Final Tuning: The "F" stuff

[Stalker0]

As we "hopefully" draw towards final balance, the goal of this thread is to examine aspects of the game that are just plain bad.

For those who have never looked at my score system before, I often rate things as A (great balance), C (decent balance), and F (needs work).

At this point, A and C debates are mostly done. We are at the point where people have to agree to disagree on certain subtle balance points.

So instead, we will just look at "F" ratings. Are there policies, pantheons, units, etc that are still complete stinkers, and need a final look at? Are there things you never take, or never build...because they are just that bad?

 

[Stalker0]

Oh wrong area. Moderators, can you move this to the "General Balance" area please?

Moderator Action: Moved as requested. leif

 

[tu_79]

I'm always dissapointed with Order's Spaceflight Pioneers. It looks like purchasing SS parts with engineers is a thing, but actually you need 3 engineers to build just one part.

Also, I'm beginning to suspect that Tradition is not as strong as it used to.

 

[Mad Madigan]

Okay, some "stinkers" from various categories:

Religion (Founder):
- Way of the Pilgrim: Specifically the part where it makes Wonders require less policies. The only time this would ever matter is if your science SO outweighs your culture production that you would be massively ahead in technologies but behind in policies. However, if you have War of the Pilgrim and you're actually using it effectively you should be grinding bonus culture production from missionaries and not be that far behind in that regard. My suggestion would be to drop this aspect completely from the Founder and buff it in some other way.
- Divine Inheritance: Perhaps the most boring and generic of the Founder beliefs, and only really useful for strategies that involve having a Super-Capital and banking off of constant Golden Ages. Could be useful for Venice (if you ever manage to found a religion, which is unlikely for them). Given how good and balanced Apostolic Tradition is in comparison to this, I'd almost always rather have that Founder for a Super-Capital focused on Golden Ages than Divine Inheritance.

Religion (Enhancer):
- Ritual: The distance spread aspect is fine, but the secondary feature is pretty useless. I would suggest changing it so that instead of only affecting Friendly/Allied CSs, it doubles the religious pressure from ALL of your trade routes.

Otherwise, I cannot think of any buildings, units, or otherwise that stands out as an 'F' rated item in the game, balance-wise.

 

[phantomaxl1207]

I just wish Panzers had something powerful for being the latest UU in the game. Not even a coat decrease for coming earlier. The few times I have used them, they delivered, I would say.

 

[Stalker0]

The few times I have used them, they delivered, I would say.

That sounds like "C" behavior to me.

 

[pineappledan]

I have only ever played Polynesia 2 times, but I have never once built a maori warrior.

• Playing Polynesia as an ocean-explorer/deep ocean expansion civ makes them one of the least confrontational civs, so having a pure combat UU is unhelpful
• The Maori's main attribute is parity with another unit (longswordsman) without needing a strategic resource. Longsword gets shock, you get haka dance. That's basically it.
• As Polynesia, you have access to lands, and therefore access to resource tiles, which other civs simply don't, so I never found myself hurting for strategics anyways.
• MW got left behind with the buffs to pike, landsknecht and spearman. Hoplite, immortal and Pictish were buffed but Maori wasn't.
• MW doesn’t get bonus vs mounted, so it is situationally worse than the unit it replaces. Arguably the unit’s best selling point is it makes for a marginally better tercio.

Some small boost to your economy, or some overwhelming power to tilt Polynesia into warmongering (like what the sea beggar does) are the only solutions I can think of. Otherwise, the Maori doesn't do anything a normal longsword couldn't do just as well, and dies on the vine while Polynesia expands into the far corners of the map, antagonizing no one.

 

[Mad Madigan]

When it comes to Unique Units I have a hard time comparing them all directly because some are intended to not be as "spectacular" because the Civ's other Uniques are so good. For example, compare the Cossacks to the other mounted ranged units from the Renaissance/Industrial eras. They are clearly better than the rest, but they're supposed to be. Austria, Shoshone, etc. don't need great UUs because their other abilities and buildings are so good. The Panzer is still a great tank, and it's fine that it comes late because Germany has a fantastic UA and UB.

