GEM: Leaders

[Naeven]

Maybe a general solution would be to slightly raise the barbarian pressure again? Early game has been rather safe for a few months now. (Also lower the number of units City States get (maybe add a free unit later on when they enter the medieval age)).

The spawn rate from camps could maybe be raised, but I don't think spawning more camps is a good idea. Already almost my complete early economics come from Barbarian killing. It's usually not until medieval that I actually get a positive static income.

 

[Bernd-das-Brot]

I like the idea of a Viking longship.

This is part of the tech tree I spent a lot of time thinking about. I wavared back and forth between having or not having the link between Philosophy and Compass. It would actually make that area of the tree a little easier to see without the fourth link, so if it would also help gameplay, I can remove the link. I added it because people said Compass was too easy to research.

I agree it would be too easy to reach the medieval via compass with just researching Optics as the only classical tech. But Philosophy leading to compass feels very strange.
I think the best solution for the techtree in general would be something like this:

Please see Attachement

I really like the connection between sea and trade techs which makes much more sense than the actual culture/sea-link.
I see it would be a big change in gameplay making optics and compass a must for the better gold techs like banking. But Trade and naval power were often linked (Rhodos, Carthage, Venice, Netherlands, GB).

 

[Bernd-das-Brot]

Early game science farms are fun. Late game science farm are just a slight boost and it won't change the way you play the game much since well, it takes time to replace all the trading posts with farms and it kinda conflicts with specialists, no?

So I'd vote to keep the early science boost, though maybe we can split it? +1 from the start, +1 with the university tech?

As I tend to only build farms and mines in the early game, the farm bonus still seems incredibly powerful to me without changing my playstile. But obviously this depends on ones personal strategy.
(Gold comes mostly from trade, luxury yields, luxury trade and barbarians and with traditions maintenace-free army the costs are not that high.)

To split it coluld be a compromise as long as we have not enough data to be sure. As I started the Korea-discussion I will try to make a game with them, but I am not sure if I find the time before the holidays.


I agree with Naeven there shouldn't be more barb camps. It's fun to hunt barbarians so this is fine, but I feel they have mostly become more of a bonus than a nuisance/distraction as they give experience, culture (with honor), gold and if you are lucky CS influence.

 

[Naeven]

I agree it would be too easy to reach the medieval via compass with just researching Optics as the only classical tech. But Philosophy leading to compass feels very strange.
I think the best solution for the techtree in general would be something like this:

Please see Attachement

I really like the connection between sea and trade techs which makes much more sense than the actual culture/sea-link.
I see it would be a big change in gameplay making optics and compass a must for the better gold techs like banking. But Trade and naval power were often linked (Rhodos, Carthage, Venice, Netherlands, GB).

This.

About Korea, I personally still prefer Babylon over Korea.
In practice, if i spam farms and get all those goodie techs slightly earlier, I won't have the to build the wonders or the to buy all the buildings. Where Babylon creates more of a earlier snowball effect with free GS, and early wall scientist, at lesser expanse + the awesome unbeatable dessert archer that melts barbarians away

The free acadamy they get gives 8 +the resource that can often give , and . The second scientist comes around what?, early classical? It's probably not until Philosophy & the national wonder that Korea actually can catch up. By then, Babylons snowball effect could already dominate.

EDIT:

with traditions maintenace-free army the costs are not that high.)

This just made me realise, maintenance free units per city is a wide bonus belonging in Liberty or Honor, not a tall one.
And since the barbarian buff, Tradition could really use a buff IMO.

 

[jacktannery]

Good point Naevan about production.

For me, the most important thing about the Korea special farms is that they encourage a completely unique playstyle, one that I would not use with any other civ. Reducing the farms to +1 instead of +2 would diminish this hugely. If +2 farms are too good, we should balance it by making something else less good, rather than reducing the farms. Perhaps the Hwatcha could be given less hp/defence value so that it is used for defence only (thus making Korea almost unable to take cities in the trebuchet era)?

 

[Bernd-das-Brot]

This.

About Korea, I personally still prefer Babylon over Korea.
In practice, if i spam farms and get all those goodie techs slightly earlier, I won't have the to build the wonders or the to buy all the buildings. Where Babylon creates more of a earlier snowball effect with free GS, and early wall scientist, at lesser expanse + the awesome unbeatable dessert archer that melts barbarians away

The free acadamy they get gives 8 +the resource that can often give , and . The second scientist comes around what?, early classical? It's probably not until Philosophy & the national wonder that Korea actually can catch up. By then, Babylons snowball effect could already dominate.

