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

[noto2]

I don't think that's how the Hanse works. I'm pretty sure the bonus is civ-wide. (so if you have 6 CS trade routes, all cities with a Hanse get +30%)

Also, we must have very different play styles. Sure, when I play as, say, Korea, I generally try to establish as many internal food trade routes to Seoul as possible. When playing as Germany, however, I would take Patronage and basically all of my trade routes would be with CS. With Patronage, I'm not missing out on any gold or science at all.

Heck, even when I'm not playing Germany I trade with CS all the time. Trading with other civs is often far too problematic and not worth the extra one fricken beaker that it would give.



Anyway... I've got 800 hours in Civ 5 and it's getting boring because I've played all the "interesting" civs. Many of the civs in the game have UA's that are so stupid/boring I'm just not interested in playing them at all. I'd like it if EVERY civ in the game were as powerful and interesting as Korea, because that boosts replay value.

 

[fimbul]

HI Acken, I skimmed through the videos on your youtube - is it common to get CI and MP? More interesting than normal deity where the only reliable early wonder was oracle. The videos + chumchu's screenshots are tempting me to play this rather than disect it.

Anyway lux-mapscript bug seems to be nqASP related to me, the region has an eligible lux for placement but for some reason cant place it and then i guess the while loop hangs.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

I don't think that's how the Hanse works. I'm pretty sure the bonus is civ-wide. (so if you have 6 CS trade routes, all cities with a Hanse get +30%)

Also, we must have very different play styles. Sure, when I play as, say, Korea, I generally try to establish as many internal food trade routes to Seoul as possible. When playing as Germany, however, I would take Patronage and basically all of my trade routes would be with CS. With Patronage, I'm not missing out on any gold or science at all.

Heck, even when I'm not playing Germany I trade with CS all the time. Trading with other civs is often far too problematic and not worth the extra one fricken beaker that it would give.



Anyway... I've got 800 hours in Civ 5 and it's getting boring because I've played all the "interesting" civs. Many of the civs in the game have UA's that are so stupid/boring I'm just not interested in playing them at all. I'd like it if EVERY civ in the game were as powerful and interesting as Korea, because that boosts replay value.

As for the Hanse being Civ-wide, I just went to Civilopedia and it definitely looks like you were right. It is worded slightly ambiguously, but I'm certain.

Personally I think Patronage is rather lackluster and, especially when playing Germany, I would almost always go either Commerce or Rationalism second. Talking about the unmodded game here.

In AckenMod Patronage is even more useless since on any difficulty above Emperor most city states will be gone by the time you get to Banking.

Also it is not "just one beaker per TR", it's actually a ton of Science (iirc it's the number of techs you're behind).

When you entire empire's science is just as high as the turn number (like turn 50 onwards) a boost of even 5 Science with one TR (which I've gotten lots of times) is like a 10% straight science boost. That is massive. That is a Rationalism policy...


@The Grumpy Buddha

I have played a few Montezuma games and rolled some nice maps, never played until Labs though. I've got a lot of stuff on my hands - if you want I can share one particularily good map with you where you can settle up to six or seven expos without anyone trying to war you. I doubt I'll be playing any Civ atleast for the next few days.

 

[Acken]

About map problems they are most likely related to the NQMa^p. If the problems persist I suggest deleting the NQMap subfolder in the map directory and install the NQMap separatly. This is something I may even end up doing (removing it from the mod and suggest people to just get it separatly).

 

[Tombaugh]

hi acken, I think your mod is already great, for changes here are my suggestions:
on gold topic: +50% of basegold is added to food (similar to fertility rites)
for example 30 basegold =+15% food (rich cities are more appealingthan poor ones)
improvement of tradeposts,custom houses,monarchy(tradition imo is nerfed a bit too much)
maybe gold for plantations back to vanilla
sipahi: faith per kill (like the pictish warrior), instead of pillaging, i think ottomans are already buffed (stronger janissary, stronger sipahi, stronger trireme)

 

[Acken]

Tradition has never been nerfed by this mod.

