Australian Summer Patch discussion thread

[DWilson]

Considering how easy this game still is, I can't help but think that nerfing the barbs (the most difficult, and in my opinion fun, aspect of the game) is a terrible idea at this stage. That said, tweaking the scaling is probably a good idea, as I've found the difficulty differences don't seem too apparent as the barbs can be nearly equally a game ending threat regardless of difficulty.

Also, if the AI performs better without barbarians, then they should probably be coded to be less dangerous in raids against non-player civs (producing, for example, half as many units when AI cities are identified.

 

[Magil]

I don't really like to play the early conqueror, but with how aggressive the AI is about forward-settling me and how I need to have the units to deal with barbarians anyway I'm kinda forced to do it.

It's actually one of my bugbears in regards to Civ VI.

 

[LDiCesare]

No, you lose immediately because of a refusal to survive. Fitting.

Since my opening strategy is to build slingers and warriors, probably for the first five or seven things I build unles I'm Sumerian, I don't think I'm refusing to survive or anything like that. If the game makes me play 10 turns and condemns me because of bad RNG, it's not a problem with my strategy or choices. It's not a matter of adapting.
The issue is that, once I've succeeded the die roll of 'do you survive the early turns", I've effectively won the game. So tossing a coin and calling heads or tails is about as challenging as playing Civ VI at this stage. The AI needs a buff. Barbs don't matter in the long run.

 

[nzcamel]

Since my opening strategy is to build slingers and warriors, probably for the first five or seven things I build unles I'm Sumerian, I don't think I'm refusing to survive or anything like that.

With a build order like that you must be the unluckiest son of a gun playing this game if you keep getting done over early in the game by barbs.
At least you're not justifying building a scout first, or not building a warrior at all early.

 

[Victoria]

Friggin AT barbs... I HATE them... I'm going back to emperor for a while

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Barbs are poorly implemented. There are too many situations where you receive a punishment mechanic (scouted --> returned) with no possible action you can take to prevent it. Then you get horses and other units in your face in the opening turns.

Can you survive this on deity? Yes. You can. Does it set you back in an undue way that was outside of player control? Yes. Can it cost you the game if you are playing vs people who are not similarly "scouted" from the opposite direction their scout went on turn 3? No doubt. The damage to the opening is non-trivial. You can win in deity SP anyway because the AI is so bad that even that difficulty is forgiving enough, but this is not a well-implemented mechanic and it shouldn't even be considered in MP until it's fixed.

 

[PendragonWRB]

Building a scout first is now a luxury. One you're going to have to give up if you want to handle everything thrown at you.

And like someone said a bit higher up in the thread - circle your city with your first warrior, exploring the close tiles; but keeping him at a length where he can make it back to defend.

I disagree. The scout is critical to getting out there and FINDING the barb camps BEFORE they find you. The mobility is key, and they can body block the barb scout if they come upon it. The real decision I face is the second unit, another scout to be sure I have the immediate area explored, or a slinger with lousy mobility, but the ability to help kill barbs.

Luxuries like a worker or building don't come until I have my area secured with at least two warrior/slinger pairs and one or two scouts to 'go long'.

 

[Victoria]

There is more than 1 way to get a job done. Killing a camp has got to be priority. It is weird that a scout coming back will trigger the hordes from hell but a barb blatantly attacking their camp gets nada.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I disagree. The scout is critical to getting out there and FINDING the barb camps BEFORE they find you. The mobility is key, and they can body block the barb scout if they come upon it. The real decision I face is the second unit, another scout to be sure I have the immediate area explored, or a slinger with lousy mobility, but the ability to help kill barbs.

Luxuries like a worker or building don't come until I have my area secured with at least two warrior/slinger pairs and one or two scouts to 'go long'.

This would be valid if you could possibly build a unit before barb scout rolls up turn 3 from the opposite direction you sent your initial scout.

But you can't do that. The pre turn 10 phase is complete RNG BS right now. After you get a few military units it's a lot less borked. Mad pointed out that this could possibly be fixed by making the camps spawn a minimum distance from start positions. Maybe that's all it needs, but it needs something.

 

[LDiCesare]

With a build order like that you must be the unluckiest son of a gun playing this game if you keep getting done over early in the game by barbs.
At least you're not justifying building a scout first, or not building a warrior at all early.

I don't keep getting done. I'm unhappy because I win easily despite an early game that forces me to do almost exactly the same thing everytime.
I'm saying the early game is not fun. You may be unlucky, but usually you can manage. But then here you are with a big army and neighbours who can't defend themselves. So... It turns boring pretty quickly.
This also expands into other areas of the game, which become uninteresting either because the AI has an early lead or for some other questionable design reason. Religions (can't compete unless you're Arabia on highest difficulty level), great people (pool flushed at each era so you will hardly ever see early GPs) come to mind. The issues come from a bad pace: Hard early on and then too easy.

 

[PYITE]

If you think early game defending of your capitol against barbs is difficult, how do you think the AI does? Especially on higher difficulties when they start with 2-3 cities to defend. Barb pillage festival. This is crippling to the AI because they rarely repair improvements or districts. Playing without barbs will give you more challenging major civ opponents and makes turn times significantly faster. When the AI learns to deal with the barbs and make repairs, I'll go back to playing with them. You still have to start mostly military because instead of Barbs surrounding your capitol at turn 15 it will be major civ warriors and slingers.

