1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

about Barbarians...

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by epicivfreak, Apr 25, 2010.

  1. epicivfreak

    epicivfreak Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    235
    Location:
    USA
    As of civ4 there are now effectively three different levels of barbarians. We have the passives (goody huts), harassers (animals) and the conquerors (true barbarians). I've got a few ideas on how to expand and enhance these barbarian menaces.


    Passive Barbarians:
    1. If they have not been discovered by a certain amount of time - set a turn limit per scenario I would assume, they turn into Barbarian cities!!
    2. If you pop into a goody hut and get hostile barbarians - give those guys a settler so they can found a city and start growing. Maybe instead of attacking you they move a tile away, build a city and start plotting your destruction!
    3. Never give settlers from huts, it's too powerful, IMHO.


    Harassing Barbarians:
    1. Change "Barbarian Animals" to "Barbarian Raider" - I thought the whole animal concept was a bit silly (although I understand and appreciate - and of course still want, the added game play value of these harassers) and would rather see some other kind of barbarian unit than a panther attacking my scouts. The animals totally kill the immersion.
    2. Add "Barbarian Sea Raider" unit, which is essentially a galley with a full cargo of Raiders on board. It can drop these things near your borders to harass you. I know there's been a change in the concept of transports, but I really want to see raids from the sea like this - it would be so sweet to have. Once the sea raider has dropped his cargo, he can then harass your fishing boats, then ships, then if nothing else, block your sea trade - forcing you to deal with them. Perhaps they can even pick up raider units from land and bring them to where there are easier pickings.
    3. Give these raiders the ability to walk into your border and pillage or attack units, but not to go after the city. Just one more level of harassment for them. Of course, the great wall blocks them from entering if that's still how it works.
    4. The raiders get XP for the value of stuff they destroy, giving them promotions that make them better harassers! This should be the goal of these barbarians - get as much XP as they can - even if it comes from harassing those "other" barbarians (with cities).


    Conquering Barbarians:
    1. Please give the barbarians with cities unique tribal names as was done in civ3, that was so cool for immersion.
    2. Please let these barbarians also build settlers - eventually. If they can build up to like 4 or 5 cities, it would be awesome if they could somehow become another full-blown civ too.
    3. Bring back the Hordes!! I have a feeling this will be partially taken care of by the fact that the barbarians have their own tech trees and cities now, and they'll just sit there building military units. But please make sure the barbarian AI doesn't just send one or two units in at a time - build up a force first and go in with the intention of taking a city.
    4. Sea Invasions! I want to see these guys build up and do invasions by sea as well.
    5. Barbarian Wars! If you have unique barbarian tribes as per #1, allow them to conquer each other. The barbarian's goal should be to get as many cities as they can regardless of where they come from.
     
  2. Flexmaster

    Flexmaster Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2001
    Messages:
    55
    If they're going to build 4-5 cities they are no longer Barbarians but rather a Civilization. Barbarians are more like nomads who aren't as big or well organized as a Civilization.

    I never liked the roaming bears and wolves either.
     
  3. Semmel

    Semmel Large Sid Meiers Collider

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Messages:
    233
    I hate barb gallies!
     
  4. Shurdus

    Shurdus Am I Napoleon?

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    Messages:
    2,301
    Location:
    Settle in place
    Goodie huts are not barbarians, as in custom games they have a different tick box than barbarians have. To say that they are a barbarian layer or anything similar is just absurd.

    Also I am unsure if your ideas would make the game any better. That is, I do not really see what is wrong with the current system and I do not see why we would need a game that uses your ideas. It is fine as it is. Animals do not 'break immersion' for me, and I do not even know what that means. You do realise while playing that it is a game, right?
     
  5. Naokaukodem

    Naokaukodem Millenary King

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,218
    Goody huts should remain and cultivate the earth. (a la Colonization indians)

    Gameplay wise, those animal barbs were really a pain in the butt when it came to scouts. After all, scouts are hunters they should know how to avoid wild animals... beside that, wild animal are not that dangerous when we don't provoke them or they are not hunting. Maybe scouts should be able to see animal barbs even in the near fog of war?