Babylonia is a good strong civ, but at least their scientific power is much weaker then Koreas in my eyes. By building just four farms you have +8 science, too. And this farms allow use of mines or a lib-scientist, if wanted. You are not forced to only use farms, if you farm half your land it will be more than enough for a rocket start.
And it really starts when the second city is built, where 4 farms give +8 science again but there is no second free GS for Babylonia. And so on. Reaching civil service early is another milestone.

And to use the extra-scientist slot you have to sacrifice production/gold to build walls, something which is not very desirable in early game. Building farms is prod-free (everybody needs workers). And running 2 scientist for further GS early really slows citygrowth down.

I would say Babylonia may be better (or at least comparable strong) between turn 25-50 or so, but after this I would bet on Korea any day.

This just made me realise, maintenance free units per city is a wide bonus belonging in Liberty or Honor, not a tall one.
And since the barbarian buff, Tradition could really use a buff IMO.

With the high maintenace costs in Gem it would be too good in liberty, so I think it's on the right spot. And with honor your armies are moe often in the field and not at home.

 

[Naeven]

I would say Babylonia may be better (or at least comparable strong) between turn 25-50 or so, but after this I would bet on Korea any day.

Yes, not sure about the exact turns, but the point I was trying to make was that the early advantage is enough to snowball beyond Korea.

With the high maintenace costs in Gem it would be too good in liberty, so I think it's on the right spot. And with honor your armies are moe often in the field and not at home.

But is that what we really want? It's to strong in Liberty, so Tradition will have to take it, eventho it's really a wide bonus.

 

[jacktannery]

What percentage of science comes from the farms and Jade Hall in your game around the classical era, after the Jade Hall is built and specialists are active? Do a quick count of farms and specialists when you have some time. I'd like some numbers before deciding if we should give -1 science, delay the second point of science to a later tech, or leave it alone. It will also help compare with other leaders I have calculations for, to see if the other Korean bonuses need to change as well, and by how much.

Thal, I loaded up my Korea game.
Emperor level; Large map; Epic Speed; Turn 306; 1430 AD. I am in the lead by x2 through clever diplomacy, conquering and tech.

Empire Science
12 Science for free
1,111.7 from cities
68.2 from city states

Capital Science (my capital is my science city)
64 terrain (5 in centre; 3 academies 15 sc each; 13 farms 2 each - not sure why this does not add up to 64)
23 buildings
33 specialists
96 population
BASE 216
90% from city
TOTAL 410.4

Typical large secondary city Science (my capital is a monster so not the average)
10 terrain (5x farms at 2 sc each)
1 buildings
26 specialists
50 population
BASE 87
60% from city
TOTAL 139.2

Hope that helps!

 

[Ahriman]

Thanks for posting this.

I think looking at the late-game like this can under-emphasize the value of farms, because it is at the point where you can have 4-5 scientist specialists, which is not feasible in the early game, but it is easy to work 4 farm tiles from quite early on.

 

[Thalassicus]

@Naeven
The goal is for everyone to get a few policies in most trees, and most policies in a few trees. The maintenance cost reduction is designed to be one of the policies wide players want in the Tradition tree. If tradition was all-tall and liberty all-wide, we wouldn't really have a choice. It would be an automatic decision.

@Naeven, jacktannery
I agree that Korea and Babylon are probably equally good overall. Building farms reduces our gold/production to actually build the things we research with all that science. It's got downsides.

@mitsho
The main thing affecting early barbarian pressure is the turn when barbarians can enter civilized territory. I'd be okay with reducing it. The current settings are:

Barbarian release turn
100 Settler
90 Chieftain
80 Warlord
70 Prince
60 King
50 Emperor
40 Immortal
30 Deity​

How about this change:

100 Settler
80 Chieftain
65 Warlord
50 Prince
40 King
30 Emperor
25 Immortal
20 Deity​

@Bernd-das-Brot
In v1.11 compass requires optics, currency, and philosophy. I can remove the philosophy requirement if we want. This would reduce the number of techs needed for compass by only 1, since philosophy and currency both require drama. This would not significantly affect gameplay, but might feel more realistic, and would make that part of the tech tree a little easier to read.

Land and sea units are mutually exclusive opposites. We have limited economic supply for units (gold/production/resources etc), so we must choose between land and sea for each unit. In games with lots of water, we build fewer land units, and vice versa. Everyone needs civilian techs, so civilian techs are in the middle of the tree between the opposites of land and sea. If sea units were in the middle, it would cause problems for conquerors on land-focused maps, since people would have to get sea techs we don't need to reach the civilian techs we do need.


