bribing non-barb units

[debeest]

I've seen quite a few posts from folks who rely on diplomats for defense against AI invaders. One of the host of things I've learned from this forum is that barbarian units (and cities) can be bribed very cheaply, especially considering that they'll be NON units if they're far enough from your own cities. But my invariable experience has been that bribing any AI unit costs many hundreds of gold pieces, roughly as much as bribing a size-5 AI city with 2-5 units and 2-5 improvements in it. I decided long ago that bribing a lone enemy unit is almost never worth the money -- only when I really need that particular unit out of the way (e.g., it's in a mountain fortress I want to get past, or it's poised on the doorstep of my undefended city).

Am I missing something, or is it really only in pretty rare cases that it's worth bribing a non-barbarian enemy unit?

The AI often seems to find it worthwhile to bribe MY units, though. I'd like to see what effect that has on its bank accounts....

[finbar]

Barbarian bribe cost relates to the unit you're bribing. They're set prices, so to speak. Horsemen, from memory, cost 20-something, and so on up the scale, with chariots, archers, etc, costing more. From memory, barb Legion cost about 110 gold. I'm sure someone will remember the exact figures. Barb units become NON units if, when you bribe them, they're closer to another civ's city (or a barb city) than one of your own cities. The real value in bribing 2-movement barb units is your opportunity to chase the barb leader who is usually nearby.

------------------
Founder, ACS Pedantry Institute
Founder, ACS Gourmet Recipe Exchange
Troll & Hydey Wrangler
Mono Rules!
#33984591

[tonic]

The issues have been treated at the Scrolls of Wisdom site. finbar has covered the Barb side well (as always )- I think from memory the formula for the cost of bribing a Barb unit is something like:

(Number of shields required to build unit) * 2 + n

where
n=0 for shields =< 20
n=1 for shields =<30
n=2 for shields > 30

So a Barb Horseman would cost 41 g and a Legion 82 g.

The AI unit costs are more complicated so the given link would be worth while following up. Variables are distance of the AI unit from its capital and the size of the AI civ's coffers, among other things.

Edit: One of the best AI units to bribe is the Caravan particularly from a distant AI civ about to establish a trade route with your city. In OCC or for your SSC the extra potential science bonus is sizeable. I usually put my upper limit at about 200g although it depends on the punt you take on whether the (to be revealed) commodity is in high demand or not.
[This message has been edited by tonic (edited November 07, 2000).]

[debeest]

My question is about NON-barbarian units, units from other civilizations. My experience is that they cost hundreds of gold pieces to bribe. I consider them too expensive to bribe as a standard form of defense, but lots of people seem to do exactly that. What am I missing?

I'll reiterate my frequent observation: the Scrolls of Wisdom are wrong, wrong, wrong. The formulas are not correct and not even really close to correct.

[tonic]

You can check and test some aspects of bribing AI units yourself by just loading an appropriate game and using the cheat menu. A complete study will certainly be complex but you can get some ideas by using the Scrolls scheme as a starting point (sure I'm not surprised there are holes in the stated scheme). For starters look at

1. Distance of AI unit from its capital
2. The amount of gold the civ has in its coffers
3. Of course the shield-cost to build the unit

By varying each of these in turn you'd gradually build some picture. It would be helpful for discussion and feedback too if you could elaborate on where the Scrolls forumula are amiss.

[East Street Trader]

In general I share your experience and, as a result, rarely bribe AI units.

I can add to the exceptional cases though.

Sometimes a unit is found wandering far from home and can then be a cheap buy. (A point that may play a part in Tonic's preference for caravan heisting ).

If you have Leo's, and there is a very small backward civ around, it's antique units will be cheap and will soon turn into something more useful. In fact, in the extreme case of a civ still producing warriors in the midst of armour/howies/mobile infantry (which I've seem two or three times) you can work a variation of the recruiting station outside a barbarian city tactic. Warriors are always a cheap buy as compared to riflemen (so I am sure that Tonic is right to think that, like the bribe cost of a barb, initial unit price is part of the formula). In fact, even without Leo's the price is worth it if the units are always "none" because you can use them in the cases where you occupy choke points and have need of a second unit to double up as protection against bribery. I often find myself tying down diplos and spies that way and an antique "none" warrior will free those units up.

