The Huns

The game is balanced around single player, not multiplayer; unless AI Huns performs well over expectations, I doubt Gazebo will agree to a nerf (particularly to an aspect that the AI cannot use well like capturing units).

Sounds easy to home-code though. :)
 
You spent 0 hammers on military and still have the lowest score, what more evidence do you need that you need to improve your gameplay?

I played multiplayer regularly about a year ago. Everyone got to ban one civ, the huns (and denmark, but he has changed) were banned everytime (we also allowed you to ban a wonder if you choose to, oracle and mausoleum were sometimes banned). This is a simple, immediate solution that goes a long way to address to balance issues. The mod is constantly moving towards balance, but fine tuning is a long process. Allowing all players to ban a civ, then using a drafting website (like fruitstrike's civ drafter) is a great system to improve balance of the game. What makes this system really good is you don't need a consensus, its a personal choice who you ban.

As for the Huns, they are really OP. In my recent game as them I didn't even get to clear a barbarian camp, capturing units on kill is absurdly strong. The only condition is having to kill with a horsemen, which is already like really easy to achieve. When people wonder why I find civs such as Sweden underwhelming, its because civs like the Huns exist
 
Please note unworked horses at turn 173 and complete absense of military units.
My strategy was to rush triremes and then defend coast between our islands until I advance and get ahead of him. This was the only viable strategy, ok? I had NO CHANCE of defeating Huns on land, especially on such completely open flat continent without mountains and barely some hills and forest squares (just see screenshot, this is the worst possible type of continent for defence against horses). Every military unit built would delay triremes further. I almost managed to get triremes on time, just needed maybe 5 more turns and coast would be secured (Huns have no advantage on water and he had less coastal cities and I think no Sailing yet). But elephants came 5 turns earlier than I was ready. Well, I almost succeeded. Nothing else I could do anyway (trying to defend on land vs Huns with superior production would just be delayed suicide).
 
You spent 0 hammers on military and still have the lowest score
Because I barely had any production tiles. In early game production is critical to start empire growth, but everything was so slow for me. First settler took 30 turns to build (on Epic) in capital of size 3 (typically its 10-15 turns). And other cities had same problem. So I concentrated on farms and gold, to get production from specialists ans hurry buildings often. Also I got production bonuses for religion in the end. My empire really started advancing by that time, but that's when he invaded with elephants.
And I didn't improve horses because I didn't research Animal Husbandry for a while (was rushing Sailing), and then my workers were busy with other things. Nothing would have changed if I improved horses, because his production was ahead anyway (just see his perfect island) and I wouldn't be able to defend with Horsemen in any case (triremes were the only hope).
 
Last edited:
So turn ancient ruins, event system and random civ for picking of, just use what everyone recommened for multiplayer, everyone bans one civ, then there is the dice roll from which civ you can pick and get started. And maybe you guys should stop playing communitas, if that is such a problem ...
 
And maybe you guys should stop playing communitas, if that is such a problem ...
This time it occured with Tectonic.
The problem is that all map scripts use some random here and there, and random often turns against me. Even in our last game where I'm Huns - it may seem that I'm extremely lucky to get powerful race, but in fact it's not - L29Ah got his own private continent where he advances to singularity while our continent is stuck in endless wars (most of continent for some reason united against me and so I can't advance much). So L29Ah already got ahead of me and is gonna win this again, because random decided so. He is luckiest player in maybe 90% of games, and I don't remember him even once in horsehockey situation like being Arabia and being placed one-on-one vs Huns player on flat horse-raid-friendly continent without production (I get such starting conditions most of the times).
 
Unless you play on set maps, there's a random element. The guy I play with all the time and I deal with this by doing start mulligans. We also play with a mod that starts with a bigger hunk of our starting area revealed. It's not perfect, by any means, but we still have fun.
 
Maybe you have because you don't have overwhelming unluckyness as some people do ( i.e. me ). In fact I feel not that I'm playing against players or bots, but rather that I'm at constant war with random number generator which tries to crush me at every step.
Though I don't notice much unluckyness in real life or some other games, in civ5 it's disgusting, and often presence of L29Ah makes it even worse. ( I do pretty well vs Voker57 if we play duels, but if there's L29Ah in game - I'm getting fudged by statistically unlikely events over and over again )
 
In my experience, the Huns aren't too strong in the AI hands.

But if the majority of community/Gazebo decide to change the UA to be less strong in human hands/more equal in AI's hand, I'd recommend, if possible, something like: "Clearing a barbarian encampment spawns a random UU and grants +30xp to the clearing unit, razing a city spawns 2 UUs and grants +25xp to all existing units".
 
Nj666, if you think other people have better luck with the starting RNG (start location, civ,...), a suggestion: -> once you start a game, on turn 0 switch your position with one of the other players/AIs.
 
