General Leader Discussion

[ElliotS]

I think Aztec is the weakest now. (How the mighty fall!) They're just worse than every other warmonger. Lower bonuses for winning and/or worse at combat. The faith and gold fall off hard, and religion has been de-powered enough that it no longer feels so powerful to guarantee yourself one.

You get less advantage from fighting than Denmark/Greece/France/Assyria/China/Rome and your only bonus to win wars is... Jaguars? I mean the fact that their upgrade line is more viable now is really nice, but compared to the Swedens and Zulus of the world you're basically bonusless.

They feel like a less flexible Ethiopia. I'm not sure if they should get more bonuses for winning, killing or just combat bonuses, but they feel like they're in a pretty bad spot.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

It's been a while since this thread was active, with many changes implemented since then.

Taking that into account, what are, in your opinion, generally the 5 weakest civs for humans to play with on Pangea/Oval map, standard size&speed and standard settings (+ no events or ancient ruins)?

My thoughts, considering I'm usually playing on Immortal and sometimes on Deity (I'm omitting Venice because it's such an outlier in so many ways):
1. Austria (imho the weakest bonuses to its early game)
2. Germany (also generally starts with little bonuse to its early game)

And that's where my list ends, as I have no idea how to rank the rest of the civs. (I'm omitting Venice because it's such an outlier in so many ways) The rest of the civs all seem to have something to lean on in the early and early-mid game that enables the human player to carve out a decent position to carry into the mid game.

Your thoughts?

Austria's probably the weakest early game, but after a few marriages they turn into beasts. XP for getting a city quests can be pretty crazy if you go Statecraft, your army will have more levels than Sweden. They do require Gold to do most of that and as such Tradition is the worst option you can take. You won't afford the marriages, you will have a harder time getting to Ally range, etc. It requires thousands of Gold that it doesn't help genereting to get +GP% and free votes and no CS influence loss, but they get them in a higher amount than anyone else. The only thing it has that sucks is the Coffee House, it really is awful.

I'd say Babylon was not super strong, but at least it's got a niche with those investitions that no one could step on. Sure, Assyria outteched and still outtechs them, but +15% Production invests are great. Meanwhile Aztecs remain a poor man's warmongerer civ. Even before the first nerf I'd never really pick them over Denmark/Greece/Japan/etc, so I don't understand why they got so many nerfhammers for so long. They now have a bit of a stronger early game because UA's Faith/Gold got buffed and the UB works a bit better, but I don't see them competing with other "benefit from warfare" civs so they still lack something.

I think Aztec is the weakest now. (How the mighty fall!) They're just worse than every other warmonger. Lower bonuses for winning and/or worse at combat. The faith and gold fall off hard, and religion has been de-powered enough that it no longer feels so powerful to guarantee yourself one.

You get less advantage from fighting than Denmark/Greece/France/Assyria/China/Rome and your only bonus to win wars is... Jaguars? I mean the fact that their upgrade line is more viable now is really nice, but compared to the Swedens and Zulus of the world you're basically bonusless.

They feel like a less flexible Ethiopia. I'm not sure if they should get more bonuses for winning, killing or just combat bonuses, but they feel like they're in a pretty bad spot.

I agree with everything here. They don't even have an edge when being passive as the UBs/UIs of others are either stronger (even when they provide a kill/pillage bonus, passively) or at least comparable.

 

[chicorbeef]

The weakest civ I've played, I'd say it's Babylon. But that was before the extra culture on walls. Don't know right now. I've also struggled with France, but that could be caused by having a strong defensive neighbour in the only place I could expand. And I feel a bit ashamed, but I wasn't able to make India work lately, since the changes to happiness.

I tried Babylon for the first time in the version before it was buffed. I was impressed. They actually have all the tools they need to play Progress efficiently-Defense, Infrastructure, and Science. It's hard to go wrong with Babylon, they are a very consistent Progress civ.

Now with the comp bow buff I think the Bowman is going to be a force to be reckoned with. I'll try them again and see what they're like now.