Warships are good tagets. No doubt that's partly because they are often far from home but can also be because a single powerful warship can decisively change the balance of power in a particular theatre. I've cheerfully paid a good four figure sum for a battleship before now - and picked up several cities to expand a tenuous beachhead as an immediate result. This is particularly true if you are a democracy, don't have Shakespeare's Theatre and the nearest coastal town to the bribe site belongs to the AI. Once bribed the ship will be a "none" and that's very valuable in such conditions. On some maps a merchant ship is worth paying a high price for in such a case.

Sometimes an antique explorer will turn up in a remote location late in the game when his ability to work well with alpines makes him a good buy.

Lastly, there are cases where the fact that the bribed ex-AI unit gets to move in the turn it's bribed (a familiar point in the context of bribing barbs of course) can be enough to decide an otherwise close battle and thereby prevent a potentially costly counter attack.

A point of technique which this thread has made me realise I have been overlooking is that if the AI's bank balance is a factor in the price then, during the period in the game when it can be done, it would pay to try to extract tribute before sweet-talking the unit. A point which probably applies in the commoner case of bribing cities too.

An oddity that I've noticed is that an approach to bribe settlers produces the most exorbitant prices of all. I've seen some four figure demands. I suspect that partisans are also a premium price. Quite appropriate, I think, that those units should be more loyal.

Bye the bye, I've speculated whether the distance of the bribing diplo/spy from the enemy capital is relevant to the price (as in the case of cities) but haven't been able to demonstrate that it is (but that may be because nearly always being so far from the target's home means that a couple of squares can't make a difference) and also whether the price advantage for a spy over a diplo and a veteran spy over a greenie (again in the case of cities) applies. Anyone know the answer?
[This message has been edited by East Street Trader (edited November 08, 2000).]

[debeest]

East Street, those are all excellent points, many of which I hadn't considered and will have to remember. But I raised this question because so many people seem to take it as a matter of course that they'll bribe any enemy unit that comes around to make trouble, relying on that as a major part of their homeland defense instead of military units. I find that the price is usually in the range of 6-10 gold per shield-cost of the unit, and you can buy your own units a lot cheaper than that. What makes it worthwhile as a standard form of defense? Come on, I know you people are out there! Fill me in!

[N35t0r]

i think the money the AI civ has also affects the cost...
Or is it only with cities?

[Ming]

Against the AI, I very seldom find it worth the money to bribe units. Since the AI cheats and has tons of money, their units can become very expensive.

But, in MP, I love bribing units that are wandering into my turf. They usually don't cost much, and I can keep an opponent from learning more about my territory.
I bribe MANY, MANY, MANY, more units in an MP game

[Mercantile]

yes Ming does, i am one of those stupid players who forgets to stack his troops until too late, either that or my units admire the prosperity of Ming or Flash and *poof* they become solid citizens

[Hawkman]

Against the AI, I typically pay about 90-100 gold for bribing a Horseman unit and about double that for Elephant and naval units; warriors are even cheaper, but I dislike their lack of mobility. Best to approach these units when they are far from home and near another civilization.

The cost may seem high to some but with Leonardo's Workshop these NON-affiliated units will promote to very effective assets, with no maintenance costs. Without LW it's not worth bribing a lot of units, but a few NON-affiliated ships (especially Frigates) are very nice to have.

[Blaupanzer]

Distance from AI capitol does figure in the bribe. Test this by running a spy around a unit and try to bribe it from different squares. (Just as with cities, the game-measured distance that counts is that to the briber, rather than to the target.) I bribe when I need defenders in rather isolated cities and the opponent sends me one, when a rail is blocked by a unit and I have howies to deliver, when the unit can be used effectively in a planned counterattack, and when it's cheap enough because it's far from home. The last criteria means I bribe all the barbs I can. The price shouldn't get in the way of the strategy.

[N35t0r]

quote: Originally posted by Blaupanzer on 11-08-2000 01:13 PM Distance from AI capitol does figure in the bribe

Hmm, and i have noticed that on round worlds, the computer can hardly recognize that the world goes on...


