Balance Tweak Suggestions Summarized

[DilithiumDad]

Dilithium Dad’s Balance Tweaks for Beyond the Sword

Most of these are borrowed from others on the forum and summarized here. These are focused on strengthening weak aspects of the game. You won’t find yourself saying, “Wow! That would be so cool!” because these suggestions are for balancing tweaks, not major modifications. Most of the changes should be readily made by changing the programming code. Changes that would involve changing fundamental coding have been avoided, so far as my limited knowledge of programming allows me to guess.

Traits
1. Protective. Widely agreed to be the weakest trait, although it is effective in the hands of the AI. One good fix is to improve the value of walls and castles (see next section on buildings), which are nearly worthless buildings that Protective civs can build for half price. In addition, consider adding half price buildings that come later in the game. Security Bureau is an obvious candidate and highly consistent with the protective theme. Add in half price Intelligence Agencies and Jails and now the Protective trait is starting to look interesting. There is currently no trait that has espionage advantages. Why not make Protective the trait for budding spies? Interesting possible minor bonus: +1 espionage point in capitol city (starts after Alphabet).
2. Imperialistic. Widely agreed to be the second weakest trait. The most obvious fix is to make the 100% production bonus for settlers apply to food and not just hammers. This fix would not even require a change in the Civilopedia! It would make the current entry more accurate: “100% bonus to settler production”. Possible secondary bonuses:
a. Colony costs reduced by 50%.
b. Distance city maintenance reduced 25%. (This would be an alternative to reducing colony costs, not in addition).
c. +1 trade route in capitol city.
3. Expansive. A medium-strong trait. A slight fix would be to make the 25% production bonus for workers apply to food and not just hammers. This fix would not even require a change in the Civilopedia! It would make the current entry more accurate: “25% bonus to worker production”. Interesting possible minor bonus: +1 food in capitol city.
4. Financial. Many people think this trait is overpowered. Rather than diminishing this trait, it would be preferable to boost the other traits. Interesting possible negative minor bonus: +1 maintenance in capitol city.

Other traits: I like the idea of adding a small bonus that applies only to the capitol city and relates in some way to the trait character. The bonus will have some impact because it accrues throughout the game, but it is unlikely to alter the outcome as it only applies to one city. It would affect the “flavor” of playing with each trait, and also provides an opportunity for a small balance tweak.

Buildings
1. Walls. Almost never built, although the AI uses them effectively. Suggested fixes:
a. +1 happiness. This would have a major impact on the early game, and would make sure walls were built in the major cities. Even if it expires with Rifling, this would make building walls worthwhile.
b. +1 culture. Makes wall building a more palatable choice, especially the base price were also reduced by 10 hammers.
2. Castles. Almost never built, although the AI uses them effectively. Suggested fixes:
a. Make castles available with Feudalism. They should be buildable right at the beginning of the Middle Ages.
b. Double the culture and trade route bonuses to +2. Trade routes are seldom worth more than one gold at this stage. Given their limited lifespan, the bonus should be greater.
c. Reduce cost by 10 hammers.
3. Industrial Park. Seldom built, except in National Park city. Given its cost and health downsides, it should give 2 free engineers instead of just one.
4. Laboratory. Marginal even in previous versions, it now comes so late as to be nearly worthless. Severe problem for the Russian unique building version of laboratory, the Research Institute. Suggested fix: +50% Great Person Points. Could lead to an extra late game great person or two. This would synergize with the free scientists in the Russian unique building.

Wonders
1. Chichen Itza. Seldom built, although the AI benefits from the city defense bonus. An effective fix: Chichen Itza doubles the effect of Theocracy. This would be like an early Pentagon, but only if you are running Theocracy. Effect would obsolete with the defense bonus, at Rifling.
2. Internet. Seldom built, although the AI can benefit. Too late to have an impact. Fix: The Internet also gives +10% commerce in all cities.
3. Space Elevator. Often built, but many feel it comes too late. Only useful for Spaceship victory. Fix: The Space Elevator also gives +10% commerce in all cities, which is helpful to all the victory conditions. (As an alternative, it could give a 100% commerce boost in the city in which it is built, just as in Alpha Centauri)

Units
I think these are done quite well. The only exception is the Explorer, which is considered nearly useless. It should start with Sentry so it could actually be used for recon, and the strength (defend only) should be beefed up to 6 or 8.

