The Huns for BtS

[cool3a2]

Thanks for enlighting me, Edgecrusher. I'd really like to have your files. You could send them by pm or, if camarilla is also interested, post them here. I tried it the way camarilla suggested it. I placed 15 cities and the UB (for this test I gave it a 10 as iPower instead of 2) and compared the points displayed above the minimap. Well, it doesn't makes a difference if I have the cities with or without that UB, so I guess this rating has nothing to do with iPower. Unfortunately I couldn't continue this test because the population in all cities starved... and with this the rating got lower. Well, I would have to give them what they want to keep the population constant or even growing. On the other hand this test got useless as we've seen that the rating displayed in the game has nothing to do with iPower.

So, according to what you said, edgecrusher, all these UB you've mentioned have an other advantage, too. Maybe we should give our UB a second bonus, too. So let's say 4 or 5 for iPower (I have totally invented these values, no reason to really use them) plus increasing either moral or culture. If we would take culture the cities radius would grow faster, thus the land controlled by the Huns would grow as well. That would fit, I'd say. But what could it be?

Well, now that you told me all this, I should do some changes to the UB of my magyar mod, too, since it is some kind of castle...

EDIT: I requested a graphic for this mod here already 2 weeks ago. It could be used for the UB, too (but of course not for replacing the palace). Unfortunately nobody answered on this request and it is too hard to do it by my own (although I already did some graphics).

 

[Edgecrusher]

iAsset will increase the points (in the lower right corner)
iPower I get the felling is just there to give the AI a "feel" to how strong you (or other AI's is). and thus because all the mentioned buildings affect the Military, they have a higher iPower. Its not really a "bonus", the way that the Spanish Citadel gives all siege units +5 XP points over a standard Castle. Its more of an effect of the other bonus. Because the Citadel makes the Spanish Military stronger over say the Babylonian. All other things being equal, a 3rd AI will view the Spanish as "stronger" vs the Babylonians and will make adjustments in their foriegn policy accordingly. Weither it be attacking the weaker, giving in to the demands of the stronger, etc...
You, I, or another human can look at enemy cities and make an estimate on their relative strengh. If we see a Barracks, Forge, Walls and Castle in every enemy city, we are going to think. "Holy crap, not only is there alot of defence in that city, but the Barracks will make their units stronger, and forge will make the quicker. They might be a problem".
The AI (I could be way off base here) cannot make that assumption without a "value" assigned to each building. That is all the iPower is.

I dont think you need to change the Vegvar for the Magyar (assuming it is also 2). The Castle/Vegvar would be the same, (because the additional benefits of the Vegvar are science, if I recall correctly). As mentioned, the Citadel's is higher is because the Citadel gives the Spanish +5 EXP to Siege Units.

Also regarding those files. I will zip them, and upload them here when I get home. just so you know. There is alot of "crap" worksheets in the excel files with various notes I have make. I think 1 worksheet was a list of all the art that had been made here. So If I needed something I could see if it was made, then get it. But I stopped updated that a whole ago.

 

[kivanc]

hmm good to know these. posts 100 and 102 were really fine. Thankie...

then if you really want that power rating idea to work, iasset and ipower must be applied together.

it seems a #2 increase of UB according to the repalced building type is what the ger already has. so the UB must have much more boosting than 2. of course this is, if you want to make it the only bonus.
on the otehr hand, giving a small bonus to ipower and iasset (etc. whatever effects how much strong the AI considers you) and giving anotehr bonus else seems a better idea; just like cool3a2 said.

for example: let's say ipower is 5 and so is iasset, with a small bonus.
and plus 1culture, 1 happiness, replacing barracks
hmm did i make it too strong, what do you think? Yes, too strong but existing Huns need it. Because I believe, the traits are bad and UU is also mediocre.

AGG/EXP is -IMO- a very bad combo, when considered alone. And I consider the Ikhanda within the top 5 strongest ones. So I feel, as long as you give Attila AGG/EXP traits, I hardly will agree that the Huns will be as strong as Zulus. If you are sure on AGG/EXP, then UB must be super to compensate it.

