[NFP] Commandante General Soooo Strong...

[Mr. Shadows]

I have wondered about the selective cries for civ nerfing. Why are some civs immune from the cries (Nubia for example) while others are not (Hungary, GC).

@OmegaDestroyer To put it in perspective, Nubia is one of the strongest war-mongers, but starting in the Classical Era GC's archers are just as strong as Pitati Archers but with an extra movement point, and they get to keep those bonuses as they as they upgrade to more advanced units.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

I haven't seen anyone really provide evidence that Gran Colombias abilities lead to significantly faster victory conditions other than religious or domination compared to other top Civs, so that's that. . It was abundantly clear to me from the first second that they'd be the strongest Dom Civ in the game, especially because others who used to be amazing (Mongolia, Zulu) are now merely okay. I am unsure how good the unique improvement is, and just how impactful +1 moves is for settlers and workers, but it seems incredibly strong to me. Don't really care for nerfs anyway since I'm not buying the season's pass unless major balance changes are taking place.

 

[Arianrhod]

Why do people always want to nerf Civs and take the fun out of them??

To me every Civ should be powerful in different ways, it's a much more enjoyable game that way.

It's more time-efficient to nerf one blatantly overpowered Civ than it is to buff 40 civs of varying strength. And what happens if one of those gets over-buffed, do we buff everyone else again?

I agree that every Civ should be powerful in different ways, and that's exactly why having one civ that's better than everyone at the majority of things is atrocious design. Adding a Civ whose niche is "When reaching the Classical era, gain a GDR and some Uranium/turn" would be hilarious and fun for a bit, sure, but it would be horrible for the health of the game because you're lowering the number of civs who have any reasonable means to be chosen.

There are lots of different nerfs you could give GC that wouldn't destroy them, and many that would barely even impact them but at least force you to actually think. I'm wondering the opposite thing you are: why are people so determined to justify Civs being horribly balanced, in either direction? If you want to be buffed/crippled that badly, just choose a different difficulty level or an unfavorable map or something.

 

[The Highwayman]

I think the Zulu are still an amazing dom civ. The meta changed significantly with the cavalry nerf, but the Zulu's ability is a catch all since it buffs their dirt cheap Impis.

 

[OmegaDestroyer]

"Heck, you could probably completely disable them from being able to get GG (like the Maori or Kongo) and also remove the CG from giving any movement bonuses to units (just combat bonuses and retirement abilities), and they would *still* probably be one of the best warmonger civs out there."



Again, I think it's absurd to cry for nerfs to Civ A because it might be stronger than Civs B & C while ignoring Civ D.

I guess I don't understand why GC has to be made weaker than other Civs. What's wrong with it being strong? Is it unbeatable? Someone has to be at the top, right?

 

[Kwami]

"Heck, you could probably completely disable them from being able to get GG (like the Maori or Kongo) and also remove the CG from giving any movement bonuses to units (just combat bonuses and retirement abilities), and they would *still* probably be one of the best warmonger civs out there."



Again, I think it's absurd to cry for nerfs to Civ A because it might be stronger than Civs B & C while ignoring Civ D.

I guess I don't understand why GC has to be made weaker than other Civs. What's wrong with it being strong? Is it unbeatable? Someone has to be at the top, right?

Sure, some options will always be stronger than others. But, you don't want any option to be too far from the average. Game balance actually does matter, even in single-player games.

 

[Sostratus]

I guess I don't understand why GC has to be made weaker than other Civs. What's wrong with it being strong? Is it unbeatable? Someone has to be at the top, right?

The key is “unbeatable,” or at least, “no counterplay.”
Great people cannot die and you cannot, in most situations, actually prevent Colombia from getting a CG, since they need only tech to ironworking. And it’s unconditional. GC can mirror everything you do and by existing get their army of +5 +2 units in the classical. No need to have a certain CB or anything.

I think that’s what people are picking up on. It removes a ton of risk from warfare in a way that you don’t have to sacrifice anything for - Alexander has big rewards for conquering, but he has to conquer. Nubia must leverage the pitati early to have an advantage, but Simon can just kind of choose without committing.

This creates a Civ that perhaps unintentionally starts sidestepping strategic considerations in a way that ultimately harms the player’s experience of the game.

 

[Goodenuf]

The +1 movement is (too) great. I could see them keeping it for civilian (settler, worker, etc.) and for scouts, and leave it out for everything else, and GC would still be over the top. Or maybe military gets +1 movement when starting in home/ally territory... something to that effect.

But currently, admittedly, its a bit too much fun to play; almost comical. Almost assuredly there will be a nerf coming soon.

 

[Starwars]

I do have to wonder just what the design philosophy is behind a civ like this. I mean, they have balanced civs in the past in patches and so forth so it must be something they think about at least a little. So how does GC make it into the game with all the bonuses it has? That's just weird to me. It's so clear if you play them that they are... really overpowered. Just movement alone is huge. Then free generals that apply their bonuses to all units, regardless of era. That also stack with regular generals. And you can promote units and move them after. It's just kind of insane.

 

[bbbt]

Movement bonus is super strong, but fine, imho. The stacking puts it over the top. Not just the CG and GG, but extra movement from the CG.

