Mongolia completely overpowered?

Well, the Civ 5 version lacks vocals. What else did you feel was missing? Out of curiosity. I looked up "Mongolian long song" on youtube just today and was astounded by what I found. :O

I also think the Civ 5 version is based on the Silk Road exhibit at the Institute of Chicago, also on YouTube. Just a guess.

Like I said, it wasn't bad. I think music is one of things that the game got right in general. Perhaps I was expecting too much.

I guess I can listen to the CDs of Mongolian music I have when I play again. That'll do.

Anyway, I am glad you enjoyed the Mongolian music you found on the internet. :)
 
Part of the problem is that horsemen are already, effectively, a ranged unit. Think of it this way- you attack with an archer at range 2, and he ends turn. Or you attack with a horsemen at range 2, and move back again. The horsemen takes a little damage, but it will heal fast. With an army of horsemen you don't need ranged units.

I wouldn't even waste time thinking about what "a smart opponent" would do. Multiplayer is so buggy I can't do it at all, and if it does work it'll focus heavily on scout/warrior/archer rushes, ending long before knights and probably even before horsemen.

I usually have no problem getting GGs to keep up with horsemen, because the horsemen have to attack, retreat, and heal, while the GG just sits there from the back.

you spend so much time here :):):):):)ing Moderator Action: Swearing is not allowed in this forum. about the game, but it's clear that your playstyle is part of the problem. try a huge map with no CS's, good luck using your 4 horsemen to take over the world with that. also, the ai is much more intelligent now, I swear that I actually saw the irroquois use some tactics against me earlier. I actually lost a lot of units while taking over my 1/2 of a pangea map in fact.

If you hate the game so much go play civ iv.
 
It's in the latest patch, log on steam, it should download & patch. There will be a scenario for Mongolia (haven't tried it yet), and you can also select Mongol from single player mode (never played CiV MP yet but I assume it works there too).

When it comes to Civ V and Multiplayer, it's best to assume that it doesn't work. Maybe you'll be pleasantly surprised once in a while.
 
Look, these are the Mongols. In their prime, they were OP to the max, and pretty much nothing could stop them. It's the whole point. You have the advantage of knowing what is coming once they reach the tech level for knights, so you either 1) wipe them out before they get that far (Greece, I'm looking at you) or 2) survive their onslaught and wipe them out after their high-phase is over. Just deal with it.

These discussions show the developers are doing something right: The list of civs that somebody has called "overpowered" at some point or the other is getting silly. They (almost) all have a major strength in one area, which is what gives them far more character than the old civs.

Now if they could only fix the combat AI so it actually means something.
 
some people in this thread mentioned that you can't conquer cities with keshiks. I just want to state that you actually CAN do that, if there is no unit garrisioned in the city. just use the move command once you've beaten down the city to minimal hitpoints.

Keshiks are really great units. i just won a standard continents king game by domination, started with 4 horseman (i wanted to wait for the keshik tech, but got dowed, so they left me no choice :)), and just plowed through everything. In the end I had 8 keshiks with 4 khans, some of them with +1 range +1 additional attack. just insane.
 
Babylon is superior

The Bowmen is superior to the Keshik

Fact- Early

Fact- No Rescources

Fact- Cheap

Fact- Walls of Babylon make them like Cannon

the evidence is clear- It is good that they do not include Babylon and the Mongols in Multiplayer because I would kill everyone who is playing greece and the mongols
 
And yes, the Khan does seem to be bugged. I'd agree Mongolia isn't OP. At the moment I'd say the real problem is just cavalry in general, and how they stomp things or get stomped in ONE HIT (or close to) most of the time, just like how infantry insta-kill archers when they attack, which I think is to make up for the fact that archers can do substantial damage from range. A bit clunky, and it can lead to unbalanced battles. :S

The main thing about Mongolia which is powerful in 5 is the Keshik, as it gains double XP by default and generates Khans at double the usual rate, in addition to having uber movement. The UA actually kinda sucks imo--an early city-state captured is nice, but really only helps if you're serving a hostile CS that wanted that CS eliminated. And even then this only helps a little bit, as the CSes might all turn on you for warmongering.

If I had the time or the patience to explain how many things were wrong with this statement, I would. Fortunately for you, however, I don't. So I'll just say one thing...

"The UA actually kinda sucks imo?" Bull. I hate when people say the Mongolian UA sucks because you never want to attack City States, etc, etc. What you failed to realize is this: Most people do not like the Mongolia UA because of the City States effect. The people on this thread like the Mongolian UA because of this game breaking effect: +1 Movement to all Mounted Units.
 
Babylon is superior

The Bowmen is superior to the Keshik

Fact- Early

Fact- No Rescources

Fact- Cheap

Fact- Walls of Babylon make them like Cannon

the evidence is clear- It is good that they do not include Babylon and the Mongols in Multiplayer because I would kill everyone who is playing greece and the mongols

You'll need way more than that to convince a single person on this thread.

