I'm going to hate AI Persia. The AI is already gung-ho, and this civ has an incentive to be even more gung-ho than usual. Boo
I'm getting flashbacks to Civ 3. There were reasons the subtitle of one of the most comprehensive guides to Civ 3 at Apolyton was "The Persians have declared war on us . . . Again"
Depending on how many turns it lasts, that +2 movement bonus for surprise wars will range from ridiculous to WTF ludicrously OP.
At least in multiplayer games, where otherwise tactically even human players will get a game-winning advantage with a great general, which is only +1 movement to nearby units of the correct eras.
I'm starting to realize it's a business strategy to make all the DLC civs overpowered.
Depending on how many turns it lasts, that +2 movement bonus for surprise wars will range from ridiculous to WTF ludicrously OP.
At least in multiplayer games, where otherwise tactically even human players will get a game-winning advantage with a great general, which is only +1 movement to nearby units of the correct eras.
I'm starting to realize it's a business strategy to make all the DLC civs overpowered.
As I read it the movement buff was just for the turn of (or after) declaring the surprise war, so useful but not as OP as it seems. I may be wrong however.
Depending on how many turns it lasts, that +2 movement bonus for surprise wars will range from ridiculous to WTF ludicrously OP.
At least in multiplayer games, where otherwise tactically even human players will get a game-winning advantage with a great general, which is only +1 movement to nearby units of the correct eras.
I'm starting to realize it's a business strategy to make all the DLC civs overpowered.
Sigh. That kind of stuff and the AI has me not wanting to play lately. I guess I should just get over it, nothing is perfect.
Steam Profile | My Art | NID: DarkMecha (SW-4787-9571-8977) | PSN: DarkMecha
As I read it the movement buff was just for the turn of (or after) declaring the surprise war, so useful but not as OP as it seems. I may be wrong however.
In a single player game it's not much since it's easy to outwit the AI tactically anyway. Against a human you'd otherwise get shot to death by his ranged units, +2 movement means you could hit all his ranged with your melee first. Even crazier if a great general stacks with that for +3 movement. Even if it's only one turn that's crazy. All you need to do is close the gap and get the first attack in.
He could pull all his units back from the borders and leave them right next to his cities, but even then that's a huge advantage to you if he can never afford to post units directly on the border.
I imagine Persia would be banned in any remotely serious multiplayer game. Rome is already up there being considered for it.
Ehh, serious mp games are often DOW on first contact as a rule. So that bonus may or not actually be useful in those for much else besides scout wars. If its a mp game trying to use diplo, yeah it will probably be banned along with the other military powerhouses.
0
Options
SnicketysnickThe Greatest Hype Man inWesterosRegistered Userregular
I imagine Macedon will be much like Scythia in that at first I'll be all gung ho to conquer the world, but then I'll end up playing a defensive builder game anyway.
After all, you get bonuses from taking enemy cities. It doesn't say you have keep them.
I am very happy about further tweaks to the warminger penalties. It seems that as long as you are not waging a war of conquest you will be fine: less of a penalty for taking over that 1pop city the AI just placed next to your capital and now the AI does not get mad at you for waging war on their enemy that they themselves are fighting with.
Not sur if it solves the constant feeling of unfairness I experience during my games, but it sounds like a step in the right direction.
0
Options
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
Not a lot in the way of civilization balancing, which is a shame.
More AI changes! Going to have to run another game of this now... Super excited to see how much these tweaks effect mid game AI progression, Really miss seeing 1-2 AIs steamroll their neighbors to provide a nice late game challenge.
Harbors seem really really good now given access to a few coastal resource tiles, otherwise I am not sure my cities ever get high enough population to really benefit as land improvements will still be slightly better, but I do play really wide with cities never really growing bigger then 9 population.
+1 for the Royal Dockyard change, even though England has shown itself to be stronger in mp after the previous patch then before, at least they feel more interesting on paper now.
Anyone tried the new civs yet? I am not quite sure if I want to spend the money on another DLC, although ill probably crack and splurge one of these weekends...
+1
Options
That_GuyI don't wanna be that guyRegistered Userregular
Steam's downloading ~1gb update for Civ 6. Looks like it's our big spring update.
Persia is good thematically as a civ but I find Cyrus weird as a leader, I am not sure of the reasoning the focus on surprise wars in particular. He certainly was a conqueror, though.
Hypsasists are ok for Macedon but I was really expecting a pikeman type unit. Guess greeks sort of have that covered though. Some people are complaining about Macedon being seperate from Greece but realistically no one from Greece up to that time would have considered him Greek, so... The Macedonians were really only adopted by the Greeks proper as countrymen after they had conquered the world.
I feel like we need some more alternate leaders for existing civs.
I feel like we need some more alternate leaders for existing civs.
I wouldn't hold your breath. When the Devs did the Gorgo stream before release, they mentioned that alternate leaders was a feature they were including mostly for the mod community to play around with, and that their own priority was going to remain focused on creating entirely new Civs. Their behavior up to this point has been consistent with that statement.
