[GS] Are Mountains OP?

[The Technomancer]

Mountains aren’t OP at all!

laughs in Australian +10 campus

 

[Bliss]

Mountains are OP for the following reason:

If a city has mountains, it is VERY LIKELY that it has a very defensible position. It implies safety for development, which implies easy focus on campus district and its building. It is very likely that you can IGNORE military units and wall.
If you are in the open, you won't only have a DISADVANTAGE in science bonuses but also need to worry about military, dealying the production of a campus and its buildings.

Not to mention that AIs won't bother building a campus if they don't have adjacency bonuses towards it, which is clearly a mistake, since science is essential.

 

[NukeAJS]

I'm sure someone mentioned it (didn't read the whole thread), but mountain ranges are often good because they usually mark a continental divide. Right off the bat, that means settling two continents which is great for several reasons: luxury resources are by continent and you can use the "not on you capital's continent" policy cards to nice effect.

 

[EgonSpengler]

I haven't caught up to the thread, so maybe this has been said already, but the Adjacency Bonus afforded to Campuses by Mountains is one of the game's greatest head-scratchers. I hate it. If there's a mod to remove it, I'd love to know what it is.

 

[The googles do nothing]

I haven't caught up to the thread, so maybe this has been said already, but the Adjacency Bonus afforded to Campuses by Mountains is one of the game's greatest head-scratchers. I hate it. If there's a mod to remove it, I'd love to know what it is.

That brings up the question of what would you replace it with? I would just remove the Mountain tile and Rainforest bonus and give everyone the appeal bonus. Move the Geothermal Fissure and Reef bonus to campus.

 

[EgonSpengler]

That brings up the question of what would you replace it with? I would just remove the Mountain tile and Rainforest bonus and give everyone the appeal bonus. Move the Geothermal Fissure and Reef bonus to campus.

Good question. I don't love the whole adjacency mechanic, where it relates to geographical features. I do like that Adjacency encourages contiguous construction, so maybe a Campus could get +1 for every adjacent District instead of for every 2? Or something. I dunno.

 

[steveg700]

Well, I can understand not liking the way terrain grants adjacency bonuses, because it's not like all the great places of learning are located in the middle of jungles or mountain ranges. However, disjointing adjacency bonuses from terrain (and therefore the map) would serve to undermine the primary reason to have adjacency bonuses in the first place.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Well, I can understand not liking the way terrain grants adjacency bonuses, because it's not like all the great places of learning are located in the middle of jungles or mountain ranges. However, disjointing adjacency bonuses from terrain (and therefore the map) would serve to undermine the primary reason to have adjacency bonuses in the first place.

I'm not sure any of the great places of learning have ever been in the middle of a jungle or a mountain range, so I think historical accuracy - or even a sense of verisimilitude - is straight out the window. Purely from a gameplay perspective, geographical Adjacency Bonuses tie the placement of Districts to locations on the map as determined by the random map generator, instead of the player's choices about where to place our cities and how to arrange their component parts. When it makes sense (e.g. Commercial Hubs on rivers) I'm okay with it, but none of the Adjacency Bonuses for mountains make sense to me.

 

[steveg700]

I'm not sure any of the great places of learning have ever been in the middle of a jungle or a mountain range, so I think historical accuracy - or even a sense of verisimilitude - is straight out the window. Purely from a gameplay perspective, geographical Adjacency Bonuses tie the placement of Districts to locations on the map as determined by the random map generator, instead of the player's choices about where to place our cities and how to arrange their component parts. When it makes sense (e.g. Commercial Hubs on rivers) I'm okay with it, but none of the Adjacency Bonuses for mountains make sense to me.

Well, the mountain and jungle bonuses are there to carry over bonuses from Civ V, where mountains provided observatories and jungles boosted universities.

In the real world, outposts would be established in jungles and mountains for research, but in Civ it is assumed that there is no such thing as a no-man's land and the entire map is up-for-grabs.

