1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Civics: Next big change

Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall: Europe' started by 3Miro, Feb 18, 2011.

  1. Force44

    Force44 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    477
    Location:
    The Low Countries
    no! right from the start, so before gunpowder or flintlock.
     
  2. Swarbs

    Swarbs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    938
    That seems a bit ahistoric for Hungary to have its units counting as gunpowder units right from the start.

    If we want to represent the power of gunpowder in Hungarian armies then it should be a bonus to gunpowder units to encourage the Hungarian player to build them. So Hungarian gunpowder units get a 25% increase in strength, for example.

    Although I think you misunderstand Hungary's UP - it is about reducing the instability from occupying foreign cities, not helping with the actual conquest. A boost to unit strength will do nothing if Hungary is constantly collapsing because it is capturing cities with huge amounts of foreign culture in them.
     
  3. Arcangelus

    Arcangelus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2016
    Messages:
    18
    Location:
    Chile
    Is it possible to make a unit able to ignore, let's say, half of the defensive bonus(from cities)? That would be a way to represent high amount of gunpowder units for infantry before true regiments of them are available. However, I have no idea to what extend the Hungarian army used them, nor how much of a game-play advantage that is.
     
  4. Force44

    Force44 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    477
    Location:
    The Low Countries
    True, but the rationale here is to give Hungary a bonus from the start to compensate for the relative loss of power for their UB (no instability from foreign culture vs little instability from foreign culture under the subjugation civic (possible even the feudalism civic in a later stage)

    Not all civs need to be balanced but I am with Absinthered here that the Hungary would benefit from in increase in there UP here. (IMO Making the historic great power of Hungary in the mod only/primarily the result of the briljant leadership of the player belongs in a RFCEH modmod)).
    Spoiler :
    Rheyes and Fall of Civilizations Europe Hungary ;)

    Also I would strongly argue to give this bonus well before the invention of gunpowder as gunpowder units make it basically obsolete.

    An argument can be made though to gift them the bonus not right at the start but at a certain turn to counter the ahistoricity of the (proposed) bonus (in its current form).

    I disagree that that power should be represented by gunpowder units.
    Contemporary armies didn't employ gunpowder units to the extent of Hungarian armies because it was too expensive. (in this frame of mind) Giving a bonus to gunpowder units for Hungary would just tell you that the gunpowderunits of the other civs might be called gunpowderunits but really they aren't. (In other words/to be more precise) The application of gunpowder units by other civilizations leveled the playing field (besides the Hungarian army being the only full time professional army besides the army of France at that point in time).

    That might be the case. But I'm not sure you understand my understanding. So please endure me and let me elaborate (a bit further).

    :old:
    ^
    |
    (me)​
    There are two states (of being, not the civkind of states) in the game.
    X and Y

    (X Always precedes Y)
    X->Y

    Y is foreign culture in your cities.

    Hungary receives a bonus to state Y (compared to other civs)

    If state Y is made more prevalent the the bonus Hungary receives in state Y is applied more often and therefore stronger in comparison to other UP's.

    More state Y always means more state X.
    To make state X appear more often the civ would need a bonus to accomlish state X.

    Not the only, but the most frequent way of acquiring foreign culture is city conquest.
    A bonus to combat and thereby to city conquest would increase the prevalence of state X.

    Conclusion/Summary:
    IMO the UP of Hungary is tied to conquest.
    The bonus I suggest to Hungary should be applied in addition to the bonus they currently receive (no instability from foreign culture)
     
  5. Force44

    Force44 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    477
    Location:
    The Low Countries
    That also is an interesting idea.

    my ideas on how this might impact the gameplay

    The most obvious bonus for a player(as Hungary vs AI) would be attacking cities with cavalry.
    I think combat against other fortified positions will occur rarely.
    (but still it would be nice to have an edge when you messed up and want to remove a now fortified unit from your territory)

    For player vs AI(Hungary) it is a nice obstacle to overcome
    (the players sieges will be a little bit harder because their designated defenders receive only half their fortification bonus) and the impact on your cities from Hungarian attackers will be a bit greater.

