[R&F] December Update Video Thread

[AsH2]

So, it's not just the bowler hat, but also a signet ring and a glass with port or sherry or whatever that is.

Do you think that's his signet ring, or is it a prop?

Also, it's Catherine's pose, so this could be a hint at a future alternate leader if you stretch it

I bet there's a Firaxis logo hidden in that ring..

 

[nzcamel]

Very happy to see some more diplomatic options and a bit of a boost to the AI decision making process.

You can already do that.

We already have a Leader Picker, we only can't choose wish Leaders we don't want in the Game.

I want to be able to do it without using a MOD that adds all sorts of other stuff, and without having to pick all the Civs. I want surprises. Just not the Korean/Babylonian kind

The Resource Picker would be more useful for Players who use Resource Mods, especially luxury resources. Since the Game only allows 4 Luxuries per Continent, it would be nice to choose resources that will be in the Game.

The difference I see is that resources within their type are identical in how they impact the game. Sure, you may prefer coffee to furs for whatever reason, but unlike Civs, it makes no practical difference which you have. Ergo, while the resource picker would be nice, it isn't anywhere near as important as a Civ "picker".

Babylon rush just got even better though! Yikes the easier industrialization is probably the biggest one there for them, but the others are just pushing an S tier civ to S+.

overall looks solid though! Just will have to reroll if I see Babylon

Only real concerns:

• I'd rather have had a Civ picker than a CS picker, but I'd ultimately enjoy having both; hopefully this one's on the way for the next big patch.
• is that a babylon b u f f

Yeah, I'd rather see (even before the addition of Babylon!) Eurekas and Inspirations be harder to get, not easier.

I’m happy Rationalism has been nerfed. But I think it was wrongheaded not to get rid of the flat thresholds / bonus. The risk is now just having a bunch of Pop 15 Cities instead of a bunch of Pop 10 Cities. As others have said, I think a scaling bonus would have been much better.

 

[MrRadar]

Do you think that's his signet ring, or is it a prop?

Looks like a personal accessory:

Spoiler :

as visible here (from https://tronster.com/)

Unless it fits perfectly here as part of this masquerade
I'd sooner focus on the route: bowler hat -> Magnus -> corporations mode

 

[AntSou]

Nice catch.

Then I'll go with the less lunatic suggestion, bowler hat = corporations.

 

[Zegangani]

The difference I see is that resources within their type are identical in how they impact the game. Sure, you may prefer coffee to furs for whatever reason, but unlike Civs, it makes no practical difference which you have. Ergo, while the resource picker would be nice, it isn't anywhere near as important as a Civ "picker".

You're completely Right! It's just a personal Wish of mine, cause I'm currently working on a Mod that makes resources more useful, for example: each Type would have it's Benefits (City or Empire wide). So they would be different from each other (not just via Art). That's why I think that it would very helpful to have a Resource picker, to make sure some will be in the Game.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Their direction is always on the wrong way.

They don't even mention the Nalanda bug, I suppose this won't be fixed. So as the Macedon one.

They also don't realize that the peace deal bug is just a symptom of the general trade bug, it may still be triggered in normal trades.

I think they'll introduce new bugs again and again.

BTW Babylon is strong enough, why make it stronger and stronger? (Reduce eurake req, promoting anti-cav, etc.)

 

[AntSou]

I agree I don't really see the point in changing the eureka requirements.

 

[Sostratus]

Not everybody will get Mausoleum. And people usually rate Industrial Zone and Workshops very bad, I don't really see a problem.

*heavy breathing*

It must have been 2018 or 2019 that I started saying Einstein should apply to Labs. Do I still think the Hypatia-Newton-Einstein line is too strong? Yes. But, happy that at least you will have to put in some work instead of being handed 20 science universities.

The anticav changes... I must contemplate.

 

[Equilin]

The advantage of the new CS picker over the YnaMP is that it actually shows you the Suz bonuses of city-states. Meanwhile YnaMP have several options on how to deal with the choices (select&random, ban list, etc.).