 

[MaximusPlatypus]

AI starts with 3 or 4 warriors on higher levels. I don't like changing difficulties, due to the AI needing the bonuses throughout the game. if I'm playing on map starts I am unfamiliar with, i'm not averse to adding a warrior or two for myself at the start. Call it a cheese strat, maybe.. Restarting just takes too damn long and annoying due to the options I play with. I'm not going to waste like 30-40 minutes potentially having restarts if i'm only going to have a play session of an hour or two a day.

 

[bbbt]

I don't know why they don't just make barbarians a slider: None - Low - Medium - Raging.

 

[Yzman]

I have noticed one constant, anyone that thinks the game is easy tends to be aggressive early. Its just the fact of the game which I find disappointing. Probably why I never play higher than king. I don't mind early wars, but I hate that to be the only ideal strategy. But it just seems like if the first part of the game isn't you aggressively expanding then it will snowball into you falling behind later in the game on higher difficulties.

Its a shame because I really like the religion and culture game and usually try to go for culture victories but anything higher than king you basically need to be super aggressive it seems to me.

 

[nzcamel]

Friggin AT barbs... I HATE them... I'm going back to emperor for a while

I suspect it's a good sign that several of us are big enough to admit that we need to drop a level for the now. I think that is half the issue for some people here - they need to drop a level, but they don't have the kahuna's to admit it without throwing some toys.

I disagree. The scout is critical to getting out there and FINDING the barb camps BEFORE they find you. The mobility is key, and they can body block the barb scout if they come upon it. The real decision I face is the second unit, another scout to be sure I have the immediate area explored, or a slinger with lousy mobility, but the ability to help kill barbs.

Luxuries like a worker or building don't come until I have my area secured with at least two warrior/slinger pairs and one or two scouts to 'go long'.

Finding camps to destroy is a luxury if you aren't going to survive that long. If it is as bad as a few of you are stating very strongly; then build one warrior is as much a no brainer as build one scout was in V. This doesn't mean that your idea of blocking barb scouts with your own scouts is bad. But that tactic will have to wait until you've first built enough military units to defend your territory.

I don't keep getting done. I'm unhappy because I win easily despite an early game that forces me to do almost exactly the same thing everytime.
I'm saying the early game is not fun. You may be unlucky, but usually you can manage. But then here you are with a big army and neighbours who can't defend themselves. So... It turns boring pretty quickly.
This also expands into other areas of the game, which become uninteresting either because the AI has an early lead or for some other questionable design reason. Religions (can't compete unless you're Arabia on highest difficulty level), great people (pool flushed at each era so you will hardly ever see early GPs) come to mind. The issues come from a bad pace: Hard early on and then too easy.

I'd say that even with the more aggressive barbs, most players would still agree that the early game is the most fun. All that unexplored map, all those goody huts, all those relationships with AI yet to go south (at least since the patch, they might not go south so quick ). It is the mid to late game which tends to suffer more from tedium as you are locked into your past choices with little to nothing to explore.

All I have done is advocate that people: (1) do not build a scout first, (2) do build a warrior first or second.
I have not insisted that you have to arm yourself to the teeth at the expense of other routes in the game; though I appreciate that at the highest levels a couple more very early warriors may be a must.

 

[Morgawr]

I agree. Meanwhile the devs that are reading these kinds of threads are thinking "hey we must have done a good job, folks are now complaining the game (barbs) is too hard!".

Yes the barbs situation is not FAIR. One player may get run over on turn 10 whereas another doesn't have to worry. But this is a assymmetric game; I just accept it and move on. Makes every game UNPREDICTABLE. Even if unpredicatble may mean you lose. This is what the devs intended and they succeeded. I personally have fun with unpredictability but not everyone sees it that way. I love the thrill of starting a new game wondering "how bad are the barbs gonna be this time? what will be starting continent be like? what neighbors will I have? Will this be one of those games where I'm destroyed before turn 30? etc"

Instead of complaining about how vicious the barbs are, I'd rather focus on how much improvement opportunity there is still with the AI, so devs continue to fix that..

Also: to folks saying this is RNG and dice roll - of course, this whole game is one complex dice roll. Your probability to survive the first 50 turns, or to win the game, depends on a multitude of variables like starting geography, proximity to other AI, Proximity to CS, Aggressiveness of neighbors, BARBS, Your gameplay decisions, Your combat tactical ability, etc

The point being, BARBS being particulary tough or not in a single game is just another random variable. You cannot expect to control 100% of these variables other than your own gameplay

 

[Pietato]

Friggin AT barbs... I HATE them... I'm going back to emperor for a while

AT?

 

[hongyu20]

Does anyone know how long the production boost for Australia is ? Is it for the duration of the war or how many turns ?

 

[Browd]

AT?

AT = anti-tank

 

[DWilson]

Does anyone know how long the production boost for Australia is ? Is it for the duration of the war or how many turns ?

10 for war, 20 for liberation, at least on standard settings