Is Byzantium OP?

[kb27787]

I vote for "yes".

Its power is at least comparable to Mongolia or Gran Columbia.

Free heavy cavalry is insane, but actually the most insane part is that "cavalry get 100% damage against walls".

This reminds me of the good old days when every domination victory is finished before T150, including those continental ones.

And this is also combined with another insane, Mongolia-like strength bonus.

What if you put Mongolia to the very vanilla version? even under that version, you need a ram for cavalries. Rams only have 2 movement, but apostles have 4 movements, and you can select the ignore terrain cost belief.

Back in the day, I would just buy a new ram from a newly conquered city instead... easier that way.
Apostles have 4 move, BUT you need to found a religion AND have a holy site, AND spend charges, so an apostle is consumed every 1-2 cities, and that really hamstrings any bonuses they have. A ram at 260 gold, doesn't scale, is far cheaper than an apostle (gets easily to 500+ per apostle once you've bought several).

I wonder whether free heavy cavalry is that insane. With production cost cards, one would wonder whether it is better to just build the unit straight up rather than finish a whole district. (what this does allow is for you to produce them beforehand and then finish them right when you unlock the civic, otherwise you just get plain chariots) There will come a point where the district becomes substantially more expensive than just chopping out the unit. Moreover, it seems this comes really late (divine right) when compared to feudalism.

 

[Navelgazer]

NFP Civs have all been uniformly amazing.

I feel like all of the NFP Civs have the *potential* to be amazing, but the difference between them ranges from Maya (get explosive science if you do everything right and are lucky enough to have a map that supports that, which you can't even really engineer in the game settings) to Gran Colombia (get massive bonuses without having to do particularly anything for them.) Ethiopia forces you into a religion game, which for some people is a non-starter for their playstyles, but it's so good and powerful in that gear that it's probably more towards the GC end of the spectrum. Byzantium I think is between Ethiopia and Maya on this scale - they synergize very well and don't really have any implicit malus, but you do have to rush religion and prioritize districts that a power-gamer probably wouldn't. In MP, I expect this to be very exploitable early on, especially as Byzantium will be tough to stop once they get rolling, making dealing with them early kind of a necessity. In SP, it should be a lot easier to get the engine going, but will still take some work.

And yeah, too soon to really tell.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

I know it will be a little bit boring and might sound puffed up, but sometimes I have a feeling we are overusing some terms.
Before we call something OP we should establish a definition. Calling over-powered always a) refers to something b) it is marked as bad for the game and considered as a mistake in design. Usually corrected by nerfs or buffs.
In competitive multiplayer games, the point of reference is always a metagame (established on an average chance to win with a certain fraction) and it is always bounded up with a balance. Calling something OP in those games makes sense and is relatively easy to predict or test. Some fractions are stronger than average and players who want to win ale enforced to chose OP fraction. (the main bad consequence). It is also unarguably a bad and undesirable situation for this kind of game.
But...
What is the point of reference in a singleplayer game where difficulty level and the metagame is defined by... chasing with AI? And do the balance is an issue in a single-player games at all? Are we enforced to use some fraction to play, or win the game? So can anything be OP as a consequence?
I would call them just strong. (Term OP would mean that it should be nerfed)

As for multiplayer games. Yes, they seem OP

Will just ban Byzantium just as banning Gran Columbia or Sumeria or Russia or Aztecs.

Or shall we allow all of them? And anyone who doesn't get one of the OPs will be completely turned down.

 

[OmegaDestroyer]

People always complain new civs appear overpowered yet never seem too concerned that Nubia is one of the most busted Civs in the game.

In all seriousness, it is too earlier to really tell. They seem strong but not that strong.

 

[Sostratus]

I wonder whether free heavy cavalry is that insane. With production cost cards, one would wonder whether it is better to just build the unit straight up rather than finish a whole district.

The problem with “free” is that it’s not like the Byzantines can only get Heavy Cav from Hippodrome. They can do everything other civs can do, which includes building Tagma normally. In addition to this and unbounded by their iron stockpile they can drop Hippo+Arena for 2 Tagma at a nice discount while also getting bushels of amenities.
Even with the Chivalry card (the medieval mounted production red card, whatever it’s called) a Knight at 220 is effectively 147, while an Arena costs 150. And the underlying district at that stage of the game is substantially cheaper than that (scaling Linearly from 27 on turn 1 to 270 at future tech.)
So the real upside here is that you can load up on amenities while getting an army, or you can build an army and then get more army anyways.