 

[cool3a2]

I am playing civ4 with my magyar mod only and I used to take Árpád as leader who has AGG/EXP. I don't felt he's weak. Anyways, it's okay for me to take CHA/AGG like Kabcsi suggested.

So maybe we could do the UB as follows:
- +2
- 4 or 5 for iPower/iAssets (I'd like to take a look on edgecrushers file to make a real suggestion)
- replacement for barracks or stables, like you want it
What we would need, is a name and a civilopedia entry. Is anybody volunteering?


As for the Magyars UB (Végvár), science bonus is small and it is also increases the cities defense. To rebalance it, I made it a bit more expansive than ordinary castles. So what I mean is, that I should give it a higher iPower/iAssets value... But this is a bit offtopic here.

 

[kivanc]

I am playing civ4 with my magyar mod only and I used to take Árpád as leader who has AGG/EXP. I don't felt he's weak. Anyways, it's okay for me to take CHA/AGG like Kabcsi suggested.

So maybe we could do the UB as follows:
- +2
- 4 or 5 for iPower/iAssets (I'd like to take a look on edgecrushers file to make a real suggestion)
- replacement for barracks or stables, like you want it
What we would need, is a name and a civilopedia entry. Is anybody volunteering?


As for the Magyars UB (Végvár), science bonus is small and it is also increases the cities defense. To rebalance it, I made it a bit more expansive than ordinary castles. So what I mean is, that I should give it a higher iPower/iAssets value... But this is a bit offtopic here.

well. if you would make him AGG/CHA, that would be very good really. then a monument repalcement with extra XP coudl also be fine: like the totem pole UB. CHA gives 1 free happiness and 1 mroe happienss with monument and 1 culture of default monument as well.
A little power rating and XP on new traiend units. That woudl maybe be overpowered already.
If you will adobt a mounetd UU, CHA/IMP is betetr than AGG/CHA.

 

[Edgecrusher]

In the "Huns" mod I made for my own personal use. I made their unique building a "Yurt", as mentioned in a previous post. A Yurt i belive is best described as a portable home for the pastorial nomads in the central steppe in asia. (Mongols, Huns, etc..).

Since the leader of the Huns is a military mind, the UU is strong, I think it would be overkill to give them a building that is also military related. It is making them very one dimentional. Originally I thought the UB should focus on the "Nomadic" aspect of the Huns, make the building the same as the standard version, jsut "cheaper". Also the Huns are an ancient/classical civ, so the UB should appear in the early part of the game. Anyway, long story short. I made the Yurt a repacement for the Barracks, with a +1 Happiness bonus and made it 25% cheaper. My reasoning was
1) A Yurt is a home, Barracks are homes for solders. I didnt want it to replace the Stable because the Mongol's, a similar civ already had that and didnt want to similar of civs.
2) Made it cheaper because Yurts were by design a "quick" home, similar to a Tent. A home a family (or army) could put up relativly quickly.
3) The Happiness Bonus was there balance out the armys conquest. The Huns conquored and then assimilated neighboring tribes. the +1 Happiness will counter the unhappiness attributed to being under foriegn rule that some cities have.

Note because its "cheaper" I didn't make Attila Aggressive. I made him Expansive and Imperialistic (this was in Warlords when the combination wasnt used.) In BTS I made another trait called "Tactical" and made him Imperialistic/Tactical.

I dont feel any bonus should be game breaking, and I also dont think they should be numerous. Most of the buildings have 1 bonus. giving them a whole list just unbalances the game. The bonus should be small. a nice compliment, but not one that if you do not get, your game is ruined.


The File
Link

let me know if you have any questions on how to read it. There is alot of extra "crap" i.e. buildings where art was created that I am not using, although I put some ideas next to them, when I get around to it, to incorporate. etc..

