Changes in rules.txt - Page 2

War4ever · June 25, 2003, 19:07

THats not very nice ST.... not nice at all....come to the mp playground and i will teach you a thing or two about manners

DrSpike · June 25, 2003, 19:20

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowThinker

You defile my important thread by such a spam!

Boco · June 25, 2003, 23:02

In my limited experience with plain vanilla Civ2, I've always felt that Legions weren't worth their cost. If that's not off base, what about changing the Legion's mf to 172 (i.e. 4/3 of a mf)? That way it can occasionally force march two squares. What's more useful is the ability to fortify after moving, or attack 0d units after moving a square.

War4ever · June 25, 2003, 23:48

Boco that is interesting...but i always thought of legions as offensive and not defenseive....

legions unless acquired en masse via huts or built close to a ai are sorta lame at their cost and poor movement.

sure vet legions are nice , but only if you get them to the location quick enough....and they must travel over tough terrain to protect themselves....b/c on flat terrain they are quite weak defensively and costly to replace.

not really sure what i would do with the numbers...they are kinda skewed....

DrSpike · June 26, 2003, 06:15

I'm not sure about calling them underpowered.............if you can get them early (or more likely adapt your strategy because of the hut techs) they can be fearsome. Making them better would make the early game strange..........it is a long while till defence will catch up.

SlowThinker · June 26, 2003, 06:21

War, I think there was a smiley in that bad post. Anyway I think I could accept your dare. I will post a calling card in MP Civgroup or Active Civ II MP Player List.

SlowThinker · June 26, 2003, 06:23

Legions: I agree with Boco that we can consider Legion a defensive unit - it can defend a city or a strategic point alone.
But I don't understand why 4/3*1=172 . Some Scenario League trick?

About barracks - in fact I didn't want to debate about a moment when thay are useful. I wanted to say that the game (or rules.txt) is more interesting if you are not able to built barracks in time when you want to build them and therefore you have to discover the appropriate tech first.
And this is similar with marketplace, library.

Boco · June 26, 2003, 06:50

Yes, 172 is a Sleague trick discovered long ago by W Keenan. My concern with changing Legion stats is that a major change (df=3 or cost=3) would cause an imbalance. With a 4/3 mf, a few new nuances are available, but the unit is basically the same. Fortified vet legions aren't always rollovers in open terrain, particularly if the AI is short of units and is (as always) willing to attack piecemeal. Still I recall that I acquired virtually all of my Legions via Leo or bribes (probably a waste of gold).

rah · June 26, 2003, 08:09

To take advantage of Legions it has to be real early, and you have to have surprise. If your closest opponent has an embassy with you, there will be a "catty" welcoming committee when they show up.

RAH

War4ever · June 26, 2003, 15:00

What Rah stated was what i was trying to point out.....if you get the legions REAL early and have surprise, yes, four vet legions can wreak havoc.....

but if it takes even average time to get them, yoiu will lose them all to cats or archers..

and yes fortified on open terrain is fine, but i can tell you that you won't be able to fortify them on open terrain by me

War4ever · June 26, 2003, 16:12

ST i did see the happy face..my post was likely taken out of context due to a lack of smiley on my part

Boco · June 26, 2003, 21:22

I didn't pay close attention to the forum name when I posted.

ST's got this thread crosslinked over half of Civ2 'Poly.

Some of my reasoning for the Legion adjustment has to do with playing the AI. Still the ability to fortify at the end of each move effectively raises the df by one. This mod won't make you want to build Legions by the dozen. Just makes them a little more useful when they fall into your lap.

Quote:

Making them better would make the early game strange..........it is a long while till defence will catch up.

Not sure I have a good answer -- other than to say the modification doesn't make Legions into superunits. When I tried the mod, I still didn't build them. Then again I don't think I'd last past 3000BC against this crowd.

War4ever · June 26, 2003, 23:15

3000 is too early to die.....unless that exploring chariot finds you of course... its all how fast you get a different govt and what you do the next 1000 years or so after that.....

adjusting as the game goes....is the key to a good civer....

rah · June 27, 2003, 08:25

I only ever seem to have legions when I'm forced to bribe a barb legions early.

War4ever · June 27, 2003, 09:46

well that is the most logical way to get them...and expensive........ i just like wandering into a village early after someone gets iron and picking up a few en route to the battlefield...

admitttedly this happens more in SP mode than MP

rah · June 27, 2003, 09:57

Yeah, that's never happened to me in MP.