 

[LDG]

re: Explorers

A suggestion might be to add two units as an upgrade path continuing the Scout --> Explorer line...

A Str 8 Moves 2 all-terrain-as-1 Recon Unit "Pathfinder" with a continuation of the promotions and the ability to attack at -50% Str. Set in the 'Napoleonic' era techwise, it would allow the unit to attack weak barbarians camping on goodie huts as is common on Terra maps in that period. Perhaps it still should not be able to pillage, however.

A Str 16 Moves 2 all-terrain-as-1 Recon Unit "Special Warfare Group" that continues further the promotions to include guerilla III for the retreat chance (or Tactics without a Warlord?) and normal attack and pillage ability. It would be set in the late Industrial or Modern Era techwise, and would need a pretty spiff set of promotions or abilities to be of use vs. period units.

More specifics on both are available for discussion if warranted by anyone actually thinking such would be a good idea. Heh.

**off topic slightly: this might also answer the debate in some threads as to what to do with the American UU "Navy SEALs" if there is to be an upgrade unit in the Modern Era for Marines and/or Paratroops.

 

[Cvntpumeler]

A suggestion for Imperialistic:

Imperialistic should get a 50% (or whatever is most balanced) domestic trade route bonus. This would help make it more powerful as well as reflect reality... A truely "imperialistic" leader would be good conquering lands and assimilating them and making them trade together. For example, the Eastern and Western parts of the Roman empire no doubt experienced increased trade revenue compared to what they would otherwise have due to the fact that they were united under the Roman Empire. The same could be said for more modern imperialstic societies and the "trading colonies" they created. Imperialism seems to be much about trade and resources... modern imperialism especially.

 

[DilithiumDad]

re: Explorers

A suggestion might be to add two units as an upgrade path continuing the Scout --> Explorer line...

A Str 8 Moves 2 all-terrain-as-1 Recon Unit "Pathfinder" with a continuation of the promotions and the ability to attack at -50% Str. Set in the 'Napoleonic' era techwise, it would allow the unit to attack weak barbarians camping on goodie huts as is common on Terra maps in that period. Perhaps it still should not be able to pillage, however.

A Str 16 Moves 2 all-terrain-as-1 Recon Unit "Special Warfare Group" that continues further the promotions to include guerilla III for the retreat chance (or Tactics without a Warlord?) and normal attack and pillage ability. It would be set in the late Industrial or Modern Era techwise, and would need a pretty spiff set of promotions or abilities to be of use vs. period units.

Could work, but I think recon units should be for defense only. Your plan is similar to how things worked in the final expansion of CivIII. Remember geurillas? They were great!

 

[DilithiumDad]

A suggestion for Imperialistic:

Imperialistic should get a 50% (or whatever is most balanced) domestic trade route bonus. This would help make it more powerful as well as reflect reality... A truely "imperialistic" leader would be good conquering lands and assimilating them and making them trade together. For example, the Eastern and Western parts of the Roman empire no doubt experienced increased trade revenue compared to what they would otherwise have due to the fact that they were united under the Roman Empire. The same could be said for more modern imperialstic societies and the "trading colonies" they created. Imperialism seems to be much about trade and resources... modern imperialism especially.

Hmmm..this would certainly make Mercatilism more appealing! But it would make Imperialistic leaders LESS interested in foreign trade and LESS suseptible to trade boycotts. Seems opposite to the way it should be.

 

[BlastDuke]

My suggestion for the "Financial" trait (that seems too strong for me):
Make it "+1 on spots with 3"
(Now it is: "+1 on spots with 2")

What I would really like to see would be an improved spaceship construction, like my suggestions in this post

I disagree with your opinion of the Internet - I see it as very important in the endgame when you're not in tech lead (and you're not often on Immortal)

Castles need a longer lifetime, your suggestion to allow them with Feudalism sounds good to me

 

[DilithiumDad]

My suggestion for the "Financial" trait (that seems too strong for me):
Make it "+1 on spots with 3"
(Now it is: "+1 on spots with 2")

I think all the Financial whizzes on this forum would rise in revolt against this idea! Better to improve the weaker traits than gut Financial. My idea of adding +1 city expense to the capitol city for Financial civs would be a tiny but real penalty, especially early on.

