Civilization Balance

[Nimbus]

1 being "totally weak and useless," 10 being "game-breakingly powerful. 5 is the middle, means no IMBA and no weenie. Usually 5's are dull and boring. I always play Huge maps, Normal speed, Prince difficulty(starting to try Monarch)
All views as player only.



Amurites - 6, new magic system hurts them
Balseraphs - Kaelyn 4, Perp 6, (summoning trait hurts Kaelyn)
Bannor - 5, Boring
Calabim - 7, get them to mid game and game over
Clan of Embers - 7 new changes make them a force to be reckoned with if managed properly
Doviello - 3 even making Lucian an early hero for them didn't help in a game i tried, need to be revisited.
Elohim - 5 but I never play with the altar victory on
Grigori - 6 pretty well balanced, kinda fun
Hippus - 7 both humans and AI seem to do well, leave them alone
Illians - 2 needs work obviously
Infernal - 1, no reason to change other than from a challenge standpoint
Khazad - 8, production usually is obscene, military juggernauts
Kuriotates - 2, only 5 cities on a huge map, kiss of death
Lanun - 9(lots of water) 4 (little water or bad start) on the right maps they are a power to be seen.
Ljosalfar - 9, 7 if you can't found FoL
Luchuirp - 10, fireball wielding golems, yes please.
Malakim - 5
Mercurians - 7 (If lots of wars) 5 (if very peaceful)
Sheaim - 8, slow going, but can be powerful in the hands of AI even
Sidar - 7,
Svartalfar - 7 hidden nationality holds them back somewhat

 

[Ecofarm]

Think they're out of order? Your strongest is too far down the list, or one of the top ones sucks? Post your ratings and see if you can make them move! Don't artificially inflate, though... be honest.

You need to go back and re-calculate! because upon reflection and some additional play I am changing some of mine and others should as well at least until we reach a decent 'n'.

2 factors are significant: Game speed, Map size

 

[jwin]

Amurites 7 strong magic, good defense, unlimite skels
Balseraphs 8 loki to paralyze early, some good uniques later
Bannor 5 Other than free units, nothing special
Calabim 10 powerful with vamps or losha, unstoppable with lords
Clan of Embers 6 one minded, but good at it
Doviello 4 lost their only special when everyone gets free weapon upgrades
Elohim 5 fine for a builder
Grigori 8 adv good for either rush or late with magic or tier 4s
Hippus 8 another good civ early and late
Illians 5 (I dn't know, never played them but don't want my survey discarded)
Infernal 4 Even with getting an unlimited supercity, hard to compete
Khazad 9 SUPER powered military - tier4 1-2 turns makes up for no magic
Kuriotates 5 well balanced
Lanun 5 On water worlds very good, otherwise a little underpowered
Ljosalfar 7 Good synergy for a builder or magic
Luchuirp 8 Powerful, but tech tree is too diversified for high difficulties
Malakim 6
Mercurians 3 Usually end up trapped by your summoner and squezed
Sheaim 10 Once you get rolling, hard to stop. Eater is invincible-take a city, summon 15 chaos beasts that will be around forever.
Sidar 7 Unless you use some exploitatable tactics, probably won't have that many shades
Svartalfar 7 Good hero and some synergies

 

[WCH]

You need to go back and re-calculate! because upon reflection and some additional play I am changing some of mine and others should as well at least until we reach a decent 'n'.

2 factors are significant: Game speed, Map size

Hundreds of factors are significant. What I'm attempting to do is establish intersubjectivity by letting everyone speak based on their prefered playstyle. So, when someone gives different scores for different leaders... I just take the higher of the two scores; when they give two different scores based on something else (common with Lanun, one for close to water, one for not), I average them.

And if someone lets me know they changed their score, I can easily go back and fix it, because I've got them in an Excel file listed by username, making it easy to doublecheck.

 

[frenzyslave]

Amurites 7
Balseraphs 8
Bannor 5
Calabim 9
Clan of Embers 6
Doviello 4
Elohim 7
Grigori 5
Hippus 7
Illians -
Infernal 6
Khazad 9
Kuriotates 3
Lanun 5
Ljosalfar 8
Luchuirp 6
Malakim 6
Mercurians -
Sheaim 9
Sidar 7
Svartalfar 6

 

[Slvynn]

Lanun is top 3 civ, going after Svalt and calabim. If anyone doubt that - i invite you into PVP MP game on hamachi. The only case they suck if no coastal line at start. They have top 2 economy in game, very powerfull world spell, very usefull leader traits (both), best SE in game (yeah they better SE than Sidar).