 

[kivanc]

@edgecrusher
"yurt" means "homeland" in Turkish. It's also used as a word meaning buildings with apartments reserved for students and orphaned children etc etc in Turkey. shortly it is always related to settling for sure. it might be possible.

on the otehr hand, a CHA leader already has 2 happiness bonuses in early game, so i don't think 1 more happiness will help so much.

as considering the nomadic property of the Huns, i still think the settler repalcement will be the best candidate for Huns. Of course if higher defense abilities are possible in the game.

 

[Edgecrusher]

granted its wikipedia and I take everything there with a grain of salt.

Yurt.

It does say that Yurt is turkish for "Dwelling Place" in the sense of a homeland not a specific building, but over time evolved to mean an actual building.

I just couldnt think of anything that screamed "Hun". Anything that one uses would be a stretch, specifically because they didnt leave very many lasting pieces of their culture.
I don't discount a settler option as a UU, I just dont think it would be very valuable. If you gave it 2 strength, then in the early game you just didn't have to escort it. Big deal, you save the use of 1 warrior/archer to be put somewhere else. In fact I would still bring an archer with a settler to be used as a defender, while the city grows. If you really want to use the nomadic aspect, you should just get rid of the settler and give the Huns the Mongol Camp Code to make it "spawn" units. (Archers, Axeman, Settlers, Workers and a Horse Archer) but that would require python code to be included.
That will create a truely unique game playing experience. The Huns wont start with a city. instead they get a unit that will spawn other units in its stead and they are forced to conquor their way. Although still give the camp the ability to spawn settlers. The Huns did produce some cities along the way.
I always wanted to incorporate "the camp" to be attached to certain leaders, make it attached to a trait. Attila of the Huns, Arpad of the Magyars, a pre-Genghis Mongol Leader, and maybe an Aztec/ Pre-columbian. Say if it was attached to Arpad and not Lajos for the Magyars, you have 2 totally different experiences playing the same civ.

 

[kivanc]

hmm i just heard about camp mode, now. not strange for me, as i never played any of the mods.

the settler with 2 defense, plus boost vs animals and boost with copper etc will help you build cities very far away than the capital. very useful for 2nd, 3rd, 4th cities. a very good beginning.
do you want to early rush someone? you can go settle near the strategic resoruce even if it is far.
and I also adviced that settler repalcement to be cheaper than normal settler, making Attila a little quarter Imperialistic. well, it would suit the Huns very well.
similarly, you can go settle near the stone and build early 3 wonders in a cheap way. very good beginning. especially much better for a SE.

and about the UB, well. I don't know much about culture of Huns. But mid Asian Turkic Empires were famous wqith their ancient manuscripts called "Orkhon inscriptions".
Those inscriptions enlightened that age very well.

As Huns have a simialr culture, that might be might be given the name for the Hunnic UB as a monument replacement.

EDIT: the inscriptions consisted of monument like stone columns with writings on them. the original name is "Orhun Yazitlari"
"yazit" in the meaning script

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orkhon_inscriptions

 

[cool3a2]

Well, I think CHA/AGG (for BtS version) is really okay. And I also think that the UU should be a mounted unit. As I said before mounted units where the one and only type of unit the Huns knew. The only unmounted units they had in battles came from their vassals. And because of the parthian shot the shock bonus of the current UU fits very well. On the other hand I also don't think that a settler UU would be that useful, although it would be unique.

The UB Edgecrusher suggested, maybe with a culture boost instead of a moral bonus. This way the hunnic territory would also grow faster. Because this would be a military UB, a minimal iAssets/iPower bonus (let's say 1 more than usual baracks) would also fit. A monument doesn't fits that much IMO, because it is not known that the Huns built something like that. It wouldn't be that realistic.

For me this sounds realistic and unique (because of the UB, which wouldn't get obsolete then, the Huns would be even different from the Mongols).

 

[Gurra09]

A little thing about the yurt you where talking about before:

Yurt and Ger is the same thing and if the huns had Yurt as UB they would have the same UB as the mongols when it comes to what it is.


