Civilization Balance

[Marnok]

Perceived Bad Civs:
I think because playstyle is such a big factor, what really is needed is for people who have had a problem with a civ to state what that problem is, and supporters of the civ can explain how to play differently to compensate. If there is no way realistically to compensate for a weakness, then it could be agreed that the civ has a weakness.

Perceived Strong Civs:
Fast power and killer combos can't really be argued with. Although there are ways to counter these strategies, if they can be achieved consistantly, it could be agreed that the civ capable of those options is stronger in balance.

So a marks out of 10 rating might not acheive any answers, just a lot of to-and-fro-ing.

 

[[NWO]_Valis]

5 is the middle, means no IMBA and no weenie. Usually 5's are dull and boring

Just those witch I really know:

Amurites - 6, havent tested with the new magic system
Balseraphs - Kaelyn 4, Perp 5, +2 for Loki
Bannor - 5, well balanced
Calabim - 6, powerful at the end but really who is not with a strong economy?
Clan of Embers - 5 in 0.25, did not play them since then
Doviello - ?
Elohim - ? [supose 5 but I never play with the altar victory on]
Grigori - 6 or even 7, AI is always strong with Cassiel
Hippus - ? [this will be my next game]
Illians - ?
Infernal - 7 or 8 in hands of a human, 3 in hands of an AI
Khazad - 5, well balanced
Kuriotates - hard to tell, 4 or 6, nothing overpowered about them beside the rush but sometimes lack production
Lanun - 5, ok
Ljosalfar - 6, 7 if you can get FoL [had to run RoK in my last game! ]
Luchuirp - ?
Malakim - 3 but havent played since 0.30a
Mercurians - ?
Sheaim - 8, powerful in the hands of AI even
Sidar - 7, I have a weakness for them, beated Bals in a culture war with then
Svartalfar - 7

 

[Zechnophobe]

Another variable you need to throw into this would be role playing. I play Perpentach/Balseraph about 90% of the time. I am constantly changing build orders and tech research to coincide with my leaders insanity. This makes the game a lot harder and pushes an otherwise strong civ to one that needs a lot of help.

Take the Lanun for example. I never build a city that does not border an ocean tile with them, even if it severely handicaps my city position choices. I do this because it is "in character."

How about the Elohim? You can get swarmed by settler spam pretty quick, but I will never declare war while playing as the Elohim, I insist on waiting for someone to declare war on me.

Role Playing has nothing to do with battle. It is sorta like saying "The Luichirp are poorly balanced, because Everytime I build a brewery, I chug a beer, and it makes me too drunk to play."

While I think that a lot of a civ's strongest potential should be in line with it's flavor, it doesn't change the 'balance' of the civ at all.

 

[thewyrm]

Battle is just one aspect of a civ. There are a lot of different things you have to take into account other than simply "battle" when determining what civs are and are not balanced.

I already gave one example. Changing Perpentach or Keelyn to nuetral so you can upgrade your Harlequins into Druids is a very powerful strategy. The sheer power of that strategy affects their balance. However, I will never be able to use this strategy because I consider it out of character for either leader to not be evil. Thus I have accepted a handicap that affects the overall balance of my civ. I am ok with this, because playing in character makes the game more fun despite the additional challenge.

After all, the purpose of the game is to have fun. Winning is not neccessarily a requisite for fun.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

This topic is about balance though, which has to do with how good civs are at winning. Your talk about roleplaying handicaps would have their place in certain discussions, but not this one.

 

[Slvynn]

Battle is just one aspect of a civ. There are a lot of different things you have to take into account other than simply "battle" when determining what civs are and are not balanced.

I already gave one example. Changing Perpentach or Keelyn to nuetral so you can upgrade your Harlequins into Druids is a very powerful strategy. The sheer power of that strategy affects their balance. However, I will never be able to use this strategy because I consider it out of character for either leader to not be evil. Thus I have accepted a handicap that affects the overall balance of my civ. I am ok with this, because playing in character makes the game more fun despite the additional challenge.

After all, the purpose of the game is to have fun. Winning is not neccessarily a requisite for fun.

For different people different things playable through roleplaying , i mean there are alot of people who can roleplay neutral fol balseraphs. Its just matter of each others personality and imagination.

 

[PotatoOverdose]

I would have to agree with Monkefinger; roleplaying is all well and good, but you can justify nearly anything in any game, especially this one, with 'roleplaying'. Since this thread is about balance, which is distinct from roleplaying, roleplaying shouldn't be a consideration.

There have been certain consistencies in the rankings. I'm curious what people think about Svartalfar vs. Ljosalfar. For my part I think Svartalfar are better in every way; they have a more useful ub (the recon line as a whole is far superior to the archery line as a whole), a better hero, and better traits. Arcane/Raider vs. Raider/Defender(worthless for elves since they have good defensive capabilities anyway) and Arcane/Expansive (worthless because forests eliminate health as an issue altogether). I suppose one could make a case for cre/spi but imo Arc/Rai is better. However, I've noticed that a number of individuals have ranked the Ljos higher then the Svart. Is there something I'm missing about the Ljos as compared to the svart?

