Seminole Thread

[Peachrocks]

Hey,

As a follow up to the Native Thread I made, I want to discuss each native group one by one. I might do a new thread every week or when the conversation resolves. Granted their are a bunch of generic boosts across the board that can be discussed for natives (Summer palace, increased limits etc.) there are some where the units themselves really need a good look at even if the techs they offer are decent.

In many cases, the units are not worth training even if you didn't need the map control/trade post to get access to them and that ultimately is the purpose of these threads, to discuss the units and their techs with the end goal of having these map decorations actually get used.

The other purpose is to get an idea for what direction people want. Do people want the native posts to be little more than glorified arsenals with good techs? Or should they open different strategies that reward flexible thinking on given maps. Obviously I have a bias here, but I won't stand in the way if people are content to have the units be terrible but have niche techs.

So let's start with the Seminole. A group that people rated much more highly than I did simply because they are very strong for archer civs but obviously this makes them useless for any non archer civs.

We'll start with the unit first

Seminole Sharktooth Bowmen
Type: Ranged Infantry, Native Warrior, Archer
Cost: 75 food, 25 wood
HP: 115
Resist: 20% range
Speed 4.5
Ranged Damage: 16 (2x vs Heavy Infantry, Light Cavalry and Eagle Runner Knight, 0.75% vs cavalry and coyote runner)
Melee Damage: 8 (same as above multipliers)
Rate of Fire: 1.5 (both ranged and melee)
Range 12
Siege Attack 10

---

The important thing to note here is that it only has 12 range and it's got a set up time on top of that making the unit extremely impractical. It does have slightly higher damage than the average native archer (Aenna, Cetan Bow) but a 4 range deficit is significant and is the biggest reason they do not see any use whatsoever and honestly the Aenna and Cetan Bow are not the biggest draws of the Iroquois and Sioux respectively (not to mention all the cards Aenna can theoretically get) and the Seminole Sharktooth is significantly worse than both in terms of villager seconds and otherwise.

The niche the unit does have is the fact with the Guerilla Wars tech it can get 40 siege as a base. Pikeman by comparison have 32 and don't have ranged resistance.

Seminole Guerilla Wars
200 food, 200 coin
Seminole Sharktooth Bowmen get 3.0x multiplier against buildings.

Obviously not very useful as of current because as I discussed above the Sharktooth Bowmen just isn't very useful. However this could be used as a useful design direction for the unit to make it unique and stand out.

Seminole Bowyer
300 wood, 300 coin
Archer units get 25% increase in attack.

This is what the Seminole is most known for by players the biggest reason people rated them so highly despite me not doing so. True, for Aztecs, Japanese, British, China (Iron Troops or CKN), Sioux, Iroquois and maybe Portuguese with bestieros if we are being generous this is something worth considering and then forgetting the post ever existed. Even at 800 resources (counting the trade post), it's easily better than what these civs can send with cards. However for anyone else without a decent archer? No. It's near useless because it only helps the Seminole, Crossbows or other such units. I feel this sort of 'imbalance' where a native post is extremely useful for half the civs and useless for the rest is not ideal. Furthermore it's a 'build it and forget it' deal, you don't even need to control the post to maintain the benefits of the tech. However as I said at the offset, if this is the direction people want, I won't stand in the way of it.

What I would do
To start with I'd give Seminole 16 range. There's literally no reason for them to be so much worse then units that barely get any use as is. Secondly I'd lower the siege tech cost by half (100/100). A Seminole rush or 'harass' on buildings should be something people should need to deal with. As for Bowyer, I'd lower its cost to 200/200 but its effect to 15% but also give the Seminole Archers 2 more range so they are more viable as a mid game option and therefore its more worthwhile to get as civilizations that don't have good archers. Realistically I doubt these changes would be enough alone to make the Seminole worth using but little steps. The last thing I want is to turn any Seminole map into Seminole rush frenzies or something.

Another alternative is given the Sharktooths much better siege to begin with as to give them a niche and having the Guerilla Wars technology have a different effect entirely.

