April 2021 Update - Patch Notes Discussion

[InsidiousMage]

I like Potato, but he and TGM aren’t representatives for the community.

I feel like the big problem with most Civ6 streamers is that they are deity players and it seems like their primary concern about a civ being good or not is "MoReYiElDs," which is an insanely boring way of playing the game. Potato is kind of an exception to this but not entirely. I haven't watched a lot of the TGM but his critique of Kublai's ability so narrow minded. Is it super powerful and game changing? No, but it does offer interesting gameplay options and gives Kublai something unique to do.

 

[Kwami]

I'm not arguing over the truth in streamers influencing the game. I was quoting someone who was saying that if we wanted Scotland to be buffed, we should have had streamers talk about it more, and I thoroughly disagree with that statement. I don't believe anyone is more entitled to fix the game than the devs themselves who take an honest look at the general sentiments of the community. I appreciate everything the streamers do to keep the game popular, but if it's true (as the person I quoted stated) that many of these changes were taken directly from them and certain mods, yes, I have an issue with that.

Yes, you were quoting me. I said that. Because, like it or not, the streamers probably do have more influence over changes than we do. That's not because streams are more entitled to be listened to, but rather it's because they're "louder". Carl (and probably other developers) are often active in Twitch chats, for instance. They're collecting feedback all the time. They read our posts here, too, but I'm sure that forum posts are less memorable than conversations with streamers. That's just how our brains work.

And, I can 100% confirm that some of these changes were based on feedback that Carl (and probably others) received from Twitch chats and from the BBG mod. Carl said so.

 

[DogeEnricoDandolo]

Are there still any unique units that don't replace anything, now that many of them have been re-assigned to the three new units?

Yup, we still have Keshig, Mountie, C.Tiger, Maryannu, Malon Raider, just to name a few. There are some more.

- Did they just make the Chateaus to be like Civ 5's, lol?

Civ 5 Chateau is absolutely worthless though. I think Civ6 Chateau is underwhelming, but still has some uses.

- Vietnam's Thanh nerf is kind of funny. So minor. But sure, I guess since you can basically build the district for free, you'd probably be dominating all the generals as much as England dominates admirals

Promise you this isn't minor. May require some testing, but this may mean you either need to expend production on more Barracks than you used to, or need to run projects to have a GG when you push with your elephants. England doesn't dominate admirals anymore than Phoenicia or any naval civ on water maps, since they want to build Harbors in every city. Vietnam however, completely dominates generals, because they are the only one who builds encampments everywhere. This doesn't kill the civ, obviously, VC is still the best unit in the game, but it makes their push require more investments.

- Zulu getting some science from their Ikanda buildings is nice.

I feel 1 science per encampment building is irrelevant, considering Ikanda still requires population.
Overall, I agree with every other points you made

 

[InsidiousMage]

And, I can 100% confirm that some of these changes were based on feedback that Carl (and probably others) received from Twitch chats and from the BBG mod. Carl said so.

Potato also said he was directly contacted by Firaxis, Carl if I remember correctly, about some of the changes in the patch.

 

[bengalryan9]

Random thoughts from me:

-Scotland probably should've been adjusted but wasn't. That's really the biggest omission I see. I still don't think they're completely pointless though - in my experience, the AI does pretty well with them so they're just a better opponent than they are someone to play us.
-I think the adjustments to Radio Oranje are a little stronger than they are getting credit for. Netherlands was already really good even with a weak leader ability... their civ ability is that good. I can't believe there are comments here suggesting they were ever weak.
-I will never understand how people here can think Norway is weak. I'm as peaceful a player as can be and even I can easily drown in science and culture from pillaging with them. The worst part of their kit got buffed (the Berserker), too.
-Canada goes from sneaky good to really good. Some of you stuck to the whole "Canada=bottom tier" meme argument way too long and now we get this. Fine be me!
-I really like the global changes to tourism benefits.
-Good to see a bunch of UUs getting adjusted to now be able to be upgraded into.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

2. Australia got a stronger coast bias, but I'm not convinced that it was a buff. Harbors don't benefit from Australia's bonuses. It's true that coast increases appeal, but it also usually comes with a lot of flat land. I'd rather have mountains for appeal and hills for production. So, eh. The Digger buff is really just in line with the other unit changes.

