• We need to know your opinion about our social media accounts! Tell us here if you follow us on social media and what we could improve.

Fair change to dun?

seasnake

Conquistador
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Messages
1,892
Location
California, United States
Hey civvers, just wanted to get a couple of of thoughts:

Which of these seems like a more useful/balanced to change to our friend, the Celtic Dun?


Dun: Keeps the Guerrilla I promotions AND 10 percent esiponage defense
OR
Dun: No promotion, +1 Food per hill in city
OR
Dun: Keeps the Guerilla I promotions AND +1 Food per hill in ciy
OR
Dun: +1 Hammer per hill in city.

My goal is to balance my civ game so every unit/building/improvement/civ/trait is balanced and worthwhile depending on your strategy. Of course, I don't like to rely on just my judgment alone, so I'm asking for feedback ...
 
You could also have it give Guerilla I+Guerilla II, which opens up the powerful Guerilla III at level 2.

1+hammer/food per hill is potentially game-breaking, but I do like the idea of espionage defense.
 
Really think its as good as is? Most civvers have a ton of contempt for the Dun. Still, if there were a way it's bonus stacked with the Gallic Swordsman's then I'd probably be content with it.
 
You could also have it give Guerilla I+Guerilla II, which opens up the powerful Guerilla III at level 2.

1+hammer/food per hill is potentially game-breaking, but I do like the idea of espionage defense.
+1 hammer or food per hill would be ridiculously strong. But if the city is founded on a hill, then a +1 hammer and +1 food bonus could be interesting. That would still be very powerful, but I think the necessity of it being built on a hill, and needing Masonry would keep it from becoming game breaking.
 
is there such a thing as an "espionage defense" value? there's "thwarts rival spies" which comes much later with security bureau at democracy, maybe that's coded as espionage defense but it's not described as a percentage so i don't know. stationing a spy in a city helps but i don't know how that's handled in the code. i imagine it's an ability tied to the spy and moves with him, and can't be tied to a physical location. edit: i looked at the .xml and there is a line for buildings. i can't find security bureau in there tho hahaha.

you can get a lot of hills in a city, and since cities working hill tiles are the ones that need the most extra food, i think extra food for each hill would be way game-breaking. 6 free food from turn 1 anyone? ;)
 
Really think its as good as is? Most civvers have a ton of contempt for the Dun. Still, if there were a way it's bonus stacked with the Gallic Swordsman's then I'd probably be content with it.

If it gave the bonus to more units it would be better, but 50% withdrawl at 4xp is very strong.
 
Yes, you can give things an espionage defense value. The same option for security bureau exists as an option for buildings. Actually, I was thinking it'd be nice if Protective civs had that ability (10 percent espionage defense) but I'm not quite sure how to make it trait-specific, just building-specific.
Some, maybe extra 1 extra food if the city is built on a hill, but not from each hill in the city? could be fair.
 
[...snipped]
My goal is to balance my civ game so every unit/building/improvement/civ/trait is balanced and worthwhile depending on your strategy....

As far as improving it, maybe something simple like keep promotion and +1 :) and/or +1 :culture:. Scanning some of the buildings, this may make the Dun more on par with the other buildings. I agree with others that the :hammers: and :food: bonuses on all hills in the city radius would be too big.

This approach may be shooting off the mark a little though. Improve the Dun, but many things are not all balanced, and it does not have to be. While it is important to balance a game to make it playable; since you speak of balancing "every unit/building/improvement/civ/trait," forcing such large scale balance could be the wrong route to go. In the early versions of Civ, the total equality of the civs was one of the least appealing things about the game to me. Some of the most fun can be had when things are not balanced. It will probably also be near impossible to do so.
 
I just want everything in the game to be worthwhile, and then you pick what to pursue ... Jags for example are weak, but cheap and have a Woodsman promo so there's some balance. I just question whether Guerilla I, by itself, is any good.
But little things, like giving spies 2 moves or pushing citadels' obsolete point to chemistry are quick fixes.
 
