Going for Gold: What remains that is "Broken"?

[Stalker0]

So G has mentioned the possibility of going gold again, which likely means starting to hammer down on changes.

At this point a lot of our discussions revolve around small changes. +1 to this, -1 to that. Civ A is a little strong, pantheon B feels a little weak.

A lot of that we will never get fully agreement on, and there is no such thing as perfect balance imo. We can (and have!) debate those small changes for years.

So lets look at the big question, is there anything left in the game that is straight up "broken"? Anything that is so weak you honestly forgot it existed, its been that long since you used it. Anything so strong that you actually feel embarrassed to use it, as you feel like your cheating.

And quite frankly, the answer could absolutely be (and I would love if it is)....nothing. There may be nothing left that falls into that category.

Once again I remind you, this is not "well I feel X civ wins more than I would like". This is "if X civ is in the game I consider quitting as I'll never beat them". Truly....broken.


Discuss!

 

[Stalker0]

Just to set the tone, here is an example I something I once considered broken (but has since been fixed). The 4 archer rush.

A few patches ago, it was possible to rush out 4 archers and effectively take over your neighborhood with a minimum of fuss. It required almost no tech investment, and a small hammer investment. I didn't even need to use authority to do it, just build 4 archers and win. It was broken.

 

[pineappledan]

Order still feels half-finished. It has a t3 tenet that is just a copy-paste if a freedom t1 tenet

that’s the only thing that sticks out to me as being simply under designed right now, aside from my perennial issues with Spain and the skirmisher line’s designs.

 

[crdvis16]

I think the mechanics that lead to the AI getting their pantheons earlier than the player typically can needs to be fixed. The player getting the last pantheon in most situations even if they have a decent start and go shrine first isn't ideal. It feels similar to when the majority of early wonders were impossible to get once upon a time.

Maybe just dropping the extra yields for the AI's first city would help, or at least dropping production/food to slow their start slightly? Ideally every civ that goes shrine first should all get their pantheon within a few turns of eachother (the difference just being slight variations in initial tile food/production) so if the player chooses to prioritize shrine first then they have a decent chance of being among the first pantheon choices.

 

[InkAxis]

Yeah I wouldn't say this is completely broken but I agree Spain's "no conversion of owned city's/allied CS" is just a boring ability that's unfun. As soon as you have a religion it takes no effort to utilize, it's not fun. And it's not fun for other players, it just removes the entire religion game for converting Spain because you just can't. England's ability isn't that you can't spy on them, but it is harder and they get bonuses to spying. Sorry for a bit of a rant but I just haven't had games with Spain and now I see how underdeveloped they are.

Edit: I agree with crdvis16 that the AI can found too early, but I think that can be solved by just removing the production bonuses they get, but only for shrines.

 

[Cokolwiek]

Anything so strong that you actually feel embarrassed to use it, as you feel like your cheating.

Authority. Been writing about it for some time. May be deity-specific. It's providing too much at the same time. Without it I fell naked against AI and handicapped for the majority of the game. With it nearly every game becomes boring in moving the troops over and over again but winnable. But the issue may stem at least partiality from the current design of deity which heavily favors warmongering, which is being discussed in another thread.
Maybe apostolic and that other founder that provide culture?

Not straight up broken but I would consider them not finished in elementary way, just mentioning because there is currently no thread on them:
The fact that food and growth becomes irrelevant at some point, and even detrimental when going wide. Now much more so than before. Half a year ago I was forced to cut this part of the game and lock all but one or two best cities at industrial, rarely renaissance or modern. Now it happens always by renaissance, many time at medieval (!). They have enough yields for me to be the first in techs and score and enough production to remain self-sufficient in constructing buildings or units for the rest of the game.
Lack of meaningful development, especially useful buildings from modern era on.