    In Civ5, units can cross seas without having to build a boat. I guess that if the player wants to prevent that, he would have to build a small float a offensive boats, like galleys or triremes. So the importance of naval warfare, even in early times. that makes me think that in Civ4, at least, you didn't have that many coastal cities in order to build a decent naval army in a decent time. Not to mention that coastal cities are often improductive. That brings two points: 1. make possible to build (offensive) boats even if the city do not touch a coast. 2. give every city a bonus of 1 shield per ocean hex.

    I, too, think barb galleys were a pain in the butt. Never liked how they could surprise you. Adding a horde into them would make the things worse. By the way i think that in Civ5 any barb may be able to cross water without a boat. Hence the two points above. About them to be able to take a city, i liked how they had diplomacy in Civ2 or 3 (don't remember which one): they asked you to give gold instead of invading your city. that was very helpful because barbs are impredictable and often annoying. Giving them a sum of gold to get rid of them would be nice. But then, there is now in Civ5 the automatic defense of cities. Barbs could not invade anymore your cities from scratch. By the way, if they were on the point to defeat a city, this feature would be welcome anyway. the barbs may not simply vanish, only going back from where they they come in the following turns.

    Anyway they may not go after the cities now that those are automatically defended. Probably this defense will outcome their early attack capacity. Nonetheless, it could be cool that they just steal gold if they (can) defeat a city, and not take or even worse raze the city.

    Hordes with 1 unit per hex? I don't think so.

    Then barbs would become a major source of annoyance. Not sure it is the way all civ fans want to go.

    +1! If barbs are by definition in war with everybody, they should attack other barbs also! A problem: if barbs are noly labelled barbs, how to be sure that they will not civil war everytime? (like a barb attacking the very city he came from) To make this possible, barbs should have different nationality. We come closer of a true civilization!

    Indeed, i wish barbs and goody huts are true civs, differently mooded and at different level of developement. some civs would be agressive, some other would give you techs, gold, or rumors. Just like the indians of Colonization, again.
     
  6. Theon

    Theon Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    75
    Goody huts are replaced by ancient ruins in Civ 5, so that basicaly removes passive barbarians from play.
     
  7. henryMCVII

    henryMCVII Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    Messages:
    237
    Hm, instead of replacing animals I would suggest replacing units winning experience for hunting down animals with adding some other small bonusses. Maybe adding 1 food point to the granary in next own city nearby. Or adding one beaker (or so) to some "hunting technology" like archery tech or musket tech or even rifle tech and so on. Some animals may even get catched and adding some ressource bonusses then (for limeted time span [fur, food]? Or only if they are brought home and get domesticated [wulf -> dogs, elephants -> war elephants, wild horses -> horses]? Not sure... but since ressources are quantified now, it could make sense). Something like that, hope you got the idea.
     
  8. weltraeumer

    weltraeumer Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Messages:
    135
    Location:
    Austria
    In the beginning every human camp can be considered as barbarians, and through time, culture, science and engineering some arosed into bigger and more powerful civilizations. In Civ those succesful ones are pre chosen as "civilizations" and barbarians represent those who never made it. Don´t treat them like a civ, they are here to fail.

    Of course their role in Civ shouldn´t be a simple bugger as it was in episode I-IV. They have their agenda, and I would love to see diplomacy with barbarians. maybe more trivial, something like gold for attacking a certain city or gold for not attacking, but still diplomacy.
     
  9. MrBanana

    MrBanana Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Messages:
    380
    Location:
    Toronto
    They have nomadic tribes that spawn in unsued areas, start with some soldiers, and maybe settle a city or two. They'll demand gold or resources. You can ingore them and fight them, appease them, or bribe them more to attack a rival. :cool: Maybe even have the kind of deal ROmans made, and fight battles along side them, and they get some of the spoils.
     
  10. epicivfreak

    epicivfreak Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    235
    Location:
    USA
    The comment about barbs being designed as failed civs kind of makes sense. It also got me thinking that if they did become civs, that would destroy the Terra map experience as the "new world" would fill up with civs. I understand the terra maps are quite popular, so I guess I'd retract that one, but the others are still good IMHO.