 

[acluewithout]

I don’t mind Campuses having adjacencies from Mountains or jungle. Neither makes any real sense, but I guess they sort of feel okay?

I just had another game where Mountains just defined my whole game. England, spawned on a mountainous continent split. Protected from Spain, Zulu and someone else (I forget who) so could basically ignore early military. Spammed settlers. Put down 3 +5 to +6 campuses and a bunch of holy sites. Heaps of choppable jungle on hills - so good early food and production, then lots of chops, then still have hills for production. Volcanos salting food rich mines all over the place. Missed Pyramids (so felt like a hack) but chopped in a bunch of other early wonders just because I could. Easy golden age, and lots of faith to spend on more settlers and Builders. Was going to build IZs and aqueducts all around a Dam and some stone, because why not, right?, but then realised my Dam spot didn’t quite meet the Dam placement rules (jesus, there needs to be a way to confirm where Dams can be placed early game). Built three slightly less joined up IZs anyway. Easy Iron in reach, Easy horses. Niter quite close. Turn 110 and the game is basically over.

Played another game with a flat start. It’s fine. I’ve got great IZ placement. Just enough hills to build units and hold off early AI attack. No good campus spots in easy reach, but I can squeeze out science via Eurekas and Pingala + high pop in cap. But difference to the other game is palpable - I’m now exposed to the AI and also having to work for everything.

I wouldn’t really want to change mountain adjacencies. They’re fun. I particularly like how you end up with this synergy between campuses and holy sites because they both use mountains (there’s a Dark Age card that’s leverages that synergy too). Quite fun. I’d love the option of building a University or Observatory as T3 campus buildings, but really just for flavour.

I think mountains would be less game defining if campuses were pushed back in the tech tree. Campuses just come way too early.

 

[lotrmith]

I think mountains would be less game defining if campuses were pushed back in the tech tree. Campuses just come way too early.

Any further back and the civs with early units gain a bigger advantage than they already have. Esp Sumeria. Plus any civ lucky enough to spawn near a science wonder.

Early campuses are how less equipped early civs use their production to be able to survive.

 

[Bliss]

I don’t mind Campuses having adjacencies from Mountains or jungle. Neither makes any real sense, but I guess they sort of feel okay?

I just had another game where Mountains just defined my whole game. England, spawned on a mountainous continent split. Protected from Spain, Zulu and someone else (I forget who) so could basically ignore early military. Spammed settlers. Put down 3 +5 to +6 campuses and a bunch of holy sites. Heaps of choppable jungle on hills - so good early food and production, then lots of chops, then still have hills for production. Volcanos salting food rich mines all over the place. Missed Pyramids (so felt like a hack) but chopped in a bunch of other early wonders just because I could. Easy golden age, and lots of faith to spend on more settlers and Builders. Was going to build IZs and aqueducts all around a Dam and some stone, because why not, right?, but then realised my Dam spot didn’t quite meet the Dam placement rules (jesus, there needs to be a way to confirm where Dams can be placed early game). Built three slightly less joined up IZs anyway. Easy Iron in reach, Easy horses. Niter quite close. Turn 110 and the game is basically over.

Played another game with a flat start. It’s fine. I’ve got great IZ placement. Just enough hills to build units and hold off early AI attack. No good campus spots in easy reach, but I can squeeze out science via Eurekas and Pingala + high pop in cap. But difference to the other game is palpable - I’m now exposed to the AI and also having to work for everything.

I wouldn’t really want to change mountain adjacencies. They’re fun. I particularly like how you end up with this synergy between campuses and holy sites because they both use mountains (there’s a Dark Age card that’s leverages that synergy too). Quite fun. I’d love the option of building a University or Observatory as T3 campus buildings, but really just for flavour.

I think mountains would be less game defining if campuses were pushed back in the tech tree. Campuses just come way too early.

Maybe they could nerf mountains: 1 science for every 2 mountains or simply add science bonuses for pastures/farms on resources.
Agronomy is directly tied to science. Or, at least, as much as mountains and jungles are.

