Acken's Minimalistic Balance for singleplayer (and AI improvements)

Hmm... that should be okay, depending on your opponent of course. Go after softer targets, preferably tradition civs with nice cites and wonders, and not stuff like honor players with a large army (even if they look threatening). As long as they do not have medieval units you should be fine if you can gather like 6 swords and some support units by that time. Even if they also have swords you can use flanking and the fact that they promote cover instead of shock/drill to beat them in my experience even though you might lose 1 or 2 swords. Catapults are necessary to take harder cities efficiently, they are hardly ever targeted if you have a wounded swordsman in range, which you probably will. If you still struggle try the Vikings for 23 strength move 3 (+) units at MC.

How are Tradition Civs "softer targets"? Taller cities have more defence. Tradition Civs get free walls in their first few expansions. Tradition Civs are almost as hard to fight early on as Honor are.

On the other hand Liberty will settle a lot of cities which means their units are spread out more. Easier to catch off-guard. Also less defense value. Easier to single out a city in open terrain.

In my opinion the enemy Civ that goes Liberty ICS or Piety Wonder spamming should always be the first target.

I wasn't talking about the ability to win peacefully based on a passive AI.

In Civ we are supposed to have different options to victory. On Prince, for example, I could do two things:

strategy 1: establish a small empire of 5-6 cities and focus on my economy, getting a tech lead and winning by space ship. I would fight wars but they would be primarily defensive in nature, or defending a city state ally. I wouldn't need to war to conquer enemy capitals, for example.

strategy 2: forget building any wonders at all. Focus 100% on the military and conquer everyone and everything in sight. Win by conquest.


The problem is that on Immortal, strategy 1 is out of the question. I like aggressive AI's. I like having to defend my empire from invasions. What I don't like is when I play as Korea, have an empire churning out 1000 beakers per turn at turn 175, have academies and scientists up the wazoo, have 7 cities, avg city pop is 30.....

and yet, the freaking Huns, who have no academies, not much more population than I do, no universities, are still 5 technologies ahead of me.

Can I win such a game? Of course I can. All I have to do is build artillery and battleships and blast the living crap out of everyone. That's why I won a continents game with England on something like turn 240 (using ships of the line, not even battleships)

But can I win without conquering everyone? No. Is it just me, is this just my problem? On high difficulty levels, I can't win without conquering at least a few civs. In my last game, for example, I was Babylon and I was determined to win by space victory. No conquest. Byzantium hit the modern age before I hit the industrial age. Without using my military to smash everyone in sight, the game seems just impossible to win above emperor. The AI is impossible to catch via peaceful means, the only way to beat it is on the battlefield. That's why I think the AI's battlefield performance needs to be buffed, and its economic performance nerfed.

Not to be rude or anything but if you can't catch up to tech at Immortal you need to work on your growth/science game.

I've managed to win quite a few peaceful victories on DemiGod now. From many hours of testing I'd say the AI usually wins peacefully at around turn 240 to 260 standard speed so if you can't finish by then there's probably no chance of you winning.

If you didn't manage to win a SV on T250 or lower in the unmodded Deity game then you probably won't win any VC but Domination on AckenMod above Emperor. It's just very challenging, not impossible.
 
On gold topic: The slope of gold cost doesn't make any sense, and it might as well be removed. Earlier buildings should be a bit cheaper, and later buildings should be much more expensive. Also, since the purchase reductions are additive, they need to be nerfed.

Late game stuff already cost more. It's the ratio of cost/hammer that gets better. And it makes sense because of how rushing late game stuff has less of an impact. In other words you get a discount for time.

To me the biggest flaw about gold bonuses is how gold bonuses stack. When you get commerce + order/autocracy you get ridiculously low prices for buildings/units respectively. Calculating multiplicatively those bonuses instead of adding it to a percentage reduction would hinder this exploit.

For example if you get the 15% + 25% + 33% bonus pack, summing percentages reduces the base cost by 73%, but applying them multiplicatively, the reduction goes to 57%.

