Morningcalm
Keeper of Records
It's a lot harder for Korea to do that when warcarts and barbarian horse archers are at its door.
[R&F] Anyone think Korea is OP?
- Thread starter Bad Wolf
- Start date
Bad Wolf
King
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2012
- Messages
- 633
A lot of the responses to this seem to amount to, "Yeah but war carts." War carts are only available to ONE civ, which will not necessarily be in every game and which will not necessarily start within striking distance of Korea. So not really the best example imo...
And it doesn't matter what civ you're playing as, if you can't handle barbs you need to lower the difficulty...
And it doesn't matter what civ you're playing as, if you can't handle barbs you need to lower the difficulty...
ChocolateShake
Prince
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2016
- Messages
- 525
I haven't played many games against Korea, I'd be worried to have her as my neighbor and see a bunch of super high tech units next door 
Though it seems like that's not the case, hopefully I'll see in my games soon. I like her as a leader too.
Are they OP? Possibly, they're certainly one of the top civs. Not sure how they could tweak them without making significant changes to the seowon that might make it lose its current flavor.
Having a lot of improvements attracts barbarians like @Morningcalm said, they'd just slow you down more than they normally would if you go too wild with seowons and mines. I think the argument that they don't have a strong early military aspect is valid, it kind of reminds me of "booming" nations in RTS, where they're weak early but give them enough time and they'll quickly get to the top.
I'm definitely more inclined to call civs with a strong early military OP. I guess my answer is that they'd be OP in instances where they get a nice isolated spot to quietly build in.
Though it seems like that's not the case, hopefully I'll see in my games soon. I like her as a leader too.Are they OP? Possibly, they're certainly one of the top civs. Not sure how they could tweak them without making significant changes to the seowon that might make it lose its current flavor.
Having a lot of improvements attracts barbarians like @Morningcalm said, they'd just slow you down more than they normally would if you go too wild with seowons and mines. I think the argument that they don't have a strong early military aspect is valid, it kind of reminds me of "booming" nations in RTS, where they're weak early but give them enough time and they'll quickly get to the top.
I'm definitely more inclined to call civs with a strong early military OP. I guess my answer is that they'd be OP in instances where they get a nice isolated spot to quietly build in.
EgonSpengler
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2014
- Messages
- 11,704
I finished my first R&F game over the weekend, as Korea, and while it was just one game, I did think they were a bit strong. The automatic +4 adjacency bonus on their campuses - which I think are also less expensive? - combines with some Policy Cards. The placement restrictions on the Korean Campuses didn't seem to slow me down, and the bonuses to adjacent mines and farms probably make up for it anyway. The 10% boost to both Culture and Science for every city with a Governor really snowballs (one of the Governors already does this - I couldn't tell if the two bonuses stacked).
[EDIT: Oh yeah, the Rationalism policy card provides a +50% to any Campus with a +3 adjacency bonus, which for Korea is all of them.]
[EDIT 2: Yes, Seowons are half the price of regular Campuses. I think the buildings are all regular price.]
Anyway, the upshot was that I was way ahead of everybody in both science and culture by Turn 200 (Emperor; Large Continents), which thus meant my military was unbeatable, my economy was roaring, and I was swapping out Policy Cards practically at will (more Culture = faster Policy swapping).
One confounding variable was that I started near Geneva, which is also O.P. I poured every Envoy I could into them (again, more Culture = more Envoys) and was their Suzerain for the rest of the game.
[EDIT: Oh yeah, the Rationalism policy card provides a +50% to any Campus with a +3 adjacency bonus, which for Korea is all of them.]
[EDIT 2: Yes, Seowons are half the price of regular Campuses. I think the buildings are all regular price.]
Anyway, the upshot was that I was way ahead of everybody in both science and culture by Turn 200 (Emperor; Large Continents), which thus meant my military was unbeatable, my economy was roaring, and I was swapping out Policy Cards practically at will (more Culture = faster Policy swapping).
One confounding variable was that I started near Geneva, which is also O.P. I poured every Envoy I could into them (again, more Culture = more Envoys) and was their Suzerain for the rest of the game.
Last edited:
Frostburn
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2016
- Messages
- 151
On higher difficulties, from a pure min-maxing/"power gaming" standpoint, I still think civs that excel at early warmongering are the best. However I think Korea and Australia are the best non-war focused civs in Civ 6 and for passive playthroughs
Last edited:
Disgustipated
Deity
all unique districts are half price
Morningcalm
Keeper of Records
Replicate it for any Civ with military units before the hwacha, or even without, and Korea is in trouble if you attack. Korea also lacks production bonuses given to some other civs that make defending against warmongers more viable (Australia, Nubia, Germany, Scotland).
KingCheops
Chieftain
- Joined
- May 12, 2017
- Messages
- 37
The later game dedications that let campus adjacency add to production make Korea broken as heck. Slot the +100% adjacency card and you are looking at an extra +6/+8 production.
Pietato
Platonic Perfection
You just upgrade your troops.
Sostratus
Deity
Most civs, korea included, don't have penalties. So in the general case korea can always copy what a generic civ would do, only with more science, growth, and culture. The time dimension is hard to account for, but there are a lot of things things in civ that you achieve by winning a positional challenge; i.e. being the best or doing it first. Wonder building, victory, etc. So just being able to do more sooner because of breakneck tech progress is a killer ability. You can start a key wonder 5 or 10 or more turns before anyone else. Your cities have otherwise developed the same. That alone is a powerful ability. Korea gets this on anything tied to tech! Units, districts, projects.
