26-10-2002 12:28									#1
	Cannons and my MOD Full PM-box? Change here!

There is one idea that poped in my head, but I don't know is it good, nor should it be added in my MOD. So I need some comments.

It's about Cannons.

First let's compare Strenght of bombarding units.

Artillery (Bomb. 12, ROF 2, cost 80)
vs Cannons (Bomb. 8, ROF 1, cost 40):

Against defense target of 6,
Cannon takes out 0.57 HPs
Artillery takes out 1.33 HPs

Against defense target of 4,
Cannon takes out 0.67 HPs
Artillery takes out 1.5 HPs

Against defense target of 10,
Cannon takes out 0.44 HPs
Artillery takes out 1.09 HPs


Catapults (Bomb. 4, ROF 1, cost 20)
vs Cannons (Bomb. 8, ROF 1, cost 40):

Against defense target of 4,
Catapult takes out 0.5 HPs
Cannon takes out 0.67 HPs

Against defense target of 3,
Catapult takes out 0.57 HPs
Cannon takes out 0.73 HPs

Against defense target of 6,
Catapult takes out 0.4 HPs
Cannon takes out 0.57 HPs

.

So, at the end, Cannon is more then twice weaker then Artillery (thanks to lower ROF), plus has lower range.

Also, Cannon is NOT twice better then Catapults. Two Catapults do more HP damage then one Cannon.

.

Thus, I think about changing cost of Cannons to 30 shields (from 40 shields).

What do you think?
Would that be OK?
Balanced?
Gamebreaking?

	26-10-2002 12:30									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

P.S.
This is in strategy forums, since this is NOT about creation, it's about game-balance and stretegy implications of rule changes.

	27-10-2002 02:21									#3
	Inflate your Upload Space

How about keeping the cost 40 shields, but boosting cannon's ROF to 2? They would be closer to artillery in pure damage, but artillery is still far superior since it can fire 2 squares.

	27-10-2002 03:39									#4
	Remove this text

That's an interesting suggestion.

But it would probably make infaltion of some other units bombard strenght & ROF, like for Frigate (which on avergae deals similar damage as Cannon) or Ironclad.

That's why I was thinking about reduced cost instead.

	27-10-2002 03:50									#5
	Increase Your PM Length

Leave it be. Cannon strength is appropriate for the period(s). Napoleons were the basic cannon in use from the Napoleonic wars through the American Civil War (musketman through rifleman). Larger (siege) guns and mortars were used, but were not common.

Besides, if you decide to actually USE cannons then you might build a dozen or two, making artillery plentiful when it is time to upgrade.

	27-10-2002 04:30									#6
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Jaybe Leave it be. Cannon strength is appropriate for the period(s). Napoleons were the basic cannon in use from the Napoleonic wars through the American Civil War (musketman through rifleman). Larger (siege) guns and mortars were used, but were not common.

Actually, you are right. Thare power is similar to other bomb. units of that age (like Frigate).

But they are a little bit more on expesive side compared to Catapults.

I mean, TWO CATAPULTS can do more damage then one Cannon.

Not a good thing.

quote: Originally posted by Jaybe Besides, if you decide to actually USE cannons then you might build a dozen or two, making artillery plentiful when it is time to upgrade.

Lower cost ==> higher chance that you'll use Cannons.
(and I'm not talking about keeping them just as Arty placeholders)


P.S.
Other option would be to make them with FP of 2, but with cost of 60.
Although that would make some difficulties when "converting" new Korean UU.

	27-10-2002 05:41									#7
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

The other concern is that of the AI's use of them. If they cannot effectively use bombardment units, you are only making them better for YOU.

If it turns out that PtW improves the AI's use of bomb. units, OTOH, ...

	27-10-2002 15:18									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Jaybe The other concern is that of the AI's use of them. If they cannot effectively use bombardment units, you are only making them better for YOU. If it turns out that PtW improves the AI's use of bomb. units, OTOH, ...

But in that case, with original rules you can effectively use Arty (before Tanks), also you could effectively use Catapults (against Greeks if you have no Iron).

But Cannons?
They are pretty much unneded exept as Arty "placeholders".

Since making them stronger (like higher ROF) could be unbalancing, I was thinking about just decreasing cost to 30 shields.

That way you could make in average several Cannons more (and AI too if he prefers that stretegy), but not some spectacular powerfull unit.

P.S.
By the way, in my MOD, I have Radar Arty with movment of 2.
(should not be unbalancing since Bombers have greater range)

	28-10-2002 19:41									#9
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

A cost of 30 for the cannon shouldn't be unbalancing. As these tend to hang around and only be useful in large numbers, the upkeep would be the limiting factor anyway. If this is the only change you consider balanced, you should certainly include it in the MOD(?).

I would give cannons a bombard strengh of 11 and leave its cost and ROF unchanged.
This would make it over twice as good as the catapult only against a rifleman fortified in a metropolis on a hill (I think) and almost half as good as an artillery.

Since this can only do 1hp of damage it should not be too unbalancing.
Increasing the ROF might be unbalancing on its own. If you do this and decrease its bombard strengh or increase its cost, you would also decrease its effectiveness at defence (The usual fate of AI artillery!)
As for the comparison with the frigate, I don't buy it. The choice is rarely an issue so they can easily be balanced seperately.

