[NFP] [discussion] Major flaws of Civ VI - part 3: Faith economy and production costs

[Socrates99]

It's a good point that synergy is a major issue here. This also ties into Civ6's general design philosophy which seems to be "more is more" (and more with more on top is even more), which really shows with how they designed NFP (and is perhaps THE major flaw of Civ6). I'm not sure I agree that Monumentality is not in itself inherently broken, but that is probably a moot point, because as you say, the game is played as a whole, not as each individual part in isolation. The fact that Monumentality repeats over three eras - and can be picked repeatedly over all three eras - is obviously another major issue here, which ties into the design of the era system, which merits a topic of its own.

There are some interesting points brought up wrt. pantheons and whether the desert/tundra/jungle-pantheons should be nerfed. I'd probably go the other way: I'd leave these pantheons as they are, but boost some of (a lot of) the other pantheons and increase the faith cost for buying things to make faith less valuable as a universal currency. The reason I would do this is that a lot of pantheons have already been nerfed into uselessness - Harvest was completely removed, and both Earth Goddess and Divine Spark have been nerfed to the point where they don't make much of a difference. I often find myself in the situation where I need to pick a pantheon and look at a list with 20-or-something choices and literally think: All of these are trash for me in my current situation. When the choice is between getting perhaps +2-3 culture from plantations or pastures, or getting perhaps 3-4 faith from quarries or mines, it feels rather boring.


I certainly agree with the last part. Just out of curiosity, where are the governor promos better used? This is an honest question from my end, because I find the governors to be mostly trash. Obviously you want to throw at least three promos into Pingala for start, to get the double GP promo, in most situations I also want both the culture and science boost. Throwing at least one promo into recruiting Armani also seems universally usefull, and sometimes if a really important city state comes up and is contested (Bologna, Yerevan, Valletta?), going for the level 3 promotion on Armani can also be a priority (but I'd argue that often this can wait). Depending on food and chopping availability, recruiting Magnus and giving him the settler promotion is also generally useful (but if you have a city with good food access, for instance sugar or spice resources, I'd argue the settler promotion is actually less useful than it looks on paper, because the city will most likely be housing capped and will replace the lost population in a couple of turn anyway). On the other hand, I practically never see any reason to recruit Victor, Liang or Reyna until later.

So depending on your priorities, you can realistically have Moksha up and running by the time you finish Guilds and Medieval Fairs in late Medieval era (by this time, you will have 6 promotions from civics and 3 from Government Plaza). Getting one or two governor promotions from huts will obviously help a lot in giving you the liberty to invest heavily in Moksha, but unlocking Moksha by late medieval is just about perfect timing to having your faith economy set up and having had the opportunity to benefit from Monumentality in classical and/or medieval era.

I said if I'm not going religious. Most of Moksha's promos are completely useless w/o religion. Ping's the no brainer, Amani and Magnus get at least one obviously. If you're going monumentality I'd say Liang's first and getting provisions on Magnus are better spends than wasted Moksha promos. From there you'd be better off buying districts with Reyna and find a better faith dump than districts since you're already deep in the game. Buildings, units, great people, etc. Even bumping Amani up to hang onto a vital CS is better.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Monumentality is the major issue, no one doubts that.
There are niche civ’s / strategies that make gold buying good but not as great as faith buying.
This is based the fact that you get holy sites earlier, holy site adjacency cards earlier, you get a small amount of extra faith once all the prophets are gone and there is more faith tiles to pillage. Also you have to consider getting to CH in the ancient era costs more science due to being a classical era district.
GOTM shows time and again for the min/max era that faith is the better currency. By extending its use into modern eras a CH lost its ascendency value later. The CH is one of those districts that does give benefits to other districts but overall and more vitally, it is the early game that dictates the speed and ease of success later.

I am not convinced by all of the OP’s arguments but most are valid.

To me the bottom line is the faith benefits kick in earlier and you get more bang for your buck out of it but it would not be as good without monumentality to be able to convert faith into builders and settlers. This ignoring the more truly religious benefits like the CV OP reliquaries, converting faith into production and getting significant combat bonuses.