 

[noto2]

@yungcarl: when other civs conquer CS that's the perfect opportunity to go and liberate them by force, getting an ally in the process (and weakening your opponent). A maritime CS ally provides almost as much food as an internal food route. Just something to consider.

 

[Lord Yanaek]

I suggest deleting the NQMap subfolder in the map directory and install the NQMap separatly. This is something I may even end up doing (removing it from the mod and suggest people to just get it separatly).

Thanks, it works. Removing it from your mod seems like a good idea especially now that it's easy to get all the maps as a package, as long as you put a link in case some people are not used to look at reddit for CiV mods (i really had no idea where this map script came from when i first read of it ). It would save you some work.

Tradition has never been nerfed by this mod.

Yes it was ... in a way.
Although you actually buffed Tradition compared to the last patch by removing Oligarchy as a prerequisite for the "important policies", the improved efficiency of wide empires makes tradition less powerful (maybe more balanced). Also Tradition was best for peaceful games and peaceful games are hard (if not impossible) with the mod : it's another hit on Tradition. Finally, the change in Oligarchy (free wall rather that added ) and only for 4 cities makes this policy weaker, especially considering that cities now have low strength and walls won't really save them (the real use of Oligarchy now seems to save a few gold and get the free aqueducts).

Something to consider (maybe). As this mod encourages larger empires, would you think removing the artificial limitation to 4 cities for the free buildings would be fair to Tradition and not OP? I hardly see a tradition player able to self found more than 6 cities without the fast settlers, bonus to global happiness and reduced SP cost of Liberty. At least it would force tradition players out of the 4 cities stereotype and encourage them to grow their empire as much as possible given land and resources.

Also, since the thread is currently in "suggestion mode", a few suggestions of my own.

• I like the idea (not sure who posted this, is it chumchu?) to move the "resettlement" to Exploration. It would give an incentive to use that tree even on non islands map, and while the policy in itself isn't bad, Industrial/Modern is probably too late, especially considering there are other priorities when going Order.
• Likewise, as someone noted, something could (should?) be done about CS and protection. I looked at your LP and you pledge every CS, then steal some workers, don't really care when an AI attacks your protected CS. It's all good moves, but bad design from Firaxis. Here are a few suggestions (again someone already suggested something).
  
  • Increase pledge resting point to +15 (with Consulate it's enough for a "free" friendship)
  • If you attack your own protected CS you get the same penalty as DoWing a CS twice
  • If an AI attacks your protected CS you get a Casus Belli against them. If however you fail to actually protect that CS and it gets captured, you immediately loose all your pledges (they are cancelled and you immediately loose 15
• Would you consider removing barbarians and slightly increasing the size of the "map" you get from ruins. It would remove the most frustrating ones (even you consider the maps as "crappy", i heard you on your LP )
• Finally, a few suggestions to improve some civilizations (that don't necessarily need a boost) without really changing them
  
  • Celts. Make the Pictish Warrior upgrade to Longsword rather than Pike. It was already somewhat annoying without the mod to have a UU enter a dead-end path, it's worse now that Pikes don't really play a big role in Medieval era.
  • The same could be done with Greece and Persia although those units are actual spear users.
  • Germany. 100% barbarian captures from Furor Teutonicus. It's hard to abuse this ability anyway as camps get removed fast by the AI.
  • Songhai. Triple gold from pillaging improvements in addition to camps and cities.
  • Iroquois. They automatically acquire forest tiles between their cities or get a large discount to buy them (to help get the free roads)
  • Morocco. Kasba can be built on Deserts and Plains.
  • Indonesia. Get rid of purely bad promotions for the Kriss Swordsman. Double edged promotions like the one giving more attack but less defense are OK.
  • Maya. I know they are already strong but their "free" great people are now the only ones that are not really free (as opposed to Liberty, Leaning Tower ...). Make them real free.
  Obviously other civs need changes but those might require an entirely new UA (Mongolia, Ethiopia, Netherlands, England ...).

 

[noto2]

Acken I like playing on continents and hemispheres maps, and I've noticed something funny. In all Civ games, navies were practically irrelevant, so Firaxis buffed their importance in this title and that's really cool and swell... but I think it has gone too far.