 

[Raguel]

I'm surprised that Malakim, not just in this thread mind you, is considered to be so weak. I have to admit I haven't played a lot of the civs (mostly Capria/Bannor/Order, Sidar/Emp, and Malakim/Emp). I have to admit though that switching to Phaedra/FoL felt like switching to easy mode . I haven't played Bannor in awhile; I thought after what amounts to a major nerf to priors they'd be too weak but that doesn't seem to be the case. I guess I'll have to play a game and see.

 

[WCH]

Battle is just one aspect of a civ. There are a lot of different things you have to take into account other than simply "battle" when determining what civs are and are not balanced.

You're right, there's more than just battle to civ. There's also economy, research, trade, diplomacy and expansion. Roleplaying is all well and good (I've got a D&D game in about 3 hours, actually), but it's not exactly a built in part of the game, certain doesn't factor into balance.

Think of it this way: civilizations which are overpowered simply allow for more roleplaying, because you can get away with making suboptimal decisions.

 

[Sureshot]

I would have to agree with Monkefinger; roleplaying is all well and good, but you can justify nearly anything in any game, especially this one, with 'roleplaying'. Since this thread is about balance, which is distinct from roleplaying, roleplaying shouldn't be a consideration.

There have been certain consistencies in the rankings. I'm curious what people think about Svartalfar vs. Ljosalfar. For my part I think Svartalfar are better in every way; they have a more useful ub (the recon line as a whole is far superior to the archery line as a whole), a better hero, and better traits. Arcane/Raider vs. Raider/Defender(worthless for elves since they have good defensive capabilities anyway) and Arcane/Expansive (worthless because forests eliminate health as an issue altogether). I suppose one could make a case for cre/spi but imo Arc/Rai is better. However, I've noticed that a number of individuals have ranked the Ljos higher then the Svart. Is there something I'm missing about the Ljos as compared to the svart?

Arendel would be the one that makes them better, since shes Good and when armageddon comes her forests won't disappear when hell terrain comes rampaging through. all of faeryls forests will disappear quickly with her evil alignment, since hell terrain spreads into evil lands early armaggedon counter wise. creative and spiritual are both great traits for builders, where as arcane and raiders provide no bonus except in war.

theres also the ljosalfar world spell which is better.

svartalfar are better if you plan to war constantly tho.

 

[Ecofarm]

Arendel would be the one that makes them better, since shes Good and when armageddon comes her forests won't disappear when hell terrain comes rampaging through. all of faeryls forests will disappear quickly with her evil alignment, since hell terrain spreads into evil lands early armaggedon counter wise. creative and spiritual are both great traits for builders, where as arcane and raiders provide no bonus except in war.

theres also the ljosalfar world spell which is better.

svartalfar are better if you plan to war constantly tho.

Life node. Allows the resurrection of Hero and sanctify. With a couple adepts at chokes, hell terrain is not to be worried about. Arcane provides bonus not in war: casting inspiration, etc. Raider provides bonus not in war: hunters get subdue animal quickly, etc. Ljos worldspell is early only; turning all ancients into new forests is devastating 10 turns after you take FoL as state - to the tune of starving off 8 population. I would not give up druids, given the synergy with FoL and Commune (getting druids early being the only reason to play ljos). Adept micromanagement be damned. If you are willing to have terrible micromanagement (SP only, really), then Svalt worldspell can be powerful. Best religious hero for svalt is chalid, so they are neutral if they get honor.

I suppose cre/spi for a builder (culture win), but I'd prefer Kur for that. Ljos is only above 5 because:

 

[Rod]

And since when is incense even key to getting benefits from religions?

1)Almost all temples provide the major part of their additional happiness-boni with the help of the incense resource.
2)Many Priest-units require the incense-resource as basic requirements.
3) Especially in the case of FoL in an Elven State all Priests require Incense and one of FoL's biggest strengthes is the synergy between the Priest's Bloom Spell and the Elven Forest Infrastructure.
4) Next to the Elven Forest Infrastructure - Bloom Synergy there is also the Bloom - Ancient Forest Synergy. With the help of Bloom you are able to surround your state with Forests that turn into Ancient Forest (FoL - Feature) and then provide you with Treants in case that hostile forces try to enter your realm. As the Ancient Forests take time to grow it is beneficial to have Priests as early as possible.

Please post if you have any more questions regarding the importance of the Incense - Resource for Religious mechanics. I am always happy to help.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

RE Ljos vs. Svart: The main thing that makes me rate Ljos higher is that I hate Arcane. Post mage nerf, I consider it even worse than Defender and Sprawling.