Clan of Embers is broken, as well as Charadon. They cant compete with some civs at any case - no resereach, double tier 1-2 units? They should be fixed imo, and Svalt nerfed.

The last post (i not quoting) is not correct. We talking about not personal preferences but real balance, and last chart is completely wrong.
We playing alot of MP games, at crazy, overkill settings, Deity level for quite long time.... as far: fix barbarians, nerf Svalt

comment about Bannor - 5 is too low, bannor can compete with most civs, because they beline to 1 direction, get tons, i mean really tons of base 5 str units (7 with iron), and fastest to get CR3 paladins (ouch) and sphener. With Sabathiel priors are easy to get as well.
Once bannor get righteousness - game is over.

elohim have hero caster, which is not bad actually, and worldspell and monks can save ass pretty well. Also great retreat rates for some units.

Ljos loses points due lack of usefull hero (city defender hero lol) , lack of cats, and other good elvish issues.

so far : top 5, based on mp PvP and PvE games
1. Svart
2. Calabim
3. Bals / Lanun
4. Amurites / Sheaim / Luch / Ljos
5. Bannor / hippus

 

[mahazel]

Amurites - before new spell system 8, now 6
Balseraphs - ?
Bannor - ?
Calabim - 9 - especially for Governon`s Manor and Losha.
Clan of Embers - 10 - my favorite civilization from basic FFH, in 031 version without razing the conquered city and with End of Winter option they are really great. In my opinion they should be agnostic too, but schould get a special unit, the Priest of Bhall, something like mazatl Priest of Ommor or cualli Priest of Agrrount (or something), because noone of existing religions are fitting to them.
Doviello - 2 - nothing special
Elohim - 3 - I just don`t like them.
Grigori - before new spell system and with Luonotars ability to build Altar - 7, now 5
Hippus - 8 - lot of fun, but really shematic game
Illians - ?
Infernal - ? Even if I summoned them, I just killed them all.
Khazad - 4 - nothing interesting
Kuriotates - 4 - In the beggining they were fun, but now they are just boring.
Lanun - 6 -maps with lot of water tiles, in land-map 4
Ljosalfar - ? -never played them, just because I hate elves
Luchuirp - ?
Malakim - 6, but I haven`t played as them since 023.
Mercurians - ?
Sheaim - 10, I love Eaters of Dreams (with chaos 3) and Abashi.
Sidar - 4 - they are just boring
Svartalfar - ?

From Fall Further modmod:
Cualli - 7 - they have my favorite hero.
Mazatl - 10! - the best civilization ever, with swamp system they are indestructible. Vehem, I`m waiting for new city models in next version
Archos - 7 - they are cool, especilly with FoL.
Chislev - ? - I haven`t played as them, but they are really strong as opponents.
Dural - ?

 

[WCH]

The last post (i not quoting) is not correct. We talking about not personal preferences but real balance, and last chart is completely wrong.
We playing alot of MP games, at crazy, overkill settings, Deity level for quite long time.... as far: fix barbarians, nerf Svalt

There's no such thing as wrong here. We're talking about experience, which is necessarily subjective; each person experiences things a certain way which is different from all others. If you think it's possible to speak objectively on this matter, you need to educate yourself a little.

The order I have for them is based on the average of two numbers, both of which are based on the scores other people gave. The first is the order of the means, the second is the order of the orders that everyone has them in. Those two are similar but different, and I've combined them into the end list. Because it's set up in Excel, it's dynamic, and I can change it pretty easily.

Being numerically based, of course it's "wrong," in the sense of not conforming to any particular person's subjective experience. What it is instead is a predictor of subjectivity: the more people assign a certain ranking to a given civilization, the more likely it is that any other random person will also assign a similar ranking. That is, if most people find Luchiurp to be the strongest civilization, a new player to the game will be most likely to find Luchiurp the strongest. May disagree entirely; it's simply a predictor.

