Problems registering at AoCZone?
You can try resending activation email. If that doesnt work you can send an email here. If you forgot your password click here.
 Main Menu

 ForumsSearch »

 SY Nations Cup 2017

 Escape Gaming

 EGC #1: Strike the Balance

 Gladiators of the Arena

 AoC Recorded Games

 AoE2HD Recorded Games

 AoFE Recorded Games

 Major Past Tournaments

 Auto downloadedFind »

 Users currently online
Staff (1)
Members (58)
»  BacT
»  BruZi
»  ebbu
»  Fedex
»  GriN
»  Hico
»  Janik
»  Locka
»  tdkr
»  wAkKo
»  Xtasy
Guests (148)

 AoC Clans Add yours »

 Links

 Ads

Civilisation - Scorecard Version 2.1 (by Mike "Captn" Kidd)

Game tutorials, strategies, tips & tricks
Advertisement from Google 
 

Civilisation - Scorecard Version 2.1 (by Mike "Captn" Kidd)

Postby  BugA_the_Great » Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:53 pm

Image
Civilisation - Scorecard Version 2.1
(by Mike "Captn" Kidd, AI-Designer at Ensemble Studios)

Mike Kidd: "I love playing random civs. But pretty much everyone gets into this situation once in a while: You draw a civilization that you don't play often, say Persians. You try their strong suit and use a small boat boom to launch an early castle age Knight attack. Your opponent has Pikemen waiting, so you shift to plan B, and invest heavily in Swordsmen. You start your attack, upgrade to imperial, and...what's this? No two-handed swordsmen or champs? Argh!

I hate it when that happens.

What I needed was a single-page quick reference, that I could check in a matter of seconds while a random civilization game was in progress. I wanted to know which lines were good for each civilization, without checking for all thirteen technologies that upgrade Cavalry Archers. So I made my first attempt at a scorecard, rating each unit line for each civilization with an A-B-C-D-F grade. I implemented it as a spreadsheet, by assigning values to all the unit upgrades, technologies and civilization bonuses that affect each line. Then I asked for help around the studios.

Karen Swanson (UI designer) pointed out that the ABCDF - system isn't universal, a 1-10 numbering system might be more universal. Kevin Holme and Alex Quintana pointed out some very questionable weightings I had used in the first draft, and completely re-did the numbering system. Kevin also had the suggestion of making "10" mean "all the upgrades and no special bonuses". This allows units that are "better than perfect" to score higher than 10, like those Saracen Camels or Turk Hand Cannoneers. And Greg Street and Kevin Holme also helped out catching several errors and omissions in round 2.

Civilisations Cavalry Archery Infantry Siege Naval Civilisations
Knight Scout Camel Archer Cav. Archer Hand Cannoneer Skirmisher Swordsman Spearman Monk Scorpion Ram Mangonel Bombard Cannon Trebuchet Galley Cannon Galleon Fire Ship Demo Ship
Aztecs -- -- -- 8 -- -- 9 13 9 11 7 10 10 -- 10 6 -- 10 7 Aztecs
Britons 7 7 -- 10 8 -- 11 10 10 8 7 7 8 -- 10 10 -- 10 10 Britons
Byzantines 8 7 9 10 8 10 11 8 10 11 5 8 7 7 8 10 10 12 10 Byzantines
Celts 8 7 -- 5 5 -- 7 11 11 6 13 12 12 -- 11 8 8 7 10 Celts
Chinese 8 9 10 10 9 -- 10 10 10 9 11 8 7 -- 8 10 8 7 12 Chinese
Franks 11 7 -- 5 5 10 7 9 7 8 10 7 8 10 10 8 8 10 10 Franks
Goths 7 9 -- 7 8 10 10 13 12 8 8 5 7 7 8 9 7 8 8 Goths
Huns 11 10 -- 8 11 -- 9 4 9 8 5 8 5 -- 10 10 8 7 10 Huns
Japanese 6 6 -- 10 9 10 10 13 12 10 10 7 8 -- 13 10 10 10 7 Japanese
Koreans 5 6 -- 10 8 10 10 8 8 8 7 7 13 10 10 10 8 10 -- Koreans
Mayans -- -- -- 11 -- -- 10 6 10 8 8 8 7 -- 8 10 -- 10 10 Mayans
Mongols 7 10 9 9 11 -- 9 10 7 4 11 11 11 -- 10 9 9 8 8 Mongols
Persians 11 10 10 8 9 10 8 4 10 5 8 8 7 7 8 8 10 10 10 Persians
Saracens 6 10 12 10 11 10 10 10 7 10 7 10 10 10 10 12 10 7 10 Saracens
Spanish 10 10 -- 7 9 10 10 10 10 10 5 8 7 7 8 10 12 10 10 Spanish
Teutons 9 6 -- 6 5 10 8 10 10 10 10 7 10 10 10 7 7 8 8 Teutons
Turks 8 10 10 9 10 14 7 10 3 8 8 8 5 12 8 10 12 7 10 Turks
Vikings 5 5 -- 10 6 -- 10 13 9 5 10 10 8 -- 10 13 11 -- 11 Vikings

Here's how to use it: Let's say you get Persians in a random civilization game, and your Knight attack isn't working. Looking across the Persian line on the chart, you'll see that their Swordsmen line gets only a 4, so that would be a really bad choice. They get a 10 for all stable units, and also a 10 for Hand Cannoneers. (Dang! That would have been great against those Pikemen!) They also score well in Bombard Cannons and all non-Galleon naval units, and their Archer line is decent enough to use as a complement to whatever I choose. Or suppose you draw Celts. OK, don't bother building an archery range, go for infantry and siege.

