Following on from the original thread, I have a question for players, for this beautiful brand new year where we are about to lose some days swapping PB servers and have nothing else to do: What civs would you never pick, would you hate to roll in a random game, and why? And what do you think would improve them, so that you wanted to pick them?
And the counter point: which civs are too good, and need toning down?
(January 16th, 2015, 04:14)dtay Wrote: Question about civs in RtR mode. My understanding is development has basically halted (by design) on the base RtR mod, making the current set of changes roughly the final set, and any additional mod ideas are going into the gameplay expansion mod (correct me if this understanding is wrong, though even if it is half of what i have to say below is still relevant).
I personally feel somewhat ambivalent about the gameplay expansion mod, not necessarily because of objections to any particular idea in it, but just that I feel weird about playing a mod with the goal of broad gameplay changes as opposed to balancing the civ 4 that already exists. Nothing bad intended towards those who are interested in the concept, and honestly I'll probably try it out once it's done, but it's just not my cup of tea.
But that said, I think RtR still has a one area for reasonably large improvement: civ balance. About 5 civs or so are better than the others, and notably are "interesting", with cool unique buildings/units that you can to some extent base a strategy around. Another set of civs are good enough that you'd feel excited about them as long as you had the right start techs. And then there are the civs that are honestly, just... err meh. Like Germany. Or Korea. None of these are civs that will screw you like some will in base Civ 4 (fixed mostly via start tech balancing), and the gap between weakest and strongest civ has certainly shrunk. But I think there's still room for improvement.
So is there any interest in brainstorming/working on another round of civ rebalancing to RtR? My understanding is most (all?) civ changes can be done via XML, so the coding isn't the hard part here, but rather deciding what exactly needs to change. I don't really care if this becomes RtR 2.0.7.4 or 2.0.8.1 or a mod-mod "RtR-civ-rebalance", but I think it's a worthwhile project.
In the case I was wrong and RtR development isn't done, then this is really just a brainstorming thread for whenever the next wave of changes comes out.
Actual Discussion of Changes:
I think we should shy away from nerfing anything, I don't think any of the top tier civs are so OP that the need to be brough back down to the pack (possible exception: Zulu and the rushes it enables, but I don't feel anywhere close to strong about that). Instead I think we need to identify the civs that have little to their name and think about giving them small to medium buffs, the idea being every civ should feel roughly as exciting or solid to play as something like Inca or Aztecs or Zulu (my opinion of which civs are the best atm) do right now.
Candidates for upgrades in my opinion (and to be clear upgrade doesn't mean I think these are unplayable or suck, but that there is clearly room for buffs while not breaking the current top-tier ceiling) Germany Maya Korea Greece Japan Ethiopia (this one is close, Oromos are pretty cool) Spain (impacted a ton by the power of Free Market and Economics obsoleting the UB, if the Free Market balance fixes work then this one feels fine to me) America (as far as I know hasn't been played up to Rifles with new changes, so maybe minutemen changes are better than I think. Woodsmen feels pretty useless by that point of the game though, and Guerilla only ok)
Another catagory that I haven't gone through and made a list for yet are the civs that feel pretty useless without trait-synergy. These I feel like could use small buffs to their non-trait-synergistic aspects to make them a bit more generally interesting. However, they often aren't really that weak, so might be worth leaving off. Good example of civs in this category are Khmer or Russia. And America if it isn't in the above catagory.
So, anyone else interested in working on this? Where working means thinking of what changes to make to what civs, not coding, that should be easy and a bridge to cross when we come to it. I can probably do it myself, never modded civ 4 before but have a reasonable amount of coding experience.
(January 20th, 2015, 11:36)Old Harry Wrote: I haven't really thought about it enough to have an opinion on which civs are least fun to play, but I'm happy to make dumb suggestions to make the list you wrote more fun. Presumably they have to be start tech, UU or UB related?
Germany
(Hunting, Mining, Kannone, Assembly Plant at Steam Power)
- Give the Kannone a promo? Accuracy or Barrage or just some free XP? It's hard to give them anything earlier in the tech tree as Germany only existed for the last 200 years.
Maya
(Mysticism, Mining, Holkan, Ball Court)
- Should the Colosseum be cheaper? Or give the Holkan Blitz .
Korea
(Agriculture, Mining, Hwacha, Seowon)
- the Seowon is a disappointingly small bonus on a building you only tend to build to enable Oxford anyway, would +50% science or +25% science, +25% cash make it more attractive? Or maybe it could be cheaper?
Greece
(Fishing, Hunting, Phalanx, Odeon)
- The Phalanx is actually pretty good, saves building spears before HBR, if the Colosseum was cheaper the Odeon would be better.
