4.5 AI-Only Game Statistics (we love war)

Unless we give warmonger civs some economic advantages, they'll stick to killing all unfortunate civs that spawn close to them but not win.
 
Unlike the victory points that are very "natural" and not gamey at all. Also, the world just stops at 2050 ad. very natural
If victory points reflect how great empire is (which is debatable currently) then sure. The world doesn't stop at 2050 ad, though. It's just for checking the scores, could be any different year.
 
If someone wanted to, they could remake the time victory.
Personally I have only hit it once or twice when I plunged the world into a dark age from my bloodthirsty warmongering. In those cases it felt fine. I would have "pseudo-domination"ed a science victory otherwise, and that's quite boring.
 
I have always disabled the time victory, though not sure how often I would have actually hit it.
 
Does it focus on score more?
It focuses more on immersion and historical concepts being correct than on anything else. Here's a link to the latest alpha, if you'd want to give it a try. Leaving comments in that thread is welcomed by the creator, so I'd take notes while you play & post them after.
 
There was a time i didnt know why is it so strong, untill i saw amphibious Knight on a river :)

Im learning to play on diety now, and im at the stage im trying to judge any tile basing on its relative value,
and value of a production is a lot, especially early game. You get like 8 tiles of river near your capitol, and you are set up, to dominate
your neighbours. So yea, those Tabya-s seems like almost OP, not sure why there is this additional 10% towards buildings there. Its already strong :)
It also gives early culture from being UB, which at this stage of the game for many civs could be 50% more culture in the expansion cities.


Wow, is those strange triangles are offensive roads build by new automated workers :)? Impressed :)
And they clean after xD
Hmm, just wonder, do workers know, which roads were built by automated workers, so that whey dont remove roads that wer build by human?
I mean, i wonder what would happend to offensive roads build by human, is it a risk, that automated workers would remove it prematurely?
I have problem with current workers, that sometimes i build road not optimally, so that i could squize more villages between close cities, and i see sometimes, that
there are parralel roads build next to mine :) Just learned to accept , that i cant squize 3 villages, when on optimal road could be only 2 :)
I said it many times. Leave the Songhai alone. Of course they are op. The game needs a civ like that. I also think the tabya is more op than the mandekalu, even so, leave it.
 
No leave that to vanilla and civ6, we really need to nerf the most op stuff, balance is imperative to the mod.
But Mandekalu and tabya arent the game breakers, its the extra movement that really make it roll over other AI's unable to understand how to defend against it, exaggerated by UU being cav and ignoring rivers which are normally a hindrace/defensive line.
Hwatcha logistics for free is another bad one.
 
Iroquois are also almost as OP as Songhai with the extra movement, extra production from longhouse, woodsman promotion. And if you play with 3/4 UC you can add prowlers (indirect fire, retreat) to the OP list.
 
Why? Do we also need OP cultural victory that we had?

No leave that to vanilla and civ6, we really need to nerf the most op stuff, balance is imperative to the mod.
But Mandekalu and tabya arent the game breakers, its the extra movement that really make it roll over other AI's unable to understand how to defend against it, exaggerated by UU being cav and ignoring rivers which are normally a hindrace/defensive line.
Hwatcha logistics for free is another bad one.
It's just so funny how things work out the wrong way. Nerf, nerf, nerf, but what do you actually achieve. Mainly, you eliminate ways of not winning the game, ever thought about that?
 
Iroquois are also almost as OP as Songhai with the extra movement, extra production from longhouse, woodsman promotion. And if you play with 3/4 UC you can add prowlers (indirect fire, retreat) to the OP list.
Thats the thing, use modmod if you want op stuff and yes Iroquois is also subject to this issue under certain circumstances, celts and kilimanjaro isnt as extreme since hills are usually spread out.
It's just so funny how things work out the wrong way. Nerf, nerf, nerf, but what do you actually achieve. Mainly, you eliminate ways of not winning the game, ever thought about that?
Nerfs does not eliminate ways of winning, its supposed to eliminate trivial wins.
The main problem with broken civs is that you know they will erase near by civ(s) and your only hope is to be close enough to help or take your cut of the AI that is doomed.
If you' are on the other side of the world the op AI is going to snowball.
 