I have won game after game after game now with my navy alone. Often I'll go to war with a civ who's army is 2-3 times the size of mine, but I have the better navy. The AI just doesn't seem to pay attention to naval power at all. And I go and use my navy to burn every single coastal city. Even if the AI has inland cities that I can't hit, losing 60% of their cities hurts them enough to effectively knock them out of the game.

Melee ships are just so extremely powerful. It's very easy to get Coastal Raider 3 on them. A CR3 ironclad hits a city about 3x as hard as artillery, for crap sake. Even a CR1 privateer hits a city as hard as artillery, and there is a full era between those two units.

I think ranged ships are fine as they are. Fully upgraded ranged ships are slightly more powerful than the ranged units of their era (battleship vs artillery, for example), and that seems about right to me. But the melee ships are just bonkers. An ironclad has almost as much strength as a GW infantry, and GWI come much later in the tech tree. It's difficult to get a city attack bonus on land units, and often it's not worthwhile. But with melee ships you can go ahead and take those CR bonuses no problem... and the iron clad ends up hitting a city as hard as a tank, like two eras between those units.

In theory, the AI could spam its own melee ships with the boarding party promotion, to counter your CR melee ships... but that just never happens.

So, anyway, I think the CR promotion is out of balance. I like the stealing gold aspect of it, but the bonus damage to cities should be heavily nerfed, imo. Maybe melee ship strength should be nerfed in general, and that would force the player to choose the anti-ship boarding party promotion if they wanted their melee ships to actually be useful in naval combat.

 

[Lord Yanaek]

Re : Ironclads
Funny, i just thought AI is now much better at naval warfare. America's Ironclads just ruined a perfectly fine Maya game for me. Most of the time the AI sucks at naval warfare so being a Pangaea map, i didn't pay much attention to building some navy myself and when those showed up, they just ate 2 big cities including my best production city. Nothing i could do against them, they would just attack for something like 1/3 of the city's health (not sure how many attacked, quick combat sucks but thanks Firaxis for such slow animations) then they move away out of range from my ranged units and in 3 turns i loose a city (as Ironclads appear to be able to move after attacking, not sure if it's a change in the mod or something from the base game, i never really played those). Of course i should have built some ships myself, but i'm not sure Caravels would have helped much and i didn't push for the naval techs on a Pangaea map.
That might be another issue, since ICs are out of the ships line, you can just build some without even investing into naval techs, merely going for the usual war technologies of Rifling towards flight and they show up at a time where they have basically no counter.

 

[Jaybe]

Re : Ironclads
(as Ironclads appear to be able to move after attacking, not sure if it's a change in the mod or something from the base game, i never really played those).

Yes, naval melee ships can now move after attacking in the mod.

 

[noto2]

I've always found it a little weird that ships can actually take cities, without supporting army units. I mean... helicopters can't take cities, right? So why can ships?

But it looks like ship city capturing is here to stay. I just don't think the math is right. Ranged ships are stronger than ranged land units of the same tech because that makes the navy relevant, which is fine... but that means that melee ships are also stronger than the equivalent melee units of their era... BUT... melee ships get a CR promotion with each level up, whereas land based melee units need 3 (or 4?) promotions just to get a single one specialized at city attack, and usually they can't afford to take that one.

So... this all adds up to melee ships being INCREDIBLY strong against cities, usually much better at taking cities than the era's equivalent siege weapons. In fact, my play style is now to use the navy to take any city I can, only resorting to artillery when I need to take inland cities. Privateers are far better anti-city units than cannons, iron clads better than artillery, destroyers better than rocket arty, etc.

With a cannon, you have to slowly inch it towards a city, get it in range, then waste a turn setting up. A group of privateers can sail in borders in one turn, all striking the city in the same turn, and with frigate support will easily take the city in that turn.

 

[Jaybe]

Naval melee units (obviously?) must have marine contingents included in them.

Personally, I would prefer that cities could never be reduced to under 10 or 15% of their total hit points due to bombardment, whether from land, sea or air. No more taking a city with a bleepin' scout because the city is down to 1HP (well, from solely bombardment units, anyway)!!
Sorry, this request obviously(!) doesn't cover those pesky privateers ... destroyers.