Japan
(Fishing, The Wheel, Samurai, Pagoda)
- Pagoda is interesting but a bit anti-synergistic. Samaurai's 2 first strikes isn't exciting, perhaps adding Cover automatically would be good - defenders tend to be Longbows at this point in the game...
Ethiopia
(this one is close, Oromos are pretty cool) (Oromo Warrior, Stele, Hunting, Mining)
- the Stele is only really useful for culture wars, if it didn't go obsolete with Astronomy then it could be handy for a culture victory too?
Spain
(impacted a ton by the power of Free Market and Economics obsoleting the UB, if the Free Market balance fixes work then this one feels fine to me) (Fishing, Mysticism, Conquistador, Citadel)
- Actually I think the Conquistador is improved by the tech cost increases giving it a longer lifespan, so I don't think this needs further buffing
America
(Fishing, Agriculture, Minuteman - rifle with G1 W1, Mall - grocer with happy)
- 2XP gives you a hill or forest 2-mover, 5XP gives you G3 for a bonus attacking hills and a 50% withdrawal chance. Or 16XP for C1 M1 W3 gives a 25% medic if you can't spare a great general for a 45% medic. I don't think it really needs the buff...
(January 20th, 2015, 14:56)Commodore Wrote:
(January 20th, 2015, 11:36)Old Harry Wrote: Germany
(Hunting, Mining, Kannone, Assembly Plant at Steam Power)
- Give the Kannone a promo? Accuracy or Barrage or just some free XP? It's hard to give them anything earlier in the tech tree as Germany only existed for the last 200 years.
Well, Landsknechts...
(January 20th, 2015, 11:36)Old Harry Wrote:
Maya
(Mysticism, Mining, Holkan, Ball Court)
- Should the Colosseum be cheaper? Or give the Holkan Blitz .
Creative, it's excellent. Only Mining/Myst option too. Holkans get drill one!
(January 20th, 2015, 11:36)Old Harry Wrote:
Korea
(Agriculture, Mining, Hwacha, Seowon)
- the Seowon is a disappointingly small bonus on a building you only tend to build to enable Oxford anyway, would +50% science or +25% science, +25% cash make it more attractive? Or maybe it could be cheaper?
How about 1-2 less required for Oxford unlock?
(January 20th, 2015, 11:36)Old Harry Wrote:
Greece
(Fishing, Hunting, Phalanx, Odeon)
- The Phalanx is actually pretty good, saves building spears before HBR, if the Colosseum was cheaper the Odeon would be better.
I've been Creative Greeks twice, I like 'em. No issue with the start techs better IMO.
(January 20th, 2015, 11:36)Old Harry Wrote: Japan
(Fishing, The Wheel, Samurai, Pagoda)
- Pagoda is interesting but a bit anti-synergistic. Samaurai's 2 first strikes isn't exciting, perhaps adding Cover automatically would be good - defenders tend to be Longbows at this point in the game...
Drill 1 and cover? Not bad. Or go a totally different route...strip those first strikes/drill but make them 2-move!
(January 20th, 2015, 11:36)Old Harry Wrote:
Ethiopia
(this one is close, Oromos are pretty cool) (Oromo Warrior, Stele, Hunting, Mining)
- the Stele is only really useful for culture wars, if it didn't go obsolete with Astronomy then it could be handy for a culture victory too?
No idea, but I think it's probably okay. Maybe Stele cheaper?
(January 20th, 2015, 11:36)Old Harry Wrote:
Spain
(impacted a ton by the power of Free Market and Economics obsoleting the UB, if the Free Market balance fixes work then this one feels fine to me) (Fishing, Mysticism, Conquistador, Citadel)
- Actually I think the Conquistador is improved by the tech cost increases giving it a longer lifespan, so I don't think this needs further buffing
Eh, no big opinion.
(January 20th, 2015, 11:36)Old Harry Wrote:
America
(Fishing, Agriculture, Minuteman - rifle with G1 W1, Mall - grocer with happy)
- 2XP gives you a hill or forest 2-mover, 5XP gives you G3 for a bonus attacking hills and a 50% withdrawal chance. Or 16XP for C1 M1 W3 gives a 25% medic if you can't spare a great general for a 45% medic. I don't think it really needs the buff...
Yeah, Mall is good, this is fine.
