New Barracks System [IMPLEMENTED]

[raystuttgart]

Hallo guys,

I have now ported the sibling of New Harbour System as well:

New Barracks System

Game Concept:

• Military Land Unis and Military Profession need space ("Barracks Space")
  
• Civil Units / Wagon Trains, ... are untouched / unaffected by the System

• Defensive Structures (e.g. Stockades) add "Barracks Space" (but it will always be limited)
  
• otherwise there is just a small number of Military Units allowed in the City

• Once the Barracks are full other Land Military Units can not enter the city anymore (or be stationed)
  
• Thus players need to consider a bit more how to defend his Cities and by which Units.
• Stupid "I hide all my military behind walls", will not work anymore.

E.g.:

• For Foot Soldiers it is normally 1 but for Mounted Units it is already 2
• For Light Artillery it is 1, for Heavy Artillery (and Mortars) it is 2

Other:

• AI can handle it. (It has easier rules for it though.)
• It is all completely balanced in XML
  
• Civ4UnitInfos.xml: Units, Civ4ProfessionInfos.xml: Professions, Civ4BuildingInfos: Buildings giving "Barracks Space"
  
• It can easily be completely deactivated in XML by a single setting (GlobalDefinesAlt.xml: ENABLE_NEW_BARRACKS_SYSTEM --> 0)
• Barracks Space (needed and available) is visible in Colopedia, Mouse-Overs and in Cities

 

[raystuttgart]

New Barracks System now also considers Improvements that act like Cities.
(It is limitted though and can not be abused. 2nd level improvements double the Space.)

 

[raystuttgart]

@Kendon:
Could you write these English GameConcepts texts for this feature please.
Once they are written, I will take care of the German versions.

• TXT_KEY_CONCEPT_NEW_BARRACKS_SYSTEM
• TXT_KEY_CONCEPT_NEW_BARRACKS_SYSTEM_PEDIA

It does not hurry though, can easily wait until the new year.

 

[modmod]

A realism addon for armies.

I may implement a new specific Building "Barracks" instead

Not instead but additionally just like the fort.

 

[raystuttgart]

Not instead but additionally just like the fort.

I was originally considering to move that capability to a "dedicated Barracks Building", but infact I am not planning that anymore.
(It would just waste space in the City Screen since that "dedicated Barracks Building" would otherwise have no usage.)

When I create stuff like this, I often have lots of ideas that I consider and maybe even try.
In the end only the stuff remains that I was really convinced of in the "provisionally final version".
(Meaning I give that version to the team, let them try it and adjust it to their feedback.)

Edit:
I removed that sentence about "dedicated Barack Building" from the concept.
(The "Stockade" and its upgrade will stay the Buildings that give "Barracks Space".)

 

[nci]

@raystuttgart how will this concept affect the natives? E.g. Aztecs often have lots of land units stationed in their cities...

 

[raystuttgart]

@raystuttgart how will this concept affect the natives?

The logic excludes Native villages. It only checks European settlements.
(And AI also has easier rules, so it is not hampered by it.)

Main reason for excluding Native villages:
Performance

 

[Sarin]

Is it balanced for the slog of WoI? It's not uncommon in my experience, and actually necessary, to have over a hundred units in the most exposed colony.

 

[raystuttgart]

Is it balanced for the slog of WoI?

In my opinion it is, but I also use more versatile tactics in WOI (fighting a War of Attrition in the backland).
I accept loosing Cities first and then later having to reconquer them. I consider "turtle tactics" boring.

Generally however, we have not yet gone into "beta-testing", thus balancing has not yet been checked.
Once we have a real long internal test phase, balancing may still change a lot.

... to have over a hundred units in the most exposed colony.

That is not possible anymore. You can not stack them all in the City, you will have some in Forts, on Hills, in Forrests ... be creative.
Maybe you may just try a different play style. Do not worry too much and just give it a try.

By the way:
REF is balanced to be strongest when it can attack your cities and weakest on difficult Terrain (Forrests, Hills ...)
Thus it might be wise to not fight it where it is strongest but where it is actually weakest. (War of Attrition in the backlands.)

It is not necessary to "win by numbers". --> "slog" (as you call it)
It is possible to "win by better tactics" instead. --> "challenge" (as I would call it)

---------------

Also, if you do not like it as it is:
1) It is easy to balance in XML
2) It can be deactivated by a single XML setting

---------------

Summary:

1. The balancing still needs to be checked in beta-phase
2. I generally did not want to have "boring turtle tactics" anymore.
3. It can easily be adjusted or even deactivated in XML

Let us simply wait and see.
Right now, nothing considering balancing is set in stone.

