Does BNW optimize the game for generalist empires? Or not?

[gunnergoz]

The game sees better thought out and balanced by this point, with all the expansions and patches adding up to what is almost a new game from the original upon Civ V's release.

It looks to me like generalist empires now have a better chance than ever, to have a late-game chance at one sort of victory or another.

Others may argue that the game still rewards empires who focus early on one specific type of victory and optimize themselves to win that specific way.

I'd love to see a discussion of the two viewpoints and your arguments for and against.

What you all contribute will definitely help me better understand and play with all the new mechanics in the game.

 

[Velex]

The science player can no longer completely ignore culture, which is only fair, because a culture player could never ignore science.

 

[Talcove]

The science player can no longer completely ignore culture, which is only fair, because a culture player could never ignore science.

I don't think a science player could ever 'completely' ignore culture. After all, the 'Rationalism' tree is essential, not only for a science victory, but for scientific advancement in general.

 

[Jon the Bastard]

Well, I think BNW is definitely going to give us all a few more things to consider. The trade routes and inclusion of the tourism vs. culture mechanics are new systems to get used to and develop new strategies around. So, BNW will probably level the playing for a while, as we all get used to the new stuff. But, make no mistake about it, people will figure out new starting strategies and learn how to optimize and leverage those strategies for a specific type of victory.

I wouldn't say the game is designed for the more "generalist" empires. I would say that it forces you to engage strategies you normally wouldn't, but the level of engagement is still entirely up to you. Obviously, the civilizations themselves still have things they are good at and things they are bad at; or, rather, certain civilizations have UA and UB/UU that are designed to take advantage of a specific mechanic or system. So, I don't think BNW will make it any easier or harder for "generalist" empires. There will still be the need to specialize and commit yourself to a strategy. I think what BNW does is make it easier to move between two or more strategies.

Make sense?

 

[PhilBowles]

The science player can no longer completely ignore culture, which is only fair, because a culture player could never ignore science.

I've tried ignoring culture as a science player. It doesn't work. To win a science victory at higher difficulties you want to be running through Rationalism as quickly as you can once you unlock it. I actually tried an alternative strategy, Piety with Interfaith Dialogue and heavy missionary spam (I was right next to Byzantium, giving me reliable +140 science per missionary pop, and by late game was churning out missionaries as quickly as I used them thanks to Itinerant Preachers plus the Piety opener and finisher), but it's not as effective because it's hard to get the standard beaker count as high as is needed. Say I'm using two missionary pops a turn, at 130-140 beakers each. I'd need to be producing somewhere in the region of 800 base science for that to equal what I'd get from Rationalism at the same stage. I actually had around 400.

I would probably have done better if not beaten to the Great Mosque, however.