(4-WD) Walls of Babylon's buff

[Legen]

Spoiler Babylon's UB, with its unique traits underlined :

Cost: 110
Maintenance: -1
Defense: +8 +150 HP (from +6 +125 HP)
Science: 1
1 scientist slot

Military Units supplied by population in this city increased by 10%.
Increases Ranged Strike Range by 1.
Scientists in this city generate +2 Gold.

Spoiler Babylon's UA :

Receive a Free Great Scientist when you discover Writing, and Great Scientists are earned 50% faster than normal. Investing Gold in Buildings reduces their Production cost by and additional 15%.

Proposal:

• Walls of Babylon receives the following buffs:
  • Gains +2 Food as a baseline.
  • Reduces Urbanization unhappiness by 1 in the city.
  • Add +2 Gold to Academies in the city.

Rationale:

Babylon has lost some flexibility since around 2018, after a series of general nerfs to specialists made it harder to work them, especially in the earlier eras. The food consumption was increased by 1, and the urbanization unhappiness from working one increased from 0.25 to 1. It didn't help that Crime (mitigated by Defense, which the UB has an extra) was reworked to Distress. After those changes, players have reported that Tradition and Authority have spotted working satisfactorily with Babylon, as it became unfeasible to work the UB's extra scientist with them. Progress can still work well with the UB, but even for it is now hard to work both the scientists from the library and the UB when you reach Writing, a normally high point for this civ, which is an issue that wasn't common back then. The food and urbanization buffs are meant to address these points.

Some of the proposals in the last congress have also been particularly harsh for this civ, who is particularly reliant on gold due to its 15% improved investments on the UA. Gold from international trade routes was nerfed and late game buildings have a higher maintenance cost. Even some Ancient Era buildings had their maintenance cost increased as well. The gold on academies is meant to mitigate that; not enough to fully negate the said proposals, just hopefully enough to not be so harshly affected compared to a generic civ.

There is another reason for the gold on academies, which is related to the AI. I've noticed that the city governor tends to neglect academies sometimes, until you buff their yields with, say, Inspired Works or Historical Landmarks. I suspect that the city governor for AI Babylon has the tendency to do the same, and the AI is unlikely to aim specifically for academy buffs like a human player would. So, the AI for this civ may be neglecting an important part of this civ, who is designed to generate more academies than anyone else. A built in academy buff on the civ should be enough to address this potential behavior, and do so without need for a whole discussion on GPTI balance when addressing just one AI/civ.

 

[pineappledan]

I've always thought that the addition of gold yields onto Babylon's kit was a mistake. His UA already makes his purchases more efficient; players should have to find ways to maximize their gold yields, otherwise the Babylon kit is too much of a complete package.

This is a lot of buffs all at once and I don't personally see them as necessary. This looks like an overcorrection for a civ that is still well within a moderate power level.

 

[phantomaxl1207]

Perhaps Specialists should cost 2 Food (down from 3) in Ancient and Classical Eras.

 

[azum4roll]

The gold change affects everyone, not just Babylon. I'm writing a proposal to tweak that.

If AI won't work academies, it's an AI issue.

 

[Legen]

I've always thought that the addition of gold yields onto Babylon's kit was a mistake. His UA already makes his purchases more efficient; players should have to find ways to maximize their gold yields, otherwise the Babylon kit is too much of a complete package.

This is a lot of buffs all at once and I don't personally see them as necessary. This looks like an overcorrection for a civ that is still well within a moderate power level.

Babylon's kit is far from complete due to the high need for food. The civ's extra scientist already at Ancient Era, plus the kit's focus on boosting scientists, means Babylon has a much higher need for food in its cities than usual. And none of its uniques boost food generation or growth. Much of your core concerns when playing Babylon revolves around finding extra sources of food, as you're always struggling to feed all your scientist slots (especially with Rationalism's Observatories). The gold on scientists doesn't mean Babylon won't try to find more sources of gold as well, but it lowers the pressure of pursuing a second type of yield alongside food to make the kit work.