I'm more with maintaining the original gold ratio with minor boosts (what I did in my balance mod long time ago: No costs on monument/shrine, boosted customs house and GM gold); is good enough, as boosting the ratio is against any minimalist effort, you have to re-balance any gold-related aspect of the game : Hurry purchases, CS investment and unit/building maintenance, gold in policies, gold boosts on land, gold boosts from buildings, techs, promotions, civ traits...

Anyways, about the mod: I think this mod if far from minimalist right now, but still keeps the game core more or less the same, I did similar changes long time ago, I must say I like most of the changes, I'll give it a few tries soon enough, thanks for your hard work!

The sum of its changes may not be minimalist but the changes themselves are often minimalistic. It's mostly as an opposition to an overhaul like CBP.

As a side note the 33% bonus from autocracy/order is already multiplicative. The additive part is BB and mercantilism.

But can I win without conquering everyone? No. Is it just me, is this just my problem? On high difficulty levels, I can't win without conquering at least a few civs. In my last game, for example, I was Babylon and I was determined to win by space victory. No conquest. Byzantium hit the modern age before I hit the industrial age. Without using my military to smash everyone in sight, the game seems just impossible to win above emperor. The AI is impossible to catch via peaceful means, the only way to beat it is on the battlefield. That's why I think the AI's battlefield performance needs to be buffed, and its economic performance nerfed.

It's difficult to win without being involved in wars indeed but domination is not the only possible victory. My byzantium game ends up with a culture victory for example.

I'd even argue that culture is a good idea when you are behind in techs while science requires you to take down huge empires that are running away in tech (or be yourself the tech leader).
 
Not to be rude or anything but if you can't catch up to tech at Immortal you need to work on your growth/science game.

I've managed to win quite a few peaceful victories on DemiGod now. From many hours of testing I'd say the AI usually wins peacefully at around turn 240 to 260 standard speed so if you can't finish by then there's probably no chance of you winning.

I'd love to see a Let's Play that does this -- I'm with noto, I don't see how to get 1000 bpt by turn 175, especially peacefully. Even if you put aside warlike neighbors and such, the happiness issues can be considerable.
 
Okay, back down to Emperor for me. I just saw Korea hit the modern era on turn 168. It was about to die to a neighbour...but still... modern on T168... *shaking my head...

On topic: adding the scientist back to the library indirectly buffed Korea (and Babylon I guess). Maybe these civs need a slight nerf now?
 
I'd love to see a Let's Play that does this -- I'm with noto, I don't see how to get 1000 bpt by turn 175, especially peacefully. Even if you put aside warlike neighbors and such, the happiness issues can be considerable.

I only have a Laptop that is years old, so there is no way I can record a video for you. I'd gladly play a DemiGod game though and try to reach those numbers you proposed.

One has to remember though: getting 1000 bpt by turn 175 is not very hard if you have 8 or more cities. It is next to impossible if you have 5 or less cities. Obviously having 6 cities with 1000 bpt or 8 cities with 1000 bpt makes a huge difference.

Korea and Babylon were mentioned earlier - so do you want me to play one of the Science Civilizations and try to go for those benchmarks? Korea is probably one of my most comfortable picks.

It is doable with a non-science Civilization, too, but much harder.
 
I only have a Laptop that is years old, so there is no way I can record a video for you. I'd gladly play a DemiGod game though and try to reach those numbers you proposed.

One has to remember though: getting 1000 bpt by turn 175 is not very hard if you have 8 or more cities. It is next to impossible if you have 5 or less cities. Obviously having 6 cities with 1000 bpt or 8 cities with 1000 bpt makes a huge difference.

Korea and Babylon were mentioned earlier - so do you want me to play one of the Science Civilizations and try to go for those benchmarks? Korea is probably one of my most comfortable picks.

It is doable with a non-science Civilization, too, but much harder.

1000bpt by turn 190 with, say, Monte would be great. I've hit 1000bpt that early before in regular Civ -- once -- but the starting setup was *perfect* and there were zero AI issues. Now that the National College is less strong ... yeesh. I mean, how do you run 8 cities up that big, pre-Ideology, without massive happiness issues? (Also -- if you want good defensive units, you have to dip down in the tech tree, and do it early and more often ... wasn't the case before.)
 
