Byzantium

[Gazebo]

If we add something it needs to be very simple. I’m thinking ‘can purchase valid great people with faith starting in the Classical Era. Give Theodora a different outlet for big faith production.

G

 

[ElliotS]

I'd rather nerf Spain than buff Byzantium.

I don't think being a better religious civ than Byz is unique to Spain.

I think Celts have it better. (earlier founding has benefits, their Unique pantheons are as good if not better than a single bonus belief, they come online earlier and snowball harder.)

I think Aztecs have it better (Equally great if not better Zealotry synergy, a dozen free GAs is probably better than a single belief, better UB.)

Honestly I'm not quite sure why I would want to pay Byz. They feel like a relatively ineffective mid-game warmonger. Great UU, great power peak with Zealotry, but worse than say... Rome, Denmark, Assyria, etc.

I'm not saying they can't get there, but I would rather play another civ with a better kit for warmongering. I don't feel like they have the flexibility they once did, because religions are weaker.

I think something that helps them in an area that's not warmongering would be a good idea.

If we add something it needs to be very simple. I’m thinking ‘can purchase valid great people with faith starting in the Classical Era. Give Theodora a different outlet for big faith production.

G

Almost Ninjaed me, but I was saved by great forum features. That was actually one of my ideas, but I didn't know if it was possible. Could they get a 15% discount on great prophets after the 2nd for more holy site synergy?

 

[Han_YOLO]

I think Byzantium is fine and one of the most fun civs to play due to the flexibility of its UA. I have started many Byzantium games with grand plans to dominate the world with my religion, which often go awry because I get India or Spain between me and the rest of the world, but are always memorable. Overall, I would lean against making any changes, but have included a couple suggestions below in case consensus shifts the other way.

If we were to give Byzantium a buff, I think we could buff the Cataphract. Over the last six months, the religious game has changed so that founding and spreading occur towards late Classical and early Medieval, when major wars are beginning to happen. The Cataphract now arrives at a crucial time when Byzantium is trying to simultaneously spread its own religion and limit the spread of others. I think that Cataphracts are performing fine, but if consensus is to make Byzantium stronger, we could give them the same movement as Knights or a free Defender of the Faith ability. If a change to Cataphracts made Byzantium too strong, we could tinker with the Basilica slightly, such as by lowering its faith output to +1 faith per 3/4 citizens.

 

[phantomaxl1207]

Another idea would be to let Cataphracts be Faith Purchasable so you don't need Zealotry

 

[Giza]

If we add something it needs to be very simple. I’m thinking ‘can purchase valid great people with faith starting in the Classical Era. Give Theodora a different outlet for big faith production.

G

This would be great !

 

[Gothic_Empire]

Cataphracts could automatically convert captured cities to Theodora's religion. Then she's a minispain!

 

[ElliotS]

Cataphracts could automatically convert captured cities to Theodora's religion. Then she's a minispain!

She still needs a faith outlet. Why not let her buy boats with faith?

 

[Gothic_Empire]

She still needs a faith outlet. Why not let her buy boats with faith?

I like it.

She needs a bit of love in the mid-game, though. No reason not to give the cataphracts the ability to settle cities.

 

[Chandler]

If we add something it needs to be very simple. I’m thinking ‘can purchase valid great people with faith starting in the Classical Era. Give Theodora a different outlet for big faith production.

G

While I think the idea is nice, I'm not sure about how useful it'd be. The thing is... In Ancient and Classical Era, you save all the faith for a Great Prophet to get your religion. During Classical and Medieval Era, you'll want to use your faith for as many missionaries as you can afford, and maybe for one more Great Prophet to enhance. The UB will become a real difference between late Medieval and Renaissance Era. And is by that time when you might start thinking about purchasing other GPs with your great faith output. So the difference wouldn't be that big.

Ok, you might want a GE for a key wonder of an early era. But that'd delay your missionaries, Great Prophets... And you'd only be able to get GEs that early if you went Tradition.

 

[ElliotS]

Ok, you might want a GE for a key wonder of an early era. But that'd delay your missionaries, Great Prophets... And you'd only be able to get GEs that early if you went Tradition.

Hear me out: Hear me out: Hear me out: You faith buy a great engineer and use him to build the Haglia Sophia, which gets you a great prophet!

 

[tu_79]

Another idea would be to let Cataphracts be Faith Purchasable so you don't need Zealotry

Somehow I don't like it too much, it forces Theodora into fighting.