...
My goal is to balance my civ game so every unit/building/improvement/civ/trait is balanced and worthwhile depending on your strategy. Of course, I don't like to rely on just my judgment alone, so I'm asking for feedback ...

I think that this the wrong way to look at things. I think that the different civilizations need to be balanced on the whole, but not all of the little pieces that make up the differences between the civs. The Celts under Brennus have two great traits which work together pretty well. To compensate for this their UU and UB are fairly weak, and you really have to work at it get good use out of them. But that is an important part of the game. I don't think that you should just look at the UB and say the Dun is not as good as the Incan Terrace, so lets fix that. Instead when you play the Celts you should use your G2 archers to quickly move through enemy territory using hills.

And even with the civs balanced as a whole, on some maps some will be better than others. The Celts work way better on Highlands than the Vikings do, and the opposite with Archipelago maps. But that is fine unless you play multiplayer.

Actually balancing the UBs just isn't going to work that well. What could you do to the Russian Research Institute that would make up for the fact that you will only have them for about 100 turns?

But as long as you don't try to worry about balance too much, I do like getting an extra food if the city is on a hill.
 
I think the UB is good as it is... my only problem is that it obsoletes with rifling, if it'd never obsoleted it's be pretty good UB after gunpowder.
 
How in the blue hell is it weak? With a barracks and either Theocracy or Vassalage or a settled GG, you can crank out 50% withdrawl chance units that race across hills and are essentially invulnerable to counterattack.
 
How in the blue hell is it weak? With a barracks and either Theocracy or Vassalage or a settled GG, you can crank out 50% withdrawl chance units that race across hills and are essentially invulnerable to counterattack.

I guess you and I are in the minority here. I don't think there is anything wrong with the dun either, and when I do play the Celts (which is rare), you would fear my Gallic Warriors because you can be sure I would have a dun + barracks and maybe even Theocracy and/or Vassalge.

These units are early game hill defending city attacking monsters.
 
The dun isn't the strongest of UBs, but it's way better than it is generally given credit for (as is the Gallic) - the Guerrilla I promo is okay but not exceptional on its own, but Guerrilla II and III are amazing promos and the dun puts you one step closer. Hilltop cities are near-impregnible, hills in enemy territory become like fortresses, you've got a quite significant movement bonus, and you get a good hill attack bonus with a FIFTY PERCENT WITHDRAWAL CHANCE. GIII crossbows and muskets are fricking great, and even longbows can do some decent offensive duty.

It works well with the Gallic as well, since you can have a whole fast-moving combined-arms stack of crossbows, longbows, gallics and horsearchers that can use its speed to inflict serious damage (whether against poorly-defended cities or improvements or reinforcements) and its defensive bonus to weather counterattacks.

Brennus rocks so hard it hurts. I know my arguments in favour of the dun and gallic keep falling on deaf ears, but I'm gonna keep making them :D

Extra food as well would just be broken.
 
How in the blue hell is it weak? With a barracks and either Theocracy or Vassalage or a settled GG, you can crank out 50% withdrawl chance units that race across hills and are essentially invulnerable to counterattack.
OK, so you rule the hills. But I rule the plains, and if you want to actually conquer anything, you'll have to come down and play eventually......;)
 

I think what would help is if it gave Guerrilla[and opened that promotional line] to all land units instead of the select few that currently get it. This way your whole army would be highly mobile in the hills[including siege].

Also if you do the hill deal maybe you should only have it effect certian types of hills. Unfortunately I don't recall if the hills in the Celts traditional area were of plains or grassland type. If only 1 type of the hills got +1 to food it wouldn't be as overpowering. Or if the game can calculate .5 values for tiles give the hills +.5 food.
 
OK, so you rule the hills. But I rule the plains, and if you want to actually conquer anything, you'll have to come down and play eventually......

Right, but it means I'm essentially invulnerable while I'm on the hills (which very well could be next to your city). It also means that I can race through your empire faster. Oh, and on top of all that, I get 50% withdrawal no matter where I fight.
 
Top Bottom