Any plans to boost "weak" civilizations?

I've had a lot of success with the Bannor, perhaps because I don't know all of the FfH special abilities that well.

But I do find that they can build awesome stacks; the guardsmen protect their magic users. Have them cast buff spells. After an early conquest, late in the game, go to crusade, cast the world spell, buff their units, and you can roll over everyone. In my last game I got 75 demagogues. Add the promotions they get from their special unit, a few first level spells, put in the order heroes, and they are quite tough. I use them first when I move up levels.

So, I guess I think the Bannor are tough largely because of their world spell mixed with crusade and the guardsman promotion, which has great synergy. Add that to good leaders and I think they are fine.

I'm not saying they are better than the other toughest Civ's out there, but I do think they are quite tough. My son (who is a better player than I am) says that the Bannor aren't great, but they are probably the best for my 'style' of play (which is build up to go on one big conquest to win).

Best wishes,

Breunor

I like the idea of Valor promoted Bannor.
Perhaps a race promoted with a version of command that would let it get units (ex this race would be able to capture mimics, vampires ect.)
Maybe a healing type function to get rid of bad promotions (a few turns for "weak" or "withered" a few more for charmed, a bunch (10 maybe) insane.
Just a few ideas, bad or good?

WCH said:

The problem with Bannor is that's all they get. Compared to the awesome power of the Calabim or Luchiurp, the crazy bonuses Elves get from building improvements on forest, even the Grigori horde of adventurers... Bannor don't really get anything at all. They're like playing a "default" civilization that has no real bonuses in a game where everyone else is crazy powerful.

Click to expand...

Wait, wait...
First off, Bannor leaders traits are a big bonus for me. Sure the civ has less "cool factors" features, and I'm not saying it couldn't use more, but it's still a solid and strong civ, or at least certainly not weak. Sabathiel, with his high xp units, command posts and crusade, is an awful war machine in my hands. I don't know what you find so awesome about Luchuirp, but I've had much better games playing Bannor than with a great deal of other civs, basically games in which I won with domination, whereas I never managed to do this with other civs, mostly because of the boredom it would cause. The biggest factor in FFH2 is the experience one (for example, Calabim are considered strong because their main units, vampires, can grab easy xp), and I wouldn't say Luchuirp is awesome at all to this regard, at least not compared to Bannor.

orangelex44 said:

Well, that's not quite true, they do have Crusades... but on the whole, Crusades aren't that useful (especially for Sabathiel, who isn't Spiritual). They're too expensive to maintain - you have to pay maintenance on the "free" units, towns keep reverting back to villages, it's a high-maintenance civic, you lose economic building ability, AND can't negotiate a lucrative (or any) peace. Usually, if you're in a position to overcome these limitations, you've basically won anyway - or you're doing it as a last-ditch survival effort, leaving you with a military and no funds to support it - i.e, you're FUBAR.

Click to expand...

that's because the civic is STILL bugged, despite 0.33 changelog mentioning it's fixed. Just fix the maintenance thing yourself and it will easen up on units costs.

onedreamer said:

Wait, wait...
First off, Bannor leaders traits are a big bonus for me.

Click to expand...

I don't get it. Why? Their traits aren't particularly memorable. Entirely decent, sure, but plenty of other civs have leaders with traits just as good... and also some powerful unique mechanics/units/whatever.

I don't get it. Why? Their traits aren't particularly memorable. Entirely decent, sure, but plenty of other civs have leaders with traits just as good... and also some powerful unique mechanics/units/whatever.

Click to expand...

Sabathiel is probably the best combination of conquest traits in the game (Aggressive AND Charismatic? Wow....), while Capria combines a combatant Spiritual (not as useless as normal, since she can switch to Crusade quickly and easily) with the builder Industrious (always nice). However, I do agree with you, WCH. Some other leaders are almost/as good as Sabathiel when conquesting (Hyborum, for one - Tasunke, for another) while Capria really can't specialize in anything and thus, gets beaten to everything. So while they are, perhaps, slightly above average in leader traits that can be much less useful than some potentially weaker traits that have a synergy with the unique features of the civ - notably Arcane/Summoner, which are much weaker to look at than, say, Financial but are really nice to have as the Amurites/Sheam, respectively.