 

[Lord Yanaek]

I've always found it a little weird that ships can actually take cities, without supporting army units. I mean... helicopters can't take cities, right? So why can ships?

Maybe because a ship have a crew, including some soldiers.
EDIT : Ninja'd because i was doing some maths. I shouldn't do maths
I'm not really interested in realism in a game where USA is founded 4000BC by an immortal ruler but i'm sure we could find some satisfactory reason.

I just don't think the math is right.

And i think you are right on this. And now with cities being weaker that's a much bigger issue. While unmodded cities could often survive ship attacks for a good number of turns, and kill a bunch of them in the process (often enough to not be taken), they now fall very fast. The only way to stop ships is to use your ships. That's OK until Ironclads show up as their have a much bigger delta than contemporary units. If you compare Renaissance to Industrial a musket goes from 26 to 36 (for a Rifle) that's about 38% increase. Cavalry is harder to compare because there is no Renaissance era cavalry but the Industrial era Cavalry with 34 is 70% stronger than a medieval knight (20) On the other hand, an industrial Ironclad (45) is 80% stronger than a Renaissance Privateer (25). With such a difference and given how fast ICs eat up cities (they have a built-in promotion for 33% more damage vs cities) it seems impossible to survive an Ironclad rush if you don't have the Steam tech yourself to build your own. That or you manage to land-lock all of your cities.
On the other hand, the Destroyer (55) is only 22% stronger than the Ironclad. IC is a huge spike in naval power, without the need to even get techs out of your most efficient warmonger path.

 

[chumchu]

I did a bit of naval combat in my Japan game. Frigated my big opponent who countered efficiently with subs to take out my ironclads and frigates.

I really like the change to melee ships as they were mostly garbage before and now seem closer in strength par. Ironclads is the only melee ship that might be somewhat dominant but they totally collapse against subs which comes not long after. I'm okay with that as steam power is a meh tech without it and they cost coal which might be very precious at that time. You might remove their additional bonus versus cities.

The only real worry I have is Korean turtle ships. On the right map they could wreck cities around turn 125.

 

[Acken]

I'm reading suggestions but right now I don't work on the mod as I'm doing something else. Don't worry if I don't respond and spend time only on questions instead

HI Acken, I skimmed through the videos on your youtube - is it common to get CI and MP? More interesting than normal deity where the only reliable early wonder was oracle. The videos + chumchu's screenshots are tempting me to play this rather than disect it.

Early wonders are more reliable on DemiGod than base game deity if that is your question. You'll have a shot at the great library for example if you wish. But the AI having better tech potential you may also have more trouble getting mid game wonders.

You'll also get more engineers most likely for your own pick of wonders. I'm also thinking about making engineer slots available a bit sooner to allow investing in an engineer earlier if you aim for a mid game wonder instead of having them all pop in the last tier of the game.

 

[Lord Yanaek]

Ironclads is the only melee ship that might be somewhat dominant but they totally collapse against subs which comes not long after.

Well, that's OK if you are ahead in tech, but even Acken hit industrial after several AIs in his LP. Not sure what he would have done if Sweden or Incas suddenly sent half a dozen Ironclads on his coastal cities at the time he was defending against their land units in part 9, he still was a long way from subs. The Frigates and Privateers he just got the tech for would probably have been eaten alive, and his cities too. I'll have a look at part 10 now and see if he eventually had to face ICs and when, but America's ICs hit me around T190 (on Immortal) while i was catching on land combat techs after researching Industrialization and ST so the situation was roughly similar to Acken's LP part 9 (except i had a stronger civ and was playing a level below but i don't think i was lagging behind in tech much more than he was).

EDIT : OK just looked at part 10, Sweden actually sent a few IC somewhere T196 while he was researching Steam himself. Considering i was playing Immortal i think America's ICs hit me sooner (comparably), probably because he didn't even bother to go through naval techs (i never see a single caravel/frigate/privateer, just Triremes and then ICs) but i might have been able to defend if i had gone steam myself rather then push towards cavalry and dynamite but i'm not sure i could have had them in time. You really need your own IC before you get rushed by AIs IC (i mean half a dozen ones, not just 1-2 with a few frigates and caravels, Acken showed you can defend against this with frigates and caravels, privateers would do a better job) or you probably won't have coastal cities to build them anyway.