Also, notably, food from buildings is quite limited overall, so the investment bonus does little to help in this regard. As strong as this bonus may look, it does little in regard to Babylon's main bottleneck in its kit.

I also originally thought that the civ was on a moderate power level, given that it can perform well on human hands, but the latest AI test made me question that. Babylon was among the bottom civs with a notable score disparity on turns 300 and 400. At turn 300, most civs were around the 1300-1500 mark, with the top average score being 2062, and only two civs scoring less than 1000, Babylon and Arabia. Arabia, however, had a 0.23 winrate, while Babylon had a 0.07. On turn 400, only Babylon had an average score lower than 1000 (955, specifically), while a good number of civs went over the 2000 mark, and some of the top civs surpassed 3000. So, despite Babylon's kit being nominally strong in the economic category, it is not performing well in the AI's hands.

The gold change affects everyone, not just Babylon.

I didn't say only Babylon got affected. I said they got affected harder than a generic civ.

 

[azum4roll]

I didn't say only Babylon got affected. I said they got affected harder than a generic civ.

So instead of rebalancing gold, we go buffing individual civs like Babylon and Austria? Do we nerf them back when the gold change is reverted?

 

[pineappledan]

• Gains +2 Food as a baseline.
• Reduces Urbanization unhappiness by 1 in the city.
• Add +2 Gold to Academies in the city.

These changes are all targeted around making that scientist specialist in the WoB totally costless. eliminate its food consumption and urbanization. more gold. It all looks so shockingly bland. It also gives all of these bonuses even if you don't work the WoB.

What if the WoB acted as a forced, costless, unslottable scientist? That way it would be much more unique than a UB that adds an extra specialist (which several other UBs also do), and then you don't have to work backwards to justify/support that ability by piling on all this mess:

Wall of Babylon:
Cost: 110
Maintenance: -1
Defense: +8 +150 HP (from +6 +125 HP)
Science: 4 (1 base, plus the 3 from a base scientist)
+3 Great Scientist Points
Military Units supplied by population in this city increased by 10%.
Increases Ranged Strike Range by 1.
Great Scientists provide 10% more Science when used to discover new Technology

 

[Legen]

These changes are all targeted around making that scientist specialist in the WoB totally costless. eliminate its food consumption and urbanization. more gold. It all looks so shockingly bland. It also gives all of these bonuses even if you don't work the WoB.

What if the WoB acted as a forced, costless, unslottable scientist? That way it would be much more unique than a UB that adds an extra specialist (which several other UBs also do), and then you don't have to work backwards to justify/support that ability by piling on all this mess:

Wall of Babylon:
Cost: 110
Maintenance: -1
Defense: +8 +150 HP (from +6 +125 HP)
Science: 4 (1 base, plus the 3 from a base scientist)
+3 Great Scientist Points
Military Units supplied by population in this city increased by 10%.
Increases Ranged Strike Range by 1.
Great Scientists provide 10% more Science when used to discover new Technology

I like the idea overall, I'd just scale down the +10% on Great Scientist use for a +3 or +4 on Academies instead. As worded, the +10% on GS use would scale to massive values on a really wide empire. A direct yield boost on academies would make the +50% GS rate on the UA, which was often complained of being underpowered in the past, a lot more appealing. That, plus the city governor thing.

Of note is that your design would break Babylon's current need for food, which keeps rising with each new era after Classical. This would let the civ focus mainly on gold instead. I wasn't planning to make a massive change to Babylon's current gameplan, only to alleviate it, but the idea of breaking away from food dependence would help the AI a lot more. A bigger focus on pursuing gold and away from food would also help distinguishing Babylon more cleanly from Korea, who is very specialist focused (and therefore, with high need for food), but economically lacking overall.