And this in the context of the 2.0.9.1 change:
Quote:Zulu: Ikhanda: -10% city maintenance (down from -20%)
Work boat: requires no tech (working water tiles still requires Fishing, stolen from Seven and ToW) (instituted in 2.0.8.5 for PB41)
New proposed changes:
Fishing Civs rebalance:
America - new UB Armoury - +1XP to Gunpowder, +1XP to Mounted, +1XP to Armour, +2XP to Melee
Byzantine - Fine
Carthage - Fine
England - Stock Exchange changed to 160 hammers, +65% gold, -15% city maintenance
Greece - Fine
Japan - Change to Fishing/Agri, Pagoda to +45% science (no hammer bonus)
Native America - No change needed
Netherlands - Affected by caravel/privateer change, fine.
Portugal - Affected by caravel/privateer change, fine.
Rome - Fine
Spain - Citadel obsolete at Scientific Method
Vikings - Fine
Mongolia: Keshik now immune to first strikes (brought into line with HA and HA replacements, due to PRO change below).
Naval changes:
Caravel, strength 4, -30% against galleys and triremes, 1 capacity (can transport any units), remove ability to enter cultural borders [Other stats unchanged, 60 hammers, requires Optics, 3 moves]
Carrack: Increase to strength 4, -30% against galleys and triremes, 4 moves, 2 capacity. remove ability to enter cultural borders
EIM: Lower to 3 capacity (unsure if change matters, it probably isn't needed), remove ability to enter culture without OB
Privateer: Requires Optics and Paper (other stats unchanged, cost 80, strength 6, 4 moves, hidden nationality, requires iron or copper)
Ship of the Line: iCollateraldamage = 75, iCollateraldamagelimit = 70 (ie 30% hp max damage from collateral), iCollateralDamageLimit = 5
Ironclad: Decrease to 1 movement point. Starts with Navigation 1 and Flanking 1 promotions, 1 free strike strength 12, no defensive bonus, requires iron, coal, steel and Steampower, costs 120.
Traits
PRO: Remove free CD1, give free Drill 3 (+2 free strike chances) to Archery and Gunpowder Units
FIN: +35% production of Library
IND: Can build 2 copies of all national wonders (I figured out how to do it without SDK modding, slightly messy but completely functional), +100% production of forges. NB wonder production modifer REMOVED!
In general I think that some civs aren't valued highly because their UU and UB come late in the game, even if they're good. America used to be the worst for this until the new UB, But it still applied to Russia, England, and Germany (even with the Kanone). By the time their UU comes into play, most players in an average PB will be out of contention. By the time the Rifles and Cavs arrive, most players are either dead or too weak for that UU/UB to make a difference. If one of the contenders for winning have one of those civs then they can make a difference, but because there's no way of knowing if you'll be in that position at the start of the game, then most players wont pick those civs based on those UUs or UBs.
tldr: England, Russia, Germany, and to a lesser extent Spain, all have UUs and UBs that come too late to make much of an impact when players are picking their civs, because you can't guarantee that you'll be alive/relevant by the time they come around. So therefore they become less interesting during picking, especially with the random civs/leaders with re-rolls method of picking.
Speaking of Spain, at first glance they look pretty weak right now, but I don't know if anyone's played them recently so I have no idea how Spain would be in reality
edit: well, most players can't guarantee they'll be alive/relevant by then.
OK, so the late game civs I can understand. Are there others? For example, or some civs too early? Are some just boring? I'm not just looking for gameplay reasons, I am looking for the personal reasons people don't like or want to play certain civs, for whatever justification given.
Zulu: I'd be inclined to drop the Impi to 1 movement, and replace their Mobility promo with the ability to move in forest or jungle as though they had Woodsman 2. It seems more flavorful, and I think (though they're certainly strong) the worst thing about the Zulu isn't that they're super powerful, but that Impis are too hard to deal with early on (two-movers across everything but forested hills, four-movers on friendly or neutral roads, str4 with defense bonuses, and +100% against the only unit type that can ever keep up with them, is just a nightmare).
Germany: Apart from being late, their Uniques are boring because they don't do anything unusual: They're just like the vanilla versions, but buildable earlier or more cheaply. That can be powerful from a gameplay perspective, but not exciting.
Maya: Probably underrated, but also trait- and map-dependent: Charismatic Ball Courts mean never needing to worry about happiness, which matters a lot if luxuries are scarce, but might matter very little if they're everywhere. Holks are also a lot better on maps where being able to plant a good city that lacks copper instead of a mediocre city that claims it is an actual advantage.
Korea: The UU is close to blank (how often do you want your cats to fight melee units - or to gain enough of a bonus to fight something else instead?) and the UB is ... close to blank. Giving the Seowan a better research bonus would help but might not be very interesting. Likewise for making them cheaper. Maybe some extra specialists slots? (Maybe 2 scientist slots and 2 priest slots, the latter since they apparently also served as Confucian shrines?) Dunno if that would help much. If you want to make Korea interesting and attractive though, let the hwacha do collateral to a larger number of units, or make it capable of collateraling siege units!