Gurra09

 

[cool3a2]

Yeah, you are right: the name would be the same. The difference between them could be that the hun version replaces barracks whereas the mongols yurt replaces stables. And the properties would be different. I say "could" because we haven't really decided on that yet. If we decide to replace the barracks, the only thing would be to find another name. Maybe another synonym, or simply "Hunnic yurt" since the Huns also lived in yurts AFAIK.

 

[kivanc]

@cool3a2, ok yurt is still fine. culture is a very good boost.

but i still cannot understand why you don't make the tarkan a replacement of chariot.
if your tarkan had a great boost than HBR+archery could be valuable for reseraching early. but with the following weak UU, i don't think i would reseacrh HBR until elephants. and if i don't have ivory, then i would even wait until guilds. HBR doesn't have anything of value until elephants/knights.
i mean no offense, but really. what is the boost on this UU? i think it is only the decreased cost and the shock.

strength: 6
- movement: 2 (edited)
- cost: 40
- Immune to first strikes
- Doesn't receive defensive bonuses
- can withdraw from combat (20% chance)
- +50% attack vs. catapult
- flank attack against catapult, trebuchet
- starts with shock

honestly, i would really prefer even the simple axes instead of this unit.
at least, it would have the tiel defense and 50%to melee. and it would be free without HBR+archery. you need bronze working for chopping anyway. so why waste early beakers for HBR?

the yurt you suggest is a good UB. but consdering HUNs with this UU, i think the mighty Boudica is still much stronger than Attila.
with Boudica, i can guarantee, you will kill at least 2 of your neighbours early in the game. but with this UU, i cannot guarantee killing anyone.
IMO, a UU should have 2 important properties:

1) a UU shoudl guarantee a killing of at least 1 neighbour. if you cannot do this with a UU, then that UU is a waste. you'd better research otehr techs and get the maces or knights earlier, instead of training so many horse archers.

2) a UU must be good enough to travel by itself. but this UU cannot do anything without a few melee/archer units defending it.

for ex: immortals have tiel defense and can defend themselves. so as praets. ok these are overpowered. but many other UUs I know are also fine. one more ex, cho-ko-nu. it is a very good ALL-PURPOSE unit. this tarkan isn't.
this tarkan cannot do anything to a spearmen. even if this tarkan has a shock and combat1+2 promotions; still it is hard for him to defend against spears.
you always have to defend these units with anotehr unit. so you will never be able to move by 2 practically. you have to walk togetehr with your axes.

and if i would attack a city with such a combined stack consisting of axes+this tarkan, i woudl attack the city with axes. why? because an AGG/CHA leader's axe would have combat1, CR1,CR2 promos so early. and such an axe is stronger to attack cities than tarkan.

 

[Edgecrusher]

I still think the Tarkan should just replace the War Elephant, with a +1 movement. (and lack of Ivory requirement for a resource).

The Huns, as mentioned were nomadic. I could be way off, but I dont think a Nomadic tribe that lived in mountain/steppes would travel with Elephants. Granted 80% of the civs in Civ4 never used elephants in combat, but thats an argument for another day.

The Tarkan would be:
8 Strength
2 Movement
+50% vs Mounted

Your basically making a Praetorian w/ 2 movement. Which makes some sense because the Huns dominated warfare for 100 years, until they started to take on more than they could handle. I know they become very dependant on horses. Which is fine. Rome is very dependant on Iron, etc.. Anyway I always thought it fit. Again its only 1 small "bonus" but it makes a very strong unit for its time period and gives the Huns a chance to gain alot of ground before Pikeman.

 

[cool3a2]

The UU already has 2 on movement, with +1 it would be even faster than tanks. This is what wolfshanze wanted to tell me (plus some other things). The Huszár (UU of Hungary, I know I always mention my magyar mod, sorry) has also only a free promotion, compared with this the Tarkan seems to be okay for me. And I also don't want to make it replace the elephant unit because I want to keep the default unit system of civ4 and I don't want to make the Huns too much dependent on horses. To solve this Ekmek suggested a UB that produces horses, but I don't think a "horse fab" is really realistic. And it would be strange to see the Huns having tens of horses (well, that depends on how much cities they founded). Lastly I also don't want to forbid the Huns to build elephant units, I already explained that.