But if the majority of community/Gazebo decide to change the UA to be less strong in human hands/more equal in AI's hand, I'd recommend, if possible, something like: "Clearing a barbarian encampment spawns a random UU and grants +30xp to the clearing unit, razing a city spawns 2 UUs and grants +25xp to all existing units".
+25 XP to all existing units is a lot (like I think if you raze 3 cities you probably win the game)

A bonus to razing cities is a fine idea though
 
a suggestion: -> once you start a game, on turn 0 switch your position with one of the other players/AIs.
This won't help, because I won't know which position is better so I will choose blindly, and luck will influence it too.
 
Nj666, if you think other people have better luck with the starting RNG (start location, civ,...), a suggestion: -> once you start a game, on turn 0 switch your position with one of the other players/AIs.
You need to remember that his view of luck is a quasi-religious "Nothing bad that happens to me is my fault, everything I do is a result of massive skill and fate will conspire against all workarounds."

He's claimed that if he invested in bitcoin it would crash the market. AKA his 'luck' is more important than the millions of other investors.

It's pointless to discuss such a clearly delusional worldview.
 
CrazyG, you might be right, +25xp was a brainstorming, off-the-cuff idea. What number would you suggest?
 
You're right, ElliotS, I temporarily indulged myself, but I can see that leads to cluttering this Huns thread.

To get back on track -> Elliot, would you make any changes to the Huns, and if yes, what kind?
 
You need to remember that his view of luck is a quasi-religious "Nothing bad that happens to me is my fault, everything I do is a result of massive skill and fate will conspire against all workarounds."
Not in this case, no. In most cases I get objectively worse (and often unplayable) conditions on game start, such as getting peaceful race and spawn between 2 warmonger AIs, or one-on-one vs player with warmonfer civ. Could I do anything to influence starting conditions? No, it's 100% generated by random generator. After that I do the best I can, but so are other players and their superior starting conditions obviously let them get ahead.
And as hard as I tried to remember opposite situations ( where I got clearly superior starting conditions than other player ) - I barely could.
I don't know the reason for this but I can't ignore overwhelming evidence.
L29Ah is lucky in most games to degree of guaranteed victory. It's an objective fact. Even in last game where I got overpowered Huns - random placed him on separate continent to save him from harm, while everybody else except for maybe one AI was placed on our continent to prevent me from rising to real power. Coinscidence? Could be. Coinscidence 4 out of 5 games? I DON'T THINK SO.

I'm really tired of zealots shouting their asses off about how luck does not exist, and yet not providing ANY evidence.
If anyone doubts my skill I'm always ready to crush him in controlled environment where influence of random is minimized (mirror map, same race, same starting positions, no events or ruins etc).
 
L29Ah is lucky in most games to degree of guaranteed victory. It's an objective fact. Even in last game where I got overpowered Huns - random placed him on separate continent to save him from harm, while everybody else except for maybe one AI was placed on our continent to prevent me from rising to real power. Coinscidence? Could be. Coinscidence 4 out of 5 games? I DON'T THINK SO.
Isn't he on a different continent than you in that screen shot?
Isn't your start is really good in that screen shot? .(pearls are amazing in this mod)
Are you settling your capital well?
You had a lowish hammer start, how did you address that? Early fishing boats, animal husbandry and mining? If you took progress, an early construction tech, stoneworks and quarries will bring those stone up to 5 hammers each.
Are you playing into your civs
What is your pantheon? Were their better choices available?

It looks like you spent a lot of time having your workers make farms on those grassland tiles, that is a really bad move on this start. You just aren't making sense, if the start is so bad because low hammers you don't build farms. You need to discover and improve those pastures ASAP, even putting a mine on the hill is a much better idea than a farm is (3 food is a bad tile, even the unimproved stone is probably better for this situation)

The overwhelming evidence is confirmation bias (a lot of player would prefer to be put on a continent with an AI, eat him and take all his land)

The other thing to do that addresses all this random thing, that has been suggested numerous times but seems to be the only thing you don't quote and reply to, CHANGE YOUR SETTINGS. Very few players will play continents type maps competitively. Epic speed isn't well balanced, civs like Germany or Arabia get no chance to do anything before early UUs win the game. Use a draft system (http://civdrafter.com/civ5/#/form/playerCount), rather than just random civs (let each player get 3 options and choose one). Ban a civ like the huns if your group agrees he is OP

Please, take the suggestions or stop trolling these forums. "You're wrong, I have just have bad luck, nerf this now" isn't swaying anyones mind (this is a clear fact, no matter how bad you believe your luck to be, you should be able to realize you aren't even close to convincing anyone else)
 
You're right, ElliotS, I temporarily indulged myself, but I can see that leads to cluttering this Huns thread.

To get back on track -> Elliot, would you make any changes to the Huns, and if yes, what kind?
I can actually agree the Huns are problematic (not because of the sample game given, just because capturing almost every enemy unit is way too strong)

You could make it a % chance, but that has two issues. Even at 50% it would be really strong, but at lower amounts its so random it could be frustrating (maybe not though)
 
Top Bottom