You also speak as if your particularly extreme settings make your subjective experience somehow more certain, when in actuality they make them less valuable: what they mean is that that's the apparent ranking, as it subjectively appears to you and you alone, and only in those conditions. Since most people do not play in those conditions, that's completely worthless.

 

[Alzara]

I agree that it must be quite frustrating to have people tell you that you are wrong in a matter-of-factly way.

If I recall Slvynn was essentially telling me (on Hamachi) the clear cut reasons why playing slow speeds is wrong. Apparently my opinion doesn't seem to matter too much, I am wrong for playing epic speed

Al

 

[Ecofarm]

I agree that it must be quite frustrating to have people tell you that you are wrong in a matter-of-factly way.

If I recall Slvynn was essentially telling me (on Hamachi) the clear cut reasons why playing slow speeds is wrong. Apparently my opinion doesn't seem to matter too much, I am wrong for playing epic speed

Al

I could beat deity on slow speed with 1/2 a civ. Play quick speed.

---

And yes, you can judge these things objectively. Play every civ on every map a few times in SP and MP.

 

[WCH]

It's not frustrating to me, more like amusing. As in "wow, this guy still hasn't realised the distinction between reality as it is and reality as it appears." Maybe that's amusing more for me because I normally hang out with smart people, so people who don't *get* a basic concept are the funny, unenlightened exceptions. I imagine it'd get rather dull if you were surrounded by them, as some certainly are.

Re: speed, I prefer slow, because I think tech progresses too fast otherwise. I like each tier of units to see some action before getting upgraded, which doesn't happen on Quick... by the time you can even get them to your enemy they're already way obsolete.

 

[Alzara]

I could beat deity on slow speed with 1/2 a civ. Play quick speed.

I think you miss the point. I'm not interested if the game is slightly easier. Doesn't matter too much if you play with friends either. I don't want to play a super-fast game for my own reasons and the reasons WCH states.

Being TOLD how to play the game isn't something I'm going to warm to any time soon. It is a very strange method of thought by which you can TELL a player what speed is right for them.

I'll stick to my epic speeds thank you very much

Al

 

[Ecofarm]

It's not frustrating to me, more like amusing. As in "wow, this guy still hasn't realised the distinction between reality as it is and reality as it appears." Maybe that's amusing more for me because I normally hang out with smart people, so people who don't *get* a basic concept are the funny, unenlightened exceptions. I imagine it'd get rather dull if you were surrounded by them, as some certainly are.

Psychiatrist administered IQ = 134 and 8 years of university advancement. What? Shall we have a big dick contest? You need to quit the ad homs. An entire paragraph of them as a lead in to your apology for slow speed is pathetic.

Re: speed, I prefer slow, because I think tech progresses too fast otherwise. I like each tier of units to see some action before getting upgraded, which doesn't happen on Quick... by the time you can even get them to your enemy they're already way obsolete.

You need a waaambulance? Can't beat the AI unless you roll him as he sits defenseless? Ever tried to be the defender in slow speed? With 20 turns to build a ranger and an army closing in? And don't even get me started on people over-valuing Clan and Hippus. If you want to horse rush ftw, just go play Persia or Carthage. Those civs suck compared to civs that get units who make ffh the great mod that it is. Spells, command, marksman... you know... the stuff those ancient era focused civs get nothing special of.

---

I think you miss the point. <snip> I'll stick to my epic speeds thank you very much

I think you miss the point. You will not stick with it, unless you fail to ever play a significant amount with other people. If you so stick with it

Stop beating up on an already gimpy AI by tieing both hands behind its back via slow speed.

Spoiler :

You'll see!

 

[PotatoOverdose]

i invite you into PVP MP game on hamachi. The only case they suck if no coastal line at start. They have top 2 economy in game, very powerfull world spell, very usefull leader traits (both), best SE in game (yeah they better SE than Sidar).

so far : top 5, based on mp PvP and PvE games

With regards to the bolded statements, read the original post that started this thread, this is comparing single player. If you want to start a new thread regarding mp, go ahead, but this thread deals specifically with sp.

Clan of Embers is broken, as well as Charadon. They cant compete with some civs at any case - no resereach, double tier 1-2 units? They should be fixed imo, and Svalt nerfed.

