First patches - my expectations

[ViterboKnight]

That's what I'm expecting (and hoping) the roadmap for the next patches will be.

1st patch: resolve several game crashes and stability issues. In addition, it might solve display issues with text size and with 4k monitors.
Expected ETC: 1 month.

2nd patch: resolve AI inability to expand properly using settlers (actually breaking single-player game experience). Also, resolve game balance for culture victory.
Expected ETC: 1 month.

3rd patch: UI enhancements.
Expected ETC: 1 month.

4th patch: all other requests and suggestions.
Expected ETC: it depends on how many things they want to include, but likely about 2 month.

In this way, we will have the most critical issues be solved in a relatively short time, and the game progressively enhanced step by step, without having to wait a huge single patch that (most likely) will fix something and break some other thing!

 

[ComradeDavo]

Given that AI not upgrading units was actually brought up by the AI guy in their AI battle royal prior to launch I would expect something on that in the first patch.

 

[Craig_Sutter]

I would really hope they make production of districts a bit cheaper and work on the tech-tree timeline so that it matches history a bit more closely and doesn't go along so quickly. I would assume these to be relatively easy to rejig.

 

[elitetroops]

There are some small bugs that they should be able to fix in minutes just by correcting xml errors. For example the God of the Forge bug, which kind of ruins the game on deity right now, and smaller stuff like Ruhr Valley production modifier being defined as 20 in the xml. I also hope they fix trade routes, which currently for some reason apply double yields to all districts that also have a unique version. Civilopedia and the values in the xml file all imply you should get 1 food/production per district, not 2. I'd assume this fix also only requires editing a single line of code somewhere, that currently applies the bonus from unique districts to the regular version as well. I'd be very disappointed if small bugs like this aren't fixed in the first patch, since they have a very large impact on the game and would hardly require any resources at all from them to fix. There are obviously a lot of AI and balancing issues that need to be dealt with, but these require a lot more work.

 

[smartcanuck1988]

My guess is that the first patch is likely just hot fixes for crashes and clear exploits. No balance issues or AI issues. They had a year at least to work on the AI and other balance issues (e.g. tech tree and eurekas) and I doubt that they are blind to those issues, it just needs time and testing to change these things within the context of a complex game like Civ.

Also likely focus now is on the DLCs otherwise Deluxe purchasers might get worried.

So my guess is that I will expect a proper attempt at helping the balance and AI issues after those DLCs. Not that they are not working on them, I just don't think they'd be willing to publish anything until the game has settled a bit in our hands with all its pre-planned content.

Just a guess.

 

[Nefelia]

My guess is that the first patch is likely just hot fixes for crashes and clear exploits. No balance issues or AI issues. They had a year at least to work on the AI and other balance issues (e.g. tech tree and eurekas) and I doubt that they are blind to those issues, it just needs time and testing to change these things within the context of a complex game like Civ.

I highly doubt they had a properly functional game up and running for a year with which to properly test balance. Several months, yes, but that would have been with a rougher version that had even worse AI and bugs, preventing proper balance assessments as getting rid of the game breaking problems would take precedence.

Nothing tests balance better than a multitude of players seeking the cheapest, easiest, and most broken ways to get advantages over the Ai and other human players. Just in the few weeks we've had since release, we've seen that:

- production is king
- campuses are barely even worth it unless you need Great scientists
- city spam > compact empire
- district cost escalates far too much with science/civics progress
- selling units is far too rewarding
- war carts are just broken-OP
- and a multitude of other balance issues that the play-testers seemingly missed (or that the devs did not have the time to address).

Hopefully Firaxis is busy collecting this data and making balance and QoL fixes for the first patch.

 

[footslogger]

'Campuses are barely even worth it unless you need Great scientists' - (Nefelia)

What a strange comment. How do you propose to win a Science Victory without them?

 

[elitetroops]

- campuses are barely even worth it unless you need Great scientists

Everybody keeps saying this, but in single player, at least competitive single player that aims for a fast science victory, campuses are the most important district there is. The only bottleneck to a science victory is science, and campuses get you there the quickest. Sure, in a more builder type of game campuses might feel worthless, because you simply don't have time to build the stuff you research. But the problem here is not campuses, it's that tech costs are way too low and production costs are too high. I do hope they deal with this issue, I just hope they deal with it by adjusting tech and production costs instead of trying to make campuses more worthy in the eyes of the builders.

