So I'm starting to dabble in what is needed for modding in Civ 6. I don't have anything to show yet, but wanted a thread to talk about possible ideas for a mod. Since my main focus has been MP games, I'd ideally be looking for tweaks to rebalance parts of the game for multiplayer competition. I don't expect a lot of knowns since our MP play is in its infancy, but doesn't hurt to start taking a look at it.
Civ 6 Balance Mod Ideas: Brainstorming
|
Ui. Just rebuild the whole fucking ui.
Amenities, housing, this base cost bullshit. Every opportunity should be taken to show what the costs of things are, and what affects them. Give players information with which to make decisions. (October 10th, 2017, 21:47)Krill Wrote: Ui. Just rebuild the whole fucking ui. The CQUI mod does a fairly good job at this but we have not had agreement in the PBEMs to use it yet.
IMO,
to be continued as I think of more...
One thing that really annoys me.
I play on strategic view. Resource symbols block the yield icons and make it difficult to tell what the terrain is. Could the resource symbols be aligned to the the fair left of each tile, and the resource yields realigned vertically on the right?
Movement system is good, shouldn't be changed, but an extra movement point across units may be a good idea. Ancient roads that triple movement speed across terrain, but don't actually do much in the clear are a cool idea, and not being able to enter or attack into heavy terrain except as a full-move action is also a good idea. The maps maybe need to be increased in size a little though. One of cavalry's extra movement point should all be made conditional on starting the turn in the clear, in a city, or on roads, as is currently the case for chariots.
A lot of changes have to be made to the tech tree, starting with Military Tactics and Stirrups, which maybe should just be swapped with each other. Anti-cav units need to be either included in civic production bonuses, or get a pretty large increase to strength, in the range of +7, with the idea being that you can't build lots of them, but they can act as decent chokepoint guarders. The priority thing is definitely the UI more than balance. Also because the expansion will change everything anyway, especially with regards to religion (mid-game buildings that generate GPP are basically useless currently, I'm sure that won't be the case going forward.
Another idea to balance melee and cavalry a bit more would be to make an attack possible on adjacent tiles no matter how many movement points are left and no matter what's the terrain cost you'd attack into, but you'd only occupy the tile attacked if you have enough movement.
Lets say you have 1MP left on a sword -> you can attack an archer on a forested hill, but even if you kill it, you won't occupy the forested hill. Perhaps make this ability tied to suffering ZoC, so that cavalry units don't benefit from it (since they aren't affected by ZoC). This would also clear ranged units from suffering attacks, because they don't exert ZoC (this one I don't like). I think a change like this would make cavalry still the better option for speed and flanking, but melee wouldn't be useless when they are on the middle of the battlefield, as they should. It would also help with the annoying barb scout chase. (October 10th, 2017, 23:10)Woden Wrote:(October 10th, 2017, 21:47)Krill Wrote: Ui. Just rebuild the whole fucking ui. This one right? It seems pretty solid, without gameplay changes included. We could either authorize it on its own, or since it's under an MIT lisence and hosted on GH, we could fork it and package together with any of our balance changes (htough that would lose any updates they make unless we redo manually.) (October 11th, 2017, 12:45)BRickAstley Wrote:(October 10th, 2017, 23:10)Woden Wrote:(October 10th, 2017, 21:47)Krill Wrote: Ui. Just rebuild the whole fucking ui. Yep, that is the one. I haven't used it in a while (playing in PBEMs) and it looks like they have added to it but it was solid and stable when I did use it and gives a lot more information that IMO should be standard plus enables a building queue. |