In any case I want honest feedback and thoughts. I want to know the direction people want to take natives, my own biases and preferences be damned .

[[Armag] diarouga]

I've already said that, but making natives as good (or better) than regular units is an issue, as it removes the civ uniqueness. I think that with 16 range seminoles, people might make seminoles instead of xbowmen. Natives are great when you run out of coin, or when you're maxed out, but they shouldn't be viable in every game.

I'm totally fine with lowering the siege cost tech, although it probably won't change much. The Bowyer upgrade is probably fine as it is, it's a very strong one.

[Peachrocks]

I've already said that, but making natives as good (or better) than regular units is an issue, as it removes the civ uniqueness. I think that with 16 range seminoles, people might make seminoles instead of xbowmen. Natives are great when you run out of coin, or when you're maxed out, but they shouldn't be viable in every game.

I'm totally fine with lowering the siege cost tech, although it probably won't change much. The Bowyer upgrade is probably fine as it is, it's a very strong one.

Bowyer upgrade is a strong one. I want to be slightly less strong for certain civs and more useful for others. But that's my personal bias.

The xbow argument is an interesting one, but personally I don't think that's an issue because Xbows don't have set up time amongst other things, but assume Seminoles were better than xbows for a moment. I suppose we should get it out of the way now because this IS going to be an issue and if anything it's part of the point of natives design, to give extra options to certain civs and make it so every match up doesn't play out like a spreadsheet. However I know this isn't desirable for you. The question is, does the balance team think Seminoles (and others) should be trainable to give advantages in certain matchups that otherwise wouldn't exist. Or should they be map decorations. This question has to be answered and answered hard, because if the majority doesn't want native buffs because of how it would change the dynamic of the game, this is all for nothing. Personally I feel they could be a more elegant solution to the problem posed on non trade route maps then changing numbers of everything but that again is my bias.

I strongly doubt i'll be able to convince you but there's a reason I started with the Seminole because even if you could train Seminole's over Crossbows or any ranged infantry unit, I doubt you actually would. Even with the buffs I proposed.

Even in the rare circumstance you run out of coin you wouldn't do it, you'd build something else or be trying very hard to fix that problem. Even if maxed, you could find another use for those resources. The Seminole Sharktooths are REALLY that bad right now. Even the buffs I'm not sure would actually change that. Which is why I made them relatively mild. To mostly stress how bad the units are because I don't think you actually know how bad their stats are .

Then there's all the static drawbacks all natives have. Firstly, you need the native post in the first place which usually requires map control and you don't get to choose where this is unless you invest more into an embassy which Asians don't even have. Secondly, unlike with Crossbows you are limited in how many you can build. Thirdly a native trade post is exposed to the enemy with the symbol and you can only train one type of unit out of it unlike a barracks. There are so many drawbacks natives have as a static effect that even if they were better (and almost all of them are significantly worse then anything anyone can train) you STILL be hard pressed to find a use for them.

[[Armag] diarouga]

I've used natives (navajo) on Baja California as Portuguese, after I'm maxed.

[Astaroth]

I've already said that, but making natives as good (or better) than regular units is an issue, as it removes the civ uniqueness. I think that with 16 range seminoles, people might make seminoles instead of xbowmen. Natives are great when you run out of coin, or when you're maxed out, but they shouldn't be viable in every game.

I'm totally fine with lowering the siege cost tech, although it probably won't change much. The Bowyer upgrade is probably fine as it is, it's a very strong one.

I don't really agree it removes the civ uniqueness. For one, natives exist only on some maps, require a TP and have a build limit.

If you have e. g. Germany, it would be possible to make it so that in some matchups it can be a viable, but not necessarily the best option to train natives as an alternative to xbows. That doesn't make the civ any less unique than the fact that other civs can train saloon renegados, fishing boats or xbows.

It just seems sad that maps have natives which in 95 % of games have no use whatsoever. At least back in the day, people would occasionally use natives to rush hard, but nowadays that barely happens.

[zoom]

Ooh, great thread thread! I'll think about Seminoles, and get back.

