Rework barbarian barrier's statistics

[Angelo Locritani]

after removal of the stronghold (Bug #695018) barrier and donjon have now similar statistics:

same # of soldiers: 5
same conquest: 8

healing: barrier 1 donjon 2

vision: barrier 12 donjon 17

building cost:
    barrier: 5 blackwoods + 3 grouts
    donjon: 7 blackwoods + 1 trunk + 4 raw stones

To me, seems more "expensive" to build a barrier than a donjon: for barrier you also need grouts - in order to obtain it you need water + raw stones + coal --> a more advanced economy.

Nevertheless barrier keeps same # of soldiers, it heals them more slowly and has a lower vision range.

So, in my games, I always build donjons.

My proposal is either

1) to reduce cost of barrier (same of stronghold?)
    building cost of stronghold: 3 blackwoods + 3 raw stones

2) apply complete statistics of stronghold to barrier
    healing 1 - soldiers 3 - conquest 7 - vision 11 - building cost as above

How do you use barrier and what do you think about this building?

[SirVer (sirver)]

The basic idea of the donjon is that it sees farther than the barrier.
In my games, a donjon usually feels more expensive because blackwood is
very often scarce. I agree though that the buildings difference could be
more prolonged.

How about reducing the amount of soldiers in the donjon by 1 to 4
soldiers? this already reduces the military prowess of the building
significantly and makes the difference (scouting vs. middle priced
blocking building) stronger. What do you all think?

    status incomplete

[Angelo Locritani (alocritani)]

I like your idea, Sirver.

Maybe we can reduce the number of soldier further, to 3, in order to better underline that donjon is not an attacking nor defensive building, but just a scouting one.
It can be similar to a sentry from a military point of view, but with a bigger vision range.

[SirVer (sirver)]

We have to be quite careful with the adjustments: the barbarians life
from many weak soldiers. A redution by 20% is already plenty imho, 40%
is too much for one tweak. I think this makes the difference already
quite pronounced.

[Angelo Locritani (alocritani)]

Should we make the same tweak for empire (tower vs barrier) --> tower tweaked to 4 soldiers ?
for atlanteans it should be already balanced (guardhall vs tower).

Of course in all cases a rework of existing scenarios should be considered (ie: check starting condition so they don't put more soldiers than the allowed by buildings)

Finally, will this change break existing savegame? What will happen when a savegame in which 5 soldiers are in a donjon is loaded, when the max # of soldiers is 4?

[SirVer (sirver)]

>Should we make the same tweak for empire (tower vs barrier) --> tower tweaked to 4 soldiers ?
>for atlanteans it should be already balanced (guardhall vs tower).
No. The Empire tower is something different: it costs marble-column
which is expensive throughout the whole game. It is okay that it is as
powerful as the barrier and provides vision.

I agree about the scenarios. And about the savegames: I do not know,
someone needs to test it *hint,hint* ;)

[SirVer (sirver)]

I played a game yesterday agains Kristin - I was E, she was B - which felt like the balance of the tribes was quite good. I feel now reluctant to reduce the amount of soldiers in the donjon because it makes the barbarians weaker.

How about fiddling with the build cost?
Currently:
donjon: 7x blackwood, 1x trunk, 4x raw_stone
barrier: 5xblackwood, 3xgrout

In practive, blackwood is usually the scarce resource, therefore in practive, the donjon is feeling more expensive. It also takes longer to build (12 units instead of 8). One could make the barrier less expensive by letting it only cost 2xgrout.

Angelo, I know you already did the work testing if reducing the amount of soldiers is working out. We must approach this carefully though, because balance is essential for the game to remain fun. Our aim is to introduce a clear incentive when to build a barrier and when to build a donjon while keeping the tribe approximately the same strength.

[Angelo Locritani (alocritani)]

I changed status in "Fix Committed" because of merging in rev.6210

[SirVer (sirver)]

Released in build17-rc1.