I don't know. If I go into war I don't use axemen for attacking cities. All I usually use are horse archers and catapults / trebuchets. Well, I normally start my attacks from wood or hills, don't know if this helps or if it is only placebo effect or if it is because of playing on lower difficulty level. I don't had any bigger problems with melee units, rather with elephants or other horsearchers. I also don't take any melees with me to defend my horsearchers. And I am certainly don't think it is a big thing to research that unit. One tech is need to get pig ressource etc. anyways, the other one is not too much to research. Even if you have a big horse archer army and have researched all necessary techs to build knights you can update your units, so it's not wasted.


BTW: You said the word "yurt" means something different in turkish, then what is the turkish word for yurt?

 

[kivanc]

The Tarkan would be:
8 Strength
2 Movement
+50% vs Mounted

Your basically making a Praetorian w/ 2 movement.

Now that would be a real UU. Especially, making it without ivory. But still, not realistic for Huns. And also, it is a late unit as Huns became famous with their appearance during 500BC-500AD.

What about the following?
Similar to what cool3a2 thinks of but with some difference.

Tarkan (replaces Horse Archer)
default properties:
- strength: 6
- movement: 2 (edited)
- cost: 50
- requires horse, HBR & archery
- Immune to first strikes
- can withdraw from combat (20% chance)
- +50% attack vs. catapult
- flank attack against catapult, trebuchet

edited properties:
- receives defensive bonuses
- free flanking 1 & combat1

It receives defensive costs so that will make Huns able to move the stack without any melee/archer protection. Tarkans alone.
Also, free flanking 1&combat1 in the hands of a CHA leader is killing. I don't believe it is overpowered, as horse archers cannot get city raider promotions. CG archers would still be hard to beat and so as spears.
And I deleted the decreased cost. It has default cost now, because it already has been a very strong enough UU.

flanking1 and combat1 is very good. after the free promos, you can go thru either shock or cover according to the unit defending enemy city. Or you can continue with flanking, mobility etc.
Giving it a strength of 8 also came to my mind. But free promos are better, because they will stay after you upgrade these ones to knights.

another idea coming to my mind was to make Huns able to build horse archers only with Archery and animal husbandry instead of HBR, but still the above one is good enough. I didn't want to make it overpowered. Such a strong UU shoudl come a bit late.

But if you want to make the Tarkan UU still the same as you suggested, then making it able to be spammed with animal husbandry would be good.

For free techs, i suggest Hunting and The Wheel. It will help for faster horse resource. That is also realistic, as they were nomads.

about yurt, as i said. it is the same word which Edgecrusher pasted the link about. It has many common meanings, and all are about settling. Yurt can be a homeland, a country whereas it can also be a building which people sleeps.
In the link example, it's shown as a tent. Still the same thing.

 

[cool3a2]

Your suggestion, camarilla, sounds good to me. I will have to go a bit deeper in the properties (I'll look what these promotions mean) to avoid it is getting too strong. Then I'll post here again.

As for yurt, I hoped Turks have a different word for it. We could have used that word as name for the UB.

 

[kivanc]

Your suggestion, camarilla, sounds good to me. I will have to go a bit deeper in the properties (I'll look what these promotions mean) to avoid it is getting too strong. Then I'll post here again.

As for yurt, I hoped Turks have a different word for it. We could have used that word as name for the UB.

YURT: yurt is already Turkish. the meaning of the yurt I told you is the modern usage. i didn't know yurt meant such barrack-like tents.
i looked at edgecrusher's ling and there it says "dwelling place" for yurt. so yes, it is the same work with the one in Turkish.
there are some words with the meaning similar to barracks but I doubt they are as old as Huns.

when people say Huns, i udnerstand both the central asian and european hun cultures. but western knows Huns only with european empire leaded by Attila.

as this yurt descriebd in that link is a central asian building, i don't know if Attila's comrades had such buildings as well.
but this is still sensible because my example of orkhon inscriptions were also from central asian göktürk culture. göktürks are successors of central asian huns. As Attila's branch of migrators settled Europe, the ones staying in Central Asia founded the Göktürk Empire.
As I told before, many otehr migrator branches settled different places.