What I would really like to see would be an improved spaceship construction, like my suggestions in this post

I don't know --I think Fireaxis put a lot of programming effort into the space race and it's better not to mess with it.

I disagree with your opinion of the Internet - I see it as very important in the endgame when you're not in tech lead (and you're not often on Immortal)

OK, I was just basing my post on what I have read here. But it would be good for the Internet to have a benefit for the other victory conditions, where you could direct extra commerce to culture or research.

Castles need a longer lifetime, your suggestion to allow them with Feudalism sounds good to me

Yes, I often delay Engineering if I'm not facing a horde of mounted units and need Pikemen desperately.

 

[Silence101]

Interesting thread - there's a few things here that could use tweaking.

With the protective trait, I think we need to go back to the drawing board. I like the reduced building costs, especially if the castles are sweetened a bit. (I think walls are fine the way they are.) The free unit promotion needs some reworking though I think.

I like the initial suggestion for imperialistic. That's a good idea.

Sometimes I think I'm the only person that doesn't think financial is overpowered. Personally, I'd rather have organized than financial as it stands now. Financial is fine the way it is.

I'd also like to see another warmonger trait added in a future expansion. Haven't really thought in a lot of detail about it's implementation... maybe something like "stratigic" - all untis start with the commando promotion or something like that. Give it a +25% espianage (sp?) bonus too maybe.

I like the suggestion too for the Chichen Itza, but most of the other wonder suggestions I think are unnecessary.

 

[Cvntpumeler]

Hmmm..this would certainly make Mercatilism more appealing! But it would make Imperialistic leaders LESS interested in foreign trade and LESS suseptible to trade boycotts. Seems opposite to the way it should be.

I think Imperialistic leaders should be less suseptible to trade boycotts, as commanding resources and forcing trade with the unwilling is what Imperialism is all about. Basicly IMO, outside influences should have less effect on an Imperialistic leaders than they otherwise would. An Imperialistic leader would technically be less interested in foreign trade and more interested in acquiring the trade goods first-hand.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Well Space Elevator needs a boost, but I would keep it the same Type of boost and just change it to +200%

Internet I wouldn't boost as much (although I would boost the computer tech with the Internet) [I'd give Computer tech the Commerce bonus, and an increased bonus for Computer Tech once Anyone has built the Internet]

I think Imperialistic and Expansive can best be boosted throuh the food idea only (all bonuses should apply to the food, Factories, etc.)

I'd leave financial and Protective alone (except for Improvements to Walls+Castles)

The +1 Happy sounds good with Walls
[Also the Great Wall should require a Wall, maybe not multiple ones, but at least 1 like the Great Library... giving Qin a bonus with his Wonder]

Castles I'd just make them obsolete a little later: Corporation, Steam Power, or Steel
Feudalism is a superpowered tech as is, Engineering is good for Castles.

I like the C.Itza suggestion But I wouldn't limit it to Theocracy... just say +2 (or +1) exp in cities with state religion. I'd prefer simply increasing the bonus to 50% (which with new seige mechanisms means even longer to get through your defenses)

I like the Idea of continuing the Explorer Line a later version that has

Str 8, -50% on Attack sounds good. (add the Sentry promotion to the G+W I) possibly with Astronomy and Military Science, allowing Pillage would make it interesting because it would be hard to dislodge... could easily get +70-100% on the Defense on good terrain

Str 16, normal Attack and Pillage, Drop the movement to 1, but add the Commando Promotion (so Commando, Sentry, G I+ W I) possibly with techs like Fascism/Communism/Radio/Industrialism (maybe Communism+Democracy+Fascism to indicate 'working with the people')

[Both units having 'no bad results from huts']

Then upgrade THAT to a Modern Marine/Paratrooper Upgrade unit

 

[Bast]

A suggestion for Imperialistic:

Imperialistic should get a 50% (or whatever is most balanced) domestic trade route bonus. This would help make it more powerful as well as reflect reality... A truely "imperialistic" leader would be good conquering lands and assimilating them and making them trade together. For example, the Eastern and Western parts of the Roman empire no doubt experienced increased trade revenue compared to what they would otherwise have due to the fact that they were united under the Roman Empire. The same could be said for more modern imperialstic societies and the "trading colonies" they created. Imperialism seems to be much about trade and resources... modern imperialism especially.