Wait, wait...
First off, Bannor leaders traits are a big bonus for me. Sure the civ has less "cool factors" features, and I'm not saying it couldn't use more, but it's still a solid and strong civ, or at least certainly not weak. Sabathiel, with his high xp units, command posts and crusade, is an awful war machine in my hands. I don't know what you find so awesome about Luchuirp, but I've had much better games playing Bannor than with a great deal of other civs, basically games in which I won with domination, whereas I never managed to do this with other civs, mostly because of the boredom it would cause. The biggest factor in FFH2 is the experience one (for example, Calabim are considered strong because their main units, vampires, can grab easy xp), and I wouldn't say Luchuirp is awesome at all to this regard, at least not compared to Bannor.

Click to expand...

As for the Luichirp being powerful, Golems tossing Fireballs are a war machine even better than the Bannor's Crusade. They're easier to replace (no XP needed!) AND heal (with proper magic backing), and the Luichirp's apparent weakness of no XP is actually a great strength. They don't have to worry about it (possible exception of Barnaxus, but he can always be rebuilt). A brand-new unit is just as useful as that old, scarred one - there's no need to worry about saving that one unit from death at the cost of three younger units, or trying to rush that super stack across the map to prevent an invasion. It's a lot less micromanagement.

And I wouldn't say that experience is the biggest factor in the game. Sure, it's *A* factor, and an important one, but it will always take seccond place to a good economy and smart teching. Having some Combat 5 Warriers does no good when the enemy has base Axemen and Catapults in greater numbers than you (AI excluded, mostly because it's dumb). And again, the Luichirp can run a very good game ignoring XP entirely - granted, they get weaker as time goes on, but in the midgame they're possibly the best army in the game.

The thing about the Chirp Golems, is that they are strong even when you aren't ALREADY winning.

In most games, you have 'win more' and 'lose less' mechanics, that are both ultimately failures. If you lose, you lose. Playing in such a fashion as to ensure defeat but prolong it doesn't help you win. Similarly, strategies that help you only once you are already in a position of power aren't as valuable as those that help you get to the position of power in the first place.

For the Chirp, this is their strength. It doesn't take a lot of work to get Barnaxus up to combat 5. And once he does, his fresh off the line golems are very strong. Wood Golems come in at a base strength of 9, Gargs at 12, and Irons at 15. This doesn't require capturing metal resources, or winning lots of battles. It doesn't even require you to use specific civics to emulate. You get all that by itself.

Once you throw fireballs into the mix, and the fact you've got a lot more early game production, and you end up with a very VERY consistent battle strategy.

orangelex44 said:

Sabathiel is probably the best combination of conquest traits in the game (Aggressive AND Charismatic? Wow....), while Capria combines a combatant Spiritual (not as useless as normal, since she can switch to Crusade quickly and easily) with the builder Industrious (always nice). However, I do agree with you, WCH. Some other leaders are almost/as good as Sabathiel when conquesting (Hyborum, for one - Tasunke, for another) while Capria really can't specialize in anything and thus, gets beaten to everything. So while they are, perhaps, slightly above average in leader traits that can be much less useful than some potentially weaker traits that have a synergy with the unique features of the civ - notably Arcane/Summoner, which are much weaker to look at than, say, Financial but are really nice to have as the Amurites/Sheam, respectively.

Click to expand...

I agree with your analysis. My favourite aggressive trait (by far) is Raiders, but Charismatic comes in second. Aggressive isn't quite as good as either of those, but it isn't bad.

I thought Sabathiel was Org/Chm?

You're right; my bad... next time I should check what I'm saying instead of relying on my memory of old versions...

Breunor said:

In my last game I got 75 demagogues.

Click to expand...

I think my record is 147.

I said this in another thread already, but my problem with the Bannor is that the AI sucks badly with them. they ALWAYS get destroyed/vassalized very soon . they should get something that the AI can use efficiently imho.

[to_xp]Gekko;7321397 said:

I said this in another thread already, but my problem with the Bannor is that the AI sucks badly with them. they ALWAYS get destroyed/vassalized very soon . they should get something that the AI can use efficiently imho.

Click to expand...

I understand. I was thinking of the human playing them; obviously, the AI playing them is a different matter.