As somebody who likes to play as Australia I'd consider it a little more helpful. Since settling on the coast for them is just as beneficial as settling on fresh water, I consider it a two for one deal because it does also increase the appeal. Sure mountains are better for appeal but those aren't always going to be available along with freshwater for them either.

Promise you this isn't minor. May require some testing, but this may mean you either need to expend production on more Barracks than you used to, or need to run projects to have a GG when you push with your elephants. England doesn't dominate admirals anymore than Phoenicia or any naval civ on water maps, since they want to build Harbors in every city. Vietnam however, completely dominates generals, because they are the only one who builds encampments everywhere. This doesn't kill the civ, obviously, VC is still the best unit in the game, but it makes their push require more investments.

I do admit my only Vietnam game so far was very peaceful so I had a lot of idle GGs around linked to units considering I spammed so many Thanhs.
So I guess right now it's a good thing.

 

[Kwami]

As somebody who likes to play as Australia I'd consider it a little more helpful. Since settling on the coast for them is just as beneficial as settling on fresh water, I consider it a two for one deal because it does also increase the appeal. Sure mountains are better for appeal but those aren't always going to be available along with freshwater for them either.

I get that, but water tiles still don't offer much production. I'm not saying that the coastal bias is bad, just that it's not really very good, either. I'll still take mountains over coast, when I can get it.

 

[Chysp]

Did anyone figure out what the deal was with Atlantis on the TSL map, or do you think it's just an in-joke / hint for the future?

 

[Archon_Wing]

I think they made the Korea change because players were confused about the binary nature of the pre-patch behavior. This fixes that problem, makes the placement game a little more fun, and doesn't really change the balance of anything.

If you really want Scotland changes, then get a few streamers to talk about them all the time. I recognize a lot of the changes in this patch as being direct responses to the BBG mod and to streams like TGM and Potato.

That's not really my point. I just picked Scotland as an example. I think they could have had more impactful changes elsewhere than this.

That's what I'm getting at. Other civs that could have used changes could, over a Seowon mechanic that I've honestly never heard of anyone complain about before, and probably won't. I mean you said it yourself; it doesn't matter.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I get that, but water tiles still don't offer much production. I'm not saying that the coastal bias is bad, just that it's not really very good, either. I'll still take mountains over coast, when I can get it.

I agree that it does take a while for them to get going on production. But when you can build outback stations turning most flatland tiles into production I think it's better in the long run.

Did anyone figure out what the deal was with Atlantis on the TSL map, or do you think it's just an in-joke / hint for the future?

It could just be a joke that they've decided to run with it.
I wouldn't mind it being a hint for a mythology spin-off game either.

 

[Kwami]

That's what I'm getting at. Other civs that could have used changes could, over a Seowon mechanic that I've honestly never heard of anyone talk about before, and probably won't. I mean you said it yourself; it doesn't matter.

I don't follow many other players or anything, but I do occasionally check out Potato and TGM to see what's happening. And I very frequently see people asking if the Seowon adds an extra science/food per Seowon, and is theirs broken, etc. There aren't many binary buffs like the pre-patch Seowon in the game, so it was somewhat confusing to newer players before.

 

[DWilson]

Korea's buff is so small that I don't think it's really worth arguing about.

In fact, because the Hwacha wasn't made stronger while so many units were (with the seemingly likely result being a generally combat strength of enemy units), relatively speaking they recieved a nerf. A minor one, but it's there.

 

[DogeEnricoDandolo]

I do admit my only Vietnam game so far was very peaceful so I had a lot of idle GGs around linked to units considering I spammed so many Thanhs.
So I guess right now it's a good thing.

I have 2 multiplayer groups, 1 group plays with the Better Balanced Game mod where almost every aspect of Vietnam is nerfed 50%-60% and magically the civ is still very much viable. And then I play with my friends without that mod and I can promise you the civ is insanely broken. There is right now a common tactic with Vietnam that you bring with you a Settler, put down a city right next to your neighbor where there are some trees, run all Loyalty cards + governor to keep this city, run Logistics, and now you have Crossbowmen with 7 moves that can retreat after attacking with like 48 to 51 CS on defense. Literally nothing you can do about this civ that it is so frustrating. Not even Sumeria and Aztec or Nubia can rush them in the early game.
I know there are a lot of people who don't like war in singleplayer, but strong units like VC or Warak'aq feel like a waste when you dont use them for some territory.