Production was once king, gold could be considered god but faith is a better gold at the end of this civ iteration. The fact all 3 vie for top place to some degree I feel is great. If faith only gave 30% in monumentality but gold gave 50% there may be more of a balance in the game.
There are civs in the game that you just would not push faith because they are skewed to gold or production. So things are not extreme but faith is more than queen.

It’s some impressive bad design synergy:

1). The game is a snowball with zero breaks

2). Because of 1) early game advantages impact the game exponentially

3). Playing wide, which requires settlers and to a lesser extent builders is a slam dunk better strategy

4). Early game, faith is easy to aquire

5). Monumentality allows you to insta purchase settlers and builders at a discount with faith

It’s such a strong strategy outside of some very special circumstances it’s a no brainer

Also optionally

6). Why the hell is it even called monumentality? To me that brings forth the image of building monuments to their faith, things like cathedrals and other religious structures, or wonders, or things like that.

Maybe Monumentality should be changed that way; you can faith buy infrastructure like Valleta

 

[Victoria]

Why the hell is it even called monumentality?

Perhaps (they are game designers) they knew how monumental it would be and so called it so.
Before monumentality they had chopping giving faith as well which was more OP, I think they like an OP strat in the game.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Perhaps (they are game designers) they knew how monumental it would be and so called it so.
Before monumentality they had chopping giving faith as well which was more OP, I think they like an OP strat in the game.

Lol maybe. Perhaps we have cracked the secret to their game design?

 

[Varde]

You thought Faith was over-powered. Try harbours.

Think, they make lots of gold and lots of production; they're built early on, and because the sea and travel by sea is super advantageous, they're basically strong twice (where balance needs to be strong once/balanced early on).

 

[Planktonic]

Production was once king, gold could be considered god but faith is a better gold at the end of this civ iteration. The fact all 3 vie for top place to some degree I feel is great. If faith only gave 30% in monumentality but gold gave 50% there may be more of a balance in the game.
There are civs in the game that you just would not push faith because they are skewed to gold or production. So things are not extreme but faith is more than queen.

I think this sums up my feelings about this very well. I usually go for a high faith strategy for all culture and science victory games, and it really is more flexible and useful than gold.

But it does have its costs. Gold, production, science and culture are essential to building an empire. Faith is not. To even go for a high faith strategy means that you are deliberately shorting your capabilities in other regards- yes, it may be worth it, but it isn't immediately cost-free. Plus for me Monumentality is not always a given- you do have to work to get the Golden Age, and may have to do things that otherwise don't make sense (for example, I built a galley in a one-tile lake once just for the +2 Era score to try to reach Monumentality), which is also a cost. And for me the payoff period isn't really 3 Eras, since I often find it hard to make a Classical Golden Age and don't usually have much faith generation by that time. For me it's the Medieval Monumentality that really matters which means that the time period where faith is "OP" is itself somewhat circumscribed.

I said if I'm not going religious. Most of Moksha's promos are completely useless w/o religion. Ping's the no brainer, Amani and Magnus get at least one obviously. If you're going monumentality I'd say Liang's first and getting provisions on Magnus are better spends than wasted Moksha promos. From there you'd be better off buying districts with Reyna and find a better faith dump than districts since you're already deep in the game. Buildings, units, great people, etc. Even bumping Amani up to hang onto a vital CS is better.

Always interesting to see different playstyles. For me, the rate limiting step in Empire development is how quickly can you get districts up and running in newly founded cities. After the first two or three this seems to become interminable with escalating district costs. The best way around this is with Moksha and Divine Architect, with four promotions on Rayna an alternative but not as good. So I routinely use the first 6 Governor promotions available to get Magnus with Provision and then Moksha with Divine Architect.

 

[Victoria]

usually go for a high faith strategy for all culture and science victory games, and it really is more flexible and useful than gold.