In some ways the poor AI performance is a little surprising, because they do seem to have characteristics that an AI built to play 'regular' Civ IV should work in; perhaps part of the problem is that the Bannor is really a 'late game' power -- their strength is their diversity and their ability to generate an all out war once they are ready. I usually make my 'break' with the Bannor around turn 400 - 450.

Indeed, I find the same with the Sheam -- powerful for a human (but still tough in the beginning) but outrageous, especially for a human, once they get going.


Best wishes,

Breunor

Zechnophobe said:

For the Chirp, this is their strength. It doesn't take a lot of work to get Barnaxus up to combat 5. [...] Once you throw fireballs into the mix, and the fact you've got a lot more early game production, and you end up with a very VERY consistent battle strategy.

Click to expand...

Well, a few points:

- people seem to complain about Civs AI. Now, while Bannor AI-led did suck in previous versions from my experience, they don't anymore in the last ones.
- AI wise, Barnaxus will always end up dead and quite soon
- AI wise, Golems won't have fireballs, because "once you throw fireballs into the mix" means you need to build a quite expensive building and the AI just won't do it consistently; and won't have any combat bonus due to the reason above.
- This means that Golem's superior strength in the hands of the AI is no match for a leader like Sabathiel who can have easily units with combat 3, which means +60% strength, which means a higher strength bonus than the Golems get compared to their counterparts.

If we aren't speaking of AI, the point still remains that in my hands (or in the hands of any non-biased human player) Bannor units will be more powerful because even with Barnaxus' full combat bonus, Golems will only get up to +50% strength and eventually a fireball, but they will be immune to beneficial spells like haste and regeneration and more.

Now, I'm not trying to make a point of anything, except that saying that Luchuirp is STRONG and Bannor is WEAK, is a gross exaggeration. The only thing you can say in all honesty is that the Bannor civ can list less "features" than many other civs.

Mailbox said:

I thought Sabathiel was Org/Chm?

Click to expand...

yeah, well Organized is a better conquest trait than Aggressive

- you can build courthouses quickly in conquered cities
- 50% less upkeep costs for huge empires
- ability to build command posts everywhere (aside the +2 xp bonus it also provides Commander GPP)

combine this with

- +1 happy in all cities
- less xp needed for promotions, Bannor can get 2 promotions at start extremely easily, and 3 promotions easily. Most often a Bannor Adept can get to Mage just as fast as an Arcane civ Adept.

combine this with Sabathiel favourite religion, The Order

- Basilica stacks with both courthouses to maintain large empires and with command posts for Commander GPP.

... and you'll get the combo of Leader-Civ-Religion with which it is easier to win a domination game. Sure, it's more of a "traditional" civ because it has less fantasy features and hence your strategy will be one close to vanilla Civ, but it's still a solid civ to play with.

I think it is not problem of balance but of variety. Each civ should have nice and efficient peculiarties in both warfare and peace (economics-building-resettlement).

The idea of free (valor+command)-like promo for BANNOR is nice, especially when raiders have lost +1 xp. (And I agree that guardsman is not so good now.) And what about bonus from workshops?

KHAZAD can have +1 hammer per military unit stationed in a city. Let the army work!

0.34 changelog: MALAKIM have "1 trade" from the desert tile. What does that mean? +1 commerce of +1 trade route? The latter idea is really great! It can change really much: Malakim can expand faster, keep bigger empire and really interested in peace and good relations.

ELOHIM are intended to guard sacred places? Let they have no maintenance from distance to palace and more bonuses from unique terrain features(=National parks +3 happiness, trade routes, defence bonus in city).

DOVIELLO still need a boost in peace sphere. I did propose before: each citizen can work 2 tundra tiles instead of one. (Maybe it is complicated to code.)

it-ogo said:

0.34 changelog: MALAKIM have "1 trade" from the desert tile. What does that mean? +1 commerce of +1 trade route? The latter idea is really great! It can change really much: Malakim can expand faster, keep bigger empire and really interested in peace and good relations.

Click to expand...

Kael said it means +1 commerce. He also has a long post in the changelog thread where he says that he doesn't want to go too far in giving different civs major terrain-related bonuses. But he said (in a later post) that the Malakim still need something, and someone else started (yet another) new thread with Malakim ideas.