 

[acluewithout]

Any further back and the civs with early units gain a bigger advantage than they already have. Esp Sumeria. Plus any civ lucky enough to spawn near a science wonder.

Early campuses are how less equipped early civs use their production to be able to survive.

Moving Campuses back would require other tweaks to the game, but I think it could be made to work. Early Science isn’t as powerful as early Culture anyway. Where the early Campus really kills it is that you can place the Campuses so early, and then chop them all in after feudalism and then get this massive spike to your science.

No, I’ll tell you the real problem moving back Campuses. Early Campuses are Super friendly to new players. Build Campus, get Science, get units etc. No early Campus and new players would have to work for their Science. If players had to work hard for early science, it would make the game so much harder for newer players or other players that just aren’t across the various meta compared to a lot of players here. I suspect a lot of players approach to the game is frankly campuses and three slingers. And you know what, that’s not a bad way to play when you are still learning all the subtleties of the game. Take that away, and new players would be lost. (Of course, that’s just my hot take, and perhaps I’m wrong about that.)

I think another option would be just having more a soft cap on how many Campuses you can support across your empire.

Maybe they could nerf mountains: 1 science for every 2 mountains or simply add science bonuses for pastures/farms on resources.
Agronomy is directly tied to science. Or, at least, as much as mountains and jungles are.

No, don’t do that.

Those Campus Mountain adjacencies are just so satisfying. Taking them away would just make the game less fun.

If Campuses are a problem, then just limit the number of Campuses and or limit how many players can have.

 

[kaspergm]

Maybe they could nerf mountains: 1 science for every 2 mountains or simply add science bonuses for pastures/farms on resources.
Agronomy is directly tied to science. Or, at least, as much as mountains and jungles are.

No, don’t do that.

Those Campus Mountain adjacencies are just so satisfying. Taking them away would just make the game less fun.

I understand your line of reasoning with this, but I don't agree with this. By the same argument, we could increase adjacency bonus from mountains to campus to +2 for each mountain, or even higher. Then you'd have like +8, +10 or +12 campuses early, which on surface would add even more excitement. But obviously, it would not make the game better.

I think toning down some of the mountain adjacencies would be a sensible place to start. Making it +0.5 for each mountain up to astronomy - and then increase it to +1 for each mountain from that point, possible make it require an observatory building to get that increased bonus - and cutting things like the geothermal vents down to +1, would still make you hunt for +2 or +3 campus sites, it would just make the difference between a mountain and a no-mountain start smaller. As an added benefit, it would also make the Rationalism card less OP, because it would require more work to get campuses to +3 bonus.

I'm also a proponent of moving back campuses in the tech tree, although not massively. I'd like a Classical Era campus, to make it come roughly at the same time as the Theatre Square. My best bid for a placement would probably be at Mathematics, unless one introduces a Philosophy tech to sit above Currency, so that one has a tech progression that goes [Writing] ---- (+Astrology or Irrigation) -----------> [Philosophy (early classical)] ---> [Mathematics] and then pushes the campus back to Philosophy tech. EDIT > Although I guess in the current game context, Philosophy would belong in the civics tree. One could also have an Astronomy tech around here, which would actually make perfect sense, maybe even Observatory building as level 1 campus building, which historically would not be completely inaccurate in terms of timing when observatories started to become commonly built, but of course one would then have to rename the renaissance era tech to something else (like Telescopes, which would actually be more accurate anyway).

I'm also a proponent of moving the Library out of the Campus and into the city centre (still unlocks at writing, for an early +1 or +2 science and additionally a GWW slot, which would also help issues with that problem). One would have to come up with another stage 1 building for the Campus.

 

[lotrmith]

I think Science plays a far more important role than culture in early survival. If you can't tech to, say, masonry while your opponent Scythia or Rome or Aztec or Mongolia or Macedon or etc etc etc comes at you, no amount of culture is going to save you.

 

[steveg700]

Any further back and the civs with early units gain a bigger advantage than they already have. Esp Sumeria. Plus any civ lucky enough to spawn near a science wonder.

