England Nerf? Why?

[Archon_Wing]

Well-said all around. What does skill mean in a game you have to go out of your way to lose? It's a bit of a canard.

Arguably, speed play is the easier mode of play, not the more challenging. The AI can't sprint, so giving it every chance to approximate something akin to a head of steam is like fighting with a hand tied behind your back.

It's because of it turning peaceful victories into psuedovictory conditions. If you can win domination, you can win any other victory so if you set up for domination, then naturally any fast victory is derivative of that because nobody can stop you.

Having said that, I am happy to hear from optimizers like Lily. I think they have something to offer that others can learn from. I have actually cut down on commercial hubs a lot after realizing they weren't as vital as I was making them out to be. Lily deserves some props for selling that position. I just take issue with presenting optimized speed-play as so normative that it invariably draws out people who feel inadequate because they aren't finishing their games in 160 turns.

"Speed-shaming" shouldn't be a thing.

Well, I won't argue that some things are just plain better than others. Running a settler into the barb camp and not settling a city is probably a very bad idea.

The funny part is,of course, that it an argument for England to not be nerfed because what it had wasn't particularly overpowered anyways and I saw no reason to believe 2 trade routes (especially when you need a district building now) could be overpowered since now I'm even less likely to build c-hubs, speedrun or not.

It is of course always good to point out potential flaws in gameplay and poking holes is important.

I am beginning to wonder if the skill of the AI can become the inverse of the skill of the human player depending on how the game goes. Does the AI go into a tailspin when the human goes hard and fast? I play very long and deliberate games and as such I have never found the AI to be quite as terrible as reported by so many others. Is this because my style of play allows the AI to catch up more? Don't get me wrong, I have witnessed the AI do some dumb things. But usually it seemed the AI was simply mediocre and lacking dash. However, compared to the YouTube video of the science win, I would characterize my own play as relatively mediocre as well. Within the same game, the losing civs appear to grow dumber as the game goes on and any chance for success slips further from reach.

The AI more or less does the same thing aside from agendas and recently, a religious flavor. It always does a vague beetling to rocketry and builds whatever becomes available. If it gets disrupted, then it'll just have a hard time catching up. If you've ever seen a bunch of horse barbs surrounding an AI, it'll generally never recover because it got knocked that far off course. Thus, the Ai will look worse if you do disrupt its plan, by attacking, stealing/trapping its settlers. It's not that the AI is getting dumber, it's just having a bad (worse) game.

But some people do care. Some people want to break the speed barrier for the same reason Sir Edmund Hillary climbed Everest. They take pride in their accomplishment in the same way I take pride in my version of a successful game. The great thing about Civ6 is that there is plenty of room for all such versions.

A bit of a hyperbole yes. And indeed this does drive something widely known as the metagame and also very important to a game's design.

 

[steveg700]

Well, I won't argue that some things are just plain better than others. Running a settler into the barb camp and not settling a city is probably a very bad idea.

The funny part is,of course, that it an argument for England to not be nerfed because what it had wasn't particularly overpowered anyways and I saw no reason to believe 2 trade routes (especially when you need a district building now) could be overpowered since now I'm even less likely to build c-hubs, speedrun or not.

I think that it's not a matter of seeing the change as a nerf, but rather a change that fits in with England's broader modus operandi, which is to create strong footholds on other continents. I think the effect of loyalty needs to be seen in practice.

 

[acluewithout]

It’s weird Harbours don’t get their own city state type, isn’t it?

It must be deliberate. People have been talking about it for ages, and there were Maritime CSs in that one scenario, but yet Firaxis have never added them. I’d love to know what the design or game play reason for that is. Maybe because Harbours produce mixed yields - gold, hammers, food, and science?

I actually like that Harbours don’t have their own city state type, even if it makes them a little weaker in some situations. First, because I think more city state types would make things feel really cluttered. Second, because the gap makes for interesting tactical decisions. Like, I have lots of merchant city states, so should I put envoys into those and build CHs, or am I going to put my envoys into science or culture city states (and so harbours are as good as CHs really)?