That's a good idea. I've been saying all along that imperialistic needs an economic boost of sorts.

 

[LDG]

Could work, but I think recon units should be for defense only. Your plan is similar to how things worked in the final expansion of CivIII. Remember geurillas? They were great!

*bold by me

I guess I have to ask, Do you mean gameplay mechanic or usage philosophy? Here's why:

Low Strength highly Promoted units are often by definition "defensive" in that they have little to no chance of surviving an attack. You wouldn't go around in the early Eras attacking with a Spearman (or less) vs. Axeman/ Swordsman unless they were in the wide open, and likely not unless they were wounded pretty badly. 4 vs. 6+ that get terrain mods is not a win move. Explorers often will be facing Pikeman/ Crossbow/ Longbow/ Maceman, so it is even worse for them in the hypothetical case they could attack. But turn that around to the Explorer defending and they can and do win even against Maces, so long as they stick to good terrain and fortify when used as a picket line. The fact that nothing gets an attack bonus against Recon units is one reason, the ease of having multiple terrain-defense-bonus Promotions is another.

So long as you follow that same logic all the way up to the Strength 16 modern version, you will have a unit that will fight far above itself in defense.

Usage is a whole 'nother matter. The #1 job of Recon units is to go pop huts. The situation is that all huts are gone in moments except those on non-start location continents or a very rare outlying island. Basically, if not a Terra map, they are gone long before Compass even lets you build the Explorer. By the time you have Optics and build a Caravel to haul your Explorer off your home rock, there is not much to find... Except on Terra maps. Therein lies the rub. You build Explorer and Caravel, send them off to the "New World", and if you are anywhere after 1000 AD, you can bet on the Barbarians of the "New World" having camped on all the goodie huts on their continent(s). Explorer, not attack capable, looks on in wonder at the Barbs. Barbarians, once camped, never move or attack unless the hut pops from nearby border expansion. Thus the claim "Explorers are useless". For their #1 job, they pretty much are.

The suggested "Pathfinder" unit is intended to remedy that usage issue without creating either a super-defender versus its period units, nor an offensive unit. That said, just as Explorers can be the selected defender in a stack if they are well promoted and on terrain, Pathfinders would be the same in several cases. Strength 8 before adjustment means that with just a couple experience Promotions devoted to terrain adds, they are likely death to Grenadiers or Cannon foolish enough to attack them in a forest (or on a hill, or both!) and can rip up and sometimes win vs. Rifleman or Cavalry under the same situation. They would be your screening force in close terrain in the historical model, so it seems fitting they might play that role in gameplay under the right circumstances too. As such, just as Explorers are of cost in hammers significantly below most of its period "regular" units, Pathfinders should still be somewhat discounted from general use units... but not as much as Explorers are.

The suggestion of the Strength 16 "Special Warfare" unit is more problematical. There will simply be nearly no huts left, and nothing of real value to get from them except the +5 experience boost. They are really included to provide an interesting model of a modern unit and have an upgrade path for your Pathfinders which became artillery and infantry fodder once those techs showed up. So, some amount of usage change is going to be needed, just as some amount of cleverness in inherent promotions will be. Their survival hinges upon the fact that nothing gets a bonus fighting Recon units and the Special Warfare Group will be highly promoted for terrain, but that is just not quite enough to justify them against post-Infantry modern units. (Rifles went 14 vs. 8 against Pathfinders, Cav went 15 vs. 8... Mech Infantry will be 32 vs. 16 and Modern Armor will be 40 vs. 16, both solid winners most days. Marines and Paras are less suited, but a Modern Era replacement for them is being considered in other discussions as 28+ Str and that would be enough just as it was for Rifles or better vs. Pathfinders)

A couple of keys about the proposed Pathfinder and Special Warfare Group:

Both would be Amphibious inherently. They simply can't take the downgrade of -25% Attack across rivers, and besides, it suits them.