It's just so funny how things work out the wrong way. Nerf, nerf, nerf, but what do you actually achieve. Mainly, you eliminate ways of not winning the game, ever thought about that?

If you want OP civs to play with just modify your own game and triple some civ bonuses or so. The vast majority prefers a good balance.
 
It's just so funny how things work out the wrong way. Nerf, nerf, nerf, but what do you actually achieve. Mainly, you eliminate ways of not winning the game, ever thought about that?
Balance is achieved. Or at least closer to it. That's the point of nerfing OP things. Without it, it's trivial to play as OP civ and pain in a butt to play against it.
 
Balance is achieved. Or at least closer to it. That's the point of nerfing OP things. Without it, it's trivial to play as OP civ and pain in a butt to play against it.
Is it really true that people want to play op civs? A pain in the butt to play against. Yes, isn't that half the point of playing?
 
Iroquois are also almost as OP as Songhai with the extra movement, extra production from longhouse, woodsman promotion. And if you play with 3/4 UC you can add prowlers (indirect fire, retreat) to the OP list.
Spoiler They are very comparable. The key differences are: :

Pros for Iroquois:
- Forests and Jungles are more common than rivers.
- Even though the Mandekalu is stronger in its era, the Mohawk is arguably better because it is a spammable swordfighter that has a very large and forgiving window. It's much easier to use and much harder to counter.
Pros for Songhai:
- River movement is potentially a much better movement option compared to double movement in woods. This is especially true for mounted units. Rivers can form tactical dead zones that other civs have to avoid or cross carefully, while the Songhai turn them into an advantage. Woods may slow movement a bit, but they also provide rough terrain defense. Iroquois make a useful tile stronger while the Songhai turn a dangerous tile into an advantage.
- Rivers can't be removed, and their are strong incentives for enemies to build cities on them. This makes Songhai road access into enemy land pretty much uncounterable. At least you could clear woods if you know you share a continent with the Iroquois.
- In addition to the River movement and connection bonuses, Songhai get a :c5gold:Gold bonus for conquest and vs barbarians. Iroquois have no comparable bonus
- The Tabya boosts terrain that can't be removed, can be improved instantly by farms etc, can have GPTIs and villages placed on it. The Longhouse is much less flexible, and offers a lower power spike later than the Tabya
- The Tabya has a 10% :c5production: bonus to buildings production, and unlocks :c5production:in all cities, not just the ones with access to quarries. The Longhouse has no answer for these bonuses.

TL;DR - while similar, the Songhai just have more bonuses to more things than the Iroquois, and they don't give up much in the ways that they are directly comparable.
 
I play large maps with 20 civs. The funny thing is 2 games ago Spain was an absolute beast. And my last game it was Siam. Both were religious power houses. Spain was definitely more aggressive. Siam was SO passive. They were way ahead of me in Army size and Technology. But I could even Annex one of their city-states and he still wouldn't declare war on me.
 
Is it really true that people want to play op civs? A pain in the butt to play against. Yes, isn't that half the point of playing?
The half point of playing is playing an imbalanced game? What??

The majority prefers balance, so this is what VP designers try to do. OP civs have a place in mod mods for those who prefer it, so everyone is happy.
 
The priority should always be fun. Ideally, each civ should offer unique tools and playstyles that emphasize different aspects of the game, and make playing both as them and against them a fresh challenge.

At a certain point, having some civs that are much stronger than other ones can hurt people's fun. If you are playing a civ that is simply stronger than other civs then your opponents won't offer much challenge. If you are playing on a map with continents and discover that the other side of the map has been swallowed up by an overtuned civ before you ever got to meet them, that's maybe a pretty difficult challenge, but it's far less interesting meeting a single civ who has catapulted ahead of everyone else in Renaissance.

In my opinion the Songhai are the worst of both worlds. They function largely identical to how the Iroquois do, so they aren't mechanically unique or interesting. They are less complex than the Iroquois, because forests offers some tradeoffs, require more planning and have more tile management decisions than rivers. On top of that, the Songhai are strong enough that they can run away with a game on a somewhat reliable basis. Users have commented many times that Songhai feel like you are playing down 1 difficulty setting. We already have a lever for doing that: Variable Difficulty settings.

TL;DR - we should never compromise fun for the sake of balance, but I don’t see how the Songhai are fun, and unbalanced things can hurt fun.
 
Top Bottom