"Boudica of the Romans" an exploit or not

[BYC]

I don't think it's cheating, but I certainly don't think using unstricted leaders should is a good thing overall.

It's not necessarily about Fixaris knowing the balance of the game, cause they certainly have trouble with it, especially since Civ isn't really a competitive game like RTS' and FPS'. I think it's pretty pointless to use unstricted leaders for anything other than fun, some learning tests, and some experimentation. To me, if using unstricted leaders is a normal thing, then it opens up far too many possibilities for other allowances.

 

[Elandal]

I don't play multiplayer. I don't know how it works really. If unrestricted leaders isn't allowed, then Boudica of Rome isn't allowed either. So it's either in or out, but it's not cheat nor exploit.

In SP it's simply an advanced game option (Custom Game is nonstandard in some ways). You can play simple "Play Now" settings, which provides loads of choices already - the game is likely balanced best for normal speed / standard size / continents -settings. Custom Game allows you to get further from the main line. Sure, Boudica of Rome isn't mainline play. But it's not cheat nor exploit, it's just a variant.

I consider pangae and maps smaller than large to be on the same scale as praetorian: if you want early conquest / domination victory, it's easier the less water you have to cross and the smaller the map. Thus, Conquest victory as Boudica of Rome playing on Huge Continents map rates higher on my scale than Conquest as Charlemagne of America on Duel Pangaea. The latter is certainly easier.

 

[eewallace]

I don't generally use unrestricted leaders, but after reading this thread, I decided I had to give a try to Boudica of the Romans and I've got to say, yep, she's overpowered. I cranked her up twice and played the first 100-200 moves and it was quite clear she could clean up. (Had iron both times--it would be a different story if she didn't.)

 

[Nay]

Unrestricted leaders always has that smell of imbalance for me...

But i wouldnt go so far as to call "X of Y" an exploit.
Depending on the starting situation and general setup, it might get you nowhere to have uber-pretorians, like when crossing the sea and getting sunk by my ships.

Its rather a case of min/maxing than exploiting.
LIke any philosophical leader of the romans will produce the highest possible amount of GP bonus in the game.

Which will not help him against uber-prets if they are next to him.
Who will be powerless against (protective?) crossbowmen because boudica of the romans wont be the tech leader due to her traits.

Cheap? - maybe.
Exploit? - no.

In fact, i think ill go for Pericles of the Egyptians for once, Philosophical Stonehenge-Monolith-Priest-Economy 4tw!

 

[jimbob27]

I think it could just about count as an exploit. I mean, you're exploiting the custom game options to stack the deck in your favour... something the AI certainly can't do.

I don't use the unrestricted leaders option, but if other people want to.... I couldn't care less!

 

[Nay]

Actually, i think now that Alexander of the romans is way worse than boudica.
His PHI complements the +25% GPR from the roman forums for the logical extreme in GP bonus, while Aggressive is enough for prets.
Charismatic just doesnt pay off:

barracks: 3Xp, 1 Promo - charismatic doesnt change that
+ vassalage: 5XP, 2 promos - no change either
+ theocracy: 7 XP, still 2 promos - still no change with Cha
+ GG: 9 XP, 2/3 promos - now it confers 1 extra upgrade

needing 1 building, 2 civs and one GG for Charismatic to make a difference is plain bad imo.

Boudica of the Mongols though, well......
A Ger that itself alone (4XP) grants 2 upgrades to Keshikes, thats a combo worth taking.
Plus Barracks and vassalage (pretty standard in most of my games) thats 9 XP or 3 Promos to a UU, and for once makes excellent use of the UB as well (Ger without Cha isnt much better than a normal stable for about the same reasons Cha doesnt pay for Melee)


Is Boudica the better Khan?
Certainly!
Is Alexander the new Boudica (of rome)?
I say Yes.

What say you?

 

[Collier20]

There are several unbalanced unrestricted leadership combos. My favorite right now is Darius of the Holy Roman Empire. Money is just never an issue. The HRE unique building reduces your maintaince cost by 75%, plus they are cheap to build with the Org trait (in addition to the 1/2 civics costs). Then you have financial that just adds so much to your coffers.

But I do not like playing unrestricted leaders. I always end up attacking the wrong player because I cannot remember its Frederick of the Chinese and Mao of the Germans.