Fact- Khan>Bowman

Fact- Khan=No Resources

Fact- +1 Movement To All Mounted Units>All Babylonian Calvary

Fact- If you're intelligent, Keshiks should barely be wounded with 5 movement... Believe me, if a Keshik is low on hp, you'll probably never see it again. Within a turn, it'll be long gone.

Fact- With their UA, the Mongols essentially turn any mounted unit into a UU. *Hint hint* Horsemen- Early (Just like Bowman)

Fact- Khan+Keshik+Some Horsemen=Non-stop 5 movement army that heals insanely and can take cities.

Fact- I would take Mongolia over Babylon any day early-mid game.

Mongolia would be larger than Babylon early-mid game (at least) because chances are you would have found a city state nearby and taken it over. (Just 1 or 2) Larger means more production. More production means more units. Secondly, Mongolia could probably rush you before you could do much, considering the majority of their units have 5 movement.

The only advantage Babylon has over Mongolia is their UA, Ingenuity. Mongolia is war focused. Babylon is only partially war focused. This, of course, is determined by your style of play. Late game, Ingenuity will really help. (Even some mid game)

...But please don't act as if Babylon is superior to the Mongols in terms of war. It's simply false. Utterly and clearly incorrect.
 
Whatever else we might say, the AI will definitely need time to be coded to deal with the amazing ranged+mobile firepower in the Mongols. In this sense, the AI is currently "underpowered."

As has been noted nicely in this thread already, in many respects this means learning (for the human and the AI) how to deal with the Mongols during their high point of Keshiks, and the easiest thing for the AI to do during that time might be to focus on good defensive positions and, more importantly, focus on techs that lead to effective counters rather than trying to engage the Mongols with subpar counters - often on subpar terrain.

Of course, that way of thinking needs to be in play generally - knowing how to subvert or outlast particular opponent strengths, pounding on weaknesses. Just as this takes time for most human players to master, the AI coders will need time and practice getting it right, which it currently isn't, especially against any highly mobile, ranged unit.
 
The AI at least TRY to do something if it is hit-and-runned to death. My last game had me whittling down a hapless AI city with a single Keshik. When the city reached 10hp, its garrison and some rush-buyed support actually sallied and tried to chase that pesky horsearcher off. Unfortunately for the AI, some backup had arrived in the meantime :D
 
If I had the time or the patience to explain how many things were wrong with this statement, I would. Fortunately for you, however, I don't. So I'll just say one thing...

"The UA actually kinda sucks imo?" Bull. I hate when people say the Mongolian UA sucks because you never want to attack City States, etc, etc. What you failed to realize is this: Most people do not like the Mongolia UA because of the City States effect. The people on this thread like the Mongolian UA because of this game breaking effect: +1 Movement to all Mounted Units.

I think the Mongols City State UA is quite good. It's a different strategy that people are loath to adopt because it's different. I actually think Firaxis has done a good job here. It does cause you to think outside the box but eventually when the AI gets better and the AI starts to use city states intelligently, being able to beat the crap out of the city states will be quite useful. The AI eventually will be smart enough to ally that miltaristic city state on your back door to make things awkward for you.

I think conquering an early city state with a couple of warriors is entirely possible with the Mongols. Likely you'll be able to capture a worker as well. Seeing as how City states tend to have good resources, I think this could be a solid strategy as it will give you a huge boost in the early game. It also makes the destroying another city state mission a walk in the park.

The +1 movement from all mounted units is awesome. It mimics the hit and run tactics of the Mongols very well, even if the scale isn't perfect.

All in all, the UA is one of the best ones in the game and the UUs are extremely solid.
 
attacko strikes again
Well then thank goodness I'm not wasting my time on reading his posts.
Thormodr
The +1 movement from all mounted units is awesome. It mimics the hit and run tactics of the Mongols very well, even if the scale isn't perfect.

All in all, the UA is one of the best ones in the game and the UUs are extremely solid.
Yeah I agree, shame though that they've released Mongolia before fixing overpowered mounted problem, which makes Mongolia unplayable to me. And tbh GG that heals with 5:move: is too strong imo - it's a unit that is usable for the entire game - not a good balancing done. But hey it's fun, no? Like in Failout 3 when you had a gun with which you could kill someone with the teddy bear - omgwhatanawesome fun...
 
I chose to play with the Arabs against the Mongols. They started on a large piece of land that narrowed into a bottleneck with mountains and hills along either side. It had a single horse resource. I built a city right behind it, then put a fort on the hill in the pass. There was a CS next to it, and mountains and hills behind that, so I built a second city back there and boxed the Mongols in.

It is now 1520, and he's still there. Every now and then he'll bash a longswordsman against my fort, and die. He also steadily convoys longswordsmen and trebuchets against my second city. They die under city and crossbow/trebuchet fire.