[I_HaRRiiSoN_I]

A range buff from 12 to 14 would be nice (not 16), and possibly a reduction of food cost to 60f (50f wood be too much). I dont think the techs need to be changed as they arent currently a problem. The archer tech is kinda similar to the sioux plantation big button upgrade, 400w for 25% attack on sioux gunpowder units and can be researched by civs by making use of a 1000w shipment possibly .

[macacoalbino]

I think I'll use seminoles as upgraded petards now

[Peachrocks]

I think I'll use seminoles as upgraded petards now

My fourth most trained unit in vanilla was Seminoles precisely because so many people didn't realize about their siege attack and how set up time works and how crippling it is on a 12 range unit and they didn't react to the native trade post symbol.

Needless to say. It doesn't work now .

[dansil92]

@Peachrocks only dutch and india dont have a standard archer unit... cav archers are significantly improved with seminole for russia and otto for example. Its just a big investment to go for most of the time and the seminole maps in the esoc pool aren't really geared toward long drawn out games.

I think the unit is mediocre at best but the short range is offset by their ridiculous attack (send a few infantry cards/native cards as iro and you'll see how hard they scale). At lower level play setup animations are less relevant and sharktooths are actually decent but at high level you could give them 20 range and they probably would still not be used. I dont think there is a good way to make them useful without breaking them

[Peachrocks]

@dansil92 Ridiculous attack? Only with all the Iroquois upgrades and they have Aenna instead which have 16 range (can be 18 upon big button upgrade) 5 speed, get conservative tactics, cost less in villy seconds and don't have all the drawbacks minor natives are saddled with.

You may be right that it may not be possible to make the Sharktooths useful without breaking them in some way, but can we at least make them less of a dumpster fire? Keep in mind I would ideally like some general passive improvements to help natives across the board so it's not just a stat upgrade. I still don't have a clear answer on what the balance team wants and whether these threads are worth the effort or they just bother everyone. Based on zoom's response they seem in favour of actually making them useful but I'm not 100% sure, especially since the response in these threads seems mixed at best.

Quite honestly I think you could make some of the natives better than standard unit types and they STILL wouldn't get used at high level. Apache are more or less case and point of this for some civs. They have identical stats to Dragoons and still don't see play even for civs that don't have good anti cavalry options.

[gamevideo113]

Imo aoe3 is already very map dependant, if you improve natives to the point where they are viable a lot of the time then aoe3 will become even more map dependant because some civs will be good on maps where they can compensate a poor army composition and weak on maps where they can't. I think dutch would go for skirm goon in age2 if they were on a jesuit/apache map and these natives were 100% viable.

[duckzilla]

Now that I think of it, I definitely want to play a game as German on a Seminole map with Manchu available in the saloon. The final stats (in fortress!) of this unit become incredible with 480hp/46dmg at a rof of 1.5 for just 220g/2pop.

edit: that's far better than war wagons which are more costly (150f/150c) and have less attack (42) with a worse rate of fire.

[Peachrocks]

@duckzilla Well yeah. That’s kinda my point here. The bowyer tech is probably too strong.

@gamevideo113 This is a valid concern and why I ask the question ‘does anyone even want this?’. Though keep in mind natives require the trade post upgrading them like any unit requires an investment which unlike standard vet upgrades can become useless if you lose control of the post and many combat cards do not boost the natives themselves.

[zoom]

After reading and thinking about it, buffing Sharktooth Bowman range makes sense, to me, too. As well, I would consider rebalancing the "Seminole Bowyer" improvement, to avoid it breaking the balance of units like the Longbowman and Yumi Archer, perhaps having it increase Sharktooth Bowman build-limit. By the way, the unit build-limit is 15 per Trading Post.

[Darwin_]

Instead of buffing range, why not drastically increase their base siege damage, and then make the guerrilla wars upgrade apply to all archer units, albeit with a smaller effect (maybe 1.5 or 2.0 instead of 3.0). It would further differentiate the unit and make them an interesting option from the very beginning of the game.

