[GEM 1.14/CivUP 2.6 BETA] - Barbarian Horsemen

[AnthonyG]

I know there was talk of changing the chariot archers re: camps. (The quote from the wikia page is: "Camps are defended by Chariot units less often"). This is fine, good even, but we can't have horseman showing up from the get-go. I have a couple bearing down on my capital around turn 45. (Encountered my first horseman in the first camp at about turn 30 and he whacked my poor Warrior).

I'm all for a good baa-baa fight, but not horseman at the very beginning of the Ancient Era!

I assume this is the change (ll. 70-87 in GEM>Barbarians>GEB_Events):

function ReplaceChariots()
	local campID	= GameInfo.Improvements.IMPROVEMENT_BARBARIAN_CAMP.ID
	local chariotID = GameInfo.Units.UNIT_BARBARIAN_CHARIOT_ARCHER.ID
	for playerID, player in pairs(Players) do
		if player and player:IsBarbarian() then
			for unit in player:Units() do
				if unit:GetUnitType() == chariotID then
					local plot = unit:GetPlot()
					if plot:GetImprovementType() == campID and not plot:IsVisibleToWatchingHuman() then
						log:Info("Replace barb chariot")
						Unit_Replace(unit, "UNITCLASS_HORSEMAN")
					end
				end
			end
			break
		end
	end
end

Need to make them come later at least.

 

[ExpiredReign]

I wonder if it is possible to have them spawn only if they are in range of the 'Horse' resource.

They must get their horses from somewhere. Perhaps the same could be true of swordsman needing 'Iron'.

Then when we defeat them a small increase of that resource could be granted.

It shouldn't matter if the resource is under the control of a major/minor civ though. The logic could simply be they can raid the resource. Without actually having 'Brutes' walk up to your 'Horses' and ride away as 'Horseman'. Just have the mechanics of the process hidden.

Although 'Brutes' upgrading to 'Horseman' may be curious.

 

[AnthonyG]

Heh, Brutes upgrading to Horsemen would result in 1000s of captured AI workers and settlers.

For now, I'm going to beeline horse riding and give them back a taste of their own medicine. And get that worker back ...

Edit: Scratch that, I'm just going to get rid of them. It ruins the early game, utterly.

 

[Ahriman]

Yeah, early barbarian horsemen don't sound like fun at all.

 

[Hawawaa]

Maybe for the 3 highest difficulties? (ok seriously there needs to be a devil smile)

 

[Drakir89]

I just played an immortal game and was barely able to kill camps thanks to going for an honor start and getting a spearman upgrade event. My ai rivals were all crippled however, allowing me to pull ahead in city count, population, policies, wonders...

It's making higher difficulties easier.

 

[ExpiredReign]

Maybe for the 3 highest difficulties? (ok seriously there needs to be a devil smile)

Exactly!

That grin smilie just doesn't convey sarcasm properly.

 

[AnthonyG]

(Take your pick).

@Drakir - yet another reason to nix this. Last thing we need is something else to confound the AI!

 

[ExpiredReign]

Apparently the sarcasm smilie doesn't either.

 

[Hawawaa]

I love the kerb's devil smile more...

But seriously keep it for the hardest difficulties. This can make the game more challenging and fun.

 

[Drakir89]

But seriously keep it for the hardest difficulties. This can make the game more challenging and fun.

"Raging barbarians setting" would be cool, but you'd have to give the ai free spearmen or massive anti-barb bonuses.

 

[Hawawaa]

Ok ok, keep the other barbs at their normal time, push horsemen back 10-20 turns for top difficulties. I actually had a really early war going with China (she dropped a city way to close). Lost 1-2 units but luckily still took the city. (did one reload)

 

[Thalassicus]

What shall we replace them with? Brutes are too easy, Archers upgrade to Chariots, Chariots leave their camp, and Horses are too hard... I guess we can go with brutes.

 

[AnthonyG]

Horsemen leave their camps as well. Horsemen are/would be fine so long as they start showing up in the proper era. We get Knights later on after all.

 

[Stalker0]

What shall we replace them with? Brutes are too easy, Archers upgrade to Chariots, Chariots leave their camp, and Horses are too hard... I guess we can go with brutes.

Could you go with brutes back make the camp bonus stronger?

The bonus strength to me only applies in the early game. Even though barb units upgrade throughout the game my military bonuses simply become superior with time.

 

[Hawawaa]

I'm fine with them but on deity push back horsemen spawns by 10-15 turns. Easier difficulties you can delay their spawn even longer. Keep them.

 

[Dunkah]

Really what purpose do they serve? Should Barbarians really be able to kill units? Should they be able to capture units? Should they be able to conquer Civs?

I think that they should be an annoyance. If they kill a unit then it should be the exception to the rule rather than the norm. No one wants to lose a game because the Barbs were too powerful.

My suggestion is to make them all Brutes and Bowmen and if possible don't allow them to upgrade until such time as the AI's and Human player has upgraded. If not then stick with Brutes and just add 1 or two more to each camp.

Making them easy to kill but annoying would be better than allowing them to kill units and alter the way the game turns out. By making them try and Loot hexes and capture workers and Settlers but easy to kill they can capture your stuff but you can get it back, thus only delaying you rather than making a huge deal in your early game plans.

 

[Ahriman]

What shall we replace them with? Brutes are too easy, Archers upgrade to Chariots, Chariots leave their camp, and Horses are too hard... I guess we can go with brutes.

When you want something tougher, use spears.

 

[mitsho]

Can we get a Berzerker/Charge promo for Brutes that gives them attack bonus, but defense negative? (and camps nullify that) So that they are easy if you attack them, but hard if you sit idly by and wait for them to come at you. To simplify history to a horrendous degree, Rome suffered when it was "overrun" by barbs, not when it was expanding into "their" territory. (I feel very dirty as someone with a history degree to simplify like this).

The other option would be spearmen?

But I agree with Dunkah that the first question should be the role we want barbs to fill. My answer to that would be: On lower levels, a simple annoyance that is easy to farm for gold and culture. On higher levels, relatively easy to farm for an experienced player, but with some "peaks" of difficulty forcing you to change plans. These should in the end be able to seriously harm you and set you back (by pillaging your Korean farms, capturing your workers, etc. just like naval barbs are a pain without a navy as they block the sea tiles). In general, I would like barbs to be rather immune to city fire, but not able to take the city on their own (slow heal + cover?). So if you don't have a military of your own, they roam the lands beyond the city wall, unable to get in

 

[mystikx21]

I don't know that Rome suffered just that way either . The early Germanic invasions didn't go so well because Rome essentially assumed Germany was like Gaul. At the time, it was more like Afghanistan is now.

But... I do think it makes sense to give some barbarians a lancer style attack/defence adjustment for game play. At least on higher levels.

Agreed, the other option is to have more "pillagers"/spearmen for barbarians instead of horsemen/chariots. Horsemen/chariots are certainly more like an annoyance to hunt down and kill, but they're also free gold from the camps.