Now, the disclaimers. First, this chart is based on post-imperial strength for simplicity. Many units that are rated low here are just fine during castle age, but they run out of steam later. Second, the spread (the range from 10 to the lowest score) is completely arbitrary. The worst Camel line gets a 9, because everyone gets the heavy camel upgrade and the range of effectiveness (excluding Saracens at 12) is pretty minor. Archers, on the other hand, have a huge range, from 5 for the Franks and Celts to 6 for the Spanish, up to 11 for the Mayans. Mayan archers are so dominant over the other three that I felt this spread was justified. Third, the weightings of technologies and bonuses are subjective as well, I believe this summary is pretty accurate (Spanish Archers really do beat Celt Crossbows in imperial), but I'm sure there will be quite a few numbers that not everyone will agree with. Finally, this chart takes into account price discounts and build speed bonuses, but ignores economic bonuses and unique units, again for simplicity, and because economic and UU- bonuses get into "apples-and-oranges" situations pretty quickly. So, the Huns DO get credit for their lower-cost Cavalry Archers, but the Celts don't get any extra credit for their more efficient woodcutting.

I hope you find this chart useful, especially if it encourages you to explore the wonderful world of random civs. Good luck, and good gaming!"
 BugA_the_Great
Admin
 
Posts: 3369
Joined: Mar 13, 2010
Location: Bor, Serbia
Age: 31
 1514 (47%)
 
 

Re: Civilisation - Scorecard Version 2.1 (by Mike Kidd)

Postby  [EIF]BokiSergy » Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:03 pm

Man, nice utility ^^ I believe this can be useful for player under 2k. Maybe for 2+k because it can give some ideas :D

Wow, this gave me right now an awesome idea, we can make a calculator for counting enemy. For example u put in calculator u civ and civ of opponent. Then u put amount of his units: archers, knts, spears... Amount of ur resourses+ numbers of willagers on each resourses... And the calculator gives u information what is best answer of units u can make to count opponent... Hehe, yeah I know it sounds like imposible SF, there is many other parameters, but once day maybe we make something like that :)
 [EIF]BokiSergy
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mar 29, 2010
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Age: 31
 

Re: Civilisation - Scorecard Version 2.1 (by Mike Kidd)

Postby  The_King_Of_LN » Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:50 pm

eh too bad whoever made this was a noob...i think it could be done alot better...i see some flaws..but i guess it could be helpful to someone, im sure id be amazed at how many players dont know tech tree
 The_King_Of_LN
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Jun 10, 2010
 

Re: Civilisation - Scorecard Version 2.1 (by Mike Kidd)

Postby  [EIF]BokiSergy » Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:23 pm

hehe, yeah, maybe Mongs could get higher mark in cav archers than huns and sara.

I reccomend:
cav archers:
Mongs=13
huns =12
sara=11

and some people wouldnt agree about koreans and celts onagers, I think should be equal, dunno :) Also, sometimes Mong's onagers can overcount Korean's onagers cuz ability to move faster(if there is good micro of player)


I reccomend:
onagers:
Celts=12
Korean=12
Mongs=12

Also, its noticeable, there are not Elite castle units included... Well in this concept doesn't fit to include Castle units, but it has huge effect on civ abilities.

Anyways, I think this was nice job, and great idea^^, can improve ofc, but this first table as idea was very nice
 [EIF]BokiSergy
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mar 29, 2010
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Age: 31
 

Re: Civilisation - Scorecard Version 2.1 (by Mike Kidd)

Postby  The_King_Of_LN » Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:47 pm

actually if we are considering post imp only, saracen >> huns in ca, saracen CA have full archer armor in Blacksmith AND have parthenian tactics, there are many other things id disagree with but i wont go into all of it.
 The_King_Of_LN
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Jun 10, 2010
 
Advertisement from Google 
 

Re: Civilisation - Scorecard Version 2.1 (by Mike Kidd)

Postby  _PkZ_ » Mon Jun 14, 2010 6:42 pm

  14 Jun 2010, 15:50 GMT » The_King_Of_LN wrote:
eh too bad whoever made this was a noob...

Ok, i'm waiting for you to make it a lot better and will put it in place right away when you have it ready.