 

[Kim Dong Un]

The only thing that needs major overhaul still IMO is concerning AI trade/barter dealings and evaluations. Obviously this goes goes hand-in-hand with diplo, but @Recursive has already laid out very thorough plans for this a little while ago; I believe it's the last remaining mountain to climb regarding Firaxis' nonsense.

 

[saamohod]

Order still feels half-finished. It has a t3 tenet that is just a copy-paste if a freedom t1 tenet

Which one is it? https://civ-5-cbp.fandom.com/wiki/Ideologies

 

[pineappledan]

The wiki is out of date.

Cultural revolution gives +5 to GWs. Freedom's Creative Expression gives +2 to GWs

 

[phantomaxl1207]

I do not find Order that good when it comes to Domination victory.

 

[Drakle]

I think the biggest issue that remains is city-states. Not just one thing, but the biggest issues

Some city-states are inherently far better than others.

Tribute is still straight-up broken, which renders some UA useless, and weakens the usefulness of some early UU rushes

City-states represent the strongest way to run away. At least for me, the biggest runaways are those that dominate a bunch of city-states. This is 6 difficultly, so maybe on the higher difficulty, it is conquerer civs that tend to runaway more.


I still say Progress is too weak early game. I get it shines later game, but neither Tradition nor Authority take this long to get working. And Progress shouldn't be a tree you only take on maps with tons of room/clear settlement paths.

I agree Order is weak. Even on some wide games, I find freedom to be more useful.

 

[Recursive]

The only thing that needs major overhaul still IMO is concerning AI trade/barter dealings and evaluations. Obviously this goes goes hand-in-hand with diplo, but @Recursive has already laid out very thorough plans for this a little while ago; I believe it's the last remaining mountain to climb regarding Firaxis' nonsense.

And I plan on starting the big rework soon. Just waiting on the current version's CTD's and bugs to be fixed.

 

[tothePAIN]

Order isn't broken. It's in a decent place. I've used it for warmongering where I would have failed to keep up in science as autocracy.

 

[azum4roll]

• You can tribute gold (~30) from city states if you meet them before they finish their warrior and they're close enough. Maybe add an extra warrior to minor civ at start?
• Gold tributes are fine but it's extremely hard to get anything meaningful from heavy tributes. If you wait for a more reasonable amount there's a high chance an AI would tribute the city state for gold and lower the score again.
• Production handicap yields and their impact on pantheon timing and congress projects. I suggest removing the capital founding production and replacing the other ones with a fixed amount of production over 10 turns.

 

[Stalker0]

So are people saying "Order has a few weak policies" or are you saying "I would never ever take Order, its garbage".

If its the former, sorry doesn't fit the broken category. If its the latter....well I will disagree

 

[CrazyG]

I can't think of anything that's truly broken.

I think Terracotta army gives too much, and that cultural CS give too little, but those are being discussed (and they aren't broken by any means).

 

[vyyt]

I think maybe it is already time to open a discussion about fringe game setup cases (in a separate thread). E.g. if you play with espionage turned off, some policies lose value (you never take Statecraft), courthouses and police stations are disabled and therefore, you have less means to counter Disorder happiness. People playing extreme speeds, sizes, (43 civs???), without religion, starting in non-ancient era, etc. may come up with more examples.

 

[CppMaster]

IMHO it's better to polish game for standard settings until there is nothing to work on and then tweak it for non standard settings.

 

[azum4roll]

The game can never be balanced in every setting and every mapscript. By using extreme settings you should expect something to be "broken".

 

[vyyt]

IMHO it's better to polish game for standard settings until there is nothing to work on and then tweak it for non standard settings.

I agree, this is why I didn't bring it up earlier. But I think we are getting to the point when the game is polished enough to at least start identifying these - maybe not fixing them yet. And I am not saying that every extreme should be covered, but at least those common enough and available in the setup settings (e.g. no religion, no espionage, start in later era, 43 civs) should. No research agreements is already covered, quick/marathon + duel/huge seem to be being adjusted in the current version by scaling of the AI bonuses.