 

[pineappledan]

There are weaker and stronger UUs, sure, but I can't think of another unique component like MW which offers literally nothing of value. MW isn't just weak, it has no reason to exist.

MW has same CS as longsword/landsknecht, +3 from pikeman (note, this used to be +5 from pikeman until recently).
In comparison to landsknecht, it's objectively worse, and everyone can get those.

As you say, comparisons of UUs are a bit specious, but if you did, then the matchups are laughable. Cataphract comes at the same tech, for example, and has 1.5x as much combat strength (20vs30) and +1 move. Berserker has the same CS, but comes 1 tech earlier, +1 move, and 3 free promotions (shock I, amphibious and charge promotions), in addition to Denmark's other UA Viking promotion.

But yeah, that's my 1 big "F". I don't have many opinions about tenets/beliefs/policies, but I spend a ton of time thinking about UCs because of the mod I'm helping with, and this one sticks out like a sore thumb to me

 

[ElliotS]

@pineappledan makes a good point. I also think that a UU who's main benefit is not needing a strategic resource, on a civ that doesn't have any problems grabbing strategic resources, is a pretty meh idea. While I think +2 or +3 CS would be fine, I wouldn't mind making it a longswordsman UU despite the overabundance of longswordsman UUs.

I don't think making the UU better will be enough to make Polynesia OP, even if they're already good. Rome was considered good before the Legion was changed (because it was terrible as a UU beforehand, only good because swordsmen are good) but they're not OP now that it was buffed pretty heavily.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

I'm always dissapointed with Order's Spaceflight Pioneers. It looks like purchasing SS parts with engineers is a thing, but actually you need 3 engineers to build just one part.

Also, I'm beginning to suspect that Tradition is not as strong as it used to.

Ive made some effort to rework the tradition tree, making it more special and interesting for a great capital based play and more growing potential into lategame, but instead simply some numbers were changed after some player mentioned the weakness of tradition. For me, the greatest benefit of tradition is the growth modifier and the increased border expansion. After rising the food consumption of specialists, they can not worked as reliable as they could before. I dont think I work more than 2 specialists a long time, if I pick tradition.

The religions aspects:
Ive tried some venice games after I havnt played them a long time ago and noticed, there are only 3 good pantheons for him (God-King, Festivals and Beauty), cause annexed cities didnt get the pantheon of venice.
Some minor change could be the ability to give annexed city states your pantheon, else you cant give your cities any religious benefits, till you magically got a religion by getting 3 prophet goody huts.

Founder beliefs:
In my opinion, nothing beats holy law founder belief. It gets my top rating, cause in most cases I try to spread my religion to deny benefits to other religion founders and reduce the pressure to my cities.
While all those "first time" religions are kinda useless in my opinion, its nice like russian ability to get science by border growth, but it diminish completly in lategame, and I didnt think its better than yields per social policy, per era or great person.

 

[ElliotS]

Founder beliefs:
In my opinion, nothing beats holy law founder belief. It gets my top rating, cause in most cases I try to spread my religion to deny benefits to other religion founders and reduce the pressure to my cities.
While all those "first time" religions are kinda useless in my opinion, its nice like russian ability to get science by border growth, but it diminish completly in lategame, and I didnt think its better than yields per social policy, per era or great person.

Honestly I think the founders are perfect right now. I personally favor way of transcendence, but all of them are worth picking.

 

[tu_79]

I also think that a UU who's main benefit is not needing a strategic resource, on a civ that doesn't have any problems grabbing strategic resources, is a pretty meh idea.

This is worth thinking about. There are only two longswordsman unique units: Berserk and Samurai. Samurais had their steel katanas, so thematically it's hard to go with other than longswordsman. But Berserks don't strike me as an unit really dependent on iron, maybe this can be shuffled with Maoris for unit type. Maybe reducing Berserk strength a little if it ends up being too strong.