War4ever · June 27, 2003, 09:59

in MP i usually get ellies if that is going to happen........

rah · June 27, 2003, 10:01

Yep, the only legions I ever see out of huts are RED.

War4ever · June 27, 2003, 10:23

i have picked up a few tho....but they always come too late to be really effective, especially as they aren't vets yet

rah · June 27, 2003, 11:01

Yep, unless people get iron from a hut, they don't research it until gunpowder is desired. I've always wondered why legions upgraded to muskets. You have a vet legion with and attack of 6 and bingo, he's a wuss again.

Boco · June 27, 2003, 12:15

I wouldn't dismiss that hp difference. There is drop in quality, but it isn't major league wuss. Vet Legion against an Archer behind a city wall has ~49% chance of winning. Rookie Mouseketeer has ~42%.

It's the vet Ironclad -> rookie DD that irks me.

War4ever · June 27, 2003, 12:28

the drop is huge......vets are just way more powerfull.....even if only psychological in my mind

Boco · June 27, 2003, 12:54

Not that anyone would fight fairly in open terrain, but pitting a vet Legion against a Wuss Mouseketeer with no modifications.

Attacker
6a, 1h, 1f vs 3d, 2h, 1f -> ~55% chance of victory

3a, 2h, 1f vs 3d, 1h, 1f -> ~73%

I won't venture to guess what's in your mind.

Still wouldn't want to face you in MP. I'll stick to designing.

War4ever · June 27, 2003, 13:31

all i know is i would rather have muskets over legions...... despite the numbers...

the extra HP makes a huge difference when you roll the dice...

attacking with muskets is lame unless they are vets and against pre gunpowder units...

but defending with non vet muskets works well against most pre gunpowder units.... only vet pults and crusaders pose any risk and you generally need a few of them to pull it off....

if i have gunpowder, you can guarrantee i will have cats with them...or crusaders to prevent the mobile units from getting a free ride .....

rah · June 27, 2003, 13:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Boco
Attacker
6a, 1h, 1f vs 3d, 2h, 1f -> ~55% chance of victory

3a, 2h, 1f vs 3d, 1h, 1f -> ~73%

I wasn't talking about defense, just the attacking portion. I don't use legions for defense, (well don't use them for anything) So I'd be more interested seeing the comparison above against identical defenseman.

War4ever · June 27, 2003, 16:46

unless fortified on open terrain, legions for the most part are a sitting duck..with the sneak attack bonus a warrior can take one out....

i don't like legions much....far too costly, i can have settler for that price

Boco · June 27, 2003, 17:05

War4Ever you pretty much summed up the comparison.

Rah, I'm slow.

Which defensive unit did you have in mind? Here're a few.

Vet legion vs archer -> 82%
Musket vs archer -> 87%

Vet legion vs archer dfx3 -> 65%
Musket vs archer dfx3 -> 59%

Vet legion vs archer dfx3 -> 49%
Musket vs archer dfx3 -> 42%

I s'pose it's all academic since legions aren't cost-effective. Scenario designers, however, often use different hp/fp combos to add another variable to the mix.

Quote:

unless fortified on open terrain

That extra 1/3 mf allows you to fortify routinely.

War4ever · June 27, 2003, 17:50

yes but fortification by any of my cities on my roads is periless for you

and even more so for your settlers should they wander....

comparisons are fine and dandy, remember the main comparison should be, how badly am i to be pounded as i make my approach to the un/suspecting city.

rah · June 28, 2003, 19:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Boco
Vet legion vs archer -> 82%
Musket vs archer -> 87%

Vet legion vs archer dfx3 -> 65%
Musket vs archer dfx3 -> 59%

Vet legion vs archer dfx3 -> 49%
Musket vs archer dfx3 -> 42%

No that's what I wanted to see, just to show my point that offensively sometimes you go backwards on the upgrade.

SlowThinker · June 29, 2003, 09:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Boco
I didn't pay close attention to the forum name when I posted. ST's got this thread crosslinked over half of Civ2 'Poly. Some of my reasoning for the Legion adjustment has to do with playing the AI.

This is OK, I edited the first post now.

Quote:

172 is a Sleague trick discovered long ago by W Keenan.

Can it be used also for movement of 1 2/3 or 1/3 for example?