    For AI vs AI I would not be surprised if it had quite a big impact.
    (In AI wars AI's tend to throw units at eachothers cities untill the civ with the weakest production runs out of units.)

    comparison to the UP I suggested

    It is (initially) applied less often.
    (I do prefer bigger applicability)

    On first glance it appears way more modest.
    (personally I view my suggestions a bit on the slightly too powerfull side a lot of the time, so IMHO often a good thing)

    This would give a bonus for the entire game where the bonus I suggested originally will fade out after the invention of gunpowder.
    (I have no preference in either case)
     
  6. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,895
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    To be honest, early Gunpowder units wasn't that significant in Hungarian armies other than in the second part of the 15th century, under Matthias Corvinus.
    Fekete Sereg (Black Army) was very powerful and rather unique for a number of reasons, but IMO it could be much better represented as an UU.

    Also, historically Hungary dominated it's region from 900 to the early 16th century. The Ottomans have to be a very significant threat to them after that.
    So their UP should add bonuses to earlier aspects of the game IMO.
     
  7. gilgames

    gilgames Priest-King

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    690
    Location:
    Budapest, Hungary
    I made my own research in this topic, and have not found many things to this gunpowder element, only a regular unit called "Hajdu" whom in gamewise could be the Arquebusier with: srt 8 +15% city defense and heavy infantry promotions. They were widely used all over the country and its a gunpowder unit afaik. The current UU is a powerful being in-game and comes very early compared to its description. I would say that in early game (stat-->blast furnace) hungary should have Steppe Horse Archer's instead of normal ones, and Armored lancers then get Hajdus with gunpowder.

    There were a talk about the missing chain of str 7-8 light cavalry between HA and Pistolier. But many articles i read about middle age warfare claim that light cavalry were in use to support other army elements.
     
  8. Force44

    Force44 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    477
    Location:
    The Low Countries
    That is a shame, I really liked the possible synergy of pre-gunpowder gunpowder units with the bonus to stability they receive for controlling large foreign populations.

    But to be fair, giving them gunpowder before the Chinese is stretching history a bit.
    And by 1400 (commencement 15th century) gunpowder is already invented and applied all over Europe in the Mod.

    On a sidenote, is it considered a problem that historically this is a tad bit early?

    Still, this whole gunpowder idea may turn out not be a total loss, we might get a second UU for Hungary out of it.
     
  9. Swarbs

    Swarbs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    938
    This would hold if the AI wasn't also able to achieve such significant power. In actual fact, provided Hungary doesn't fall victim to major setbacks early in the game, I generally see Hungary become one of the largest powers in central Europe in the mid and late game, which implies an additional bonus isn't necessary.

    Also, surely making the historic great power of Hungary the result of the leadership of the player is the whole point of the mod? It wouldn't be much fun or challenging if Hungary was so easy to play that anyone could win the UHV because of all the bonuses.

    This is where, imo, your logic falls down. You are assuming that there is a need to boost the prevalence of state X. But when state X is already high, as it usually is for Hungary, this is not necessary. It is state Y which is most likely to become the biggest problem for Hungary, because of the high rate of city conquest Hungary usually achieves.

    The UP of Hungary is not designed to make it easy to conquer cities, but to mean that when a skilled player is able to conquer territory rapidly, as Matthias did, they won't be undermined by poor stability and resulting secession. Particularly, as Absinthe points out, in the early period of the game where there won't be many stability buildings or other bulwarks against instability.

    As an aside, I do agree with there being an argument for more UUs for all civs. I think it would be good to have an additional UU for every civ to add a bit more flavour and reduce dependence on a UU which is often not all that useful for achieving a UHV.
     
  10. Force44

    Force44 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    477
    Location:
    The Low Countries
    @ Swarbs

    Hold on Swarbs. I am arguing from the point that I want to increase the UP of Hungary.
    You are arguing that the UP of Hungary should not be increased.
    If I were not to assume this statement untrue I could not (rationally) want to increase the UP of Hungary.