I've been getting random crashes to desktop with my latest version 4 game. I do play with other mods, such as "weak civ AI mod" and "remove GDR", but I've been combining those mods with Acken's mod for months now with no problem.

Here's what did change: recently I added "info addicts" and "really advanced setup". Do you think there would be compatibility issues with these and Acken's Mod? (I hope not, especially with the latter, I use it to remove Venice from the game and I won't play Civ 5 if Venice is on the map. I'd rather uninstall...)
 
If you are not sure about really advanced setup, whoward has done a small fix that just disables venice&austria, judging form experience his mods are remarkably conflict-free.

I've been getting random crashes to desktop with my latest version 4 game. I do play with other mods, such as "weak civ AI mod" and "remove GDR", but I've been combining those mods with Acken's mod for months now with no problem.

Here's what did change: recently I added "info addicts" and "really advanced setup". Do you think there would be compatibility issues with these and Acken's Mod? (I hope not, especially with the latter, I use it to remove Venice from the game and I won't play Civ 5 if Venice is on the map. I'd rather uninstall...)
 
Here's what did change: recently I added "info addicts" ...
Do you also use EUI? I know EUI and InfoAddict tend to crash a lot when used together. Someone posted some workaround in the EUI thread a while ago but as far as i remember the download link for those fixes was on his youtube page :rolleyes:

Maybe it was Dushku. Not sure.
 
It was crashing in game. I deleted my cache folder and reinstalled my mods. That seemed to fix it, for now at least.
 
Found one minor bug. Trade route overview or trade route selection screen doesn't show the science you get from scholasticism policy.
 
Found one minor bug. Trade route overview or trade route selection screen doesn't show the science you get from scholasticism policy.

It is counted under "science from city states" (added to scholasticism) in the science overview. It's true that the trade route interface doesn't show it for now though (not a bug, just me not bothering dealing with UI changes necessary).
 
I'll be working on 2 additional civs for the next patch.
Ottomans and America
I may copy the Ottoman trait from NQMod (although I'll have to code it myself so I'm not really saving work doing that): +1 happiness for every religion in a city
For America I'm open to suggestions. The mod noto2 talks about gives better GPP and a free GE. Easy to make but I don't want to add free GP to every civ and think more interesting ideas could be better (preferably without me having to work on the AI for that specific civ).
I preffer thematic suggestions. So america could get a bonus to settling for example (bonus to settlers, early cities or civilian movements).
 
I feel that America is lower tier but quite decent at the moment. i would rather see nerf to the strongest civs to bring them more in line with America than buffing America.

If you want to buff them and give them more of an interesting playstyle I would give them a unique settler replacement, the Pioneer. Either you make it a land military unit that can found cities. It costs 80 hammers, has move 3 and strength 10. Or you make it a settler that cost 85, has move 3, and every time it founds a city get 100 GA points. Even if it does not use food the military settler will probably not be much slower on low hammer starts as you can start it earlier and grow to the desired pop.

It should probably replace the minutemen. They are not that defining, not very close to their historical precedent being a front line combat unit and misplaced at muskets. Many civs have special units at that time so it more unique if America have some late power.
 
I wouldn't even call America lower tier to be honest. They're good in my mind.

The bonus to tile purchasing is incredible if you have a wide Liberty empire and extremely underwhelming if you have a four city Tradition empire.

Additional sight is insanely good, yields you more ruins than any other civ will get, alerts you of barbarian camps, makes worker stealing easier, helps with war, makes horses or scouts even better spotters for Bombers.

Though the single biggest thing are the unique units. The Minuteman is so strong, it is actually worth beelining for. The B17 is just incredible. Nowadays when I war I tend to go for certain key technologies: Crossbows, Artillery. Bombers or XCom, Great War Bombers just don't cut it anymore. The enemy will already have Fighters by the time you get to GWB so they're essentially useless.

If you insist on buffing America I think a thematic change of + 1 Movement to Settlers would be fitting. It would work really well with "Manifest Destiny" in my opinion.