I don't think it's fair to say that Korea has reached Era X fast, and another civ in that era has more production, ergo korea has a penalty- because those are two different points in time. It's just a seriously strong civ, and already nerfed from it's original design of 6 science Seowons.
I don't think it's fair to say that Korea has reached Era X fast, and another civ in that era has more production, ergo korea has a penalty- because those are two different points in time. It's just a seriously strong civ, and already nerfed from it's original design of 6 science Seowons.
Pietato
Platonic Perfection
People also seem to forget that all the 'Mines give +1 production' etc, passive upgrades are in the tech tree.
Op perhaps... But playing as them I notice if I rush Seowons the district costs go waaaay up when I actually want culture and trade routes... Best to get Seowons as your 3rd or 4th district to make the most of the half price production discount... Early science without the cogs and gold is actually a hindrance...
Disgustipated
Deity
After playing as Scotland, I no longer think Korea is all that. I got 1025 science per turn as Scotland blowing away my Korea science per turn. Granted I had more cities as Scotland, I couldn't help that so many cities flipped to me. 
Including 2 former capitals. I did all this with only 2 campus districts to start, but later got 2 more through city flipping. I forgot to check my total number of cities, I may check tomorrow. This setup actually seems easier as it forces me to focus more on my happiness which I have a bad habit of not doing. Those production bonuses sure come in handy. In the end, every city I had was ecstatic.
Including 2 former capitals. I did all this with only 2 campus districts to start, but later got 2 more through city flipping. I forgot to check my total number of cities, I may check tomorrow. This setup actually seems easier as it forces me to focus more on my happiness which I have a bad habit of not doing. Those production bonuses sure come in handy. In the end, every city I had was ecstatic.
After playing as Scotland, I no longer think Korea is all that. I got 1025 science per turn as Scotland blowing away my Korea science per turn. Granted I had more cities as Scotland, I couldn't help that so many cities flipped to me.
Scotland is pretty awesome and fun to play. Especially if you can get a great Temple of Artemis in the beginning.
This is a very asymmetrical question, as several people have hinted in their posts. Korea apparently is quite over-powered if you are a highly skilled human playing as Korea, though this is also true of all other civilizations you could play as, because the AI is still not that great against Human players, even on the highest levels. (I'm personally not one of these highly skilled human players on Vanilla or R&F. But I promise I was that good on Civs I, II and IV. ) So Korea is arguably one of the most overpowered Civs in R&F for human players.
However, even though on paper it ought to be just as overpowered as an AI Civ, it doesn't seem to work out that way. If you start out next to Korea and attack it early, it doesn't display any effective mode of defense or counterattack against a small squad of early ranged units. This is different from Civs like Sumeria that do sometimes counterattack effectively enough to make their conquest costly. If you leave Korea alone, it's just as likely to face damage from another AI Civ. I suppose that if you let it last unscathed deep into the modern era, you might find it overpoweringly formidable. But if you let a Civ like Korea survive unscathed into the modern era, then you almost rigging the game to make Korea overpowered. So as an AI power, it's just not that formidable. I do only play ancient starts. Perhaps this works out differently on later-era starts.
) So Korea is arguably one of the most overpowered Civs in R&F for human players.However, even though on paper it ought to be just as overpowered as an AI Civ, it doesn't seem to work out that way. If you start out next to Korea and attack it early, it doesn't display any effective mode of defense or counterattack against a small squad of early ranged units. This is different from Civs like Sumeria that do sometimes counterattack effectively enough to make their conquest costly. If you leave Korea alone, it's just as likely to face damage from another AI Civ. I suppose that if you let it last unscathed deep into the modern era, you might find it overpoweringly formidable. But if you let a Civ like Korea survive unscathed into the modern era, then you almost rigging the game to make Korea overpowered. So as an AI power, it's just not that formidable. I do only play ancient starts. Perhaps this works out differently on later-era starts.
I had a King-level win as Scotland in my second full R&F game. Definitely fun to play as. I accidentally found that building a golf course was a great way to improve Loyalty of recently conquered cities. Kinda seems realistic. I did find the Reformed Church requirement for golf courses a little strange, perhaps even bigoted. Why pick on the Scots for their Calvinism with their UI not the Dutch for theirs? Pretty sure the Scottish love of Golf has nothing to do with their religious views.Scotland is pretty awesome and fun to play. Especially if you can get a great Temple of Artemis in the beginning.
Last edited:
Pietato
Platonic Perfection
Even though my mum is Scottish, I find it hard to play them due to the golf courses. Always hated golf, and this has only increased since 2017...
I will have to try them to compare to Korea, though.
I will have to try them to compare to Korea, though.
I also find it strange to use a Medieval Scottish monarch as the leader and give him a UU that dates to the era when they were united under British rule, in a civilization that is already well-represented by Victoria. You could have easily used a Medieval era Scottish spear-based unit, like the ones that both Robert the Bruce and William Wallace used to great effect against English knights. (The English wisely copied this tactic and used it against the Knights of Scotland's erstwhile ally, the French. No good idea every goes unstolen.) Or just make the Highlander a good Medieval/Renaissance melee unit with shock-troop offensive abilities but less effective defensive ones unless fighting on hills or in forests.
Pietato
Platonic Perfection
Highlander is just the best known I guess (my mum's dad was a lowlander).
Similar threads