 

[DanQuayle]

It looks like they datamined the least used policy cards and decided to buff them (which is good obviously to add diversity).
But I wonder if they also changed the truly broken cards like Public Transport.
I only use it for 1 turn and only in my science games, but it is still broken.

 

[Silmarillion]

This "Stop pestering me"-button for AI might be the most unexpected and wonderful thing I have heard concerning Civ 6 this entire year. I'm in tears with joy.

 

[Taefin]

I still wish they would work to adjust the game so that civs can conquer one another completely. As is, city walls pretty much shut down offensive wars, and it really hurts warring civs due to the expended resources rarely yielding much. Most of the time, the AI units fail to do much against each other, and especially against a human.

I wonder if a mod to reduce city and wall strength (likely significantly) would lead to a more exciting game.

I’d be happy to have some more people testing this out, as I agree that the possibility of AI conquest, either growing in size at one another’s expense, or threatening your own borders, could add some real excitement.

I found that weakening walls alone did some to help, but not much. I make walls 50% AND give AI +25 CS against districts (each other and players). This means their siege only needs to land one shot, which they usually can, and 3-4 units can take a walled city if not interrupted.

But what really helped was lowering the min odds of success in the Operations file from 65% to 10% once war was declared (which is less risky now that cities can be taken with a few-unit advantage), increasing the number of operations so that attacks on multiple cities with more attack teams can happen, and increasing city pseudo yield valuation so more wars are declared. I also set wars to 20 turns min but not sure if that is needed with current settings.

This all leads to most civs being at war with at least someone throughout most of the game. And they will keep throwing units at cities, ultimately emptying their empire into the assault (instead of their default of forever storing several dozen units in their own borders). This most often will cause the winner of the open war to start the rolling conquest. As I’ve shared, I pair this with a modified DA to cause the winner to collapse in a later era. This causes some back and forth among the AI, but the science advantage of owning an empire for an era or two is significant.

So at least this testing shows the entire spectrum of (albeit not smart) behavior is possible, from recklessly aggressive to needlessly passive. And player strategic advantage might falter under a more relentless assault by superior to units, or by war on two fronts.

FXS seems to have good intuition about their own parameter files, I’d like to see a patch that offers a hardcore mode where the AI is geared for conquest. This would be a great time for them to work out bomber-led assaults and deployment of fighters into combat zones. I watched a game with RealStrategy via Firetuner and Mali leapfrogged through an entire rival with a single bomber and two tanks in a matter of turns. Its hard to see air combat with animations off, but most jet fighter end up with one promotion, so they must be seeing some action at least.

 

[Pietato]

The only one I remember is Byzantium doesn't get free heavy cav units for conquering a city with an EC already built anymore.

Right. Hope there are more, particularly to older civs and leaders (HELLO RADIO ORANJE).

 

[Pfeffersack]

Their direction is always on the wrong way.

They don't even mention the Nalanda bug, I suppose this won't be fixed.

IMO, this isn't a thing of wrong direction - rather of too short time for their QA process. Unless a bug is super-critical (is the Nalanda thing really? Dunno, but if, then better make use of the new city-state picker feature for the moment...) it isn't fixed right in the next month usually. I don't see a reason why we shouldn't see a fix for this in January...if it is properly reported. It is reported and described at least (and there is a link to a chinese site), but a save is missing yet: [NFP] - [1.0.7.9]Nalanda Free Tech Bug | CivFanatics Forums So you probably could do your case a good thing by providing one (I assume a that you regularly run into it, so this shouldn't be too hard, right?). Thank you (and no, I'm not sarcastic here. Just saying...as we are here in the internet)

They also don't realize that the peace deal bug is just a symptom of the general trade bug, it may still be triggered in normal trades.

Maybe you can read their words that way, but that doesn't necessarily say anything about how they fixed it (sometimes fixes in the past have been broader than the patch notes stated and there were even some not mentioned at all)...so I would recommend waiting, until we get our hands on the patch.