 

[meatpardle]

-Added a (for now rudimentary) casus belli hidden variable making the first city a civ conquer free of any hate if:
The civ was declared war upon
A friend of the civ was declared war upon

Casus Belli has a 50turns expiration

So if a civ I have a DoF with gets attacked I can DoW the attacker and take one city without a warmonger hit?

Is that turn standard speed only or is it 50 for all game speeds?

I've wondered what the cassus belli line was in the relationship screen, guess I should pay more attention to the update log.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

@yungcarl: when other civs conquer CS that's the perfect opportunity to go and liberate them by force, getting an ally in the process (and weakening your opponent). A maritime CS ally provides almost as much food as an internal food route. Just something to consider.

I fully agree with you on this point. When the first few versions of AckenMod were released people were complaining about CS being eaten up, because they were too used to peaceful play. For me it is more often than not an opportunity I gladly take. Especially with Mercantile CS, they help a lot during warfare.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Thanks, it works. Removing it from your mod seems
Yes it was ... in a way.
Although you actually buffed Tradition compared to the last patch by removing Oligarchy as a prerequisite for the "important policies", the improved efficiency of wide empires makes tradition less powerful (maybe more balanced). Also Tradition was best for peaceful games and peaceful games are hard (if not impossible) with the mod : it's another hit on Tradition. Finally, the change in Oligarchy (free wall rather that added ) and only for 4 cities makes this policy weaker, especially considering that cities now have low strength and walls won't really save them (the real use of Oligarchy now seems to save a few gold and get the free aqueducts).

Something to consider (maybe). As this mod encourages larger empires, would you think removing the artificial limitation to 4 cities for the free buildings would be fair to Tradition and not OP? I hardly see a tradition player able to self found more than 6 cities without the fast settlers, bonus to global happiness and reduced SP cost of Liberty. At least it would force tradition players out of the 4 cities stereotype and encourage them to grow their empire as much as possible given land and resources.

Contrary to what many people report I still think Tradition is by far the most solid choice and, as a player that prefers Liberty, I still open and finish Tradition in just about 70% of my games, no kidding.

As for Oligarchy - I think it is now far stronger than before. On DemiGod, but especially on Deity, where you can be expected to be rushed at roundabout turn 30 or 40 Walls are desperately needed. Often times Oligarchy is my third policy in Tradition; a) because I know for a fact I will be attacked and b) because I need neither growth nor happiness while building Settlers. Of course Monarchy also gives gold and golden age points and of course the food will add to the Settler production, yet Oligarchy is still invaluable.

Another point you brought up - I often find myself founding big empires with Tradition. Usually Five or Six cities at the very least, but more often than not Seven, once even Eight cities. You might argue that Liberty would be much better in this scenario, but I don't neccessarily think so.

The idea is to settle your faraway cities first in order for them to get Walls and grab the best tiles, then fill the holes between your border cities and the capital. That is how I play Tradition now. This way the border cities are well-developed, have a headstart and have early walls, which is essential.

I also think the Tradition discussion is a little trite, since this is no either-or scenario. Lately I've been mixing Tradition and Liberty a lot, with great success. There are so many options:

Liberty until Collective Rule, Full Tradition, Full Liberty;
Tradition Opener, Free Monuments, Full Liberty
Tradition Opener, Liberty until Collective Rule, Full Tradition
Full Tradition; Liberty until cost reduction for policies (for faster Ideology or Rationalism)

I still don't think Tradition needs a buff.

I love all the other changes you proposed, by the way. Especially the ones to the city-state. You mention Ethiopia, which I've despised for a long time now.

Ethiopia is the perfect Civ for going wide due to the Stele, yet is punished for going wide. Ethiopia is perfect for piety, but a small empire is favored. That's rubbish.

We really oughta come up with something better. Ethiopia is a Civ that has to change.