Discussion in 'Leader Balance' started by void_genesis, Jan 1, 2015.
What if the Eki gave a +1 unit supply? Truly a hoard then, and would address the supply problem.
I find the Huns extremely strong in most Pangea/Deity games, so if we were to buff one part of the Hunnic kit, we should nerf another.
Yeah, lost on upgrade would give you the choice to keep it. you could also make it expire after 20 turns too. That way, if a UU is captured, you could move it back, heal up, and redeploy, and the debuff/NoSupply should be worn off by then.
Capturing a UU almost never happens in time for you to use a UU in the same era, but it is still technically possible. I would make it just -10% CS/RCS, just so it's nullified by Honor/National Epic, but maybe 15% would be more fair. Hard to say until it is tested. It should make newly captured units absolutely melt.
Feels like a butcher knife when a scalpel is needed. The problem is specifically how unit capture affects supply so a general boost seems disproportionate. And, hypothetically, Huns already have a boost to supply because War Weariness affects them less.
Which is why we're trying to suggest a side-grade. weakening captured units even further, but preventing their supply issues. It's less about making them stronger than making their playstyle feel coherent, so one piece of the UA isn't hurting you in specific scenarios.
Ah, I understand now, thanks for the explanation, Pineappledan!
Honestly, I've never been troubled by the supply aspect of captured units. When you play as the Huns, you usually have lots of supply (due to the war weariness, as already noted, and due to going authority (more supply from population) and generating a lot of great generals), you also usually need a few "useless" units to act as garrisons (mostly for Authority) and I'll often use some captured units for that. Also, at worst I'll go over the supply cap by one or two for one turn every once in a while, but that rarely happens because of the aforementioned bigger supply and because it's not hard to leave yourself a bit of a buffer (a unit or two under the cap) instead of always playing at full cap. So I don't the UA ever really hurting me. On the other hand, giving them access to potentially huge numbers of units, albeit a bit weaker, that wouldn't count against the supply cap would be just deadly, especially in human hands. Even being weaker (for example -15 or -20%CS) wouldn't stop me from using them very effectively as free meat shields/cannon fodder (instead of having to use "normal" units for that) and in the case of capturing AI's unique units, their uniqueness would more than offset the penalty, especially considering that, again, it's a free unit. One also has to take into consideration that humans are better than the AI at preserving our units. I mean, we can try this as a modmod at first, but I think you'd have to go quite a bit lower with their penalties (I think at least -35%CS, possibly more, I'd have to think and test it) before you reach the balance level of them being free (supply- and production-wise), and then you'd again be facing the problem of how good the AI would be at using such units, whether it would recognize the need to use them as garrison, skirmish units, cannon fodder etc.
I understand Ekis being a problem due to the abundance of resources and freshwater tiles, so I'm in favour of slightly buffing the Eki (I like your ideas!) in exchange for a small penalty (perhaps temporary, like with captured civilian units?) to captured units.
Eki suffers from being a bit swingy. Sometimes there is loads of good space for them and others there is almost none. This is increased by the fact they get an bonus for having clusters of them.
Yeah I personally think the biggest issues with Eki’s is that there terrain requirement is too specific. In my current game my capital has literally no tiles I can place it, and on my entire mid size continent there is less than 10 total (lots of desert, rivers, and resources). Captured a couple cities on a neighboring subcontinent and those two cities can work more eki’s than my other 6-7 cities combined.
Its too volatile, and imo we can’t really adjust their yields or anything before we address it. I they should lose the adjacency bonus and in return be buildable over sheep, horses and maybe Buffalo on flat terrain. That or maybe let them be built on Tundra.
Just making them buildable over flat, unfeatured pasture/camp resources should help mitigate this problem at least a little. Sheep are almost never on flat land, but the ability to build over cattle/horse would make triangles a lot more viable with this UI.
It sounds silly, but I would exclude bison just to avoid the help text gore, because you're going to have to explain why bison but NOT elephants or deer
Don’t feel bad. I hesitated to list Bison for the same reason.