The funny thing is the general reception when Vietnam was first released was the civ was a middle tier civ, maybe slightly better than avg, nothing too strong. And then their elephants run you over in like a few turns and you wonder what just happened.

 

[iammaxhailme]

I'm playing a game on the huge mediterranean map. It's pretty well detailed, although since mountains and woods are such a huge part of early game adjacencies/yields, a lot of Europe really is going to be rather boring to play in as basically the whole thing is just flat plains or grasslands. Western Europe at least should be very heavily wooded, as it was before humans chopped most of it.

 

[Archon_Wing]

I don't follow many other players or anything, but I do occasionally check out Potato and TGM to see what's happening. And I very frequently see people asking if the Seowon adds an extra science/food per Seowon, and is theirs broken, etc. There aren't many binary buffs like the pre-patch Seowon in the game, so it was somewhat confusing to newer players before.

I'm extremely skeptical that new players would even notice such a thing (I don't even bother with that level of detail. Heck with the Rationalism nerf I don't even care about campus placement much anymore.), but i guess.

 

[slavaskii]

I don't follow many other players or anything, but I do occasionally check out Potato and TGM to see what's happening. And I very frequently see people asking if the Seowon adds an extra science/food per Seowon, and is theirs broken, etc. There aren't many binary buffs like the pre-patch Seowon in the game, so it was somewhat confusing to newer players before.

Out of curiosity, do you think it would've been better to explicitly rephrase the ability (that is, say +1 science if there is an adjacent Seowon) rather than fixing it to be +1 per Seowon? If people were truly confused then it's an absolutely necessary thing to change, but I would have likely advocated the former than latter.

 

[DWilson]

I have 2 multiplayer groups, 1 group plays with the Better Balanced Game mod where almost every aspect of Vietnam is nerfed 50%-60% and magically the civ is still very much viable. And then I play with my friends without that mod and I can promise you the civ is insanely broken. There is right now a common tactic with Vietnam that you bring with you a Settler, put down a city right next to your neighbor where there are some trees, run all Loyalty cards + governor to keep this city, run Logistics, and now you have Crossbowmen with 7 moves that can retreat after attacking with like 48 to 51 CS on defense. Literally nothing you can do about this civ that it is so frustrating. Not even Sumeria and Aztec or Nubia can rush them in the early game.
I know there are a lot of people who don't like war in singleplayer, but strong units like VC or Warak'aq feel like a waste when you dont use them for some territory.

This is kinda why I never get into multiplayer- it's too hard core, unless you're playing a casual game with friends, and you have to account for crazy stretches of abilities. I just like to try to build fun empires and do fun things (like get ever city of your empire except for a small outpost to get all possible colonial bonuses as Phoenicia).

 

[The Civs 6]

reading all of these thoughts, I do kind of feel for the Firaxis people for balancing the game. There are just so many different audiences for Civ:

• multiplayer audience that is conditioned to DOTA-style competitive balance
• modders
• single player audience who have a completely different idea of competitive balance from the multiplayer people
• theme/fluff concerned audience
• people who specifically want 6 to be more like another game (Civ 4 or CK2)

And the intersection of these audiences ofc.

 

[Kwami]

Out of curiosity, do you think it would've been better to explicitly rephrase the ability (that is, say +1 science if there is an adjacent Seowon) rather than fixing it to be +1 per Seowon? If people were truly confused then it's an absolutely necessary thing to change, but I would have likely advocated the former than latter.

I don't have an easy way to check, but I'm pretty sure that's basically what it said before.

 

[DogeEnricoDandolo]

This is kinda why I never get into multiplayer- it's too hard core, unless you're playing a casual game with friends, and you have to account for crazy stretches of abilities. I just like to try to build fun empires and do fun things (like get ever city of your empire except for a small outpost to get all possible colonial bonuses as Phoenicia).

Haha I guess it is more enjoyable when you play with friends you know personally. My friends consider me to be slightly more experienced with the game, so they want to pick strong civs and I pick civs they consider to be weaker. Only Vietnam is the one civ I hate so much cuz there isn't anything you can do about them before their timing, and when their timing comes, you're just dead. I'd be extremely surprised if somehow VC isn't the best unique unit in the game the next elimination thread lol.