She still needs a faith outlet. Why not let her buy boats with faith?

Sarcasm?

So far, purchasing GP is the best idea, but it looks like Mayas.

A +20% production for any faith related building and wonder will make them a bit like Egypt, but for another era. Cheaper shrines, temples, Cathedrals Hagia Sofias, Boroburs, and the like. How does it sound?

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

1. If possible, Byzantium having Zealotry/faith-buying land units until the renaissance era as part of its UA would be a good choice considering its historic role.

2. GP purchasing before Industrial also sounds intriguing at first glance, but that amounts to what, 2 GE/GW/GGs and 1/2 GA before the Industrial era comes? Not sure it moves the needle for Byzantium. Not to mention I rarely go for Tradition when playing Byzantium, I want to use Cataphracts and Basilicas in a big empire.

3. Buying naval units? Spain has it, but sure, it's good enough to get my vote for Byzantium.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

4. UA incorporates "Defender of the faith" reformation belief effects to reflect Byzantium's historical role.

 

[Chandler]

Hear me out: Hear me out: Hear me out: You faith buy a great engineer and use him to build the Haglia Sophia, which gets you a great prophet!

Yep. That's exactly what I was thinking when I said "key wonder"

 

[RAuer2]

Is the goal of a change to improve the AI's Byzantine performance or a human's Byzantine performance?

 

[ElliotS]

3. Buying naval units? Spain has it, but sure, it's good enough to get my vote for Byzantium.

In addition to the awesome idea to let Cataracts settle cities and this, I think Byz should get to faith-buy her UB. I mean it just gives faith anyways, so why not let her faith buy it?

Is the goal of a change to improve the AI's Byzantine performance or a human's Byzantine performance?

Yes.

If possible I would also like to improve the performance of Byzantine in the hands of trained monkeys, bored cats and warmongering mice.

In all seriousness I think a discount on faith-purchase costs is in order. Those don't apply to zealtry (already almost enough to make her okay) but would help spreader strats and give a slight general buff to her. It would also continue in her theme of doing the same things everyone else can with religion, but bigger and better.

I think 10% or 15% discount would be good. (Make it kick in when she founds a religion so she doesn't get faster founding.)

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Having thought about it more, I think Byzantium is in a good place both AI-wise and human-wise. If we change it/add something, I'd like it to be minor and preferably something fun and palpable (so on this second thought, I like Gazebo's proposal). But I'd be against changing it with adding something really strong/big.

To ElliotS' earlier point about how it compares to other religious civs -> Aztecs are stronger, but Aztecs are imho a top tier civ and I wouldn't want to buff more civs to become as strong as the Aztecs are, I'd rather have them nerfed. Plus they're more reliant on warmongering, whereas it's easier to be competitive in a peaceful-ish game as Byzantium. As for the Celts, the lack of religious pressure from your religion makes it harder to play a wide religious game, plus the main benefit (unique pantheon) gets spread as well, whereas as Byzantium you can select your own 2nd founder/enhancer.

I love playing with Byzantium as it stands now, and I think it might be even a bit too strong. Peaceful religious game is very strong in VP and Byzantium is a top civ when it comes to that, with few rivals. On top of that, it has a great UU.

 

[tu_79]

I love playing with Byzantium as it stands now, and I think it might be even a bit too strong. Peaceful religious game is very strong in VP and Byzantium is a top civ when it comes to that, with few rivals. On top of that, it has a great UU.

Isn't it a bit contradictory? Great UU for fighting, great UA for playing religion peaceful, great UB for playing religion tall.

Like Celts, Byzantium flexibility is her weakness. It doesn't really excells at anything, but you can use them in any map.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

I don't think it's contradictory. UU is great even for peaceful play, because it's a great deterrent in large numbers and in an actual (defensive) war it's great because you can use terrain for defensive purposes. UB is good for both tall and wide, and the UA is basically great for any kind of play.

That's why it's great for the human player. I don't know about the AI, but Gazebo said it's doing ok with AI, so...

 

[ElliotS]

but Gazebo said it's doing ok with AI, so...

Actually in another thread he confirmed our thoughts:

Civs - all frozen except for Byzantium (she's performing middle-of-the-pack, but never better than that and often worse).

I haven't seen a Byzantium in the top 1/2 in over a year. They're bad as the AI, and now that the gimmicks have been taken away they're pretty bad as player too.