@jacktannery
Thank you. Based on the available information, the Korean UA increases our average tech rate 15-20% . Here are some UA comparisons:

| Early | Late | Rate Korea |20%|15%| research
Arabia |10%|40%| gold
Rome |15%|20%| production

This is the average amount each UA increases a national rate of techs, gold, or production. The midgame data you provided helped a lot because midgame is harder to theorize than early game, since there's more variables to consider. In the midgame, farms increase jacktannery's science rate about 15% in both capital and satellite cities, which matches my own experience.

A late-ancient empire is easier to analyze. If we have a 2-city empire where each city has 6 pop, 5 farms, and a library:

12 from national bonus
12 from population
10 from farms
22 from buildings
4 from specialists
------------
60 total
16% from farms​

An early-ancient game with a 2-pop capital and hall:

12 from national bonus
2 from population
4 from farms
2 from buildings
------------
20 total
20% from farms​

Notice how the national bonus balances the value of farms in the super-early game. The farms would normally double our science rate, but instead contribute only 20%. The contribution from farms remains in the 10-20% range throughout the game.

I will reduce the strength of hwach'a, since it seems everyone agrees more about that unit. This brings our G&K-GEM comparison to:

G&K: 150% unique caravel restricted to coast
GEM: removed

G&K: 180% unique trebuchet with -25% vs cities
GEM: 140% unique trebuchet with -50% vs cities (was 180%, -50%)

G&K: 4 specialists from the start of the game
GEM: 2 specialists with a national wonder

G&K: 200 to 6000 instantly from science buildings and wonders in the capital.
EM: 2 on farms.​

 

[mitsho]

@Thal, yes I don't see how keeping barbarians out of your borders helps you a lot. Often you want to go hunt them actively anyways and in any other case, your city+archer is often enough. In which case you want them entering your borders before massing outside when you try to send your scout/settler past them...

I was not advocating more camps anyways, I'm not sure that's possible and that would lead to imbalanced spawn of camps in the civs regions.

But would it be possible (and wanted?) to push the barbarian chariots a bit earlier? They can be a pain in the ass because of their speed (esp. if they have the terrain promotion) and might make people appreciate that unit for the player more as well

 

[Naeven]

But would it be possible (and wanted?) to push the barbarian chariots a bit earlier? They can be a pain in the ass because of their speed (esp. if they have the terrain promotion) and might make people appreciate that unit for the player more as well

This, unless it cripples the AI to much. Not sure how good they handle it.

Maybe we should remove the ability to see where camps are from Honor. Honor is strong anyway, and not knowing when & where, might force us a bit more on the defense instead of Hunting them.

 

[Thalassicus]

The delay keep barbarians out of our territory until we have a reasonable amount of time to form defenses. Removing the delay entirely swarms us with a half dozen barbs by turn 10, which pushes us into a narrow unit-only game opener. I want us to have flexibility at the start of the game, but don't want us to be able to completely ignore defenses, either.

I believe hunting barbarians is more fun than sitting in our cities, so I like encouraging hunting with the Honor policy.

 

[Ahriman]

I agree that Korea and Babylon are probably equally good overall.

I just don't see this. Korea has huge long-term potential, especially with the specialist boost. Babylon just doesn't, its benefits are all heavily frontloaded.

 

[mitsho]

But is it hunting barbarians if you know exactly where you need to go to? Mabye lower the camp detection to a 10-tile radius around your capital for the honor opener?

As for the barbs entry into your borders, I get that it might be too dangerous. But maybe that needs another poll? As I'm not really sure how much of a danger barbarians really are right now? But yes, if the AI can't handle it, it's no use.

As for Korea vs. Babylon. Both can become huge juggernauts if left unchecked. is just that much stronger than or conquest in general. But they're fun as well, so instead of nerfing them, I'd suggest buffing all other civs in that regard. If those empires reach a certain technological advanced stage, they're nearly unconquerable as they have high production potential for units and superior units are that much stronger, even against highly promoted units. So those civs can become true hermit kingdoms. There are a few specialized counter units, but those function more on the defensive side, to be able to defend against a technological superior civ (f.e. anti-tanks, anti-air). But there's not much to attack a technologically superior civ (who guns for science victory for example. Besides the hammer approach of the nuclear bomb, there's not much you can do against them. What if there was a bonus to attack for such counter units, maybe hidden in the power social policy tree? Or am I wrong in that assumption?

As for a longship for Denmark. I always liked the Norwegian Ski Infantry (since it is in the same line as the berserker), but I am ok with losing the Jelling Stone. Though maybe the civ will be too focused on naval content then? What would the stats of the longboat be? A liburna that can enter the ocean (=faster to travel, explore AND less congestion issues while attacking) or/and with a merchant raider promo?