Eki replacing flat terrain pastures sounds like a good idea.
I dont like Huns at all.
The UA (extra land grab) is counteractive with authority, atleast it used not to provide gains from tribute policy (still the same?).
The capture unit is a) unpredictable and b) often leads to gifting a kill to the enemy which c) increase my warweariness.
If the captured unit appeared in my capital it would have value, I could heal it up sell or gift it and it would not mess up my combat line.
Eki's are good, I like them, use with open sky for really nice yields.
I haven't checked all messages but what does everyone think of the horse archers? It feels underwhelming to me. It's nice that there is no horse requirement, as you need horses for horsemen, but when you upgrade to heavy skirmisher you can get in big trouble of using too many horses.
I also need to figure out if the bonus on flat land applies to the CS or RCS, but that's on me...
I liked the Horse Archers which can be very effective & last a long time. You don't have to upgrade to Heavy Skirmishers straight away as due to the increased ability & many promotions you should have, they are worth the upgrade. You are right about having a good supply of horses, & to be fair would rather have them upgraded than the mounted melle units, which I find lacking as their UA ability after awhile. At least with the horse Archers you see what you get, unlike the facility to capture military units.
Yeah Horse Archers aren’t glamorous but they are definitely strong. They are obviously highly spammable and they get to Parthian tactics pretty quick, which helps them stay useful even if you can’t upgrade them. They aren’t why I pick the Huns but they’re still very nice to use.
I was going to give The Huns another turn, but edit the chance of converting a defeated unit with mounted one to 100% but I have no idea how to do this. In the Community Balance Overhaul>Balance Changes>Leaders>Gods&Kings>GKLeaderchanges it mentions the Huns. & Land Barbarian Conversion (which I believe is from vanilla) but nothing anywhere about converting normal units & their percentages. In fact cannot find it anywhere. Anyone know where this can be found.
Youngsteve, it has to do with the promotion "Coercion", which, like the promotion "Prize Ships", enables a feature called "CaptureDefeatedEnemy" in the promotionchanges.xml . Unfortunately, I cannot find any other files with the "CapturedDefeatedEnemy" line, but I think that's where you have to look for the solution. Hopefully @Gazebo or @ilteroi or @Recursive or @pineappledan or someone else more experienced with modding will be able to help you.
Thank you for looking. I had looked at most of the unit sql but not the promotion ones. Never knew there were so many. Even one called Prisoner of War, whatever that is for. Never seen it. Doesn't mean captured workers.
Further looking there is one called PROMOTION_COERCION later than the prize ships one, mentioning CaptureDefeatedEnemy, but not sure what it means.
Good luck, I'd be interested in changing this as well, so let's hope we get the information somehow
The actual function for this is in the DLL which isn't easily editable.
Can I ask people's thoughts regarding the accuracy promotion that comes with the Huns Horse Archer Unit. I am not sure how others play, but with Mounted Ranged Units I always go down the Barrage route, mainly to get the logistics promotion, whereas non mounted ranged units I go the Accuracy route, for the extra range. The only exception is playing the Huns, as you seem obliged to go down the Accuracy route to take advantage of their promotion. Do you think it would make more sense for the Huns to have a barrage promotion for the Horse Archer instead of an accuracy one, or are people happy with how it is.
I think I choose barrage when defending with skirmishers. As an attacker, it's alright to have accuracy as you don't want to kill the enemy unit and withdraw but close distance, melt enemy unit's HP when it's high, when finish with melee to advance and hold the line. So I think it's fitting.
If I would touch anything that would be the of Eki's place on tech tree, not on the direct path to horse archers. But overall they're still solid middle civ, not top by any means.
Exactly my view. I go mostly accuracy for mounted archers on the offense. In addition to what Closed Sky wrote, I see great value in the parthian tactics promotion, mostly for the extra move. And especially with Huns I want to give all kills to melee cav to get those converted units which are free meatshields. With Mongols I get a few skirmishers with barrage, but most with accuracy.
Separate names with a comma.