People talking about rams etc are forgetting that those only apply to foot soldiers right now, while heavy cav have more combat strength and movement and can blitz out of nowhere. You can spread religion while at peace. Even if we ignore religious spread, simply having a Byzantine Majority religion (and they get easy prophets) gives you a universal +3 and anything next to a tagma (including another tagma) get +4, for an effective 55 / 5 knight before we even talk about generals.

I should also point out that knights come with Stirrups normally. You can easily beeline Divine right, but no one ever does that because monarchy government sucks. That feature to me is more of “choral music bait” and ultimately a wash.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

I should also point out that knights come with Stirrups normally. You can easily beeline Divine right, but no one ever does that because monarchy government sucks. That feature to me is more of “choral music bait” and ultimately a wash.

Actually Monarchy is earlier than Stirrups if you beeline. In fact in about 40% of my games I beeline monarchy before feudalism. (And this can be achieved around T70-75 standard speed)

 

[Ticio]

I voted that is too soon to know, but I have the feeling they are going to be very strong.

I think they will be unstoppable on multiplayer, but I'm very excited because I have the feeling that the AI will handle them very well. Therefore, single games will be more challenging and exciting!

I really like Byzantium and their bonuses, if you want to take full advantage of them you have to work (contrary to Gran Colombia).

 

[Sostratus]

I really like Byzantium and their bonuses, if you want to take full advantage of them you have to work (contrary to Gran Colombia).

What I think it very clever is that unlike a typical religion or Dom Civ, you don’t just want to convert your neighbors or invade haphazardly; you specifically want to capture holy cities. And every time you do you get extra strength.

It’s a very unique raison d’etre that many civs lack.

I also think they will take on a unique empire structure if you want to spam hippodromes- since they now tie into theater squares, pulling some of the tricks you can do with Hansas & Sugubas, will lead to massive Cultural rewards. Imagine having a bunch of +5, or +7 theaters as a consequence of getting tons of free knights.

 

[Ticio]

What I think it very clever is that unlike a typical religion or Dom Civ, you don’t just want to convert your neighbors or invade haphazardly; you specifically want to capture holy cities. And every time you do you get extra strength.

It’s a very unique raison d’etre that many civs lack.

I also think they will take on a unique empire structure if you want to spam hippodromes- since they now tie into theater squares, pulling some of the tricks you can do with Hansas & Sugubas, will lead to massive Cultural rewards. Imagine having a bunch of +5, or +7 theaters as a consequence of getting tons of free knights.

And it totally fits Byzantium! I truly find that they did a splendid job with them.

The only thing they will lack is science and trade routes, but they can tackle it with conquest (as all conquest civs do).

 

[Sostratus]

And it totally fits Byzantium! I truly find that they did a splendid job with them.

The only thing they will lack is science and trade routes, but they can tackle it with conquest (as all conquest civs do).

Well, they lack a science bonus. Byzantine science is not inherently any worse than Greek science or British science. (It’s not like they can’t just... build campuses.)

I definitely was primed by the civ5 version, which he such an elegant “extra belief” ability, that at first I felt disappointed. But now I think I see the design more clearly. (I still go back and forth on if it’s too militaristic or not. I generally feel extremely focused civs should be quite rare, no more than 1 in each victory type.)

 

[Galvatron]

And it totally fits Byzantium!

I'm no historiconomist, but didn't Byzantium get conquered by multiple other religions, not the other way around?

 

[Ticio]

I'm no historiconomist, but didn't Byzantium get conquered by multiple other religions, not the other way around?

I was referring to the synergy of Hyppodromes and cultural districts, not the other bonuses per se.

But I too thought that Byzantium would have had a defensive bonus or something like that, maybe they change it as Georgia already has them but a special city wall could have been interesting!

 

[The googles do nothing]

All of there abilities seem to be useful in all games on all maps which means they are at least better then a lot of civs. ED replacement is one of of the lesser UD, but it's still a UD and not a UI or UB.

 

[Fluphen Azine]

The Devs created this Civ for @BarbarianHunter !!

Welcome Back and enjoy your Heavy Cav Units crushing Walls!!

 

[Aurelesk]

So far, this how my mind is seeing the civilization.

You do not need to have a Holy Site in all your cities to enjoy Religion. There is room for Encampment, Campus or Theatre Square. That initial +3 Combat Strength for Holy City is on par with an additionnal level of Diplomatic Visibility, like Catherine de Medicis. Some of the players used to say that lone "+3" was good enough for Catherine to make her an early warmonger leader.

You can ignore Iron (even sell it), ignore production of Heavy Chariot, ignore the Stirrups / Mercenaries rush (cheap upgrade) and instead just do a Divine Right rush and preproduction of Hippodrome. Therefore, you could ignore the upper path of the Civic tree and go straight to Theocracy, while choosing the Tech path you want.
Free maintenance from Heavy Cavalry created through Hippodrome also means better Gold income.