Possible nerfs:
CG provides combat bonus but not additional movement bonus
GG combat bonus doesn't stack.

But ideally I think they should give him a full malus. There's plenty creative they could do with him. For example:

Can't recruit GG, but gets CG at the beginning of each era. CG auto-retires at the end of the following era (if not retired manually), and each CG gives Gran Colombia a permanent -1 amenity when retired.

 

[steveg700]

Why do people always want to nerf Civs and take the fun out of them??

To me every Civ should be powerful in different ways, it's a much more enjoyable game that way.

Welp, why does someone always elect themselves contrarian in the face of compelling arguments?

I mean, that's a nice sentiment followed up with a very fine platitude, but rather than react to how people "always" react, read the supportive data that is presented and the borkenness comes a-bubblin' to the surface.

Context matters. Balance and fun need not be mutually exclusive. There is a time to nerf. Now is such a time.

Well their UU and UI come very late so that's not very impactful.

Yup, not very impactful at all. By the time these become available, GC has already walked the bases to victory by then, having trounced all opposition without effort due to being, like, +20 stronger than an equivalent unit. Wheeee!

 

[Hans Castorp]

I had an 83 strength cuirassier army (using earlier CG boni and Napoleon Bonaparte GG) with a CG for backup. I took down 2 civs with a single unit in late Renaissance on Emperor...

 

[bengalryan9]

I think the stacking generals is clearly an oversight. Other than that, I think they're okay.

One change I'd like to see in general is that GGs (and commandantes) get completely removed from the game when attacked or when the unit they are stacked with is defeated rather than simply returned to their nearest city. I think that's just kind of silly to begin with and a change here would at least give some way for you to combat Columbia's free generals.

 

[Kwami]

I think the stacking generals is clearly an oversight. Other than that, I think they're okay.

No, it's intentional. They've said as much.

 

[Deadly Dog]

Movement bonus is super strong, but fine, imho. The stacking puts it over the top. Not just the CG and GG, but extra movement from the CG.

Possible nerfs:
CG provides combat bonus but not additional movement bonus
GG combat bonus doesn't stack.

But ideally I think they should give him a full malus. There's plenty creative they could do with him. For example:

Can't recruit GG, but gets CG at the beginning of each era. CG auto-retires at the end of the following era (if not retired manually), and each CG gives Gran Colombia a permanent -1 amenity when retired.

Yup, that movement bonus should come with a malus and the CG should be balanced so as not to stack, combat or movement. I'm sorry, but catapults with 4 movement? Archers moving from hill to hill while firing each turn?

Also, the bonuses as they are created are blunt instruments, they lack the finesse of say playing Ibrahim to be at the front for war but playing geopolitics in a foreign capital while at peace. Or using diplomatic visibility and religion as mogols, or investing in Encampments as Shaka. Poor Cyrus, he can inflict grievances at a mild discount in order to get +2 movement for 10 turns. Bolivar can race from one end of the map to the other all game, faster than all units of all civs, all the time.

Still playing my game with them though. Haciendas are coming online they are nice like mekewaps and outback stations. Vulnerable to drought though...just got a GG and have 2 active CG's so tomorrow I will experience the stacking effects first hand. I slept at the wheel as far as beelining Military Science though so llaneros are late, too late to count as era score in the Renaissance which is sad. Still, super easy game after that very very painless classical era annexation of Persia.

Anyone having with trouble playing against Bolivar either as a human or AI opponent?

 

[agonistes]

I think the stacking generals is clearly an oversight. Other than that, I think they're okay.

One change I'd like to see in general is that GGs (and commandantes) get completely removed from the game when attacked or when the unit they are stacked with is defeated rather than simply returned to their nearest city. I think that's just kind of silly to begin with and a change here would at least give some way for you to combat Columbia's free generals.

Not just generals. Any GP should be killable. Least then I wouldn’t have to c-block ai great prophets to ensure I get the first religion.

 

[Sostratus]

Still playing my game with them though. Haciendas are coming online they are nice like mekewaps and outback stations. Vulnerable to drought though...

Unlike the outback or terrace farm, (and I think this is an oversight) Haciendas do not get pillaged during droughts. I think they are extremely strong improvements, being able to conjure huge production from flat tiles, but they do come late for an improvement. Out of the box I think terraces and outback’s are better, although once you have the full adjacency benefit I’d rate them at near or peer with outbacks. 7-8 production on any grassland or plains tile is madness. Don’t need IZs. Can drop them into badly laid out AI cities to get up to par quickly on your world liberation campaign.

 

[steveg700]

There's no way to turn off the New Frontier content, is there? I don't mind the free update. I just would rather not see Maya or GC show up in my randomized games.

 

[Sostratus]

There's no way to turn off the New Frontier content, is there? I don't mind the free update. I just would rather not see Maya or GC show up in my randomized games.

The Maya & GC pack is an item you can toggle in the "Manage Content" menu or whatever it's called. I think that might turn off apocalypse mode though.

 

[steveg700]

The Maya & GC pack is an item you can toggle in the "Manage Content" menu or whatever it's called. I think that might turn off apocalypse mode though.

Thanks. I guess I do want to keep maize and the new disasters though. Hmm.