I do think Babylon should have some extra gold to support the UA, but I'm ok with the scientists no longer generating gold in exchange for not needing anywhere as much food. I think the only extra gold I'd give to Babylon would be in removing the -1 maintenance cost on the UB.

I'm thinking of withdrawing my current design to submit your design instead, but with the +10% on GS use replaced with +3/4 on academies and no maintenance on the UB. Any thoughts before I do that?

 

[pineappledan]

+10% on Great Scientist use for a +3 or +4 on Academies instead. As worded, the +10% on GS use would scale to massive values on a really wide empire.

This bumps up against my desired Korea changes:

Korea

• UA gives +20%Science during Golden Ages instead of +30%Great Person Rate
• Hwach'a changes:
  • Now replaces Cannon (32, 16)
  • Does not require Iron
  • No longer has Logistics
  • Has Field I and unique 'Singijeon' promotions:
    • 5 splash damage
    • +25% RCS when adjacent to or in a city
• Seowon changes:
  • No longer gives +15%Science during Golden Ages
  • moved back to Education
  • Base yields changed to 32
  • Gives +1 to all GPTIs near the city (to match the +1 from GWs)

Right now we have a situation where all 3 of our most SV-focused civs all have a major bonus towards great people generation on their UA:
- Babylon has a large % GP rate for 1 specialist type
- Korea has a large %GP rate bonus during Golden Ages
- Maya gets GPs for free

I need to propose that Korea change still, but it has, at its core, an attempt to unstack these three civs off the same bonus, and that involves giving extra to Academies on Korea’s UB (among other bonuses). It also splits the emphases; Korea has bonuses to the permanent bonuses and Babylon would have a bonus to the instant effect.

The bulb bonus being big and stackable if you go wide and try to max it is good; you want kits to promote an altered playstyle and give powerful enough bonuses that they are worth trying to max. It would change the conventional wisdom as to when you should switch from Academies to bulbing when playing as Babylon.

Thinking about that bonus of mimicking a specialist on the building itself, it does some interesting things that free up Babylon’s playstyle. They wouldn’t seem so obviously shackled to goddess of wisdom anymore, because the WoB wouldn’t give that specialist slot, but you could still work that merchant on the market, which also supports and frees you up to go for Babylon’s secondary focus. Freeing up that 1 let’s you go and work some other tile or specialist in addition to relieving the or burdens of feeling forced onto working that scientist slot.

 

[Legen]

I need to propose that Korea change still, but it has, at its core, an attempt to unstack these three civs off the same bonus, and that involves giving extra to Academies on Korea’s UB (among other bonuses). It also splits the emphases; Korea has bonuses to the permanent bonuses and Babylon would have a bonus to the instant effect.

As I understand, Korea already has a secondary focus on great works with the current Seowon, even ignoring the +30% GP rate on the UA. And it is not ideal, since Assyria also boosts GWs and has a bigger effect with the Royal Library. So far, what distinguishes Korea the most from other scientific civs is the focus on Golden ages; I've been thinking that the Seowon should support GAs somehow, instead of messing with GPTIs (better done by Babylon) and great works (already done by Assyria). I'm still thinking of what this GA support could be.

The emphasis on instant effects for Babylon is a weird choice in my opinion. Babylon is a civilization that is designed to be especially strong in the early game, while bulbing a scientist is usually done in the late game. And one of the fun parts of the civ right now is in how they get more academies than everyone else, and do so earlier as well; a Progress Babylon can often amass more academies than most civs going Tradition get GPTIs in total throughout the early and midgame. As such, Babylon has strong incentives to focus on GPTI boosts, like Inspired Works and Historical Landmarks, it makes sense for the UB to act as a boost as well.

On a note, freeing a citizen from the specialist slot help populating those early academies. It is not uncommon to be struggling to have enough population early on to work both the UB's slot and the early academies that Babylon gets.