I like India but the problem I always run into is that they hit a wall where growth is just not very productive for the effort it takes and my yields stagnate compared to Arabia or Korea who become yield machines during this time. I find I hit this wall in late Renaissance/Industrial. Happiness is stabilized at this time as India but my science/culture slows down.

France I've never tried but yeah, if your neighbour is strong you're obviously going to run into trouble.

Austria's probably the weakest early game, but after a few marriages they turn into beasts. XP for getting a city quests can be pretty crazy if you go Statecraft, your army will have more levels than Sweden. They do require Gold to do most of that and as such Tradition is the worst option you can take. You won't afford the marriages, you will have a harder time getting to Ally range, etc. It requires thousands of Gold that it doesn't help genereting to get +GP% and free votes and no CS influence loss, but they get them in a higher amount than anyone else. The only thing it has that sucks is the Coffee House, it really is awful.

I don't know why everyone has such problems with Tradition gold. Golden Ages are Tradition's schtick and they produce Gold and help a ton with infrastructure. Yes you'll have less raw gold output but you also have less to spend. I don't struggle with Gold to the extent that everyone seems to.

Though a lot of my Tradition games are ones where I pick Cathedrals and play India so there is that. I haven't really struggled with gold as Arabia either though.

And the Coffee House is not the most glamourous building, but +33% GP is +33% GP. It's as strong as Avant Garde. I can't complain about that.

 

[tu_79]

I don't know why everyone has such problems with Tradition gold.

This is mostly in the early game, when you need to expend gold investing in new founded cities to speed them up. This leaves very few gold for units. Also, it takes longer to get to build markets everywhere, but once you can work the merchant, there are no more gold problems.

 

[Owlbebach]

I think Aztec is the weakest now. (How the mighty fall!) They're just worse than every other warmonger. Lower bonuses for winning and/or worse at combat. The faith and gold fall off hard, and religion has been de-powered enough that it no longer feels so powerful to guarantee yourself one.

You get less advantage from fighting than Denmark/Greece/France/Assyria/China/Rome and your only bonus to win wars is... Jaguars? I mean the fact that their upgrade line is more viable now is really nice, but compared to the Swedens and Zulus of the world you're basically bonusless.

They feel like a less flexible Ethiopia. I'm not sure if they should get more bonuses for winning, killing or just combat bonuses, but they feel like they're in a pretty bad spot.

I think the best would be to make Jaguars stronger and give more stuff for killing. It was a very unique and very interesting minigame of killing whatever you see early in the game. No other civ had anything similar and this was great. Maybe give some additional promotions to Jaguars, like free Shock or Drill? And increase faith and gold on kill by 50% or something.

EDIT:
And yeah, one thing that was really cool is that you can outmaneuver enemy with Jaguars. Maybe give them something like "ignore Zone of Control" promotion?

It seems to be cool and funny and requires some thinking to utilize it correctly. I'd vote for giving them free Shock and "ignore ZoC" promotions

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Given the answers in this thread (thanks, everyone!), I tried a game with the Aztecs. Current version, Immortal, Oval map, everything standard (no ruins and no events), playing against Greece, the Huns, Rome, Sweden, France, Persia and the Zulus. It's currently the beginning of the modern era, I have 15 cities (tied with Sweden for first), a few techs and policies behind the leader (Sweden), having conquered France, Greece, a Hunnic city (with the Red fort, that was a slog!) and multiple city states. I went Progress, Fealty and Industry.

Not sure what to think/write re: the Aztecs' strength. I like the more or less guaranteed (early) religion, allowing you to choose your preferred beliefs. The early gold from killing units helps a bit as well. The GA is decent. The Floating gardens are great mainly because you can build them everywhere, but other than that it's not that better compared to water mills. Jaguars are great for early harassment of a nearby AI to give yourself enough time to settle the spots which would otherwise be settled by that civ. But like others have said, very soon the Aztecs' bonuses towards warfare fade into irrelevance compared to many other civs. But if I started next to a civ without early warring bonuses/UU, I can see myself conquering two or three of its cities before it gets off the ground (going with drill promotions and upgrading jaguars to spearmen asap).

Since Deity is too strong for me and ordinary Immortal too easy for me, I like having a warmonger-ish civ that is a bit weaker compared to others, so I can play on a bit more difficult Immortal, and the Aztecs fit the bill when I'm in the mood to play against other warmongers.

