Brazil

[AndreyK]

When Bandeirantes get Scouting I, II they see (uncover) more tiles, but those don't give any yields.

 

[iammaxhailme]

I like the idea of Brazil's UU, but it being exploration focued but not coming until the medieval era is really annoying. By then I've explored a lot. It almost makes me wnat to stick in a corner until I unlock them so I can use them to get lots of yields, which is not very fun. It'd be cool if it came earlier like the Berserker, or replaced the Scout instead.

 

[Melchizedek]

I like the idea of Brazil's UU, but it being exploration focued but not coming until the medieval era is really annoying. By then I've explored a lot. It almost makes me wnat to stick in a corner until I unlock them so I can use them to get lots of yields, which is not very fun. It'd be cool if it came earlier like the Berserker, or replaced the Scout instead.

This tradeoff that causes me to play differently is exactly what I love about Brazil, though. The Bandeirantes are so good when they arrive that I find it worthwhile to delay exploration -- but exactly how much to delay exploration is a decision made within each game depending on how the early revealed part of the map goes. I need to meet at least a few CS and get enough land settled for a monopoly, and to guard against invasion. The other interesting tradeoff with them is that if you build many Bandeirantes it takes up a good fraction of your military supply on units that are far flung and not available for defense.

I really like Brazil as is. One of the better designs.

 

[ridjack]

This has been discussed so much on the Discord that I'm surprised to see nobody has brought it up here.

Brazil is completely ridiculous right now. He is consistently in the top civs unless he starts near a warmonger who slows him down enough. If he's still relevant by the time late game comes around, he wins, period. He is frequently influential with everyone by the midgame, and spends the rest of the time padding out his lead until the victory conditions are enabled. If he's not near enough for you to attack by land early on, and an AI doesn't conquer him, you're essentially helpless to do anything but watch him win.

He is now disabled in my games until something changes. He's too consistently good, and I've gotten fed up with having to deal with him.

 

[Legen]

This has been discussed so much on the Discord that I'm surprised to see nobody has brought it up here.

This was discussed in the Strategy Section instead, for whatever reason. My answer was:

It doesn't hurt AI Brazil at all, since the civ's UA adds a +25% culture WLTKD on all cities whenever a GA happens. That means Pedro gets a 1.25 * 1.2 = 1.5, or a 50% culture modifier on all cities during those early golden ages, as Carnival and GA bonuses stack multiplicatively. Moreover, since it comes with a gold proc, you can expect AI Pedro to get workers and the Brazilwood Camps really fast to make use of that high culture modifier.

The issue isn't the civ itself, but the free GAP procs the AI gets. Brazil just happens to be the civ that gets the most value out of GAP of all civs, but these procs also shift the AI balance toward GA civs, like Persia, Korea and Egypt. And it certainly shifts the AI balance towards GA bonuses in general, such as Divine Inheritance, which has been a popular pick among AIs in my games. My opinion is that the free GAP should be replaced with something more neutral.

My opinion hasn't changed since then, AI Pedro is artificially boosted above other AIs by the GAP procs, and I don't think he's the only AI that benefits more than usual. He's only the most extreme beneficiary. To me, the real problem is the GAP proc as part of the AI bonuses.

 

[ridjack]

Currently in the middle of playing Brazil for the first time, and it's making me feel like the Bandeirantes should really share some of the blame. They are absolutely rocketing me from the bottom of the list to, so far, near the middle, including taking #1 in techs, and I still have a lot of world to explore. I'm surging ahead in techs and policies, and the insane amounts of gold are letting me invest in every building I build so my infrastructure is getting a similar treatment, even in my Tradition satellite cities.

 

[Stalker0]

I think the simple change is to nerf Brazil’s tourism bonus. It’s just too much with the newer tourism model, we taken the time to see that it is truly OP, time for a simple numerical nerf

 

[azum4roll]

I consider Brazil to be way stronger than Arabia for a CV due to the ability to convert GAP into tourism. The thing about this mechanic is that the GAP pool isn't fully depleted when a golden age starts, it only loses the amount needed, with the rest carrying over for the next GA. Once you get permanent golden ages, you can store large amounts of GAP that keep carrying over to the next, making them count twice, thrice and so on as the exceeding GAP carries over. With proper use of great artists, you can gain massive gold and tourism bombs every 20 or so turns.

Due to the above mechanic, I also find Brazil to benefit way more from Tradition for the GAP upon great person birth and the synergy with Artistry, than from Progress and Authority. These two can't maintain permanent golden ages nearly as well, and end not carrying over that much GAP when they get a GA chain. There were old patches in which Progress could compete with Tradition, but nowadays, I find Tradition way stronger for this civ.

The AI is benefiting from this with their large amounts of bonus GAP lategame (permanent golden age). Humans are benefiting from this with their better usage of Great Artists (only use them for GAP one turn before golden age to maximize gains).

What if we change the UA to convert X% of the current golden age cost (instead of golden age points) to gold and tourism? That should remove exploits and also be a considerable nerf.