 

[Enginseer]

what if the wall of babylon was a national wonder available in the ancient era and only built in the Capital that granted free walls... and provided global buffs to all other Babylonian walls and scientists.

 

[pineappledan]

As I understand, Korea already has a secondary focus on great works with the current Seowon, even ignoring the +30% GP rate on the UA. And it is not ideal, since Assyria also boosts GWs and has a bigger effect with the Royal Library.

The Seowon already has the GW bonus. My proposal matches it with a GPTI bonus so that Korea has a bonus for all GPs’ permanent action. The current setup forces that unfavourable comparison with Assyria because it is only given to GWAMs and not GEMS.

So far, what distinguishes Korea the most from other scientific civs is the focus on Golden ages; I've been thinking that the Seowon should support GAs somehow, instead of messing with GPTIs (better done by Babylon) and great works (already done by Assyria).

The current Seowon gives 15% during GAs. It already supports GAs by doubling up on the UA. I’m not a fan of how the current kit double dips on the same trigger.

The emphasis on instant effects for Babylon is a weird choice in my opinion. Babylon is a civilization that is designed to be especially strong in the early game, while bulbing a scientist is usually done in the late game.

I don't think I agree. Babylon is not a "coasting" civ like Carthage. IMO, The stronger part of Babylon's kit is the investment bonus, and that only kicks in when you have a few cost reduction and gold generation bonuses under your belt (eg. Industry).

The bulb bonus is already a large part of Babylon's kit, because they get more Academies faster than other civs. Adding more bulb % on the WoB directly would emphasize this existing bonus and bring the inflection point where you switch from Academies to bulbs earlier. Probably Renaissance.

What adding the bulb bonus does is allow us to add more early game flexibility to the kit, cut the in-built gold-generation bonus, and sharpen the focus down to the things that Babylon is about: GScientists and gold efficiency

what if the wall of babylon was a national wonder available in the ancient era and only built in the Capital that granted free walls... and provided global buffs to all other Babylonian walls and scientists.

Then that would really force another comparison between Babylon and Assyria, because they would both be Mesopotamian civs with bonuses on an early national wonder

 

[Legen]

The stronger part of Babylon's kit is the investment bonus, and that only kicks in when you have a few cost reduction and gold generation bonuses under your belt (eg. Industry).

The investment bonus comes earlier than that, at least with Progress. You can consistently invest in every UB as you settle with Babylon, getting it ready with 37 in every city. It is far from being a lategame effect. And while it takes a while before you can invest in every building you want, you're far from rarely investing on key buildings.

The bulb bonus is already a large part of Babylon's kit, because they get more Academies faster than other civs. Adding more bulb % on the WoB directly would emphasize this existing bonus and bring the inflection point where you switch from Academies to bulbs earlier. Probably Renaissance.

What adding the bulb bonus does is allow us to add more early game flexibility to the kit, cut the in-built gold-generation bonus, and sharpen the focus down to the things that Babylon is about: GScientists and gold efficiency

I'm not so optimistic about that. Chances are that, aside from really wanting a given wonder, you'll instead save your GScientists for at least after you complete Rationalism.

 

[Legen]

Wall of Babylon:
Cost: 110
Maintenance: -1
Defense: +8 +150 HP (from +6 +125 HP)
Science: 4 (1 base, plus the 3 from a base scientist)
+3 Great Scientist Points
Military Units supplied by population in this city increased by 10%.
Increases Ranged Strike Range by 1.
Great Scientists provide 10% more Science when used to discover new Technology

I'm warming up more to the +10% on GS use, thinking in how it can push for going wide, against the incentive to stay tall/thick to get the most out of the academies' base yields. I'll propose your suggestion and only add a "no maintenance cost" to it, which should preserve some of Babylon's ability to keep investing in the early game.

@Recursive , I'd like to withdrawal this proposal in order to propose a different version. I think the changes are big enough to merit a different proposal and rationale.

 

[Recursive]

Proposal withdrawn by request.