 

[pineappledan]

Better, more precise comparison for the MW: Naresuan's elephant

Siam and Polynesia both peace-oriented civs.

Spoiler :

MW: 120 NE: 200
MW: 2 NE: 3
MW: 20 NE: 27
MW: no bonus vs mounted NE: +50% vs mounted
unlocked at same tech
no strategic resource requirement
-10% to adjacent enemy units (NE loses on upgrade, MW stays)

Pikeman vs Knight: (17*1.50 =) 25.5 vs. (25*1.00 =) 25
Landsknecht vs Knight: (20*1.50 =) 30 vs. (25*1.00 =) 25
Naresuan's Elephant vs Knight: (17*1.50 =) 40.5 vs. (25*0.90 =) 22.5
Maori Warrior vs Knight: (20*1.00 =) 20 vs. (25*0.90 =) 22.5

So that's not... very flattering. Really, you might say that since MW loses the bonus vs mounted in exchange for -10% aura and +3, that it is situationaly worse than a normal pikeman.

This is worth thinking about. There are only two longswordsman unique units: Berserk and Samurai. Samurais had their steel katanas, so thematically it's hard to go with other than longswordsman. But Berserks don't strike me as an unit really dependent on iron, maybe this can be shuffled with Maoris for unit type. Maybe reducing Berserk strength a little if it ends up being too strong.

I don't think the way to make Maori warrior better is to make everything around it worse. Maori warrior is below the power curve, so you'd have to change every other unit, including base units to make it better. Because of Landsknecht effectively being a pikeman UU which is available to everyone, I would consider 20CS the absolute floor for either a pikeman or longsword Unique.

I like Maori warrior being a pikeman replacement. There are already 2 longsword replacements and MW is the only pikeman. The recent buff to spearmen, pikemen and landsknecht, however, did not come with a buff to MW, even though hoplite, immortal and pictish were buffed. perhaps an oversight on G's part, since MW was the only one left out in the cold.

I think the best course of action is to give the Maori some sort of non-combat benefit. Here's my idea for a solution(changes in bold):

Spoiler :

Maori Warrior
Pikeman replacement
unlocked at Chivalry
120
22CS (+5 from pikeman, like it was in previous versions)
'Haka War Dance' promotion: -15%CS for adjacent units (make it stronger than feared elephant)
'Pā' promotion: No maintenance if in a fort, citadel or city garrison
Can build forts

So during the inevitably long stretches of peace as polynesia, your maori can build themselves their own forts, and sit in them so they aren't a burden to your economy.

 

[tu_79]

There are already 2 longsword replacements and MW is the only pikeman.

I'm not sure you understood. The proposal, initiated by ElliotS, to turn Maoris into longswordsmen for the reason exposed above, can be balanced by turning one of the current longswordsman replacement into a pikemen replacement, and I think Berserk suits better.
Samurai -> longswordsman replacement
Maoris -> longswordsman replacement
Berserk -> pikemen replacement
But, being Berserk such a strong unit, I cautioned about considering to lower its strength if there is going to be no iron requirement.

*A Maori warrior looks more like a spearsman to me.

 

[Gazebo]

We don't need to reinvent the wheel for them, and 'passive promotions' are not AI friendly. I think just a slight boost to CS and/or a slight boost to the haka promotion is all that they need. If we want to get crazy, we could give them the Pracinha's GAP on kill ability (or give them GA points on kill, a la Moana).

G

 

[Rekk]

Fealty's Divine Right: the needs reduction modifier carries this entire policy. Is it enough?

 

[ElliotS]

To be safe I would buff their CS to 22, and Haka to 15%. They'll be a bit bland, but appropriately powerful.

Maybe 20 CS with the 15% Haka and Golden Age/Great Admiral points on kill would be more fun.

 

[Stalker0]

It sounds like the Maori Warrior may have made the "F" cut. I have made a new thread to talk about this unit specifically: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/maori-warrior-review.630545/

 

[HungryForFood]

Does anyone use Stupas? I just realised I never feel like I want to get them.