RE Incense: Don't most of the priests have an alternate resource that they can be built with? Reagents for most of them, Gems for the Kilmorph ones, etc. I remember hearing that only the Veil is completely screwed if you lack Incense.

 

[xienwolf]

All Priests require Incense EXCEPT RoK & Veil who require Gems and Reagents. There is no "Backup" resource. If you don't have that specific one, you are out of luck.

Main reason Veil gets more complaints is because without the Reagents you don't have Priests OR Archmages, so it is more notable of a loss evidently. Or people just don't care about the Runewardens nearly as much (or get lucky and snag gems from a Mine pop)

 

[Arctic Circle]

Simplified:

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

 

[Wyrmhero]

All Priests require Incense EXCEPT RoK & Veil who require Gems and Reagents. There is no "Backup" resource. If you don't have that specific one, you are out of luck.

Main reason Veil gets more complaints is because without the Reagents you don't have Priests OR Archmages, so it is more notable of a loss evidently. Or people just don't care about the Runewardens nearly as much (or get lucky and snag gems from a Mine pop)

I find it odd that no-one gets Inscence/Reagents. I always have those, but I find the RoK priests hardest to get, as there is no jungle (and thus no gems) in my maps usually, and so I find that RoK priests are the most difficult to utilise.

 

[Demus]

I find it odd that no-one gets Inscence/Reagents. I always have those, but I find the RoK priests hardest to get, as there is no jungle (and thus no gems) in my maps usually, and so I find that RoK priests are the most difficult to utilise.

all depends on map settings. reagents (and incense) get placed fairly late, so if you're running more civs than average on a map, there is a chance there won't be any space left to place the resources. Climate plays a role here aswell (it def. does for gems, a wet climate should give a lot more of those!)

 

[Ecofarm]

RE Ljos vs. Svart: The main thing that makes me rate Ljos higher is that I hate Arcane. Post mage nerf, I consider it even worse than Defender and Sprawling.

Try getting Ether late (and then elementalism or adaptation lightbulb -> sorcery), when it costs 2-3 turns to research (quick speed) around turn 100 with conquest and apprenticeship. 4xp, sometimes starting with 5 out of the box... mage 10 turns later. No need to tech ether when it costs 10 turns and create adepts that're 4-5 turns each. It allows mages to be an afterthought or safety net and a group of 4 to be of similar xp (eg. xp25-28, not 17-28 because they are only 1-2 turns apart presumably from 2 cities).

If svalt does go for mages... Blur, Shadow walk and Maelstrom from palace (and inspiration, 4 research that comes with charm and leads to d0mination). Ljos gets circumstantial utilities that you can store somewhere. You want defender (+10%! if sitting on rump) instead of mages on demand or replacement archmages if strength of will is a good path? Sure. The free promotion means mobility and still reaching two tier 3 manas. Build your archery units or disciples (if you have incense). I'll be teching down the recon tree.

Sprawling is amazing with tower, guardian or unyielding.

 

[WCH]

Keep the ratings coming! We have ten submissions so far, minus incomplete fields (not rating every civ). Good to give us a basic idea of perceptions, but not really all that significant, especially on something like Grigori where it's all over the map.

If we can get another 15 or so, the math would start to actually tell us something worthwhile.

Currently, way I've got them ranked based on scores, not taking into account levels of significance, standard deviation and all that jazz, the order from most to least powerful looks like this:

1 Luchiurp
2 Ljosalfar
3 Sheim
4 Svartalfar
5 Calabim
6 Hippus
7 Balseraphs
8 Lanun
9 Amurites
10 Clan of Embers
11 Sidar
12 Grigori
13 Infernal
14 Bannor
15 Khazad
16 Elohim
17 Malakim
18 Kuriotates
19 Doviello
20 Illians
21 Mercurians

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.

 

[SnowlyWhite]

Amurites 6 - they're probably the middle
Balseraphs 9 - loki, druids, blabla
Bannor - no clue... I love my ce...
Calabim - 10. StW, feast, feast, max. lvl. shadows from early hunters with feast killing 5 units/turn without any war weariness.... the best trait combo on flauros(now even better with an even more powerful organized)... conquest to make stw even more powerful...
Clan of Embers 3-8... better not start isolated with them...
Doviello 2... really, go play embers...
Elohim 5... my defence will kill you... how proactive...
Grigori 6
Hippus 5 I hate ponnies... plus rushing the ai feels really lame, it already plays bad enough, if you rush it they really don't stand a chance...
Illians - no clue
Infernal - 9. Good enough I suppose... but only from a human pov.
Khazad 8. Saw worse
Kuriotates 4. 1 if in the hands of the ai.
Lanun 8.
Ljosalfar 6
Luchuirp 9
Malakim 8
Mercurians 1. Pointless.
Sheaim 5. Building one unit the whole game can get boring pretty fast...
Sidar 6
Svartalfar 10