[Peachrocks]

Instead of buffing range, why not drastically increase their base siege damage, and then make the guerrilla wars upgrade apply to all archer units, albeit with a smaller effect (maybe 1.5 or 2.0 instead of 3.0). It would further differentiate the unit and make them an interesting option from the very beginning of the game.

The problem is 12 range is incredibly low for any unit. It's Musket range. Now also remember it's an archer so it has to set up before firing. These two things combined make it an incredibly easy unit to beat. Either the enemy gets close and its forced into melee where like all archers it's weak (and it should be) or it runs away and shoots out of its range forcing it to set up again. I agree the siege damage being a base feature on the unit would certainly make it novel and far more viable for early colonial style warfare but a unit that is basically good at sieging and nothing else is pretty useless (Grenadiers for instance).

The ideal as far as I'm concerned would for it to be an effective 'siege' archer that is ultimately outclassed by other units of its type (Cetans/Aennas) but isn't completely useless in it's role as an archer/ranged infantry.

After reading and thinking about it, buffing Sharktooth Bowman range makes sense, to me, too. As well, I would consider rebalancing the "Seminole Bowyer" improvement, to avoid it breaking the balance of units like the Longbowman and Yumi Archer, perhaps having it increase Sharktooth Bowman build-limit. By the way, the unit build-limit is 15 per Trading Post.

Yeah should mention the build limit being 15. As for build limit boosting techs, I think we should avoid techs that buff build limit and just do a blanket buff on built limit for natives and rethink the Huron and Cree techs which also increase limit. Also, I think considering that there are a fair few techs which boost the performance of a certain unit type across other natives (e.g Comanche and Horse units, Inca and Infantry), unless you want to redo each and every single one of these (there are a crap ton really), allowing the Seminole's to boost archers is acceptable. It probably should not be 25% though. It's one of the few native things that probably needs a nerf instead of a buff.

[zoom]

Instead of buffing range, why not drastically increase their base siege damage, and then make the guerrilla wars upgrade apply to all archer units, albeit with a smaller effect (maybe 1.5 or 2.0 instead of 3.0). It would further differentiate the unit and make them an interesting option from the very beginning of the game.

Because it's not significant enough, within reasonable limits. I like the idea. Both changes make sense, to me.

[zoom]

Instead of buffing range, why not drastically increase their base siege damage, and then make the guerrilla wars upgrade apply to all archer units, albeit with a smaller effect (maybe 1.5 or 2.0 instead of 3.0). It would further differentiate the unit and make them an interesting option from the very beginning of the game.

The problem is 12 range is incredibly low for any unit. It's Musket range. Now also remember it's an archer so it has to set up before firing. These two things combined make it an incredibly easy unit to beat. Either the enemy gets close and its forced into melee where like all archers it's weak (and it should be) or it runs away and shoots out of its range forcing it to set up again. I agree the siege damage being a base feature on the unit would certainly make it novel and far more viable for early colonial style warfare but a unit that is basically good at sieging and nothing else is pretty useless (Grenadiers for instance).

The ideal as far as I'm concerned would for it to be an effective 'siege' archer that is ultimately outclassed by other units of its type (Cetans/Aennas) but isn't completely useless in it's role as an archer/ranged infantry.

After reading and thinking about it, buffing Sharktooth Bowman range makes sense, to me, too. As well, I would consider rebalancing the "Seminole Bowyer" improvement, to avoid it breaking the balance of units like the Longbowman and Yumi Archer, perhaps having it increase Sharktooth Bowman build-limit. By the way, the unit build-limit is 15 per Trading Post.

Yeah should mention the build limit being 15. As for build limit boosting techs, I think we should avoid techs that buff build limit and just do a blanket buff on built limit for natives and rethink the Huron and Cree techs which also increase limit. Also, I think considering that there are a fair few techs which boost the performance of a certain unit type across other natives (e.g Comanche and Horse units, Inca and Infantry), unless you want to redo each and every single one of these (there are a crap ton really), allowing the Seminole's to boost archers is acceptable. It probably should not be 25% though. It's one of the few native things that probably needs a nerf instead of a buff.

I'm inclined to agree. Every tribe should probably have three improvements, too.