Walls of Babylon have 1 scientist slot. Nebu starts with a Bowman, which makes him above average at barbarian stomping. Bowmen also move faster in desert terrain, for additional fun.
I can increase the danger from AI rushes if they're not a threat in the early game. I'd rather cure the disease than treat the symptoms.
How? Just making them more aggressive just means they devote even more of their resources to war-making, and neglect economy more, and they become even weaker in the long run.
Every time I start next to a super-aggressive early AIs like the Aztecs, they almost always end up being a joke power by the time of the Medieval rolls around.
I hadn't realized there was a scientist specialist on the Walls, thanks.
But I think a faction built around "successfully defending against an early rush" is not very useful or powerful. You don't win the game by defending against an early rush.
Anyway, I'll try a game as Babylon and see how they play. The boost to the scientists might be enough of a long-term economic benefit to keep them competitive. I've found in past that my view of factions change once I've tried them again in their latest incarnation.
People felt AI rushes were too effective during the summer, so I nerfed them with many small changes: fewer units, lower starting yields, lower sight range, less siege bonus, less AI capital reveal, different priorities, and more. If we think AI rushes are too weak right now, I can shift a few things back in the other direction.
I think the smaller city attack bonus was a good and needed change; that bonus to the AI just felt gamey.
It might also be time for me to up the difficulty; I've been running most test games at Emperor.
I agree it's gamey, but necessary, due to their... less than exemplary skills at setting up a defensive line for siege units. The siege bonus on swords helped compensate for this too.
I think the existing bonus is fine, and that some bonus is needed in order to make the AI better at taking cities, but the 50% bonus felt frustratingly unfair.
Korea would need to be taken down slightly. Either +1 on farms, or +2 with a research building (university), or the +2 on all specialists should be taken down to just buffing scientists (+2 on them would be quite powerful already).
Not starting with defensive advantages just places a civ on the same grounds as others that do not, it does not start them off on a disadvantage of note to not have a UU archer/Wall or not have a warrior. Starting with those advantages changes things slightly early to make a defence more effective, but is not the same as a long-run advantage like significant science boosts. We should want interesting trade-offs between civs like this but the idea that this is all-or-nothing trade is incorrect.
I'm playing korea at the moment, and I disagree with those who want to nerf it. The +2 science on farms is really good, and really strong, however I am having problems - for example I build farms everywhere but I have big problems with gold (why build a village when you can build a superfarm!). The vast amount of science means you get loads of new technologies for your big (farm-heavy) cities but you can't afford an army or to pay the building maintenance. Its made for a great game this time.
+ 2 on farms from turn one on next to the other good boni is definitely too much. Without mentors hall and bib, every farm is worth 2 extra-citizens in science! Its a huge advantage from the absolut beginning and lasts for the whole game.
Koreans will reach wonders and better units way before everyone else gets that chance which leads to an ugly snowball-effect.
What about:
UA: +1 on farms (perhaps still the best UA) or +2 on farms with universities or by discovering education (the uni-tech)
I would prefer +2 with an requirement for it. Its more of an active bonus and distinguishes korea as medieval Power from Babylon as an ancient science-power.
Combined with:
UB: Jadehall with normal +8 instead of +16 and +2 on scientist only.
UU: Treb without landmali
Korea is still really strong, but not sou out of line like before.
I know that ships as UU are not so well liked, but I think the vikings/denmark really scream for a dragon ship as replacement for the boring Alpine Rifleman.
A better liburna with a gold bonus on city attack (coastal plunder) would really fit the theme.
Alternatively an carrack-replacement on compass. Would ensure early medieval naval domination, allowing naval invasions.
Denmark
I know that ships as UU are not so well liked, but I think the vikings/denmark really scream for a dragon ship as replacement for the boring Alpine Rifleman.
A better liburna with a gold bonus on city attack (coastal plunder) would really fit the theme.
Alternatively an carrack-replacement on compass. Would ensure early medieval naval domination, allowing naval invasions.
I agree, longboat would be way better. I'm not sure where it should go though. I'd worry that the Liburna might be too early - not enough coastal cities there to benefit from city attack - but that the carrack might have bad synergy with the Huscarl by pushing you down two quite different techlines that both flower at around the same time.
Compass is the first medieval sea-tech, so it would be one tier earlier than normal carracks. (just to clarify)
But it could still be a problem, that it is on the other end of the techtree than the berserkers.
Possible solution could be to put the longboat on metal casting, but this would be a bit unusual.
I think there is a general problem in the techtree regarding, that medieval ships require your civilization to master drama and philosophy.
actual techtree until scientific revolution (simplified):
sea techs
civil techs
military techs
perhaps it look more like this
civil
sea
military
By switching writing and sailing (and the following techs) the civils techs wouldn't seperate the military land and sea techs anymore.
(I know its not that easy, but I like the concept.)
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.
@jacktannery
I agree that building farms everywhere has downsides. The value of food drops significantly when we reach the happiness cap. When the food loses value, the farms basically give 2 compared to 11 villages (21 with a river and Sailing).
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.
@mystikx21
The only other leader who starts without a defensive unit like a warrior is Gandhi, who gets early War Elephants.
I'm confused here. Most civs don't have any early game defensive UUs or UBs.
I think perhaps you are talking about the starting warrior, while Mystix is saying that most civs don't have any particular unique features in terms of early game UUs or UBs.
Starting with a worker rather than a warrior is IMO a benefit rather than a cost - *especially* when you get a huge science kick from farms.
Workers are much more expensive than warriors, and being able to start building farms is a huge benefit in terms of when you grow to size 2 or 3.
And you never get attacked before building or buying your first workers, so building a warrior instead is easy. The only thing you lose is the chance of triggering ancient ruins.
Yes I was thinking of civs with defensive UB/UA effects and UU archers or warriors as the advantage. Having a warrior is actually pretty unimportant as the start unit to me. If Korea has the all out bid on a tech rush, a worker is a huge boost to that strategy where a warrior is basically useless.
I like tradeoffs: if we focus on warfare, we should be less effective at peaceful stuff, and vice versa. From what you say, we need some more work to achieve this goal? I don't have much experience with going unit-less because I like moving units and fighting barbarians.
I don't think you can do this with the starting unit, and other than that and UUs/UAs/UBs that are relevant in the early game, every civ is on the same footing.
I don't have much experience with going unit-less because I like moving units and fighting barbarians.
Here's the thing; not starting with a warrior is not the same as going unitless. Starting with a worker over a warrior is probably a boost even if you were planning a warmonger style, because war still relies on economy, and the worker boosts your economy dramatically.
It would take a huge early game nerf to compensate for a long term economic boost like that of Korea. If Korea plays Tall, happiness probably isn't really much of a problem, and the farms end up generating gold too through large city/trade route income.
I agree in theory. In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice they are not, so let's get some data from practical games before making a decision.
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?
If we adapt the hwachaa to normal levels at the same time, I think we are fine again.
What I've seen in my games is that Korea does tech rather fast and once it got a foothold, it's hard to conquer since it does like ranged units and aircrafts later on which makes it harder to conquer.
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)).
Hwacha at 39 even with the city malus is a huge advantage. It's better than cannons and almost as good as artillery, and better than both against units.. The reason it's so high in vanilla is that it has NO city bonus while trebs have a 100% boost (making trebs slightly better vs cities. In this case, hwachas are still 20 or so vs cities and trebs are 30 or so. Hwacha at 21 with no city boost innate and no unit penalty would achieve the same ends without being imbalanced by almost two eras
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
compared to 1
1