You should play the GOTM from the beginning of this month, Prince SV as Kongo. Easy game to win….but that lack of faith. I normally play my SV’s without temple just because it gets dull. You get enough from pillaging, why go OTT.

You thought Faith was over-powered. Try harbours.

My name/avatar may be a clue, I play Victoria an awful lot and always have, such a different game, and if anyone knows about harbours, it is a Victoria player. Faith is still stronger even with the +2 for off continent amd getting harbours that can generate 30 production a turn, Faith is early and strong…. As long as you get a golden.

 

[Varde]

You should play the GOTM from the beginning of this month, Prince SV as Kongo. Easy game to win….but that lack of faith. I normally play my SV’s without temple just because it gets dull. You get enough from pillaging, why go OTT.


My name/avatar may be a clue, I play Victoria an awful lot and always have, such a different game, and if anyone knows about harbours, it is a Victoria player. Faith is still stronger even with the +2 for off continent amd getting harbours that can generate 30 production a turn, Faith is early and strong…. As long as you get a golden.

Good, good. Important to register that Victoria is OP before playing serious multiplayer games.

I'm playing Victoria right this second.

I haven't built the royal navy dockyard, but plan to in the next few moves. Should be plain sailing from there.

 

[Victoria]

Victoria is OP before playing serious multiplayer games.

She has never been considered top level, even with the original pax ability. It all comes a bit late.
MP may be different because a lot of OP civs are excluded.

 

[9gkj548hkm20vk79dj689bnj4]

my problem with faith is that you're either A) generating so much faith that the only clear way to victory is a religious victory, or B) you're generating so little that religion as a game mechanic becomes meaningless.

 

[Victoria]

my problem with faith

My problem is I am generating loads but never got a religion.

 

[Thormodr]

She has never been considered top level, even with the original pax ability. It all comes a bit late.
MP may be different because a lot of OP civs are excluded.

I got my top score ever with Victoria. I think it was a conquest victory with nearly 4500 points.

 

[aieeegrunt]

She has never been considered top level, even with the original pax ability. It all comes a bit late.
MP may be different because a lot of OP civs are excluded.

Which are usually banned? I mean Babylon is an obvious assumption

 

[Planktonic]

You should play the GOTM from the beginning of this month, Prince SV as Kongo. Easy game to win….but that lack of faith. I normally play my SV’s without temple just because it gets dull. You get enough from pillaging, why go OTT.

Heh. I did play it, but not as well as you. I got to SV at turn 254, compared to your 197. I did make multiple mistakes, though; especially, I was overly afraid of CV and therefore very low on culture throughout.

But I take your point- the lack of a faith game was definitely felt.

my problem with faith is that you're either A) generating so much faith that the only clear way to victory is a religious victory

Eh, this comment runs counter to the whole thread it seems. The OP's whole point is that faith is so flexible and potent that it becomes the most important "currency" in the game. You can use it to buy settlers and builders, military units (with Grandmaster's chapel), districts (with Moksha), and even some buildings (with Jesuit Education), not to mention Great People, Naturalists, Rock bands etc. High faith makes *every* victory condition easier.

 

[UWHabs]

Heh. I did play it, but not as well as you. I got to SV at turn 254, compared to your 197. I did make multiple mistakes, though; especially, I was overly afraid of CV and therefore very low on culture throughout.

But I take your point- the lack of a faith game was definitely felt.



Eh, this comment runs counter to the whole thread it seems. The OP's whole point is that faith is so flexible and potent that it becomes the most important "currency" in the game. You can use it to buy settlers and builders, military units (with Grandmaster's chapel), districts (with Moksha), and even some buildings (with Jesuit Education), not to mention Great People, Naturalists, Rock bands etc. High faith makes *every* victory condition easier.

Yeah, whether to use faith to go RV depends more on how you got your religion and if you want to spam apostles around the map, or would rather do something else. I mean, sure, you really can't do a religious victory without faith, but you can certainly use faith outside of religious victory.