Early campuses are how less equipped early civs use their production to be able to survive.

Likewise, getting past the ancient era quickly aids civ's who have classical or medieval-era advantages. Seems kind of circular.

I understand your line of reasoning with this, but I don't agree with this. By the same argument, we could increase adjacency bonus from mountains to campus to +2 for each mountain, or even higher. Then you'd have like +8, +10 or +12 campuses early, which on surface would add even more excitement. But obviously, it would not make the game better.

I'm not sure "oh, but OP is fun" constitutes a line of reasoning that warrants consideration. It's more of a mildly obnoxious sentiment. We have this thread because for some players broken does not equate to fun. Excessive imbalances in the game need to be addressed, not left in place because wild stochastic swings give some folks a head rush.

 

[steveg700]

I think Science plays a far more important role than culture in early survival. If you can't tech to, say, masonry while your opponent Scythia or Rome or Aztec or Mongolia or Macedon or etc etc etc comes at you, no amount of culture is going to save you.

I'm curious to know what would prioritize culture as well. Maybe unlocking a government, getting more slots, maybe that +4 combat bonus?

I find the best bet against early aggro isn't science or culture, but rather ponying up the 25 gold to send the delegation over right away. Exchanging open borders also helps even more, which I guess is a point in favor of culture.

 

[Bliss]

I'm curious to know what would prioritize culture as well. Maybe unlocking a government, getting more slots, maybe that +4 combat bonus?

I find the best bet against early aggro isn't science or culture, but rather ponying up the 25 gold to send the delegation over right away. Exchanging open borders also helps even more, which I guess is a point in favor of culture.

Also, trade route to your neighbor asap.

 

[acluewithout]

By the same argument, we could increase adjacency bonus from mountains to campus to +2 for each mountain, or even higher. Then you'd have like +8, +10 or +12 campuses early, which on surface would add even more excitement.

I'm not sure "oh, but OP is fun" constitutes a line of reasoning that warrants consideration.

I know it’s subjective, but +1 Adjacency per Mountain feels about right to me in terms of fun, puzzle, challenge, whatever. I don't think +2 per Mountain would be fun. My cap will often have just one mountain in reach, and it’s quite a trick to sort of leverage that single +1 into a +3 with districts etc. +2 would make that all trivial, and indeed I find thermals (+2) quite un-fun for that reason (particularly if you can settle on them - free science from the thermal, lose an otherwise unproductive tile and also get a +2). I don't think 0.5 per Mountain is fun, because best case super sweet mountain ring gets me... +3? That's underwhelming. And if Mountains give +0.5, then what does give +1? Or does nothing give +1??

It's purely subjective, but I think the current design of Campuses adjacencies is good - some things give +1, some things give +0.5. I think we could lose the +2 for Thermals, but otherwise I think the adjacencies are okay.

As an added benefit, it would also make the Rationalism card less OP, because it would require more work to get campuses to +3 bonus.

Rationalism needs a complete rework. I think it’s debatable whether it’s really OP or not. But I do feel it distorts gameplay by really pushing you to spam cities, spam campuses and sets arbitrarily values for population across all cities. In terms of impact, it feels very similar to National Wonders in Civ V, but whereas they pushed you to have no more than 4 Cities, Civ 6 Rationalism pushes you to go wide and make every City identical.

— snip —

Early Culture is the most vital thing. Early Culture mean Autocracy faster, Oligarchy if you really need it, flanking / support bonuses faster, unit production cards, and governors.

You can survive early rushes with warriors and archers if need be, plus diplomacy, good city placement etc. Although, sometimes your just screwed, and that’s the way it goes.

 

[Bliss]

I don't think 0.5 per Mountain is fun, because best case super sweet mountain ring gets me... +3? That's underwhelming. And if Mountains give +0.5, then what does give +1? Or does nothing give +1??

You gotta consider that most flat land starts have +0 or +1 campuses. +3 is still good.