April 2021 Update - Patch Notes Discussion

I didn’t expect too much from the update, and I am surprisingly content from it. It is way bigger than I expect, and Firaxis even dares to add a brand new effect to Tourism. There are so many things I want to try out. Bravo! Except they didn’t make drastic changes to [insert your country’s civilization] by making it extremely powerful and extremely fun to play. Consequently, this update is obviously a total failure with no chance of any redemption!

Joke aside, I might have hoped the team would rethink more civilizations, like many other players here. France was my top contender. They did make the Garde Impériale better (70 Combat Strength!) and the Château is more flexible (same requirement as a Mekewap but not as powerful), but… I want MORE! No! This is not a child whim! I am a grow-up now!
I feel awkwardly ungrateful to say this, but they are a lot of Culture + Gold tile improvements like the Great Wall, the Pairidaeza and maybe the Golf Course to some extent. The Château was the least impressive of the bunch, so more prone to face drastic change. Basically, I imagined something like that:

I don't know what to think about the free Builders ability from Spain and Maya: it is quite powerful, maybe too much? Currently, the Ancestral Hall is depicted already as the best Government Plaza's building, but that does mean that Spain and the Maya could build the Warlord's Throne instead.
Is Gilgamesh new Combat Strength bonus cumulative? If I have 5 Alliances and manage to bring all my Allies against a common foe, does that mean I now enjoy +25 Combat Strength?!

 

Moderator Action: Snip, please take care how you interact with other posters --NZ
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
In case it needs pointing out. this is a category error. InsidiousMage stated that "people have right to be upset if the game isn't working correctly and that devs are working on seemingly pointless things" and he is 100% correct. The dev and design team aren't putting in Easter Eggs and superfluous game modes in their leisure time. No one is expecting them to be on the clock 24/7. Its pretty reasonable to expect frustration when something goes neglected and something pointless emerges instead

 

Yep it's definitely a hard job.

As to multiplayer... I did play a few games in civ 5 and 6 with people I know well, but none of us really seemed to have much fun and all our games ended up being dropped halfway through. I don't think civ is really such a great game for multiplayer, and if there have to be compromises made in terms of balance... single player should be prioritized.

 

Going with the thematic/fluff perspective, we have gotten a France in the last 2 games that is very culture focused, and on some level that feels like we are getting a little kitty cat when some of us want this big tiger. In other words, I'm not sure how satisfying a Louvre/Paris/chateau based France can be even if you get the tuning right so they are competitive.

 

I played Civ 4 multiplayer a fair amount. That game lends itself to that kind of play.

My experience with 5 is the same. Not fun, and surprisingly a large learning curve that leads to skill gaps (which aren't fun in a game where you don't know you lost 3 hours ago).

I can't imagine playing 6 as a multiplayer game. Part of me thinks it would be a super tedious experience (in part because of the load times). But part of me thinks if you just ran with it, the grab bag of stuff could be fun. Plus, I would like to see rivals in the game who are at least semi-competent for once.

 

Civ IV had a pretty culture-focused France, too, with the Salon providing an extra artist and Louis XIV having the culture + wonder bonuses. I guess Napoleon and CdG weren't as culture-focused, though.

 

Just for fun I started a TSL mediterranean game with as many contradictions as possible

1: England (Victora)
2: England (Eleanor)
3: France (Eleanor)
4: France (Catherine)
5: France (other Catherine)
6: Greece (Gorgo)
7: Greece (Pericles)
8: Greece Macedon: Alexander
9: Constantinople
10: Not Constantinople

Gorgo and Pericles spawn where Athens and Sparta are, so they're different, at least. Both Englands spawning in London and Suleiman and Basil both spawning in the same place is expected. I had kind of hoped French Eleanor would spawn in Normandy, but no, she and the two catherines all spawned on top of each other. Better make sure you don't have Suleiman and Basil in the same leader pool!

 

Yes, 100% IMHO. As a software developer I know that all features will be prioritized from a pool of limited resources (i.e. time). I wouldn't be surprised if there were estimates and tickets created to implement those Easter Eggs. Indeed, the developers (or project managers, or marketers) likely have a clear idea that Easter Eggs will net them more attention than fixing bugs, and have consciously made this trade off.

I don't expect miracles from the new features or game balance. But existing features are plain broken. I'm glad some people are enjoying the Easter eggs, at least. Unfortunately for me (i) Atlantis or (ii) petting just actively annoy me, and I wish they'd spent that time fixing the actual bugs.

 

As someone who loves multiplayer, I 100% think that the game should be balanced around singleplayer, because to achieve perfect balance in a game with so many moving parts is impossible, so modding is always gonna be required for non-casual multiplayer anyway. However, I think multiplayer components do expose a few problems that singleplayer alone cannot. I think the major difference between multi and singleplayer is in multiplayer, your opponents have a (semi) functioning brain, they know what your civ does, what you want to do so they will play around your game and try to deny you what you want, which makes it a bit more fun

 

Truncating this quote. I agree that Grand Embassy is fine as it is. I don't think that either the Korea change or the Australia change are justified as being enumerated as a balance change. I have no strong feelings on the NL change.

I'm quoting because you are misrepresenting the criticisms levelled. Or strawmanning the criticisms being raised in this thread, I'm not sure. I don't think anyone asserted that Potato or TGM ruined the game. A valid point was raised that liaison with them, seeking their consultation or advice, wouldn't be sufficient or representative.
I think something which was implicit is that Firaxis (Carl specifically) are praised for being present in the chats of streamers. I've seen this point raised at other points on the board and I agree with it that this is actually a negative. Clarifications about the game surface in the lossy media that is a livestream chat. Someone else posted that BBG were consulted as research for this update which makes me despair given the way they balance the game.

Regarding your final point, and I wrote a message about this earlier in the thread, I think that people are aggrieved because they were lead to believe this update would be more substantial than it was. And I think every person in this thread who is turning that back on anyone who mentions it with "sir it was your expectations that were faulty" is exhibiting extremely selective memory. The thread history on this forum is testament enough to how much hype was stirred up.
Firaxis had opportunities to be really clear about what they were delivering. Instead they hyped it up (recalling the tweet that went out about RE the word count of the patch notes). And I don't know why Firaxis chose to do that.

I'm really happy that Mapuche and Spain got some attention. I look forward to new Khmer, though I think they and Inca were in OK spots as they were.

What leaves a bad taste is that every bit of rationale that Carl detailed as preface to the rework reveals in the earlier April video could be extended to other Civs. I think this goes beyond "everyone having their favourites". It seems that there is no consistency as to who received a rework and who got a minor buff.

Everyone in this thread who is trying to dismiss criticisms as complaining, you are doing the game you fanatically adore absolutely no favors.

 

Surely Eleanor should spawn in Bordeaux rather than Normandy?

 

If they had actually done so the level of criticism would be substantially less

 

Hey - what information are you privy to that the rest of us are not? Is there a google doc or something with suggestions?

 

Yeah probably. I have no idea where Aquitane is lol. I was thinking Normandy because of her son Richard.

 

"Updated England and France Eleanor names to be consistent with other dual-civilization leaders."


Eleanor of Aquitaine (England) of the English Empire has declared war on Kublai Khan (China) of the Chinese Empire.
Yes. Because I didn't realize that Eleanor of the English Empire was the leader of ENGLAND.

Guess that's two more leaders I'm never putting in my games again.

 

I believe her court was actually in Crecy.


Is anyone else having issue with barb camp notifications firing every turn in an area of the map with no visible camps?