*runs towards his computer at home*

[tonic]

OK I've done a quick run based on the MO I mentioned above. Some preliminary conclusions:

1. There is a minimum distance from the AI's capital beyond which the gold required to bribe a particular unit remains the same (minimum). This is approximately 15 squares from the capital.

2. The bribe-amount is proportional to the gold in the civ's coffers. For the case of the minimum (when the unit is > 15 squares from its capital), it is given by the equation:

G = M*S

Where
G = gold required to bribe
S = shield cost of the unit,
and M is given by

M = 2.05 + 0.0028*C

where C is the amount of gold in the coffers.

So the least you would pay for bribing eg an AI Rifleman (40 shields) would be the same as for a Barb Rifleman when the civ has zero or close to zero gold in the coffers ie 82 g. But when the coffers are at 1000 g say, it would be 194 g.

The effect of distance I've only superficially tested. For an arbitrary treasury of 442 g:
2 squares from capital, bribing Rifleman costs 596 g
16 squares away (the minimum cost) = 132 g

The bribe cost gets greatly inflated when the civ is really rich eg the corresponding figures for a tenfold increse in the treasury (4420 g) are
2584 g, and
574 g


[This message has been edited by tonic (edited November 08, 2000).]

[East Street Trader]

Good work tonic. I am surprised it is the capital - for some reason I would have expected that distance from the home city would be the factor.

From Blaupanzer's post I take it that the number of squares is counted in a line from the spy/diplo through the target to the capital?

Because of the similarity to the position with bribing cities I'm now starting to think the discount in favour of spy over diplo and vet spy over greenie will also hold.

Confirmation that the civ's bank balance is critical to the price will have immediate practical application
It occurs to me that this knowledge increases the value of Marco Polo's and/or the value of establishing an embassy.

Increased sophistication in bribery and corruption will racket up the need for careful stacking in MP I guess.

[Ming]

quote: Originally posted by East Street Trader on 11-09-2000 06:07 AM GIncreased sophistication in bribery and corruption will racket up the need for careful stacking in MP I guess.

Will racket up the need? Heck, only fools or desperate people move units unstacked in MP after writing is discovered

[Blaupanzer]

Ming, that also means your units tend to die in pairs, yes? Yes, EST, spies and vet spies get different prices than diplos. Not sure how the 15-square distance works. I've got another civ on either side of me in a current game. Using shortest count to the capitol, the price seems to keep going down beyond 15.

[tonic]

quote: <font size=1>Originally posted by East Street Trader on 11-09-2000 06:07 AM</font> From Blaupanzer's post I take it that the number of squares is counted in a line from the spy/diplo through the target to the capital? Because of the similarity to the position with bribing cities I'm now starting to think the discount in favour of spy over diplo and vet spy over greenie will also hold.

There is an important distinction between bribing an AI unit and an AI city. When bribing a city it is important to place your diplo/spy at a square furthest away from the AI's capital to minimise the cost. In bribing a unit, it is the position of the unit (and hence its distance from its capital) that determines the bribe cost and it makes no difference on what square your diplo is!

Edit:
Regarding the counting of squares from the capital, I used "approximately" in my post advisedly as there is some variation depending on the direction you count. For a location directly vertical, I've found it could be about 17 squares. The 15 squares are counted horizontally. Worth a few more tests I'd reckon.

[This message has been edited by tonic (edited November 09, 2000).]

[East Street Trader]

For corruption purposes you have to distinguish between counting horizontal/vertical and counting along a diagonal (more corruption diagonally).

Hard to figure how there can be a distinction between horizontal and vertical though.

Are you testing in straight lines, tonic, or with some irregular lines?

[tonic]

EST: Straight lines. I'll clarify the distance factor a bit more when I have the time to do some more runs. The corruption aspect you mentioned may be a clue as well.

[debeest]

Once again I'm amazed at how much people know about this game. Thanks for the info, especially you, Tonic; it will certainly come in handy. We haven't seen a lot in this thread from people who regularly rely on dips for defense, and I'm still skeptical that it's worthwhile to bribe AI units most times, but EST and others pointed out some useful exceptions. I like the warrior recruitment center notion. Like others, I've found that settlers are disproportionately expensive; that makes sense, since really they're just mobile cities. My experience with AI caravans has been that they're never less than 400 gp, and I've chosen not to pay so much for something I can build myself for about 100; but I'm going to have to give it a try, to see whether it's really worthwhile to let someone else build it for me AND make the trip.
[This message has been edited by debeest (edited November 11, 2000).]