    You are missing the point here.

    The net bonus connected to state Y has decreased.
    More decreased state Y equals approximately the undecreased bonus of state Y.
     
  11. Swarbs

    Swarbs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    938
    Which is my point exactly. Your argument relies on the assumption that Hungary needs a stronger UP in order to be historically great. That assumption is incorrect, therefore there is no case to increase the UP of Hungary.

    The only valid rationale for increasing a UP is that the civ is currently underpowered. Hungary is not currently underpowered, so there is no need for an artificial increase in its UP to make it overpowered.
     
  12. Force44

    Force44 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    477
    Location:
    The Low Countries
    This is not the case.
    This is simply not true.

    What is the point you are trying to make? If it is that Hungary is fine as it is. Then OK, noted. But you will have to agree that we disagree on rationale behind tinkering.
     
  13. Swarbs

    Swarbs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    938
    What is your rationale for increasing the power of the Hungarian UP then? Is it just to increase it for the point of increasing it? Or to make it more powerful because subjugation now has a more limited version of the same?
     
  14. Force44

    Force44 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    477
    Location:
    The Low Countries
    I think Absinthred would like it improved now because subjugation now has a more limited version of the same.

    I would like to improve it to distinguish the UA of the Hungarians (and thereby the Hungarian civilization) a bit more from the other civilizations. (something I consider an aim to stride for in about all circumstances)

    My rationale is that this can be achieved by enabling the UA more often.

    The increase of power from the Hungarian UP I consider primarily an effect and not a cause.

    I hope this answers your questions.
     
  15. Swarbs

    Swarbs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    938
    I can see that argument, although the same argument could be made for the UP of France (Imperialism) and Poland (Religious Tolerance).

    The fact Hungary has a more powerful version of subjugation doesn't, imo, make it necessary to fiddle with it without a good reason or rationale of where we are going with it. Particularly when Hungary has access to other expansion civics right from the start, and so can run militarism and conquer at will without losing the benefit of the UP.

    That alone gives them a powerful and unique advantage in expansion that no other civ can match - the ability to gain stability from conquering a city whilst not losing any stability whilst the city is under occupation or whilst there is still foreign culture present. When you add that to the happiness bonus per city, it's a pretty powerful UP, which is probably why Hungary always ends up so strong.
     
  16. Force44

    Force44 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    477
    Location:
    The Low Countries
    In fact I do. (for Poland in the thread suggestions and requests)
    I am with you on this. You are preaching to the choir.

    I repeat however that my aim is primarily to increase the Hungarability of the Hungarians.

    With the upgrade of subjugation all other civs just became a little more Hungarian.

    And as a closing statement on this subject I would like to refer to the lyrics from the song Come out and play by the band The Offspring

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWH85xlhZbI

    ^
    |

    (link to the song on YouTube)
     
  17. Swarbs

    Swarbs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    938
    I think their 'Hungarability' is high enough already - it's not, imo, a problem to have their defining UP being their ability to be much better at subjugating than any other civ. Any more than France's UP is their ability to be much better at empire building; Norway's is to be much better at razing; Novgorod's is to be much better at bureaucracy; Venice much better at Merchant Republic etc.
     
  18. Force44

    Force44 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    477
    Location:
    The Low Countries
    Is Hungary still looking for a slight improvent of its UP?

    Early Hungary had a lot of raids and campaigns against what looks like practically everyone else.

    Perhaps the sheer number of all these conflicts can be simulated by giving them the ability to demand double tribute during negociations.
    (That would make declaring war and suing for peace (when winning) a lucrative option)
     
  19. gilgames

    gilgames Priest-King

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    690
    Location:
    Budapest, Hungary
    The problem is: this kind of hungarian behaviour was a legacy from the nations nomad period. In the mod it covers the first 100 years. And at very least from 1000ad it was gone. A better idea to give bonus to city attack against not walled cities. Imo.
    Btw hungaribility has a meaning in the hand of the player only. No AI civ act as they did irl. We only try to get as close to it as possible.
     

Share This Page