Both can ride in Caravels and Submarines. This is in itself valuable as a Unit (especially the Modern Era one) that can attack at all or pillage that can come in by sub would be a whole new functionality.

They need to be Movement 2, not Move 1 with inherent Commando. Especially in the case of the Special Warfare Group, they just shouldn't outpace ordinary mechanized forces in conventional offensive situations *by road movement*. These sort of units avoid roads. If you are comparing them with Commando-promoted regular forces with a base move of 2, er, well, those are some of the more experienced units in your army, likely. Get a Special Warfare Group that level of experience too them.

Special Warfare Group should be Para-capable, less interceptable than Paratroops by fighters on insertion, and have a low Interception chance (10%? 20%? no higher) just to show they can be configured to slap back at any airstrike that targets them. Ambush as an inherent promotion is also possible, but may not be decisive against Modern Armor. Would swing the difference defending against Tanks, though.

Probably, neither should get Sentry inherently. hrm...

Neither should be able to take cities? (yes, that is a question)

Neither should get March inherently.

...which leads back to the idea that the American UU "Navy SEALs" would be removed from being a Marine subset and made a Special Warfare Group subset. They would keep their additional First Strikes and March as an inherent promotion, however, making the SEAL far more survivable after it attacks than a regular Special Warfare Group.

Even with all the spiffs you can pile on a Special Warfare Group, it still will be a very special purpose unit, less desireable to many players than conventional forces the Modern Era, and would be about as expensive in hammer cost... unless they had a really odd special ability like "they contribute nothing to the accumulation of War Weariness when attacking or defending".


<grins> and yeah, I do remember guerrillas in all their permutations. Not the plan to copy them here, but yeah.

 

[the Intricacy]

Explorers: Maybe a simple fix would be to have explorers be able to attack ONLY barbs. (Maybe this would increase the likelihood of the goody hut being hostile by 100%, lol).

Chiken Itza: Maybe the 25% bonus is NOT reducable by seige. (Or is this how it is already?)

I really like the idea of linking Protective with Espionage. That makes sense to me.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

^ Well with that Idea just remove the Commando, and go back to the move-2-ignore-terrain

Amphibious is Really not necessary, they are not really designed for attack, as is you just have a fine Pillager, and behind the lines Recon unit. (16 on any Defensive terrain seems to work well if they start with guerilla + woodsman I... getting to G+W II would be easy meaning +75% Hills, +100% Forest for 28 or 32 Str... +4 with fortify) I'd leave Sentry OR give them G+W II inherently [maybe take away G+WI] because that would allow them to do something Other than just Pillage.. they would have some use, just Sitting there... you see an enemy movement.. if nothing else to wipe out that unit.

That way they could still be True Recon units [an alternative to doing it with Spies]

 

[tomaalimosh]

I don't think any of these changes are justified.... maybe just those for the explorer, and Ind. Park and Laboratory.

But other than that... no
Traits are fine, and different traits make for different strategies.
And Walls and Castle.... are you kidding? If you play a marathon on a huge map, these are lifesavers.
They are sometimes too much (especially if you are the attacker )
so ... no aditional bonusses. thank you

Chichen Itza. Uber wonder if you couple it with all of the above (protective, walls and castle... and mabye great wall as well - I always play raging barbarians). you can go defensive, with Aggresive AI and barbs. this on higher difficulties is an option.

Now if you are not playing an easier game than you should, more often than not, you will not have technological lead. and there, the internet comes very handy. again, especially on huge maps, with many civs and marathon speed.

 

[DilithiumDad]

I don't think any of these changes are justified.... maybe just those for the explorer, and Ind. Park and Laboratory.

