Like I said before, it's not a bad ability but it really feels out of place for Georgia.
Sure, but I'd rather see it with an aggressive civ like the Aztecs or even Japan where they are more likely to be able to make use of it on a more consistent basis that fits better with their overall playstyle. Before the change Georgia wasn't a great aggressive civ and still don't feel like one even with the change.
The problem is that "Georgia" doesn't want to be aggressive. It wants to hide in the hills, build walls, and form a soft empire by establishing political alliances with other small guys. And that's how Georgia was designed to play before the fix. It might not have been particularly good, but it was a very unique playstyle niche that felt quintessentially Georgian. The devs should have leaned harder into Georgia being "the protectorate war" civ and making that a viable victory path, not away from it and making Georgia more generic.
As someone who likes some good Work Ethic/Voidsingers "Faith does everything" synergy, I think my first game after the patch is going to be Khmer on a hot, wet world with Sacred Path + Work Ethic + Voidsingers + Scripture (I'd need a bit of luck to get Sacred Path and a bunch of jungle rivers, but I'd still like to try it).
I agree that defensive Georgia "feels" better, which is why I like the approach I took in my mod better: I gave Georgia a Faith boost every time they train a military unit (just like the bonus Gaul has for Culture). That way you can be rewarded for building up a defensive force without necessarily having to use it aggressively.
If you have Monarchy, Renaissance Walls give +2 Diplomatic Favor. With Georgia's bonuses towards building walls, a cheaper Renaissance Wall with the Tsikhe, and some extra yields from when you build Tsikhe, I'd say that Georgia is capable of producing the largest amount of Diplomatic Favor out of all the civilizations, and are capable of spending all the production to build Renaissance Walls without losing too much.
Of course, there reaches a point where having more Diplomatic Favor isn't all that helpful. But by having so much of it, I'd definitely say that Georgia has a good shot at a Diplomatic Victory.
I agree that defensive Georgia "feels" better, which is why I like the approach I took in my mod better: I gave Georgia a Faith boost every time they train a military unit (just like the bonus Gaul has for Culture). That way you can be rewarded for building up a defensive force without necessarily having to use it aggressively.
True, but that ability is still offensive/defensive neutral. Scythia gets bonuses for building more units; it is decidedly not defensive. Because the more units you have, the more easily you can also just go on the offensive.
I don't think your addition was a bad buff, but it doesn't incentivize Georgia to prefer defensive playstyles. Simply granting access to protectorate wars sooner isn't the same as rewarding Georgia for using it.
I agree that defensive Georgia "feels" better, which is why I like the approach I took in my mod better: I gave Georgia a Faith boost every time they train a military unit (just like the bonus Gaul has for Culture). That way you can be rewarded for building up a defensive force without necessarily having to use it aggressively.
I enjoy your mods! I don't want to make an assumption, do you think you will be doing a fresh overhaul on your Civ mods after all this (start from scratch with the balance)? That is, including all the new changes and then rebalancing? Or are you going to continue with the mod as-is and cherry pick the good ideas into the existing mod. Sorry if that doesn't make sense.
True, but that ability is still offensive/defensive neutral. Scythia gets bonuses for building more units; it is decidedly not defensive. Because the more units you have, the more easily you can also just go on the offensive.
I don't think your addition was a bad buff, but it doesn't incentivize Georgia to prefer defensive playstyles. Simply granting access to protectorate wars sooner isn't the same as rewarding Georgia for using it.
Well relatively speaking (that is, the ability I described vs the present change), mine is more defensive. I don't even recall why I chose that, but it seems like Firaxis also thought leveraging Faith for some combat purpose felt right for whatever reason.
I enjoy your mods! I don't want to make an assumption, do you think you will be doing a fresh overhaul on your Civ mods after all this (start from scratch with the balance)? That is, including all the new changes and then rebalancing? Or are you going to continue with the mod as-is and cherry pick the good ideas into the existing mod. Sorry if that doesn't make sense.
Thanks for the kind words! This update will certainly provide a unique challenge for my mod. I'm leaning towards the second thing you said (cherry pick the ideas I like). For instance, I don't think I'm going to carry over any of the Georgia changes they made - I like my version better. For Khmer, I guess I'll carry over their Prasat changes.
If you're really excited to play Georgia and really concerned about having enough units to kill to make their new ability worthwhile, just turn on Dramatic Ages. Or Zombies. Or both.
...and/or pick the God of War pantheon...and hope that both stack If Spain and Mapuches can stack their goodies with ofther features, I think chances are raising that Georgia isn't left behind in this...
OK, I guess. You might snag a few extra diplomatic favor points per turn but I'm not really convinced it's going to be make you get to 20 diplomatic victory points any faster. In my experience (which includes a ton of diplomatic victories on Deity) it's rarely favor that helps me get there, it's gold and production for emergencies, competitions, and wonder building. You need some favor, sure, but I can't see Georgia bringing in enough extra to make any difference whatsoever.
Thanks for the kind words! This update will certainly provide a unique challenge for my mod. I'm leaning towards the second thing you said (cherry pick the ideas I like). For instance, I don't think I'm going to carry over any of the Georgia changes they made - I like my version better. For Khmer, I guess I'll carry over their Prasat changes.
With all the effort you already put into the mod I think this is probably the best choice as well. Looking forward to it.