 

[Naeven]

As for a longship for Denmark. I always liked the Norwegian Ski Infantry (since it is in the same line as the berserker), but I am ok with losing the Jelling Stone. Though maybe the civ will be too focused on naval content then? What would the stats of the longboat be? A liburna that can enter the ocean (=faster to travel, explore AND less congestion issues while attacking) or/and with a merchant raider promo?

IMO, the longships should be represented by the higher embark and amphibious perks that Askia currently have. Lonships were not warships, they were transports. One of the greatest advantage with them was the ability to sail into narrow rivers were no other big ships could reach, thus allowing it to enter oceans seems backward. If anything they should be able to enter rivers! (not applicable ingame I know) Correct me if I'm wrong, but the vikings ability to explore America was not due to their boats being very good at entering ocean, rather then Longships ability to handle the northern latitudes with alot of ice. The vikings simply sailed around the "ice coast" to America.

 

[mitsho]

I was more going by gameplay perks I tend to do that more and more here...

I'm fine with having the longships represented by higher embarked strength in any case.

 

[Thalassicus]

The camp detection on Honor is a simple on-or-off toggle, so there's no easy way to customize that.

@mitsho
I believe the AI's okay with early barbs. It starts with more units than the human. I have not checked in a few months, however.

I agree it's better to buff the boring stuff than nerf the fun stuff. This is why I'm resistant to nerfing them too much. I prefer to focus on improving weak leaders instead of bringing down good ones. Korea is a very rare example of me actually nerfing a leader, because they are just crazy powerful in the unmodded game.

The Jelling Stones are war stories carved in stone in central Denmark by Harald Bluetooth - the Danish leader in Civ 5. It's got a totally unique effect of giving culture to 1 city of our choice whenever we conquer other cities. In addition to the actual physical landmark, this also represents epic war stores like Beowulf, set in the hall of a King of the Danes. We have fantastic artwork and effects for the Stones. I think it represents an interesting and distinct cultural side to Danish history.

The Norwegian ski infantry are important too - after all, some prominent sporting events developed directly from them. It just doesn't seem as iconic as something actually located in Denmark, created by the Danish leader, representing famous Danish war stories.


@Ahriman
Babylon does get +1 more specialist slot than Korea (on the walls), faster scientist generation, and a free scientist. I think these are powerful bonuses. The superior archers dominate barbarians more quickly and efficiently, which give lots of culture, and even gold if we invest in anti-barb warfare.

IMO, the longships should be represented by the higher embark and amphibious perks that Askia currently have. Lonships were not warships, they were transports.

Thank you, this is a really good point which makes a lot of sense. I'll make it more obvious by renaming the unique ability to "Longships." This is why I focused England on stronger ships while Denmark gets faster movement. The English had highly experienced and large fleets built for ship-to-ship combat, while the Vikings focused on maneuverable troop transports.

 

[Naeven]

Thank you, this is a really good point which makes a lot of sense. I'll make it more obvious by renaming the unique ability to "Longships." This is why I focused England on stronger ships while Denmark gets faster movement. The English had highly experienced and large fleets built for ship-to-ship combat, while the Vikings focused on maneuverable troop transports.

While on the subject of Naval civs, I have a few more opinions
I'm only reflecting on the naval parts of the civs, if they need other balancing, it should be done on the other traits.

Denmark - The Invader by water, With askias perks added, should be done.
England - High exp ships, historical and unique, Done. Not sure England needs a buff, but if they do, I think it would be pretty cool if they spawn great admirals easier.
Carthage - Eearly food bonus from water + early strong ships, historical and unique, Done
Polynesia - embark can enter ocean, but their ships can't guard them untill way later. I think atleast the Galleass should enter ocean as well, otherwise unique.
Ottomans - I don't like UA at all. I'd rather see Ottoman melee ships without the standard city penalty. The Ottomans did conquer alot of cities with their navy historicaly. Maybe that UA is a bit weak alone, I feel + somewhere is deserved from the Ottomans highly tolarant society well before their time. This + the 2 UU make them a solid wide military power.
Dutch - Far from complete, BUT the naval part with sea begger is solid, and if we remove the Ottoman UA as I want, It's also unique.

Byzantium - IMO, they shouldn't be a naval power, dromon should be changed for something that enhance their religius UA.

 

[Thalassicus]

What are the most important characteristics or influences on history from the Roman civilization not yet represented in Civ 5? I'm looking for broad traits like "road building" or "professional army" - not specific units or buildings yet.

One thing which came to mind is "adaptation." A lot of Roman knowledge was assimilated Borg-style from other civilizations. They got culture from the Greeks, language from the Latins, ship design from the Liburnians, and so on.