 

[Enigma256]

Charismatic just doesnt pay off:

barracks: 3Xp, 1 Promo - charismatic doesnt change that
+ vassalage: 5XP, 2 promos - no change either
+ theocracy: 7 XP, still 2 promos - still no change with Cha
+ GG: 9 XP, 2/3 promos - now it confers 1 extra upgrade

needing 1 building, 2 civs and one GG for Charismatic to make a difference is plain bad imo.

you forget that you also fight with those units, and they get XP from that as well

 

[IglooDame]

If you're playing in an MP game that allows unrestricted leaders, presumably the game also allows multiple selections of the same leader. So I can hardly claim that Boudica of the Romans is an exploit or a cheat when I can choose the combination as well - or as others have said, pick a leader/civ that directly counteracts it (Tokugawa of the Native Americans comes to mind).

In SP, it is just another way to set the game up to hammer the AI. I'm a Prince level player that has won on Deity - Quecha rushing the AI on a Marathon duel map. Behold, the power of cheese!! But cheese is all it is, not an exploit, and not cheating.

 

[Thyrwyn]

With regards to multi-player: see what IglooDude just said.

With regards to single-player: who cares?

 

[TheLastOne36]

An exploit to me is Tokugawa/Churchill of Native America.

That combo is possibly even better then Boudica/romans.

 

[Nelgirith]

An exploit to me is Tokugawa/Churchill of Native America.

That combo is possibly even better then Boudica/romans.

Why would it be an exploit ? People are so stubborn

 

[Nay]

you forget that you also fight with those units, and they get XP from that as well

Important is the first fight, which decides if the unit lives or dies.
And in that, CHA does not confer any reasonable boni.

 

[hoopsnerd]

Why would it be an exploit ? People are so stubborn

Yeah I agree. "Exploit" should be used to describe somebody taking advantage of an actual bug, not using intended features as they were intended. Sure, you could call it "cheap," but it's definately not an exploit. I just equate it to playing something like Madden. Is it an "exploit" to play the Patriots because they have a better team than the Jets? No. An "exploit" would be running the same play over and over again cause you know it always works. The whole "exploit" thing is simply ridiculous, since if you're doing what the game intended then you aren't, by commonly accepted video game definition, "exploiting" anything. "Stacking the deck" is equivelant going into WB and making sure you have Iron and goody huts all around. "Playing Boudica of Rome" would be like choosing a card-playing partner who compliments and agrees with your own strategy if you want to equate it to card-playing.

Let me ask you this: What if I play Boudica of Rome - Always Peace? Whoa, all of a sudden it got WAY underpowered. Everything is situational.

 

[Divi Filus]

It favors a very particular strategy... like playing Gengis ignoring all other tech beside Horseback riding... not really going for cultural victory...

 

[Enigma256]

Important is the first fight, which decides if the unit lives or dies.
And in that, CHA does not confer any reasonable boni.

true, but once it lived a few fights (be it by mere luck or courtesy to the suicide siege weapons) it will become stronger and stronger.

plus the +1 or +2 happy is a nice bonus

 

[Nay]

true, but once it lived a few fights (be it by mere luck or courtesy to the suicide siege weapons) it will become stronger and stronger.

plus the +1 or +2 happy is a nice bonus

Until it faces 99.9% and dies.
Still, i think id go with Boudi Kahn, 1 building for 2 upgrades is just too nice not to try.

 

[mrt144]

classic civ 1 exploit, which i would say is the definition of exploit;

save game bombers. if you saved the game adn then reloaded the bombers would have a full set of turns. i used that all the time when I was 9.

 

[Scaramanga]

classic civ 1 exploit, which i would say is the definition of exploit;

save game bombers. if you saved the game adn then reloaded the bombers would have a full set of turns. i used that all the time when I was 9.

This makes sense. If you're not exploiting a bug in the program to out-perform everyone else, then you're not cheating. Unrestricted leaders is not a bug, it's a feature (although sometimes the line can be blurred ).

 

[Underdawg]

To sum up the whole thread:

Overpowered. Just like the praetorian.
Cheesy. Whether or not fun depends on the player.
Not a cheat.
Not a bug so not an exploit.

Enough said.

I don't even play Romans unless on a GOTM - praets are sickening.