Still, if Gazebo will be looking to buff the Aztecs, here are some brainstorming ideas:
1. Floating gardens can be faith-purchased.
2. Jaguars have 50% vs. mounted.
3. Gold&faith from killing scales with era.
4. Gold&faith from killing has a factor of 1,5 instead of 1.
5. GAs from winning wars have duration of 150% or 200% instead of the current 100%.
6. Jaguars start with a free promotion (don't know which one I'd suggest between drill, shock or some other one)

But I'd be quite ok with the Aztecs remaining unchanged.

 

[ElliotS]

I think the best would be to make Jaguars stronger and give more stuff for killing. It was a very unique and very interesting minigame of killing whatever you see early in the game. No other civ had anything similar and this was great. Maybe give some additional promotions to Jaguars, like free Shock or Drill? And increase faith and gold on kill by 50% or something.

EDIT:
And yeah, one thing that was really cool is that you can outmaneuver enemy with Jaguars. Maybe give them something like "ignore Zone of Control" promotion?

It seems to be cool and funny and requires some thinking to utilize it correctly. I'd vote for giving them free Shock and "ignore ZoC" promotions

I think the reason they're weaker is because religion is weaker, and that after Jaguars they get no bonuses for fighting and the worst bonus for winning. Hanging Gardens aren't as good as they once were, but are still a good building. I think Aztecs need some actual bonus to combat in their kit, like more damage to wounded units.

Throwing more power into their Jaguars seems like the wrong idea, because they're already really strong super early and fall off later.

 

[Moi Magnus]

Throwing more power into their Jaguars seems like the wrong idea, because they're already really strong super early and fall off later.

So if we add/change anything to the Jaguars, it should be a promotion keept after upgrade.

 

[ElliotS]

So if we add/change anything to the Jaguars, it should be a promotion keept after upgrade.

That's way better for players than AI, because it entirely rewards keeping your early units alive.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Elliot, what kind of a bonus against wounded units did you have in mind? +10% extra CS vs. wounded units? Or something different?

 

[ElliotS]

Elliot, what kind of a bonus against wounded units did you have in mind? +10% extra CS vs. wounded units? Or something different?

Let's take this to the proper thread.

 

[pineappledan]

My opinion of the possible changes:
I don’t think jaguar should be touched. He gets 3 unique promotions already, making scouts redundant, and being able to ignore fortifying as you keep killing. That’s quite enough

The two best candidates for buffs are:
1. an increase to 150% on faith/gold per kills
2. Another look at floating gardens.

I think the scalers are too low. Scrap the +2 on the base building, and give 1/ for every 3.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

I think the reason they're weaker is because religion is weaker, and that after Jaguars they get no bonuses for fighting and the worst bonus for winning. Hanging Gardens aren't as good as they once were, but are still a good building. I think Aztecs need some actual bonus to combat in their kit, like more damage to wounded units.

Throwing more power into their Jaguars seems like the wrong idea, because they're already really strong super early and fall off later.

Floating Gardens might be good, but pretty much every reward warmongerer has something better. Colosseum/Mad Mosque AKA Tabya/etc

Maybe what Aztecs need is an era scaler to Faith/Gold kills? This way the amount wouldn't fall off so hard. Right now it helps me found, but once I've founded the amount it provides is too small to influence my Faith spending too much. I also agree that Culture should go and scaler should be improved on the FG. Too many base civs have Culture. Similar problem with Babywall, it's better for it to get something else.

 

[tu_79]

I'd like to point out a fast comparison of uniques related to Golden Ages and Golden Age Points, to We Love the King Days.

Uniques that go for or benefit from GA/GAP:
America UU
Brazil UA
Egypt UA
Ethiopia UB
Germany UA
Korea UA and UB
Mongol UA
Persia UA and UB
Rome UB
Aztecs UA

Uniques that go for or benefit from WLTKD:
China UA and UB
Indonesia UB
The celts UB
Somehow, Holland UA.