England: Stock Exchanges are not only late but provide only a marginal bonus over the base building, and Redcoats are a late one-mover with a bonus against other late one-movers, and (like the Minuteman) are severely affected by the change to the Draft: Instead of the best thing you can get for a 1-pop draft, rifles are now the worst you can get for 2. England still isn't terrible, but they lack that Russian sense of "I may not have much in the beginning, but just let me get to my Cossacks and I'll ride over the world!" (Plus Hunting is a much, much better starting tech than Fishing in RtR.) What if instead of their bonus against Gunpowder, Redcoats started with Amphibious? Would that be too much?
America: The flavor of the "Armoury" doesn't appeal to me, only partly because if it's American, it should be spelled without a u! (It's also likely too unbalancing in the early game, its first appearance notwithstanding.) It might help to make Minutemen a Musket replacement instead of a Rifle. The UB idea I like best would be a "Wilderness Post" as a Market or Grocer replacement that gives a bonus either with forest tiles generally or to forest preserves in particular, but I don't know how feasible this would turn out to be.
Japan: I'm not a fan of losing the only(?) fishing-wheel combination in the game. The new Pagoda (+45% science instead of +25%) is nice but not exciting on its own. I like the ideas of Samurai with Drill promotions (enabling other promotions more easily, with upgrade potential, and reducing collateral) instead of just flat first strikes.
Relatedly, changing Pro from free CG1 to free D3 did not, in my opinion, help to balance the trait. Does it need any more than cheap granaries/walls/(castles?) and D1 Archery/Gunpowder units?
Can have a look at the whole list later, but my opening thoughts would be:
Byzantium: Give the hippodrome the ability to run artists like the original theatre. Not having the artist slots always bothered me in the base game. IMO it reduces strategical options in an unfun way.
Babylon. Bowmen are good defensive units. Garden is the most boring UB at the moment. Suggestion: make it a unique aqueduct with 40% gpp or 20% science to represent Babylonian brilliance in math and astronomy. It would definitely be built in a few specialized cities, and more generally with expansive leaders.
Greece. Phalanx is not bad but seems underwhelming compared to heir historical role. Suggestion: making it a spearman with bonus against melee. This is more inline with what it was and makes it more unique. 40 hammers, 4 strength, + 100% vs. cavalry and melee. It is slightly more expensive than a spear but much more versatile. Its biggest weakness is archers which means that it will be bad at taking cities but good in the field. Just like the classical age greeks =) . Comparison to a dog soldier: - Needs metal and more expensive + has less counters (chariots, wellies and horchers).
Germany. Assembly plant is unique but kanone is a bit lacking for such a late unique unit. Giving it drill 1 and 2 would make it different from other cannons while not being overpowered.
I would also suggest giving the Ziggurat a Priest slot or two, both for historical accuracy, and because I'm finding that getting them at an earlier tech doesn't seem all that good, since by the time I'm getting around to building them I've already got Code of Laws, so their only bonus is their reduced cost, which is kinda underwhelming. And while I know I bee-lined for CoL, I don't think having the ability to delay it for a long time is all that great either, but I may be wrong there.
Also, I think the fact that Vultures lose to Axes in a fair fight is a bit ridiculous
I have a hypothesis: civs and traits have 2 factors. Interestingness and power, and they are not always correlated.
Interestingness is based around doing something new, or different, that other choices don't give you. This does not always mean what is new or different is better than vanilla options, but can be. For example, Amphib on zerks is different and powerful. Priest slots on a library or monument are interesting because they enable early bulb strategies but these aren't more powerful than a Currency or HBR rush.
Power is the difference compared to a vanilla strategy, so Zerks with Amphib enable a method of attack that other players do not have; Zerks on 4 move boats even more so.
I know this is a simple explanation, but thinking this way makes me think that it's UUs that really break things and UBs are rarely that interesting and not a reason to pick.
Anyone care to disagree, comments or call me a moron? I've thought beyond this but just want to test if this is a basis we can use to work through the civs.
Much as I'd like to call you a moron this theory rings true. But there are a few UBs that outmuscle the UU.
Eg. The Aztec Sacrificial Altar is interesting because you need to adjust your strategy to get the most from it and powerful because it's cheap and lets you whip twice as hard.
The Terrace is boring as hell but powerful. The ikhanda likewise.
The Roman Forum is interesting but not particularly powerful. As is the Obelisk.
I think the Mongol Ger gets its own category of "fun!" (I suppose this could qualify as interesting and powerful as well.)
Um. Now I'm struggling to think of decent buildings, so yeah, start techs and UUs are generally the reason for picking a civ.
.