In edgecrusher's link, it also clearly descriebs that it is the same thing with the GER. gher, grey house, many different names it has.

WORLD TREE: by the way, look what it says in viki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tengriism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tengri
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umay
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaman

so it seems I'm not wrong. like most ancient Turk/Mongol people, Huns were also Tengriist (shamanist like) In one place it says this:
Tengriism, a monotheistic religion, replaced an earlier polytheistic Turkic religion; it was also the religion of the Huns, Eurasian Avars, and early Hungarians.

while giving a UB suggestion, i just said Shaman House as i didn't know any name. But now, by looking at these shaman and tengriism articles, it seems the name could be "world-tree". Wiki clearly says that shaman priests carried drums and the drums had the symbol of world-tree. World-tree also seems to be sth like a monument building / totem.
I ltried to find a more original Hunnic, Turkic or Mongolian name for this world-tree, as world-trees seem to be common in many different religions, but I couldn't succeed yet.
So might it be "Tengriist World Tree" ? i will report if i can find a more original name, of course if you like this world-tree idea.
It seems this is the most common symbol defining the tengriist cultures. And Huns are exactly a Tengriist culture.

World Tree as a replacement of Monument: By the way, I really don't know why you stick into Barracks replacements so much? You suggest giving barracks culture and happiness. Yes, barracks are cheap for aggressive leaders but CHA leaders will build the monument anyway. A monument will give the happiness and culture already, so just make the UB a monument repalcement and give another bonus? This is better. I really think 1 free priest would be pretty cool. I looked at the UB types salon and resrch inst. they give free scientists and artists; not free great prophets and great scientists.
So this UB would give each city 1hammer and 1 gold, and 3beakers if you build the mids. But this would still be a weak UB. so i would suggest making it half cheaper (15 instead of 30) as well. so Huns would easily build these World-Trees in every city without the need of building the stonehenge in capital.
Huns would easily skip the stonehenge becasue building the monument UB in every city seperately would be more practical. And the capital won't waste time building it.

EDIT: If you like the world tree as a replacement of monument idea (half cheaper and 1 free priest), then Huns shall betetr start with Mysticism and Hunting. Or Mysticism and The wheel. By the way, AGG/CHA is really good for Attila.

 

[kivanc]

wow that's it. "világfa"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Égig_érő_fa

the otehr names for this are
"Égig érő fa"
tetejetlen fa"
"életfa"

hey cool3a2! you should have known about this better than me. Are you from Hungaria by the way?

It clearly says like this

"The shamans are the humans who are entitled to climb up the égig érő fa and wander in the seven or nine layers of the sky."

This monumentary structure shows the resemblance between Hungarian and Shamanist/Tengriist cultures.

 

[cool3a2]

Well, world-tree or világfa would fit for a monument replacement. The reason why I don't want to make the UB a monument replacement is, that no such thing built by Huns is known. On the other hand there are already 2 UBs replacing the monument, a barrack UB would be more unique (or did I miss some barrack UB? I really don't have them all in mind) and it could enstrengthen the military aspect of the Huns. We could also say making it only 10% cheaper (not 25% as edgecrusher suggested) and giving it a +10% experience for land units. That would be possible, I think.

As starting techs hunting and mysticism would also fit. But wheel would fit as well... Maybe we should orient on what tech is needed to research for the UB? Well, I would have to look this up again...

Are you from Hungaria by the way?

Now that's a question of definition. My father is Hungarian, my mother is German. A myself live in Germany (although this could change one day) and I have both citizenships. I can also speak, understand, read and write Hungarian, but not perfectly.