I feel like we need some more alternate leaders for existing civs.
I wouldn't hold your breath. When the Devs did the Gorgo stream before release, they mentioned that alternate leaders was a feature they were including mostly for the mod community to play around with, and that their own priority was going to remain focused on creating entirely new Civs. Their behavior up to this point has been consistent with that statement.
That's actually kind of awesome of them though.
Steam Profile | My Art | NID: DarkMecha (SW-4787-9571-8977) | PSN: DarkMecha
Persia is pretty silly, though your swordsmen being unable to take cities is obnoxious. Still, they're considerably more sturdy archers, and now that AI actually shoots back and targets things properly, archer rushes are a little less powerful since they are very fragile.
Like the two new wonders.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Always thought the melee strength of ranged units was a little too good. As if melee units weren't punished enough by the new movement rules.
Speaking of that, has anyone ever found a use for the "melee" naval units? Unlike the "bombardment" or "sub" types, they have zero use outside of naval combat, the ranged naval units usually get the drop on them, and the subs are way better for killing civilian water units.
Honestly I didn't see much real improvement with the AI+ mod.
The 2 mods that produced results were the siege one (lets siege weapons move+shoot, which is why the AI never used them) and the "smoother AI" one that smoothed out the curve (reduced starting AI bonuses, beefed up later ones).
I haven't gotten the chance to try the new patch though.
Always thought the melee strength of ranged units was a little too good. As if melee units weren't punished enough by the new movement rules.
Speaking of that, has anyone ever found a use for the "melee" naval units? Unlike the "bombardment" or "sub" types, they have zero use outside of naval combat, the ranged naval units usually get the drop on them, and the subs are way better for killing civilian water units.
Can they still take coastal cities? That seems like a pretty big deal depending on map type.
Yes they can take coastal cities, which the AI likes a lot more with the harbor change, it seems like.
Related story: the Mausoleum is not just interesting, it might be amazing. For those of you without the DLC, it has to be built on land next to a harbor, and it gives you a free great admiral and gives all admirals and engineers an extra charge. Which if the timing is right is bonkers. Like I got the make a free ironclad guy and then earned the make an armada guy a few turns later, so suddenly I had two ironclad armadas waaaaaaaaay before I should have. Any coastal city I wanted was mine. And the engineer part makes it maybe the best space race wonder, which is funny.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Honestly I didn't see much real improvement with the AI+ mod.
The 2 mods that produced results were the siege one (lets siege weapons move+shoot, which is why the AI never used them) and the "smoother AI" one that smoothed out the curve (reduced starting AI bonuses, beefed up later ones).
I haven't gotten the chance to try the new patch though.
You know I find this incredibly, unacceptably sad. Imagine if the AI couldn't use key units in Age of Empires 2 or Starcraft?
Steam Profile | My Art | NID: DarkMecha (SW-4787-9571-8977) | PSN: DarkMecha
So I don't play for a couple months because the graphics made it unplayable come back and Persia gets me my fastest completion of the culture tree ever. Had I really pushed military I could have won super early. Scythia attacked me from a different continent at one point and my response was to just buy eight battleships.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
In related news, Macedon is just ridiculous. Immune to war weariness, get eurekas and inspirations from conquests, a barracks that makes science when you build units, a swordsman that is just annihilates cities (two took out a walled capital without any kind of support, one with a ram destroys ancient walls instantly), and a horseman replacement that makes great generals and is crucially a heavy cavalry so it upgrades to a knight.
Oh and all of their units heal to full whenever they conquer a wonder.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Well, Sulla is the only high end player I know of. Not sure about the others. But anyway it's a good look at some detailed analysis and how to plan for optimized builds. I know in a lot of single player games, people say nuts to optimum play and just want to build, but it's neat looking at how it does look when you go for it
Some neat points on optimal play:
- Religion just aint worth it (maybe if you're playing some religion bonus civ). Found your pantheon by running God King, move on.
- Scouts really aren't worth it. Build slingers/warriors and have them scout. In the beginning, being the first to discover city states and get that bonus is more important than monument building. (sidenote: they desperately need a scout upgrade between basic scout and ranger, it's just too big a gap)
- Build one worker max early on for the boosts, then don't touch them until you get civics for their production.
- Halt research of archery and iron working one turn before completion. Once you research them, you will no longer be able to build cheaper, zero maintenance warriors and slingers. Wait until you have all the units you want (or until someone war decs you), THEN finish the research. Upgrade right before war and not a turn sooner.
Posts
I'm getting flashbacks to Civ 3. There were reasons the subtitle of one of the most comprehensive guides to Civ 3 at Apolyton was "The Persians have declared war on us . . . Again"
Steam Profile
3DS: 3454-0268-5595 Battle.net: SteelAngel#1772
Edit: or unless they flip the meta
and they get an easier time declaring 1-2 random expansionary wars? hmmmm
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
At least in multiplayer games, where otherwise tactically even human players will get a game-winning advantage with a great general, which is only +1 movement to nearby units of the correct eras.
I'm starting to realize it's a business strategy to make all the DLC civs overpowered.