I guess thinking some more, the other reason that the "faith economy" is powerful is that you can also skip it. So, like, you really can't skip production, or gold, when building your empire. You can't skip science or culture either. But you can completely ignore faith and still have a highly successful setup. And for that reason, I think it can feel super strong, because it often ends up feeling like a "free" currency, where all those settlers and builders and great people or whatever just feel like bonuses. Or because they are only tangentially related to faith, it also adds to the disconnect. I know mentally, I don't build an early +4 holy site thinking "alright, awesome, I have my Monumentality settler factory set up now".

And of course, this discussion about Harbors being OP adds another point to the discussion - if there are so many OP tactics in the game, are any of them OP anymore? Like, yeah, Harbors can be super crazy in the right scenarios. Industrial zones with the right river configuration can be insane too. Heck, I've even had games where it feels like Fisheries act as a cheat code for building up. And that's not even getting into specific civ abilities, or re-rolling because I started next to Kumasi and that's like picking a difficulty level a couple points easier than you selected. If everything is over-powered, is anything?

 

[Victoria]

If everything is over-powered, is anything?

It is about balance, sticking on harbours as an example. They are a little strong because they boost pop, housing and gold as well as possible production but they become OP only in certain situations but holy sites become more OP more often and more to the point earlier. The word OP is bandied about as a level you reach but it is a sliding scale.

It is easy as gaming enthusiasts to analyse, criticise and at times praise but reading the Firaxis 30 years old posts you have to appreciate Firaxis has even hired good mechanics analysts off this site before so they have expertise in huge amounts, it is their jobs, they live and breathe it. If you are at all balanced in your view you have to appreciate they are making choices for many reasons and I imagine one key one is pleasing many groups, one large group I imagine is the OP fans or even taking that aside, having OP in the game makes discussion and interest in itself. Maybe part of the game for Firaxis is the forums themselves? Surely it has to be, even subconsciously?

Hmmm, is it even a bowler hat scenario? In England many years ago there was a company that made bowler hats, they made them so well that they never wore out and so the company went out of business. We use this in England when talking about products being made to break or having built-in redundancy. Can you make a game so we’ll that no-one wants to get the next iteration? It’s a big scary question they must have asked themselves.

 

[civac]

I don't think that's a real problem for the new mass-marketed Civ games. There is a hard core (each) that still plays games like Civ3, Civ4, MoO or MoM and neither want nor need a new 4x game but it's not that many people in the grand scheme of things.

 

[aieeegrunt]

I don't think that's a real problem for the new mass-marketed Civ games. There is a hard core (each) that still plays games like Civ3, Civ4, MoO or MoM and neither want nor need a new 4x game but it's not that many people in the grand scheme of things.

Given the way that the gaming market has evolved, mass appeal power fantasies will sell well.

Back in the day, you had difficulty levels to satisfy both the casuals and the no lifes, but that is now gone because people apparently expect to beat the game on Diety the same day they bought it on their second playthrough

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

Back in the day, you had difficulty levels to satisfy both the casuals and the no lifes, but that is now gone because people apparently expect to beat the game on Diety the same day they bought it on their second playthrough

Honestly, what a load of elitist crap.
According to the achievements, the vast majority of players have not beat the game on deity.
And among the friends that I play with (coop), I am the only one who can consistently beat immortal and deity, the rest start to struggle near the king+ level, though we do have fun with it regardless as I help them out.

I get it, you want more difficulty, and that is perfectly fine.
But dont make a hyper-exaggerated statement like that and expect any sympathy.
The game is still plenty difficult for the large majority out there.

 

[Haig]

I consider myself a hardcore 4x player and I find the features and mechanics in Civs 6 & 5 (with expansions) as rich as in Civ 4, in some parts even more. Civ 4 had its own predictable and repetive strategies too that was never polished in patches.

(Ed Beach and co just need to switch 1upt back to some sort of limited stacking )

Some posters who hate Civ 6 & Firaxis just exaggerate things. Its good to give critique but constant smug insults to FXS dont give much content to the discussions.