[Mercantile]

i often wondered why cities cost different gold from different angles, i couldnt' ever put my thumb on it.... thanks for the info guys and keep up the good work

[SandMonkey]

I have been working on this since I read this thread, but I can't agree with the numbers that tonic gave.

I am using ToT, which could obviously account for numerical differences. When I first tested my numbers, I gave the AI 750 and 1000 gold and found the bribe cost of both of those amounts for a riflemen.

I set up the equations, using tonic's variables:

G = (y + x*C)S
204 = (1000x + y)40
176 = (750x + y)40

The numbers I dervied were:

x = .0028
y = 2.3

Beforehand, I had gone through and gotten G for when C equaled 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 175, 200, 250, 500, 1000, 1500 and 2000 gold. I plotted these on my graphing calculator and then tried ot fit my previously derived equation [ G = .0028*C + 2.3)S ] to those points, but the line only fit the two points I had used to get the equation.

If anyone can tell me how I can fit an equation to this I would be very grateful... I can't remember the "line of best-fit" command for my calc, but I don't think that is what I want anyways (it's a TI-83 plus).

I found a couple other things though.

• Government has NO effect on the price to bribe..
• size of the capitol has NO effect on the price to bribe.
• I found that, on a straight line (squares with touching sides), when the unit is greater than or equal to 10 squares away, distance from capitol no longer has an effect. Square 1 is the most expensive, and it decreases until you reach square 10, and from there on it stays the same for as far away as you go.

For anyone interested, I attempted to find if there was a common point for the x term. I used the equation:

x = (G/S - y)/C

Since I already had G, S, and C, I tried it. I used random numbers that I had already derrived, but this way proved inconclusive. The numbers from 10-100 crossed at the same point, but then all the numbers after that began crossing at different points. Could there be another variable that chages with C? Say, when C = 0-100, then z = x(1), or when C = 101-200, then z = x(2).

Let me know what ya think, everyone.

[tonic]

On the premise that a picture speaks louder...here is a graph of M with the minimum as defined previously ( M=2.05 + 0.0028*C ) shown by the lower dark line. The maroon line shows that both M and the slope are increased at a closer distance to the capital. One would expect a family of curves based on distance as parameter. The "curves" are quite linear.

____
The second graph shows the effect of distance on the birbe-cost. It's some sort of power function decay. I've checked that the critical point for the minimum cost is > 15 ie from 16 squares onwards for diagonal squares and > 10 ie from 11 onwards counting vertically or horizontally. Obviously there is some difference between the 2.42 version I use and the ToT used by SandMonkey.

[This message has been edited by tonic (edited November 13, 2000).]

[N35t0r]

WOW!

Good job!

I would never had figured that out by myself.

(wouldn't it have been easier asking Bryan Reynolds or whoever? )

[Shogun Gunner]

Can we get that in a PowerPoint presentation? I want to bring this to a meeting with my boss on Monday.

[tonic]

Just use the skill you've developed in serious civing - no challenge at all to transfer these to Powerpoint

[Shogun Gunner]

Seriously, Tonic. That's pretty incredible. It's obvious you are a master of civ!

[tonic]

Thanks for the compliment but I'm basically a simple theorist. Look at the Grandmaster thread for the real masters of the game! And also the more thorough work of the SGs in the "A for Alphabet" thread.

[Mercantile]

i am in the middle of a small map game and i have bribed many of my opponents units, and to be honest, although it is costly, its been worth it. I have been able to put up perimeters quicker and take the war to my opponents, instead of letting them come to me while i build up my cities. Slow expansion on purpose and alot of barbs. I have truly bought many mercenary armies from the ai and the barbs and reaped huge rewards for it. As units become better, they go up astronomically in price, and alas even my coffers ran dry. Oh well, looks like its campaign time for the Traders again

BTW those graphs, awesome