As I read it the movement buff was just for the turn of (or after) declaring the surprise war, so useful but not as OP as it seems. I may be wrong however.
Sigh. That kind of stuff and the AI has me not wanting to play lately. I guess I should just get over it, nothing is perfect.
In a single player game it's not much since it's easy to outwit the AI tactically anyway. Against a human you'd otherwise get shot to death by his ranged units, +2 movement means you could hit all his ranged with your melee first. Even crazier if a great general stacks with that for +3 movement. Even if it's only one turn that's crazy. All you need to do is close the gap and get the first attack in.
He could pull all his units back from the borders and leave them right next to his cities, but even then that's a huge advantage to you if he can never afford to post units directly on the border.
I imagine Persia would be banned in any remotely serious multiplayer game. Rome is already up there being considered for it.
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
After all, you get bonuses from taking enemy cities. It doesn't say you have keep them.
https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/61u88a/civilization_vi_spring_2017_update_patch_notes/
Not sur if it solves the constant feeling of unfairness I experience during my games, but it sounds like a step in the right direction.
Harbors seem really really good now given access to a few coastal resource tiles, otherwise I am not sure my cities ever get high enough population to really benefit as land improvements will still be slightly better, but I do play really wide with cities never really growing bigger then 9 population.
+1 for the Royal Dockyard change, even though England has shown itself to be stronger in mp after the previous patch then before, at least they feel more interesting on paper now.
Anyone tried the new civs yet? I am not quite sure if I want to spend the money on another DLC, although ill probably crack and splurge one of these weekends...
Persia is good thematically as a civ but I find Cyrus weird as a leader, I am not sure of the reasoning the focus on surprise wars in particular. He certainly was a conqueror, though.
Hypsasists are ok for Macedon but I was really expecting a pikeman type unit. Guess greeks sort of have that covered though. Some people are complaining about Macedon being seperate from Greece but realistically no one from Greece up to that time would have considered him Greek, so... The Macedonians were really only adopted by the Greeks proper as countrymen after they had conquered the world.
I feel like we need some more alternate leaders for existing civs.
I wouldn't hold your breath. When the Devs did the Gorgo stream before release, they mentioned that alternate leaders was a feature they were including mostly for the mod community to play around with, and that their own priority was going to remain focused on creating entirely new Civs. Their behavior up to this point has been consistent with that statement.
That's actually kind of awesome of them though.
There were a ton of rumors of an Isabella a while back, though, including some supposed references in game files. Who knows though.
Like the two new wonders.
Always thought the melee strength of ranged units was a little too good. As if melee units weren't punished enough by the new movement rules.
Speaking of that, has anyone ever found a use for the "melee" naval units? Unlike the "bombardment" or "sub" types, they have zero use outside of naval combat, the ranged naval units usually get the drop on them, and the subs are way better for killing civilian water units.
The 2 mods that produced results were the siege one (lets siege weapons move+shoot, which is why the AI never used them) and the "smoother AI" one that smoothed out the curve (reduced starting AI bonuses, beefed up later ones).
I haven't gotten the chance to try the new patch though.
Can they still take coastal cities? That seems like a pretty big deal depending on map type.
Related story: the Mausoleum is not just interesting, it might be amazing. For those of you without the DLC, it has to be built on land next to a harbor, and it gives you a free great admiral and gives all admirals and engineers an extra charge. Which if the timing is right is bonkers. Like I got the make a free ironclad guy and then earned the make an armada guy a few turns later, so suddenly I had two ironclad armadas waaaaaaaaay before I should have. Any coastal city I wanted was mine. And the engineer part makes it maybe the best space race wonder, which is funny.
Nintendo ID: Pastalonius
Smite\LoL:Gremlidin \ WoW & Overwatch & Hots: Gremlidin#1734
3ds: 3282-2248-0453
You know I find this incredibly, unacceptably sad. Imagine if the AI couldn't use key units in Age of Empires 2 or Starcraft?
Oh and all of their units heal to full whenever they conquer a wonder.
http://www.realmsbeyond.net/forums/showthread.php?tid=8658
Well, Sulla is the only high end player I know of. Not sure about the others. But anyway it's a good look at some detailed analysis and how to plan for optimized builds. I know in a lot of single player games, people say nuts to optimum play and just want to build, but it's neat looking at how it does look when you go for it
Some neat points on optimal play:
- Religion just aint worth it (maybe if you're playing some religion bonus civ). Found your pantheon by running God King, move on.
- Scouts really aren't worth it. Build slingers/warriors and have them scout. In the beginning, being the first to discover city states and get that bonus is more important than monument building. (sidenote: they desperately need a scout upgrade between basic scout and ranger, it's just too big a gap)
- Build one worker max early on for the boosts, then don't touch them until you get civics for their production.
- Halt research of archery and iron working one turn before completion. Once you research them, you will no longer be able to build cheaper, zero maintenance warriors and slingers. Wait until you have all the units you want (or until someone war decs you), THEN finish the research. Upgrade right before war and not a turn sooner.