Just because *you* can't play them properly doesn't mean they're broken. In fact, they are putatively regarded as one of the more powerful civs in the game by most players.

Once bannor get righteousness - game is over.

Um....there are many, many better things then righteousness. Hell, Clan+Warrens+Ogres is probably better...

The last post (i not quoting) is not correct. We talking about not personal preferences but real balance, and last chart is completely wrong.
We playing alot of MP games, at crazy, overkill settings, Deity level for quite long time.... as far: fix barbarians, nerf Svalt


so far : top 5, based on mp PvP and PvE games
1. Svart
2. Calabim
3. Bals / Lanun
4. Amurites / Sheaim / Luch / Ljos
5. Bannor / hippus

Aside from hijacking the thread to encompass MP, you also indicate that the post summarizing the cumulative average opinion is wrong because it disagrees with your opinion. There are several things wrong with this. First of all, the post you are referring to which you claimed is 'wrong' is actually not professing any point of view but stating the average of the opinions stated. It is inherently impossible for a cumulative numerical poll to be 'wrong' because it is simply measuring what individuals submit for data.

Secondly, that you would have the arrogance to suggest that everyone else in this thread is wrong and only you are right is just hilarious. Especially when you consider the fact that your entire argument is based on MP experience which has nothing to do with this thread if you had actually bothered to read the very first post.

Now, going back to the topic at hand, I would ask you this: Why on erebus have you ranked Calabim as number 2? Sure vampires are nice and all, but there are better things that come a lot earlier. This would be especially true in the MP context you cited where the early game is the most important stage of the game.

I think you miss the point. You will not stick with it, unless you fail to ever play a significant amount with other people. If you so stick with it

Again, read the first post, this thread deals with SP and not MP.

Spells, command, marksman... you know... the stuff those ancient era focused civs get nothing special of.

Except that if they are played right, they will gain a huge advantage later on. There was a whole discussion about this on the vanilla civ threads. Essentially, the early game is the most critical phase in the game because a good early game makes it easier to have a good mid and late game. A lackadaisical or poor early game almost necessarily leads to a more mediocre or poor mid and late game. So, strong early civs have the advantage of having a better early game in which to establish themselves and give those late game civs a hard time. So, "ancient era focused civs" may have an advantage in terms of all that great 'stuff'.

See, the problem with saying "I'm right and you're wrong" is that:
A) This thread measures opinion, not fact
B) saying the above statement is the sign of a ridiculously huge ego or the sign of someone that is not very good at debating
C) When you realize that your statements regarding MP have absolutely nothing to do with a discussion related to SP Balance, you realize you came off as a bit of an...well I won't use strong language.

 

[Ecofarm]

Just because *you* can't play them properly doesn't mean they're broken. In fact, they are putatively regarded as one of the more powerful civs in the game by most players.

I laugh. Ha.

Spoiler :

Ha.

People who like them are warrior/axe and chariot/horsearcher rushing, just like in bts. Pathetic. Play ffh.

Um....there are many, many better things then righteousness. Hell, Clan+Warrens+Ogres is probably better...

Like you will EVER get to ogres. And no.

Now, going back to the topic at hand, I would ask you this: Wy on erebus have you ranked Calabim as number 2? Sure vampires are nice and all, but there are better things that come a lot earlier. This would be especially true in the MP context you cited where the early game is the most important stage of the game.

Good question.

Again, read the first post, this thread deals with SP and not MP.

Look, game speed and map size are tremendous factors in how powerful a civ is. You ignored this once, and it will bite you again.

 

[Alzara]

Hehe found some common ground with you PotatoOverdose after that tiresome HN discussion

PotatoOverdose is right Slvynn; you should respect other people's opinions especially on a topic that is very subject to opinion.

Al

 

[WCH]

Psychiatrist administered IQ = 134 and 8 years of university advancement. What? Shall we have a big dick contest? You need to quit the ad homs. An entire paragraph of them as a lead in to your apology for slow speed is pathetic.

You need a waaambulance? Can't beat the AI unless you roll him as he sits defenseless? Ever tried to be the defender in slow speed? With 20 turns to build a ranger and an army closing in? And don't even get me started on people over-valuing Clan and Hippus. If you want to horse rush ftw, just go play Persia or Carthage. Those civs suck compared to civs that get units who make ffh the great mod that it is. Spells, command, marksman... you know... the stuff those ancient era focused civs get nothing special of.