Golden Ages give 1 extra gold and production to tile yields with gold or production, can be triggered by accumulating happiness, golden age points (mostly through Artistry) or expending Great Artists.
WLTKD give +20% growth in the city, can be triggered by connecting luxuries in the city, or expending a Great Merchant for a WLTKD in every city.

Now, aren't WLTKD underrepresented? Their effects aren't that great, GM aren't too common. Maybe WLTKD is overall more common than GA, but why so few civs make use of them, while so many civs make use of GA?

 

[Gazebo]

I'd like to point out a fast comparison of uniques related to Golden Ages and Golden Age Points, to We Love the King Days.

Uniques that go for or benefit from GA/GAP:
America UU
Brazil UA
Egypt UA
Ethiopia UB
Germany UA
Korea UA and UB
Mongol UA
Persia UA and UB
Rome UB
Aztecs UA

Uniques that go for or benefit from WLTKD:
China UA and UB
Indonesia UB
The celts UB
Somehow, Holland UA.

Golden Ages give 1 extra gold and production to tile yields with gold or production, can be triggered by accumulating happiness, golden age points (mostly through Artistry) or expending Great Artists.
WLTKD give +20% growth in the city, can be triggered by connecting luxuries in the city, or expending a Great Merchant for a WLTKD in every city.

Now, aren't WLTKD underrepresented? Their effects aren't that great, GM aren't too common. Maybe WLTKD is overall more common than GA, but why so few civs make use of them, while so many civs make use of GA?

Because WLTKD aren’t as exciting or interesting, and most of the effects listed above aren global and wouldn’t translate well to city level.

 

[tu_79]

Because WLTKD aren’t as exciting or interesting, and most of the effects listed above aren global and wouldn’t translate well to city level.

I understand that. I just want to make a point for the next civ we want to modify, that uniques based on WLTKD are not common, even including WLTED. When discussing Aztecs, all was too related to Golden Ages, and every proposal was too close to what other civs already do.

So far, all WLTKD uniques just give a minor boost whenever in a WLTKD. What it is missing is some ability that triggers a WLTKD in the whole empire (as a great merchant does) by doing something (like winning a war). This way, religious beliefs that capitalize on WLTKD can be chosen safely for said civ.

 

[Owlbebach]

Well actually i agree wuth tu_79, but my opinion is a bit biased cause i played this game a lot and therefore i do not feel that GA is more interesting and exciting than WLTKD at all. What is exciting and interesting is to have cool combos. It would be cool to trigger WLTKD in closest Aztec city when enemy unit is killed. (Just thoughts, i'm pretty sure thats impossible or very hard to code)

 

[Gazebo]

I understand that. I just want to make a point for the next civ we want to modify, that uniques based on WLTKD are not common, even including WLTED. When discussing Aztecs, all was too related to Golden Ages, and every proposal was too close to what other civs already do.

So far, all WLTKD uniques just give a minor boost whenever in a WLTKD. What it is missing is some ability that triggers a WLTKD in the whole empire (as a great merchant does) by doing something (like winning a war). This way, religious beliefs that capitalize on WLTKD can be chosen safely for said civ.

From a design standpoint, WLTKD-related things are smaller-bonus;smaller-challenge. It works for Brazil and China because the other parts of their kit are very strong. Replacing a GA effect with a WLTKD effect would either be a big nerf, OR it would be very hard to balance (if strong) on different map sizes.

G

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

From a design standpoint, WLTKD-related things are smaller-bonus;smaller-challenge. It works for Brazil and China because the other parts of their kit are very strong. Replacing a GA effect with a WLTKD effect would either be a big nerf, OR it would be very hard to balance (if strong) on different map sizes.

G

Are they really smaller? I mean -1 gold per gold providing tile, sure, but WLTKD has better and more yield percentages IIRC. Seems like WLTKD is better mid-game.

 

[Gazebo]

Are they really smaller? I mean -1 gold per gold providing tile, sure, but WLTKD has better and more yield percentages IIRC. Seems like WLTKD is better mid-game.

20% production is generally better than 20% growth, as growth is limited by consumption. Again, though, the effect of WLTKD generally needs to be 'passive' otherwise it scales too hard for large empires.

G