 

[greenOak]

Moving the pop requirement on rationalism to 15 is a good idea, but I'm not a fan of increasing the adjacency requirement (while not confirmed seems likely). First, doing so increases the value in getting good terrain which is entirely luck. Second, it increases the gap between good-teching civs and bad-teching civs - both player and AI. Civs like Korea, Australia, and Japan who were already great techers due to their adjacency abilities are all of a sudden even better.

As someone who plays mostly science games, the rationalism nerf is going to change so much. I'm almost positive growing to 15 to take advantage of the bonuses will be optimal, but its going to change the way people have to develop their cities. I can usually get a city to 10 pop with a couple good food tiles + marsh/resource chops, but there's no way I'm reliably hitting 15 by chopping. I'll probably be putting down a lot more farms (which will also mean more neighborhood gold because lets be real the odds they fixed that are slim to none), and I'll probably be making more use of encampments as my core cities will have room for one to two more districts. Even with the increased need for amenities I can't see myself using entertainment complexes, and thankfully, now I only need two of those dumpster fire districts for the boost to professional sports.

Also pumped to put in eleven culture/science city states plus Hong Kong for maximum brokenness. Maybe add in another industrial city state to get the empire wide boost from Kilwa.

 

[ezzlar]

Like already mentioned, how happy can one be for getting already developed mods includment as a patch? But yeah, stop asking is worth something...

And making late game eurekas less demanding? As if it´s hard as is.

 

[MrRadar]

I'm almost positive growing to 15 to take advantage of the bonuses will be optimal, but its going to change the way people have to develop their cities. I can usually get a city to 10 pop with a couple good food tiles + marsh/resource chops, but there's no way I'm reliably hitting 15 by chopping. I'll probably be putting down a lot more farms (which will also mean more neighborhood gold because lets be real the odds they fixed that are slim to none), and I'll probably be making more use of encampments as my core cities will have room for one to two more districts.

Would this change push players to space out cities a little more? As more tiles would be needed for farms, and one city would require more choppable jungle and forest? Also, more gold would have to be spent on buying additional tiles?

If anything, the chopping imperative becomes even stronger. Down with the rainforest and wetlands, for science and progress! I really wish they would implement global O2 counter. Chop too much and risk suffocation before being able to reach the outer space.

Cards are changed to give even more gpp yields to empty buildings, meanwhile specialists remain rather unloved and with no power to generate gpp, although now, if cities will grow more populous, there will be more citizens to assign to those slots.

But on the whole, 10 pop or 15 pop is still an arbitrary, made-up threshold. What's so fundamentally different between 14 and 15 dudes living in the same city that, with the addition of that special one, cold bricks of a specialty building just start to ooze so much more yields? If there were cards boosting specialist yields, that alone would naturally push you to grow your cities bigger so that you could afford having those specialists, it would make you build those buildings just the same, and there would be less need for made-up limits.

 

[Drivingrevilo]

On the other hand, for the rest of (aka most of) the players, we will see more fat cities and tall play incoming

Probably the most impactful change here, tbh. Casual players who just like to have whopping big cities because, y'know, it's fun—well, now we actually get rewarded for doing so! Two fingers to the min-maxers!

If anything, the chopping imperative becomes even stronger. Down with the rainforest and wetlands, for science and progress!

I mean, you guys often complain that you want more historical accuracy. What's more historically accurate than human beings destroying the environment for progress.....

 

[nzcamel]

But on the whole, 10 pop or 15 pop is still an arbitrary, made-up threshold. What's so fundamentally different between 14 and 15 dudes living in the same city that, with the addition of that special one, cold bricks of a specialty building just start to ooze so much more yields? If there were cards boosting specialist yields, that alone would naturally push you to grow your cities bigger so that you could afford having those specialists, it would make you build those buildings just the same, and there would be less need for made-up limits.

Agree wholeheartedly with this paragraph.

 

[blackbutterfly]

Something about changing what the AI asks for in peace deals - maybe that bug has been addressed?

That's a Biggie.

Cos now the game is ridiculously easy at Diety. Cos the AI trade away their empire.