Camps

[merijn_v1]

I've been playing with the idea for some time. I finally started working on it. Suggestions are welcome.

Original idea:

Spoiler :

The code wouldn't be a problem. It's entirely python. Copy-Paste (and maybe some minor adjustments) would be enough.

But it shouldn't included as a playable civ. But maybe they can act as a barb spawning spot. It will create extra barbarians. (The normal barb spawn maybe has to be softened a little) You can end the thread of extra barbarians by killing it. This removes the thread of (additional) barbs. Some turns later (25-50?), a new camp unit is created and it starts over again.

So when there is a NA camp, the barb pressure is a little more than it is now. But when you destroy it, the barb pressure is a little less.

I have the following in mind.

Unit: Camp
Strength: 10?
(Probably too strong for the Aztecs. But in the late game, it should have quite some strength to be challenging. Maybe 2 units, an early weak one and a later stronger one)
Move: 1

The first camp spawn after the Aztecs. When the first colony is settled, 2 more can appear. (Amount can be linked to the difficulty level)

Each turn, there is a 5% (?) chance of spawning a native american unit, depending on the type of tile. (Could also be linked to coordinates)

If a camp is destroyed, a new one will spawn in 25 turns.

To resolve the SoD problem, the unitAI will be set so it will try to attack immediately. (like the barbs do now)

The original idea was only for camps in North America. I think it can also be a nice addition for Rome.

Download (Test version)

 

[calad]

Well it would make Rome more intresting. Then there are no need for automated spawned Gallic cities.

 

[citis]

What do camps represent?

 

[merijn_v1]

I don't think they represent anything specific. My idea for them is that they are an alternative for the current barbarian spawn mechanic.

 

[Leoreth]

I think Camps could represent the "civilian" nucleus of nomadic or migratory groups that are represented by multiple barbarian spawns.

I have been thinking about this myself, it would be nice to have this specific unit spawn new barbarians until you defeat it, which would allow a more proactive way to deal with barbarians.

 

[merijn_v1]

I have been thinking about this myself, it would be nice to have this specific unit spawn new barbarians until you defeat it, which would allow a more proactive way to deal with barbarians.

That is exactly what I'm trying to get with this project.

 

[LatestGuy]

It would be great!

 

[Novicenoble]

I hope similar idea will be accepted to represent nomadic civilizations.

 

[Shadow Warlord]

Perhaps it should be similar to the barbarian camp from civ 3? A place for them to spawn from, but also have them defend. As Leroeth said, they are the civilian nuclei. I don't think it makes sense to have a camp that's much stronger than the units it produces when it's just the tribal families of the raiders. Giving them such high strength makes them more like fortresses.

 

[citis]

If camps are the sources of barbaric units they should be a little difficult to destroy them.

 

[merijn_v1]

Too easy isn't good. That way, you just wait for a camp to spawn, kill it and you don't face any barbs anymore. It should be about as hard as facing all barbs it will spawn.

 

[baseballpie]

Well, what if one spawns with several units guarding it?

 

[Shadow Warlord]

Well, what if one spawns with several units guarding it?

Exactly. I think raging barb activity in civ 3 had camps defended by multiple units. And even so, with some civs (like the aztecs) you may be too busy focused on the uhv or preparing for a bigger threat (conquistadors) to think about creating a stack to venture out and destroy barb camps.

I don't disagree that it should be well defended, but it should be by units rather than the camp unit itself.

 

[Leoreth]

I'd prefer a strong unit over defenders (combined with the only defend tag). Defenders require an appropriate AI and allow exploits.

Attacking the camp or playing defensively while waiting for it to despawn (which it should) should be an actual decision to make. If it is just another unit to defeat (give or take a couple of siege units to weaken the stack), it's too obvious of a way to get rid of barbarians.

 

[Shadow Warlord]

Yeah, i was preferring multiple units over one strong unit because you could just weaken the strong unit with siege and kill it in one turn. At least with multiple units (if the ai would focus on keeping a stack there) any surviving units could be promoted and healed, making it harder for your already weakened stack to conquer the camp.

Despawning the camp after a while is an interesting idea, and you're right about having a choice about attacking and defending. There are some civs that have the capacity to go out and attack and some that don't.

 

[citis]

Despawning can hapen if it goes under cultural control.

 

[yurisusuki]

The unit could have something between 8 and 10 of strengh

1 move per turn

and maybe produce 1 unit p/turn? The camp obviously shouldn't attack just defend himself, the place of spawn could be based on the real place of some of the greatest barbarians, so the place for the native americans barbarians and the old world barbarians could be very realistic, and maybe some new special units for specific barbarians camps (Maybe its a bad idea).

 

[strijder20]

For the Native Americans the U.S. engaged in wars with, the amount of camps could depend on the number of uncontrolled tiles in a rectangle in the central United States. So settling the Midwest would gradually decrease the amount of Native Americans.

 

[calad]

The unit could have something between 8 and 10 of strengh

1 move per turn

and maybe produce 1 unit p/turn? The camp obviously shouldn't attack just defend himself, the place of spawn could be based on the real place of some of the greatest barbarians, so the place for the native americans barbarians and the old world barbarians could be very realistic, and maybe some new special units for specific barbarians camps (Maybe its a bad idea).

There can be also different camps in different era.

 

[Leoreth]

There necessarily has to be.

Another solution I was thinking about is implementing it as a promotion or even like a leading GG. In that case the name should probably change from "Camp" to "Tribal Leader" or something. Then the strength could just be a modifier on a base unit, making it easier to scale with era.