As a side note i will refer to a quote i read long time ago:
"The one who call others noob are usually the biggest noob himself".
Image
 _PkZ_
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1270
Joined: May 09, 2008
 1521 (44%)
 

Re: Civilisation - Scorecard Version 2.1 (by Mike Kidd)

Postby  The_King_Of_LN » Mon Jun 14, 2010 6:47 pm

the fact you focused on 1 line of my post makes you the noob, and im sure it was a noob who came up with that quote you have there :)
 The_King_Of_LN
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Jun 10, 2010
 

Re: Civilisation - Scorecard Version 2.1 (by Mike Kidd)

Postby  BugA_the_Great » Mon Jun 14, 2010 7:05 pm

^^ With all due respect to your gaming experience and knowledge, if you read carefully what the man who wrote the article said, you`d understand better ;)

For your CA example - the only advantage of Saracen CA is that they have full archer armor (Huns miss ring archer armor), while both do have Parthian Tactics. But, Huns have the advantage of cheaper CA, and they said it`s counted in the grade, too. About Mongols, they miss ring archer armor, too, but they have CA that fire 20% faster - so I guess the equal grades are fair enough for all of them ;)

Of course there are many things to be considered, and that top players will count on their experience rather than some table stats, but it clearly says what is that table meant for - to provide quick help when you don`t have experience in playing certain civs (which means you`re not a top player, at least not with that civ). For that use, I think it`s very, very good ;)
 BugA_the_Great
Admin
 
Posts: 3369
Joined: Mar 13, 2010
Location: Bor, Serbia
Age: 31
 1514 (47%)
 

Re: Civilisation - Scorecard Version 2.1 (by Mike Kidd)

Postby  The_King_Of_LN » Mon Jun 14, 2010 7:12 pm

HOLY SHIT IM SAYING ID MAKE SOME TWEEKS TO IT, BUT I ALSO SAID ITS VERY HELPFUL FOR PPL WHO DONT KNOW ALL CIVS TECH TREES, HOWEVER I DO SO MAYBE IM COMING OFF ****. BUT TO SAY THE PERSON WHO WROTE THIS ISNT A NOOB IS BEING IGNORANT

"Let's say you get Persians in a random civilization game, and your Knight attack isn't working. Looking across the Persian line on the chart, you'll see that their Swordsmen line gets only a 4, so that would be a really bad choice. They get a 10 for all stable units, and also a 10 for Hand Cannoneers. (Dang! That would have been great against those Pikemen!) They also score well in Bombard Cannons and all non-Galleon naval units, and their Archer line is decent enough to use as a complement to whatever I choose. Or suppose you draw Celts. OK, don't bother building an archery range, go for infantry and siege."

-- CASE AND POINT.

GOOD TO KNOW THE SITE ADMIN IS THE BIGGEST FLAMER ON THE SITE....and a backstabber
 The_King_Of_LN
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Jun 10, 2010
 

Re: Civilisation - Scorecard Version 2.1 (by Mike Kidd)

Postby  BugA_the_Great » Mon Jun 14, 2010 8:06 pm

I wasn`t talking just to you, but to [EIF]BokiSergy, too, and I don`t know why did you get upset (if it was because of my post) - I just tried to explain what was the man`s main idea - he said what he said - that he had problems playing with certain civs he didn`t know so well -> so he was not an expert player at that time (or maybe he just wanted to create this for those that aren`t experts yet, having in mind how he felt before? ;) ). If he`s a noob, that`s pretty arguable... unless everyone that isn`t 2k is a noob ;) He also said that the grade spread is completely arbitrary, while some people might not agree with some of the numbers - as we had here.

For those that didn`t quite understand from the first post - the table was created by the people from "Ensemble Studios", those same people that created the game in the first place. Maybe they didn`t play it so long as some of expert players we know, but we can`t deny their knowledge of the game itself. The quote you gave is what the original idea was to create it - but that table was updated over, and over again - and it doesn`t mean it`s created by a beginner, but for beginners ;)

The point is that while the table is probably not perfect (if such table can be made at all, and to satisfy everyone, because even I - you may call me a noob ;) - showed you why CA`s could get the same grade), its value for players that don`t have the complete tech tree in their heads (and those certainly make a majority) is enormous.

With your first sentences you made all that look worthless, you said - "eh too bad whoever made this was a noob...i think it could be done alot better...i see some flaws..". What you said after can`t improve the bad impression of those first words. If a beginner reads your post, and sees your rating, he`ll think that table is worthless indeed - and that is just not true.

As I said - maybe expert players would made some corrections to it (and it`s pretty questionable if they could 100% agree among themselves), but this table is not meant for experts. It`s made for regular (or even casual) players, for those that enjoy playing random civs even if they don`t know all their strengths/weaknesses - yet.

I don`t know if your last sentence was meant for me, but I didn`t understand it.

While some of your posts seem pretty immature, I greatly appreciate your thoughts regarding AoC, and as you would probably say yourself after some of your posts - chill out, we`re here to have fun ;)
 BugA_the_Great
Admin
 
Posts: 3369
Joined: Mar 13, 2010
Location: Bor, Serbia
Age: 31
 1514 (47%)
 
 
Next

Return to Articles and Guides

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Legend: Global moderators, News posters, Tournament moderators