    I agree on the diplomacy with barbarian tribes too. Paying them to leave you alone or harass a foe instead would be great.

    Regarding ancient ruins, do we know that these simply aren't renamed goody huts?

    Shurdus, of course it's a game, but there's a thing called game immersion, where you're either "into the game" or not. Animals as units, not being approriate for a civ-level game (IMO of course), break that immersion for me.
     
  11. GIDS888

    GIDS888 King

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    England South
    Play Civ IV Std map terra with no civs on the Americas, then see how hard it is to conquer any part of it from either the Old World or Old Orient - pretty much impossible as it is. Giv the Barbs any of your tweaks, you'd have to be nuking them in the 20th C just to get a foot hold!

    Always had a soft spot for the animals - they kill OTHER Civs Scouts too Guys, don't forget. How many good starts has that given you as much as bad - admittedly without knowing.

    That's why we Civ til 4am tho' right?
     
  12. Thormodr

    Thormodr Servant of Civ Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    4,886
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Animals are fine as they are.

    They represent the difficulties of early expansion quite well.
     
  13. awesome

    awesome Meme Lord

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,768
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    behind you
    of all the possibilities for things that could possibly break immersion, you chose animals? they don't break immersion at all, if anything they add to it. i mean, go outside and chances are you'll see a squirrel or a pigeon or something. how much more likely is it that there were even more animals before people settled the area?
     
  14. onepool

    onepool Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2
    Location:
    Valencia CA
    The whole idea of barbs is a little off. Barbs should be just like civs only w/o unique units and such. I wouldn't have a problem with the Assyrians becoming a competing civ rather than merely a complicating gameplay element that one accounts for, defeats, and then forgets.
     
  15. Woodreaux

    Woodreaux Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2007
    Messages:
    357
    Location:
    So Cal
    I do think killing a pack of edible animals near your cities should give a little 1 shot :food: bonus. So like killing a bear, boar or alligator gives your nearest city like 8 :food:.
     
  16. epicivfreak

    epicivfreak Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    235
    Location:
    USA
    That's another idea I could go for, ditch the conquering barbarians altogether and slightly increase the number of civilizations on the map to compensate. Though, I'd still like to keep the harassing barbarians around in some way - they serve a very valuable purpose of slowing down exploration and expansion IMO.
     
  17. Shurdus

    Shurdus Am I Napoleon?

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    Messages:
    2,301
    Location:
    Settle in place
    I agree with this. Barbasians is needed to add a sense of danger in the early game. Having units that are always dangerous wander the map adds something that adding a civ could not.
     
  18. Naokaukodem

    Naokaukodem Millenary King

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,218

    This.

    If barbs are civs, they could only be backwarded civs when it comes to explore/conquer America. See this topic http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=361972 to see how to proceed.

    It's either scrap barbarians or give them a more general and balanced pressure, like in the FfH mod, (discovered it lately, and i like it) because the different civ in one game are never equal when it comes to barbs, sometimes you will have plenty of them that it would become nearly insane, sometimes you haven't to deal with any. (inside your frontiers)

    As to slowing down exploration and expansion, i think a civ, or a constellatio nof civs, would do the job perfectly, considering that early civs should not be too much powerfull, BUT they could act agressively nonetheway.

    See above, some civs could behave like nowadays barbs. By the way, i now always disable barbs in my Civ4 games, so... (except FfH where they are more omnipresent and uniform)
     
  19. awesome

    awesome Meme Lord

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,768
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    behind you
    that's so crazy it just might work
     
  20. jahg84

    jahg84 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    25
    Barbs should interact more with civilizations. You can pay them off, pay them to attack other civs or recruit them into your army as auxilaries. You won't be able to expect to be at peace with them forever. The barbs tend to have a tech level that is just lagging the neigboring civs/alternate tribes and it only jumps to that level, taking a longish time if a very advanced civ suddenly shows up. Barbs should have a consistent unit density related to the food production of the underlying unaltered land. If barbs can turn into civs it should be able to be scripted so that it either does not happen in a certain area or you can determine which civ will pop up in a general area.
     

Share This Page