---


I think you miss the point. You will not stick with it, unless you fail to ever play a significant amount with other people. If you so stick with it

Stop beating up on an already gimpy AI by tieing both hands behind its back via slow speed.

Spoiler :

You'll see!

Whoa! Whoa! Hold on a minute. For one thing, I wasn't talking to you, I was talking about Sylnn. For another thing, it wasn't a "lead in," it was an unrelated point. For another, your aggression is entirely unnecessary. Chill out, we can learn from one another without resorting to insults.

For instance, I see what you mean about build times: it's hard to crack off a good defensive line if you don't already have one. It's the tech I mainly want to slow down, not build times... maybe there should be a way to manipulate them independently of each other? Would require significant modding, I imagine, but it'd be really cool to have two sliders: one changes tech speed, one changes build speed.

 

[Alzara]

Psychiatrist administered IQ = 134 and 8 years of university advancement.

Do you really need to bring up IQ and education. It's not very appropriate when discussing a game. Most of us in the world of work don't have a huge amount of time to dedicate to games. Time at University and IQ has nothing to do with this discussion. If it did then we'd all be submitting our degree results, post-graduate degrees and PhD certificates along with transcripts just to prove our worth in FfH terms.

Al

 

[Ecofarm]

Whoa! Whoa! Hold on a minute. For one thing, I wasn't talking to you, I was talking about Sylnn. For another thing, it wasn't a "lead in," it was an unrelated point. For another, your aggression is entirely unnecessary. Chill out, we can learn from one another without resorting to insults.

Well that's good, because I was not sure where you were going with this:

It's not frustrating to me, more like amusing. As in "wow, this guy still hasn't realised the distinction between reality as it is and reality as it appears." Maybe that's amusing more for me because I normally hang out with smart people, so people who don't *get* a basic concept are the funny, unenlightened exceptions. I imagine it'd get rather dull if you were surrounded by them, as some certainly are.

Do you really need to bring up IQ and education. It's not very appropriate when discussing a game. Al

See red text above. I'm one of the people he was refering to (those hanging out with sylvnn, in bold text). So who brought what up? Huh What? Didn't expect one of the people insulted to step into his face? Haha. We might need two waaaaambulances. I'm not going to ignore paragraph-long ad homs lobbed in my direction. People should not make them.

---

For instance, I see what you mean about build times: it's hard to crack off a good defensive line if you don't already have one.

Movement is not scaled. Advantage to aggressor is game breaking. Period.

 

[Slvynn]

Well too much to quote and to post , but sorry i have not time for it.

Sorry for may be misunderstanding thread SP focus, and posted MP content.
But
I not telling to people what to do, and how to play - i stating oppinion (confirmed and agreed upon) of several people who play alot of MP PVP and PVE hardcore settings games at very hard difficulty (Deity, options that benefit AI, if in game). For me as for alot of people power of civ is how it can perform at hardest situation. Most durable one.
So i stated just fact (not opinion, and not subjective experience), but a FACT, which is agreed by several people. My thread only means my feedback for balance in "Civilastion Balance" thread (check name of thread).
What saying WCH and Alzara is just opposing one subjective to another, while i posting fact from my, and not only my, long-term experience.
I talked to LAzara, and we talked about which settings our group playing on hamachi, and i stated that we will play only those settings. I not dictated him how to play, i just said i will play only "our settings" .
WCH: Take about your own education. You acting agressive and arogant. Thats what you thinking about when i making feedback of what i read and what i play.

About Clan: they even have not chance to tech to Ogres. They wil be outeched and dead b4. Again, its my experience, + more people, and some man, that have very hight skill at FfH2., tested 10+ MP games with them , as well as SP, and they suck compared to others (in MP, eve PVE, that mean in SP too).

About my arrogance - i cant see it. The one i see is PotatoOverdose's.
As i said chart i posted refers to chart, agreed upon several people, who play hard settings games, alot and alot of them MP. Those facts are checked , experienced, rechecked, reexpirienced, and agreed. Thats was a feedback for how Civs compared in PvE and PVP MP. In thread called "Civilisation Balance"