Harbours do ( kind of ) benefit from certain suzerain bonus - Auckland, Nan Madol, Lisbon, Mohenjo Daro. Again, makes life interesting because it’s so situational. A few more suzerains that benefit harbours more - maybe a science one - would be fun. Maybe third tier harbour buildings could benefit from mercantile city states?

I think that it's not a matter of seeing the change as a nerf, but rather a change that fits in with England's broader modus operandi, which is to create strong footholds on other continents. I think the effect of loyalty needs to be seen in practice.

Agreed we’ll have to see how it plays out. But my expectation is that this is still a nerf, both to England’s strength and the fun factor.

- England has been nerfed twice in R&F. First, because it’s lost it’s trade route stacking. But second, because the RND (a harbour) no longer gives a TR. Now, maybe that ends up a wash because TRs have been nerfed all round, but on its face England - already a mid tier Civ - looks like it’s been significantly weakened.

- The loyalty boost doesn’t help England get footholds - it just helps them keep them. You’ll still have to found on another continent and then survive long enough to get your RND up. That said, Vicky’s free melee will presumably help with loyalty in new colonial cities, and Dockyards can be chopped in quickly.

- From a game play POV, having a few extra trade routes was fun to play around with. Again, with TRs getting nerfed everywhere, this might also be a wash. England may still actually have more TRs than other civs just because it gets cheaper harbours.

 

[acluewithout]

... a poster on reddit suggests England is now OP. Basically, Naval Tradition + Reyna + Golden Age Free Enquiry = Game Over.

Does anyone agree (or disagree)?

Link here: https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/7wfmjx/can_we_discuss_harbors_in_rnf_5090_yield_single/

 

[Archon_Wing]

It's OP on its own, but not that OP because it requires a lot of setup. Certainly not in the same game where actual game overs are like starting with Scythia near 2 horses or Aztecs 1 turning spaceports.

You'd have to settle quite a few coastal cities that would be crappy until you get shipyards, and shipyards aren't free either. The other thing is I'm not too fond of magically ideal scenarios of which almost any generic civ can do. All England has going for it is the half price harbor and the adjacency for a different continent which isn't that easy to take advantage of.

This to me falls under a "win harder" mechanic.

So definitely good, but I still wouldn't even consider it their best bonus; Their museums would be that.

 

[homan1983]

... a poster on reddit suggests England is now OP. Basically, Naval Tradition + Reyna + Golden Age Free Enquiry = Game Over.

Does anyone agree (or disagree)?

Link here: https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/7wfmjx/can_we_discuss_harbors_in_rnf_5090_yield_single/

The whole post is hyperbole:

1) according to the guy, a BAD harbour is city + 2 adjecent sea resouces <----- in reality that's a DREAM harbour.

2) a GOOD harbour is adjecent to a city AND 5 resources AND on another continent. <--- That has never happened in all my games played.

He then doubles it with a policy, and adds more with a golden age, and then doubles it with the advisor, important to note that:
a) you're only in golden age once or twice, and you have to be lucky regarding the time it happens
b) the advisor can only be in 1 city at a time


Finally none of what he said is exclusive to England, the only difference is +2gold for being on another continent.

 

[Victoria]

a poster on reddit suggests England is now OP. Basically, Naval Tradition + Reyna + Golden Age Free Enquiry = Game Over.

Well I posted this here a while ago as a theory as soon as it came out... and played it as my first game. I claim it was my idea not that it means a lot.
While it is nice and if you can get GZ in the same city it is rather strong but not game over.
I should really read that thread first but the problem is free enquiry is early so you have to push harbours early, this leads to an unacceptably long science lag.for a fast game. However it is fun and I enjoyed it. I think it can be strong but I messed up a bit in my try.

