[nbarclay]

I vote yes.

[bongo]

Not being a panelist or whatever, I still think this is a good idea.

[Theseus]

Yes