 

[UWHabs]

Everybody keeps saying this, but in single player, at least competitive single player that aims for a fast science victory, campuses are the most important district there is. The only bottleneck to a science victory is science, and campuses get you there the quickest. Sure, in a more builder type of game campuses might feel worthless, because you simply don't have time to build the stuff you research. But the problem here is not campuses, it's that tech costs are way too low and production costs are too high. I do hope they deal with this issue, I just hope they deal with it by adjusting tech and production costs instead of trying to make campuses more worthy in the eyes of the builders.

I think it's that you need campuses, but your science can actually flow quite fast without them, at least in the early-mid game. I was at or near the lead before I build my first campus, and it was only once I started to get to the middle ages that it started to feel like I was stalled and had to build some to move ahead.

In contrast, I challenge you to do anything with faith without holy sites, or culture without theatres. The fact that I can generate enough science to not fall that far behind everyone else makes campuses not necessarily worthless, but at least worth less than other districts. Which is awkward, since if you actually build a few campuses and then run the +100% building policy card, then even a couple campuses can be enough to just shoot ahead like crazy in the tech tree, which also makes it unbalanced.

 

[zarakand]

I would really hope they make production of districts a bit cheaper and work on the tech-tree timeline so that it matches history a bit more closely and doesn't go along so quickly. I would assume these to be relatively easy to rejig.

Definitely the pacing needs some work. I feel like I'm flying through technologies even though I haven't done anything in the game really.

 

[omniclast]

I doubt we will see any big balance changes in the first 1-2 patches, which need to be focused on quality of life patches. The game appears to be very stable, even in multiplayer, so hopefully they don't need to spend too much time on crashes. Instead, they can fix things like:

- The goddamn city attack icon you can't click on
- Notification cards on the right side not showing/dismissing properly
- Missing Civilopedia entries on things like Corps and Armies, Amenity Requirements, other basic game mechanics
- City bars not updating immediately with yield changes
- "Amenities required" icons showing over cities that are amenity-neutral
- Tech tree icons for things like extra spies, envoys, and improvement yield increases

- Absurd AI trading mechanics
- AIs (and CSes) not upgrading units
- AIs not repairing pillaged districts (incl. spaceports)
- Constant denouncements for warmongering, even when casus belli penalties are "moderate" or lower
- Being unable to send AIs delegations except within the first 1-5 turns of knowing them
- Not being able to declare war on friends or end alliances early
- Being able to nuke allies without triggering a declaration of war
- Barbarian scouts plundering trade routes, even though they don't attack other civilian units
- Not being able to make teams or play pitboss mode in multiplayer

- Many pantheons/religious tenets don't work (chopping forests doesn't actually give faith, pantheon yields randomly disappear, +1% production per follower being given to cities that don't have the religion) as well as some policy cards (diplo card that is supposed to give 2 envoys when suzerain is different gov't, only appears to work if diff gov't is from same era)
- Getting full gold from selling less than full-charge builders
- Huge production/food boosts from removing terrain features regardless of distance from cities
- Deployed air units making units underneath them un-attackable
- Observation balloons, great generals, and other buff/de-buff support unit bonuses stacking
- Being able to use siege towers and battering rams well after they should be obsolete (i.e. modern era)
- Not being able to remove unfinished or accidentally misplaced districts/wonders
- Unique districts not counting toward district limits and not receiving buffs/debuffs (e.g. not being able to faith-buy theatre buildings in Acropolis with the appropriate religious belief)

- I would also really, really like a build queue. But that one might just be me.

Those are the most pressing things I can come up with off the top of my head, and they should all really be in the first or second patch. I don't think Firaxis will even attempt to address victory condition balance until the first expansion, and I highly doubt we'll see any fine-tuning to things like production costs before then either.

 

[Mathias Rex]

It would be nice if I declare war against a civ which another civ is at war with (fighting against a common foe) than the warmonger penalty should be lighter in this relation.
A civ is in war with B civ. I declare on civ B. Not joint war. Now the warmonger penalty is huge with civ A too.