As for the Ottomans - I really hate the NQ Mod change. It is not only boring, it also turns a Civilization that was cut for war into a middle-of-the-road Civ with barely any specialization.

Janitschar might be the best Warrior-line unique unit there is in the game, their bonusses even stay with upgrading, making them even more ridiculous.

If you ask me just give them a bonus towards naval and land units, not just navy. The bonus in the unmodded game isn't thematic anyway, Ottomans had great land armies, too.

Also please, please change the Sipahi. It's such a waste of a unit, for multiple reasons:

-You can get the +1 Sight from a promotion anyway if you really needed a spotter (which you don't, at least in that stage of the game)
-You can get the ability to pillage without movement cost by buying Landsknecht and upgrading it to Lancers (in my opinion the best way to make use of the unfortunate unit called the Lancer)
-It is a unique, yet has absolutely no discernable trait. Any Civ can build "Sipahi" if they go Commerce

So, what does the Sipahi offer?

Timarli Sipahis of the classical Ottoman period usually comprised the bulk of the army and did the majority of the fighting on the battlefield. While infantry troops at the army's center maintained a static battle line, the cavalry flanks constituted its mobile striking arm. During battle, Timarli Sipahi tactics were used, opening the conflict with skirmishes and localized skirmishes with enemy cavalry. Regiments of Timarli Sipahis made charges against weaker or isolated units and retreated back to the main body of troops whenever confronted with heavy cavalry. During one regiment's retreat, other regiments of sipahis may have charged the chasing enemy's flanks. Such tactics served to draw enemy cavalry away from infantry support, break their cohesion, and isolate and overwhelm them with numerical superiority. Anatolian Sipahis had the ability to harass and provoke opposing troops with arrow shots. More heavily equipped Balkan Sipahis carried javelins for protection against enemy horsemen during their tactical retreats. All cavalry flanks of the Ottoman army fought a fluid, mounted type of warfare around the center of the army, which served as a stable pivot.

*They were much lighter than most of the Heavy Cavalry used at the time
-> Give them a little less Combat Strength than a normal Lancer, but make them cost less Hammers and Gold to upgrade so they're spammable
*They abused numerical superiority and retreated whenever they were in a pinch
-> Give them a Promotion akin to Discipline in the Honor tree
*They carried around many different weapons, allowing them to attack with Lances, Bows and Arrows, Javelins and Swords
-> Give them either the equivalent of Spear Throw or Blitz

As for the Ottomans in general - You will be fielding a lot of units, especially melee units, so I think something like this would not only be thematic but fit in well both unique units:

"Ottoman Caliphates"
- Pay half maintenance on wounded units
- Conquered cities only spend half the time in resistance

"Ottoman Caliphates"
- Puppeting a city will no longer drop your happiness
- As long as a city is puppeted it will produce an additional 3 gold for your empire

Ottoman Classical Army was the military structure established by Mehmed II, during his reorganization of the state and the military efforts. This is the major reorganization following Orhan I which organized a standing army paid by salary rather than booty or fiefs. This army was the force during rise of the Ottoman Empire. The organization was twofold, central (Kapu Kulu) and peripheral (Eyalet). Following a century long reform efforts, this Army was forced to disbandment by Sultan Mahmud II on 15 June 1826 by what is known as Auspicious Incident.

"Ottoman Army"
- As long as your gold per turn and happiness is positive your units receive the "Morale" promotion which increases combat strength when attacking by 10%

That's all I can think of right now.

I feel that America is lower tier but quite decent at the moment. i would rather see nerf to the strongest civs to bring them more in line with America than buffing America.

A lot of the strong civilizations have been nerfed already. Even if it wasn't so, what is the point of nerfing every single Civ considered "strong", let's say Korea, Babylon, Poland, Inca, Maya, Persia, maybe even England and Rome instead of just buffing the two or three Civs that feel underwhelming?

And if you accidentally nerf those too much you will have to adjust all of them yet again. However, if you buff America and the Ottomans instead the worst thing that'll happen is that the changes get reversed. It's way less work and I would believe Acken has enough work on his hands as of now.
 
Back
Top Bottom