Is Babylon overpowered?

[spider1]

Sometimes I like to play the Inca in Civ4 as well. This doesn't stop me from recognizing that they are clearly out of balance with the rest of the civs in that game

I'll concede your point, but it won't change my mind.

I like winning games in any manner other than military conquest, and Babylon is an effective science and defensive civ to play and fits right into my style.

 

[Kaosprophet]

This. Babylon are weaker than philosophic civs were in Civ 4,
its just that GSs are a lot more powerful now.

Only by a raw-number comparison made in a contextual void.

 

[bhavv]

No really, philosophical in Civ 4 was +100% birth rate for all GPs, in civ 5 Babylon has 50% to great scientists only. Its no where near as strong, its just that bulbing is stronger.

I also play my games in any way but conquest.

 

[Kaosprophet]

No really, philosophical in Civ 4 was +100% birth rate for all GPs, in civ 5 Babylon has 50% to great scientists only.

In an entirely different context. What you're saying here makes about as much sense as claiming Swordsmen are stronger in Civ5 because they have 11 strength and 2 move instead of 6 strength and 1 move.

It's far more complicated than that - strength is relative. The trait doesn't have the same numbers, but the competing traits aren't anywhere near as strong as their closest Civ4 comparisons either. Even with the reduction and limits their trait is still closer to Philosophical than Egypt's trait is to Industrious, for example.

As for bulbing: nerfing it would affect everyone anyway - at best you'd simply make settling into academies more appealing in general (and apparently it's already good enough for competitive MP.) Babylon would still retain it's ability to generate significant tech edges in that context, combined with the advantages of an extremely powerful early UU - useful for either rushing or defending territory while expanding, and far earlier (with less deviation from economy-building) than the next likely candidate.

 

[aatami]

But really, in my opinion, Babylon isn't nearly overpowered, at least after the massive nerf. I'd just wish people would stop complaining about it, since it seems the devs do listen to the community, thus if enough people complain about something, the devs could make the wrong decision and nerf Babylon without any real need IMO.

Sure, Babylon is top-tier, but I'd say Babylon isn't even near the best civ in the game (best = most over powered in this case).

 

[apocalypse105]

But really, in my opinion, Babylon isn't nearly overpowered, at least after the massive nerf. I'd just wish people would stop complaining about it, since it seems the devs do listen to the community, thus if enough people complain about something, the devs could make the wrong decision and nerf Babylon without any real need IMO.

Sure, Babylon is top-tier, but I'd say Babylon isn't even near the best civ in the game (best = most over powered in this case).

great scientist are overpowered and I would be glad if they got nerved and I thinx I am not the only one

 

[Gucumatz]

They still are OP...

People can rush Rifles by turn 70 with Babylon in Multiplayer if they time things right. How is that not overpowered?

And that is only one technique. It is entirely OP in human to human relation. If this was only a singleplayer game then I could understand maybe why some people would want to keep the outrageous advantages they get.

 

[Tabarnak]

DLC civs are built to let everyone beat deity once in a time

Rifles at turn 70 isn't game breaking if you only have 1-2 of them

 

[Gucumatz]

DLC civs are built to let everyone beat deity once in a time

Rifles at turn 70 isn't game breaking if you only have 1-2 of them

Which is why you have units to upgrade . 4-7 Rifles so early gets Babylon rolling like crazy in most multiplayer games. Then just build more.

=======

Well I don't play Deity much, but haven't ever tried with Babylon or Korea (Guess I like the hard way ).

 

[spider1]

They still are OP...

People can rush Rifles by turn 70 with Babylon in Multiplayer if they time things right. How is that not overpowered?

And that is only one technique. It is entirely OP in human to human relation. If this was only a singleplayer game then I could understand maybe why some people would want to keep the outrageous advantages they get.

Depending how you set up the game, there are a lot of civs that are overpowered. Selecting the Incas on a Highlands map is much more overpowered than Babylon. Every civ should have something about them that is an advantage otherwise it wouldn't be fun.