But other than that... no
Traits are fine, and different traits make for different strategies.
And Walls and Castle.... are you kidding? If you play a marathon on a huge map, these are lifesavers.
They are sometimes too much (especially if you are the attacker )
so ... no aditional bonusses. thank you

Chichen Itza. Uber wonder if you couple it with all of the above (protective, walls and castle... and mabye great wall as well - I always play raging barbarians). you can go defensive, with Aggresive AI and barbs. this on higher difficulties is an option.

Now if you are not playing an easier game than you should, more often than not, you will not have technological lead. and there, the internet comes very handy. again, especially on huge maps, with many civs and marathon speed.

Wow, a defender of walls and castles! I'll bet you even use forts! I respect your view, but you're really in the minority around here. Most people say they build no more than one or two walls, maybe one castle occasionally, and rarely bother with The Internet. I have never heard Chichen Itza called an uber wonder!

You say you mainly play Huge maps on Marathon with many AI's --I think that's a different game from what most people are playing. My computer can't handle anything beyond a standard size map.

 

[Cookie Crumbs]

Beef up the strength of Explorers and you'll have a strong stack/city defender too early in the game. Giving them 100% bonus against barbarians would be good.

Extend Castle lifetime to Corporation and the defensive bonus to Artillery and they should be fine.

I quite like the idea of boosting domestic trade routes and reducing colony maintenance though.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Beef up the strength of Explorers and you'll have a strong stack/city defender too early in the game. Giving them 100% bonus against barbarians would be good.

Extend Castle lifetime to Corporation and the defensive bonus to Artillery and they should be fine.

Castle Defense bonus never obsoletes (at least not with any tech You get)

It does obsolete when your ENEMY gets the Gunpowder Tech.

But I agree it would be simple enough to only extend their benefits to Corporation (that replaces the Trade Route bonus directly and you had to get access to Jails to replace the Espionage Bonus)

As for Walls... well the Great Wall should really require it one way or another. Some less direct bonus would be good too (like Castles representing the 'Local' Security) But you can deal without that.

As for Explorers, the idea would not be to beef Them up, but to have some type of upgrades to them.

(Thinking a good set of techs for a ' 2nd upgrade' Recon unit would be Radio, Plastics, Medicine... the survival+commmunications tools)

 

[DilithiumDad]

Castle Defense bonus never obsoletes (at least not with any tech You get)

It does obsolete when your ENEMY gets the Gunpowder Tech.

But I agree it would be simple enough to only extend their benefits to Corporation (that replaces the Trade Route bonus directly and you had to get access to Jails to replace the Espionage Bonus)

I agree. Either giving them earlier (with Feudalism) or extending the trade route beenfit until Corporation would make them worth building.

As for Walls... well the Great Wall should really require it one way or another.

I agree. The AI usually grabs it insanely early.

Some less direct bonus would be good too (like Castles representing the 'Local' Security) But you can deal without that.

Local security --like -1 unhappy or +1 happy? Like the Police effect in Alpha Centauri?

As for Explorers, the idea would not be to beef Them up, but to have some type of upgrades to them.

(Thinking a good set of techs for a ' 2nd upgrade' Recon unit would be Radio, Plastics, Medicine... the survival+commmunications tools)

I was trying to think of something simple Fireaxis might actually do in a later patch. Giving Explorers the Sentry ability (+1 sight range) and increasing their strength to 6 could be accomplished by changing a single line of code, I believe. Adding new recon units for a whole new upgrade path would be more complex and could introduce unforseen bugs.

 

[tomaalimosh]

Wow, a defender of walls and castles! I'll bet you even use forts! I respect your view, but you're really in the minority around here. Most people say they build no more than one or two walls, maybe one castle occasionally, and rarely bother with The Internet. I have never heard Chichen Itza called an uber wonder!

You say you mainly play Huge maps on Marathon with many AI's --I think that's a different game from what most people are playing. My computer can't handle anything beyond a standard size map.

I'm not saying I always play like that (defensive I mean), but when you do, those things are usefull.
You could try for instance an "All out Defend" map, with the locked war option checked, and maybe OCC, and see how much you last . It's fun.

But... I might say that I never played any speed faster than epic (to... arcade for me ), or on any map smaller than large...
I guess I should try that too sometime