For something a bit more on topic- For some reason I always liked Scotland's happiness bonus but it never felt strong enough. With the liberation war bonus also being weak, I really hope to see some changes there. I would be happy if they just had some more interesting mechanic that's a little be more proactive since you can't really force a liberation war situation.
So with Georgia having her CB bonus changed, that is why I am hoping to see Scotland's changed as well.
Well relatively speaking (that is, the ability I described vs the present change), mine is more defensive. I don't even recall why I chose that, but it seems like Firaxis also thought leveraging Faith for some combat purpose felt right for whatever reason.
Oh yes, I guess I didn't know the comparison frame. Your ability is definitely less offensive (and therefore de facto more defensive) than the NFP change.
I still think that you should have left the protectorate war bonus in on top of that. It's incidental enough that it isn't game-breaking, but it does fill in that logical "gap" between units and suzerain bonuses that encourages Georgia to a) recklessly pursue city-state suzes over other, more stable victory paths and b) prioritize sending its military to protect city states more often than to conquer new territory.
The way I see it, the casus belli bonuses were actually a really fun and interesting way to encourage different civ playstyles. The problem is that they were pushed as full features rather than situational surprises, and so every civ with a casus belli benefit felt like it only got half an ability. Now that almost every civ in NFP got buffs-and-a-half and all the civs are being brought up to a new baseline, I think every civ that had a casus belli should automatically keep it on top of a full, proper new ability. I don't think any of the casus belli should have been abandoned because those situational "sprinkles" amount to a lot of character. Except maybe Scotland's because Scotland's design just doesn't make sense on so many levels: when I think of what a "war of liberation" does, I don't think Scotland; I think Gran Colombia, or Mapuche, or Gaul/Numidia/Palmyra, or (haha) Haiti.
One item I'm disappointed they didn't mention is any policy card re-work. I hope that's included in the patch too - there's a lot of policy cards that are virtually useless right now, and could use a boost, and others that are probably still too strong that could be pruned down. There's also plenty of new items which have been added which could have policy card pieces - thinking of cards for stuff like the government plaza, diplo quarter, or preserve, maybe, or cards which adjust other aspects of the game. I could definitely imagine a card like "One with Nature" giving you like +1 amenity per city with a preserve - might not be a totally useful policy card, but might have its place in some games.
Could also certainly imagine them tone back the Democratic trade route bonus or Wisselbanken which are super strong since they now apply to suzerains.
Yeah, the video seemed really light on overall details even compared to other update videos. I'm really want to know if the pre-GS unique units like the Mamluk and Wing Hussar are going to be better integrated into the unit trees.
Yeah, the video seemed really light on overall details even compared to other update videos. I'm really want to know if the pre-GS unique units like the Mamluk and Wing Hussar are going to be better integrated into the unit trees.
Well, with 2/3rds being redone, they can't really afford to do any in depth looks and probably just took a couple of tasters for us. That's what I hope - it'd suck if the rest were all really superficial.
Anyone know when the patch notes might be released?
Well, with 2/3rds being redone, they can't really afford to do any in depth looks and probably just took a couple of tasters for us. That's what I hope - it'd suck if the rest were all really superficial.
Anyone know when the patch notes might be released?
Well, with 2/3rds being redone, they can't really afford to do any in depth looks and probably just took a couple of tasters for us. That's what I hope - it'd suck if the rest were all really superficial.
Anyone know when the patch notes might be released?
Well, with 2/3rds being redone, they can't really afford to do any in depth looks and probably just took a couple of tasters for us. That's what I hope - it'd suck if the rest were all really superficial.
What I mean is they focused exclusively on the a few of the changes with no details if there was anything else in the update besides the new units and civ reworks. Even just saying older units are getting reworked would have been more than enough for me.
What I mean is they focused exclusively on the a few of the changes with no details if there was anything else in the update besides the new units and civ reworks. Even just saying older units are getting reworked would have been more than enough for me.
They did say that they retuned the combat strength of older units and that some of the unique units will become replacements instead of stand-alone units. That's something!
The new units sound terrific but I am worried about implementation. I may have missed this, but do swordsmen upgrade to men-at-arms because it feels like there is a short period of time between them. Stuff like that..
There is enough of a gap I would say to add the Men-at-Arms, it's just on a weird tech that players don't always go for so sometimes the gap between Swords and Muskets feels really small.
What I do like about adding those two melee units does is that it will help a civ without Niter have some better fighting power as long as they have iron, and same for those without oil be able to make some corps that can stand toe to toe with Infantry (though I do hope that they remove the oil requirement for infantry, as it is still ridiculous and really the benefit of spending that oil per turn on a tank is usually more obvious to most players).
The Trebuchet is the most welcome since it will REALLY open up medieval siege warfare - before, a city with medieval walls was way too tough to crack, esp for AI, so this will be excellent to have finally.
They did say that they retuned the combat strength of older units and that some of the unique units will become replacements instead of stand-alone units. That's something!
All of the units mentioned are related to the three new units mentioned. I'm most interested about all of the heavy cav units that don't upgrade into Cuirassiers and similar units like the Crouching Tiger.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
If Spain and Mapuches can stack their goodies with ofther features, I think chances are raising that Georgia isn't left behind in this...