EDIT: just read the thread, I do not remember my last game with 4 resources let alone 5. If you play the internal ocean map which has lots of resources then sure but try standard continents and a lot gets in your way. Also miss the golden Like I did and you are dead. I will try again today, the game I played was on deity, One suspects the eras are shorter there due to everyone’s ability for bonus increasing.

 

[Victoria]

So this is my current game and is MUCH more realistic.. still not bad and with a shipyard +12 production. I am about to go into a second golden age so thats nice for a loong time

And this is my commercial hub

 

[ezzlar]

I tested this and even playing as the germans the bonuses are huge! Next game will be with Victoria!

 

[Victoria]

Next game will be with Victoria!

You need off continent RNDY to make Vicky any more science... but the speed of build with no requirement for lighthouse really is what makes it good.

Question for you... what was your best number of adjacent sea resources? (unless playing inland sea) I have NEVER had 5 in all my time playing like that fool is quoting... but I guess I never restart nor use abundant resources

 

[kamex]

So this is my current game and is MUCH more realistic.. still not bad and with a shipyard +12 production. I am about to go into a second golden age so thats nice for a loong time

View attachment 487837
And this is my commercial hub
View attachment 487838

Sorry for the noob question but what exactly is giving the science yield? Is this a new feature?

 

[ccjmne]

Hey, good job!
My best was 3 adjacent sea resources (so +5 GPT from Adjacency). The thing is, that setup never ever happened while also letting me have a river & district-triangle tile available for a Commercial Hub too (like you have here).
I think hoping for 2 Sea resources all the time could be reasonable though: I don't thrive so much for fresh water in my coastal cities!

Also, the more adjacency from Harbour, the more Production with the Shipyard...

@kamex, it's from one of the Dedications that you can choose when having a Golden Age during the Classical or Medieval Era: your adjacency bonuses for Harbours and Commercial Hubs yield as much Science as they do Gold!

 

[Sostratus]

With alliances in the game, that many extra trade routes would be too strong. Wisselbank is +4 yield on every ally trade route, which doubles to +8 for Arsenal of Democracy. That's a very serious bonus for cities within 3 tiles of coast; worth building every time you have a realistic ability to secure an alliance. Reform the coinage's later eras giving +3 gold per specialty district at the destination compounds the problem- that's a lot of additional base yield + 4 food/ 4 prod/ 9-12ish gold trade routes you can afford to send out. (We'll just ignore what happens when you slot E-commerce and Market Economy in too.) So i understand why they wanted to remove england being a huge outlier; it's a lot easier to balance TR strength when all civs realistically get ~1 per city plus maybe 0-4 depending on Civ, wonders, and great merchants. Wisselbank alone is as strong as the dark age policy which prevents you from settling new cities. Just keep that in perspective.

It was wise to give England better colonial loyalty tools. Maybe it needs an extra loyalty point since you have to build the RND first, but that's balancing at this point.

 

[Victoria]

I don't thrive so much for fresh water in my coastal cities!

I play Victoria 90% and I play a lot. I also do not restart and so often get a non fresh water start on deity... I even win them... frsssh water is overrated, especially at the start when a capital has more housing and spews out settlers.
The thing is... 2 sea resources = 1 house, Lighthouse = 1 house you soon get there and TBH... I only really want 3 districts so 7 is reachable easy with a granary

 

[ccjmne]

I play Victoria 90% and I play a lot. I also do not restart and so often get a non fresh water start on deity... I even win them... frsssh water is overrated, especially at the start when a capital has more housing and spews out settlers.
The thing is... 2 sea resources = 1 house, Lighthouse = 1 house you soon get there and TBH... I only really want 3 districts so 7 is reachable easy with a granary

Victoria is my favourite too and I definitely agree with you, fresh water is overrated!
That's actually what I tried to say, I meant "I don't strive to Fresh Water" -- English isn't my natural language and I should double-check before posting

 

[Victoria]

English isn't my natural language and I should double-check before posting

Thats fine, you can say what you want .. you are showing useful things