 

[aatami]

One thing came to mind: Will Korea be too OP if Babylon is nerfed, since Korea is already a steady competitor against Babylon as a science civ?

 

[donhenriko]

Babylon is way too overpowered. Especially in MP it is impossible to keep up in tech against a good player playing Babylon.

Same with Korea, but to a lesser degree.

Both should be seriously nerfed.

 

[smallfish]

Babylon is way too overpowered. Especially in MP it is impossible to keep up in tech against a good player playing Babylon.

Same with Korea, but to a lesser degree.

Both should be seriously nerfed.

I feel the exact opposite.

That's why those two civs are DLCs, and why they should remain that way. They provide overpowered content that you can choose to not include in-game.

 

[Tabarnak]

I feel the exact opposite.

That's why those two civs are DLCs, and why they should remain that way. They provide overpowered content that you can choose to not include in-game.

+1

They are in options after all.

 

[bhavv]

Neither Babylon not Korea are overpowered, stop crying to nerf them. You can make great scientists and sign research pacts and take rationalism / build GL and PT with any civ if you want.

 

[aatami]

Neither Babylon not Korea are overpowered, stop crying to nerf them. You can make great scientists and sign research pacts and take rationalism / build GL and PT with any civ if you want.

/Sign

Stop the complaining.

 

[Mesix]

No really, philosophical in Civ 4 was +100% birth rate for all GPs, in civ 5 Babylon has 50% to great scientists only. Its no where near as strong, its just that bulbing is stronger.

I also play my games in any way but conquest.

You're missing the point entirely. What makes Babylon overpowered is not the 50% increase in GS. It is the free GS early in the game. GS were seen to be overpowered in the early game which led to the developers nerfing the Library to prevent early GS unbalancing the game. Babylon kept their free GS while every other civ in the game lost the ability to develop an early GS.

 

[spider1]

Complaining about this just seems silly to me. Why isn't there a thread about Egypt being over powered? They get a 20% build on wonders to start the game with, then you select Aristocracy and you another 15%. You knock a full third of your hammers off to build wonders, why aren't folks complaining about that?

All civs in the game should have some unique advantage to them.

 

[aatami]

Complaining about this just seems silly to me. Why isn't there a thread about Egypt being over powered? They get a 20% build on wonders to start the game with, then you select Aristocracy and you another 15%. You knock a full third of your hammers off to build wonders, why aren't folks complaining about that?

All civs in the game should have some unique advantage to them.

This.

Also, wouldn't Babylon become underpowered if the free GS was taken away?
For example, France gains humongous benefits through their UA, while a GS-less Babylon will be able to compete with other UA:s only just before the games winner is already quite decided.

 

[Somohexual]

Complaining about this just seems silly to me. Why isn't there a thread about Egypt being over powered? They get a 20% build on wonders to start the game with, then you select Aristocracy and you another 15%. You knock a full third of your hammers off to build wonders, why aren't folks complaining about that?

All civs in the game should have some unique advantage to them.

That would make sense if Egypt got 20% Production toward Wonders and a free GE upon researching Masonry (same cost as Writing). To rush Wonders as Egypt you also give up early production speed on Settlers from the Liberty tree and your capital is gimped pretty significantly during the early game. Not saying Babylon is overpowered but they're not forced to rush anything and they don't need to deviate from the standard path of tech/policy/city advancement. Science is also more valuable than Productivity because buildings that boost it come later on in the tech tree and have decent upkeep costs.

Don't get me wrong, I really love Babylon. It encourages a defensive play style with its UB and focus on technology, which I prefer over warmongering, and I hate how flimsy normal Archers are so their UU is wonderful as well. My only gripe was when I tried rushing Stonehenge -> Great Library on Babylon. Combined with Research Agreements, it didn't take long until I was burning through techs so quickly that I could just randomly click ones without worrying about it. I agree though that Babylon doesn't need a nerf, GS' should just give a scaling amount of Science rather than a completely free tech.

/2c