 

[Kendon]

@Kendon:
Could you write these English GameConcepts texts for this feature please.
Once they are written, I will take care of the German versions.

• TXT_KEY_CONCEPT_NEW_BARRACKS_SYSTEM
• TXT_KEY_CONCEPT_NEW_BARRACKS_SYSTEM_PEDIA

It does not hurry though, can easily wait until the new year.

Here's the Barracks English text. I can't put it into ConceptInfo in GitHub because the last change there was so large (1.22 Mb). Harbours is written too, in its own thread.

"Cities need to have barracks for the soldiers. Defensive structures such as stockades increase barracks space, though it will always be limited. At first only a small number of military units are allowed in a city.[PARAGRAPH:1]As defences grow stronger, military housing keeps pace which is important because, once the barracks are full, more fighters (land units) can't be stationed in that city any more.[PARAGRAPH:1]That means that players have to plan strategically to defend each city, selecting the most appropriate units. For example a colonial militia needs one barracks space but a dragoon takes up two.[PARAGRAPH:1]A stockade provides 8 spaces. A bigger city will have many more barracks spaces according to the size of the fortifications. Simply hiding all available military behind city walls is no longer an option.[PARAGRAPH:1]A fort has four barracks and four harbour anchorages."

Pedia

"The main object of barracks is to separate soldiers from the civilian population . They have been called discipline factories for soldiers. The basics of life in a military camp have remained constant for thousands of years.[PARAGRAPH:1]During the War of 1812, Major-General Isaac Brock oversaw the construction of Fort York on the shores of Lake Ontario in present-day Toronto. There are several surviving British Army barracks built between 1814 and 1815 at that site today."

 

[raystuttgart]

This here is just the name of the pedia entry:
(No long texts possible)
TXT_KEY_CONCEPT_NEW_BARRACKS_SYSTEM

This here is the actual long text inside the pedia :
(What you see after you clicked the entry)
TXT_KEY_CONCEPT_NEW_BARRACKS_SYSTEM_PEDIA

I will combine your 2 text passages to the long text inside the Pedia entry.
I will commit it later today.

 

[raystuttgart]

@Kendon:
Your texts are commited now.
Thanks for taking the time.

 

[raystuttgart]

Small Improvemen to the Mouse Over in City Screen:

 

[Mr. ZorG]

hmm.. I meant a little different..)

 

[raystuttgart]

hmm.. I meant a little different..)

Like what?

 

[Mr. ZorG]

like that
Improvements (Quality) - UI and Pedia [ACCEPTED]

 

[Alignn]

Does this mean that once full, military units physically can't enter the tile at all? Or just that they won't benefit from buildings etc? If it's the former, can they still path through the city tile and make use of the roads?

 

[AemonAlCaar]

Why does a citadel not provide barracks space?

 

[raystuttgart]

Why does a citadel not provide barracks space?

It is a different Special Building.

Also it would not really create more space inside a City for troops to build their barracks / tents.
(In fact it in most cases took space away because Citadels were basically just combat fortresses with cannons.)

Otherwise:
1) Because I felt there was no need for more space considering balancing (I often do not feel "more is more")
2) The Citadel basically allows to bombard enemy Units / Ships in Ciy Radius (So it already has another feature)
3) Also I think the logic will just check for the "highest value" given by a Building. (It is not designed for summing 2 Buildings.)

--------

Everything can always be implemented / balanced a little differently. It is often just personal taste.
If somebody wants to invest effort to implement something better, go ahead and do so.

 

[AemonAlCaar]

In my imagination, I still have rooms in a citadel where soldiers are housed, which is also built in the city ("new" place). The "walls" are actually no place to provide soldiers.

I understand the technical side.
But I have never understood why the citadel is not simply an extension of the fortress. The city screen could then simply continue to display "wall" + citadel.
OK, technically it's nicer if three expansion levels don't have to refer to the same city walls for the 3D view, especially since another building is added to it.

From the "gameplay" I find it a pity that in a city with a great bastion can not stand more units than in one only with a fortress.

But yes: Especially considering point 3, the current implementation is much better in terms of workload/benefit ratio!