The Hwacha may need a RF of 2, despite historical considerations, if it is to be on a level with the Patch Suggestion F15 (genuinely annoying to play against.)
P. S. As for the Radar artillery, I would prefer a 0/0/2 21.2.1 with blitz...(continued on another forum)

	28-10-2002 20:43									#10
	Increase Your PM Length

I almost never build cannons, because they cause such a little damage. 30g may be a better price, but I probably wouldn't build them for this price too, because they are utterly useless. I would prefer if you leave the cost at 40g and make them (and catapults too) more powerful instead. What about a bombardement of 10 or even 12 (ROF 1), or bombardement of 6 and ROF 2?

	28-10-2002 22:35									#11
	Put an end to popups!

I agree, cannons are not very useful. I only make them for coastal def, if I do not have any shipping on hand. I then have to cross my fingers and hope for a rare hit.

	28-10-2002 23:48									#12
	Increase the size of your Attachments

catapuls cant go on jungles or mountains (can cannons)?

	29-10-2002 00:07									#13
	Put an end to popups!

There are meny options for rules changes (like 6 - ROF2), but it's really difficult to find a proper one.

And I also want to make simple conversion of Korean UU when it comes out.

So I guess I'll just make them cheaper.

I first thought to do them as Bom6/ROF2/Cost40, but somehow it just bothered me to have Destoyer and Cannons with equal bombard ratings (it was maybe more a flavor thing for me). And it maks them weaker when defensing a city.

Theoreticly with 8/1/30 they would get similar bombard cost-effeciuvenes as Arty, but with lower range.
You would just need to make more of them.

Anyway, there is another problem with those units, which is not just firepower related.
You get them in time when you can use very powerfull Cavarly, so you realy don't need them in attack (maybe only in defense).
On the other hand you get Arty in times of Infatry, so you need them to soften up enemy defenses (before Tanks).
But this thing can't be solved without making all attacking units much more weaker (and I won't do that).

.

P.S.
As for Korean UU stats, remeber that they have same cost as Cannons.
So with original PtW rules, you could build two those units for price of one 1 artillery and practicly get same firepower (2 Hwachas = 1Arty)
And it's even better, if you reduce cost of Cannons (and thus, cost of Hwacha too).

Already good, if you ask me.

P.S.
Anyway, as I remeber Hwacha has also some other benefit exept Bom. str. of 12 too.
Is it no need for some resource, or cheaper cost?
(I realt don't remember)

	29-10-2002 01:17									#14
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by UberKruX catapuls cant go on jungles or mountains (can cannons)?

No, cannons can't either, unless there are connecting roads. They are also wheeled (artillery are not).

(But in MY mod, tanks, panzers, MI & MA are also wheeled...)

	29-10-2002 04:02									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Jaybe No, cannons can't either, unless there are connecting roads. They are also wheeled (artillery are not). (But in MY mod, tanks, panzers, MI & MA are also wheeled...)

This includes my MOD too.
And Arty and RA.

	31-10-2002 03:13									#16
	Tired of ads?

vmax1,

As a rule of thumb, only 1 shot in 8 actually hits anything when bombarding. Part of the problem is that the buildings have a defensive strength of 8-16 depending on whose mod you look at.

In my own mind, cannons should be alot stronger and more expensive since in actual battle use, they could rip big holes in whatever you shot at but were vulnerable to counter-attack.

I have some historical precident for wanting a couple of different cannons in the game. Early siege bombards like the ones at Constantiople in 1492 weight several tons and fired stone balls 3 ft across. They were assembled on site and fired one or two shots a day.

The seige mortars used by the Europeans at the same time fired smaller iron shot that would still bring down a stone wall, though not as effectively as a trebuchet at punching holes in castle walls.

Improvements to the casting process and better gunpowder lead to smaller, longer range cannons on ships. The English ships that fought the Spanish Armada were a good example: 2-5 lb shot with about a pound of powder behind it and it could reliably hit a target at about 2-400 yds or so. Land based guns could fire further, but took many times longer to load and aim.

Fast forward to Naploeon's era in the late 1700's, and he had smooth bore cannons that could send a ball half a mile and have enough force to cut down men in file. Part of Wellington's tactical genius at Waterloo was to put his men on the reverse slope of the low hills and prevented Napoleon's gunners from bouncing their shots through their ranks. I've seen the battlefield and at the ranges they were setup at, it must have been frustrating for the French to see the cannon balls bounce over the heads of the English troops.

The US Civil War was the last hurrah for the smooth bore cannons. The Ironclads used rifled barrels like the Union's Springfield rifles did. This, combined with better metalurgy in the stock, and the machining of metal, made for a much improved weapon. Toss in High Explosive shells and there you have modern artillery.

As Player1 has detailed in his patch_suggestion mod thread, cannons in their present form are essentially useless, except in defense or in ridiculously large numbers. I'm working on my own mod and am going to make cannons and catapults able to do some damage to both units and buildings, and add a trebuchet unit.

Player1, I suggest doubling the attack strength of your support weapons and see if they at least hit once in a while, then do your comparrisons. I'll do my own and we'll compare notes.


D.