I've made a point of not allying with the CS, so as not to draw the Mongols' wrath on them. And they're still there, watching the show.

They don't seem so overpowered to me!
 
I chose to play with the Arabs against the Mongols. They started on a large piece of land that narrowed into a bottleneck with mountains and hills along either side. It had a single horse resource. I built a city right behind it, then put a fort on the hill in the pass. There was a CS next to it, and mountains and hills behind that, so I built a second city back there and boxed the Mongols in.

It is now 1520, and he's still there. Every now and then he'll bash a longswordsman against my fort, and die. He also steadily convoys longswordsmen and trebuchets against my second city. They die under city and crossbow/trebuchet fire.

I've made a point of not allying with the CS, so as not to draw the Mongols' wrath on them. And they're still there, watching the show.

They don't seem so overpowered to me!
What diff setting was it? I'm simply curious as to how dumb the AI still is.

That's the Civ5 AI in action. It's a pain to watch.

What I meant with my post is that Mongolia is unplayable for me as a player. When you pick a nation, you kind of play to its strenghts, otherwise you're missing the point (like picking Japanese and not fight any war, or Darius and not enter a single Golden Age). So when I pick Mongolia I want to use mounted units, but with Mongolia's UA and UU I can just as well have GDRs from the start instead (at least they're slower xPPP).

Once mounted units will be nerfed (for instance lower the strength by 2 of each Horsemen, Knight etc, spears/pikes will get +150% against mounted or open terrain penalty will be lowered down to -10% or sth) then Mongolia could be fun to play, as it is now it looks like a GodMode to me :sad:
 
Look, these are the Mongols. In their prime, they were OP to the max, and pretty much nothing could stop them. It's the whole point. You have the advantage of knowing what is coming once they reach the tech level for knights, so you either 1) wipe them out before they get that far (Greece, I'm looking at you) or 2) survive their onslaught and wipe them out after their high-phase is over. Just deal with it.

These discussions show the developers are doing something right: The list of civs that somebody has called "overpowered" at some point or the other is getting silly. They (almost) all have a major strength in one area, which is what gives them far more character than the old civs.

Now if they could only fix the combat AI so it actually means something.

100% agree the mongols were in most huge battles they won outnumbered and just won by insane speed and battle tactics. compared to history the mongols feel very well in their current implementatio.
 
100% agree the mongols were in most huge battles they won outnumbered and just won by insane speed and battle tactics. compared to history the mongols feel very well in their current implementatio.

I think Firaxis did a pretty good job overall with the Mongols. They've captured their spirit fairly well. The AI needs to be improved massively though.

Welcome to the forums. :)
 
I think the Mongols City State UA is quite good. It's a different strategy that people are loath to adopt because it's different. I actually think Firaxis has done a good job here. It does cause you to think outside the box but eventually when the AI gets better and the AI starts to use city states intelligently, being able to beat the crap out of the city states will be quite useful. The AI eventually will be smart enough to ally that miltaristic city state on your back door to make things awkward for you.

I think conquering an early city state with a couple of warriors is entirely possible with the Mongols. Likely you'll be able to capture a worker as well. Seeing as how City states tend to have good resources, I think this could be a solid strategy as it will give you a huge boost in the early game. It also makes the destroying another city state mission a walk in the park.

The +1 movement from all mounted units is awesome. It mimics the hit and run tactics of the Mongols very well, even if the scale isn't perfect.

All in all, the UA is one of the best ones in the game and the UUs are extremely solid.

Ah yes.. It seems someone stated another point that I had neither the time nor the patience to state.. Ignoring the +1 movement to all mounted units, the UA still isn't that bad... (Not saying it's still one of the best UA's. Just saying it's not bad)
Honestly? People seem so reluctant to attack city states... You're going to have to do it at some point. And when you do, it might as well be with these guys.. Now considering the Mongols are one of the best warmongers, a militaristic city state helping out your enemy could prove to be extremely irritating... So kill it ;)

Also note that with that part of their UA, these guys are the natural enemy of Alexander. Their Horsemen are just as fast as his Champ Calvaries (Although not nearly as strong) and his UA completely counters Alexander's. Not saying the Mongolians would win..(Although they might)
Just saying Alexander hates these guys.
 
I chose to play with the Arabs against the Mongols. They started on a large piece of land that narrowed into a bottleneck with mountains and hills along either side. It had a single horse resource. I built a city right behind it, then put a fort on the hill in the pass. There was a CS next to it, and mountains and hills behind that, so I built a second city back there and boxed the Mongols in.

It is now 1520, and he's still there. Every now and then he'll bash a longswordsman against my fort, and die. He also steadily convoys longswordsmen and trebuchets against my second city. They die under city and crossbow/trebuchet fire.

I've made a point of not allying with the CS, so as not to draw the Mongols' wrath on them. And they're still there, watching the show.

They don't seem so overpowered to me!

No offense.. But if that was a human player, you would be long gone.
 
Top Bottom