You can save some Faith for conversion, since you can convert by crushing enemy units, leading to better Faith economy. This means you could buy a Great General if needed. You can do faster conquest, since it is easier to bring Apostle / Cavalry than Battering Ram / Melee against Walls.

In case you are coastal, you have access to the Dromon which is absolutely incredible. In the end, all depends how to secure a decent religion, how to deter early agression in the expansion phase (like in all playthrough), and how fast is a Divine Right rush.

All in all, this is just a different way to play and it is too soon to tell if that new playstyle is way better or on par with all other warmongering approach.


My main concern: +3 by Holy City. The Combat Strength formula is not linear.

• +_3 Combat Strength: +13% in offense and defense, so +27% power.
• +_6 Combat Strength: +27% in offense and defense, so +62% power.
• +_9 Combat Strength: +44% in offense and defense, so +106% power.
• +12 Combat Strength: +62% in offense and defense, so +162% power.
• +15 Combat Strength: +83% in offense and defense, so +224% power.
• +18 Combat Strength: +106% in offense and defense, so +325% power.

This is where the ability is borderline: once started, Byzantium is unstoppable. The worst is that it doesn't need to conqueer the city, just to convert it.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

So far, this how my mind is seeing the civilization.

You do not need to have a Holy Site in all your cities to enjoy Religion. There is room for Encampment, Campus or Theatre Square. That initial +3 Combat Strength for Holy City is on par with an additionnal level of Diplomatic Visibility, like Catherine de Medicis. Some of the players used to say that lone "+3" was good enough for Catherine to make her an early warmonger leader.

You can ignore Iron (even sell it), ignore production of Heavy Chariot, ignore the Stirrups / Mercenaries rush (cheap upgrade) and instead just do a Divine Right rush and preproduction of Hippodrome. Therefore, you could ignore the upper path of the Civic tree and go straight to Theocracy, while choosing the Tech path you want.
Free maintenance from Heavy Cavalry created through Hippodrome also means better Gold income.

You can save some Faith for conversion, since you can convert by crushing enemy units, leading to better Faith economy. This means you could buy a Great General if needed. You can do faster conquest, since it is easier to bring Apostle / Cavalry than Battering Ram / Melee against Walls.

In case you are coastal, you have access to the Dromon which is absolutely incredible. In the end, all depends how to secure a decent religion, how to deter early agression in the expansion phase (like in all playthrough), and how fast is a Divine Right rush.

All in all, this is just a different way to play and it is too soon to tell if that new playstyle is way better or on par with all other warmongering approach.


My main concern: +3 by Holy City. The Combat Strength formula is not linear.

• +_3 Combat Strength: +13% in offense and defense, so +27% power.
• +_6 Combat Strength: +27% in offense and defense, so +62% power.
• +_9 Combat Strength: +44% in offense and defense, so +106% power.
• +12 Combat Strength: +62% in offense and defense, so +162% power.
• +15 Combat Strength: +83% in offense and defense, so +224% power.
• +18 Combat Strength: +106% in offense and defense, so +325% power.

This is where the ability is borderline: once started, Byzantium is unstoppable. The worst is that it doesn't need to conqueer the city, just to convert it.

Converting a Holy City just by slaughtering units won't be that easy though. Unlike theological combat, the Byz ability doesn't remove pressure from the defeated religion.

 

[XX36789]

I think Byzantium will be as good as the player is aggressive with religious and military units.

 

[IvoryPavane]

Converting a Holy City just by slaughtering units won't be that easy though. Unlike theological combat, the Byz ability doesn't remove pressure from the defeated religion.

This is where I feel Byzantiums power level will definitely depend on the mode they are playing.

In SP, with a slightly anemic AI, it will be easy to take advantage of the religious based combat bonuses. That’s unlikely to be the case with savvy human players.

I would happily accept a Byzantinian neighbour before I would a Mayan, Nubian, Sumerian, Aztec etc etc

 

[BenitoChavez]

My rather simplistic view is that they are somewhere between the Aztecs and Ottomans. Aztecs and Ottomans are good civs to be sure, but they aren't on the level of Grand Colombia.

Like Byzantine, the Aztecs get a scaling combat bonus throughout the game and free units. Builders in the Aztecs case which imo is more valuable than the free* heavy cavalry because they come earlier and help snowball your empire.

Like the Ottomans, Byzantine requires some setup and gets their power spike more in the mid-game. They will be excellent at seiging cities with cavalry units and will be able to field a very large army due to free* heavy cavalry. The main difference is the scaling combat bonus Byzantine gets which lets them snowball more.

*free as in maintenance free. You still have to build entertainment districts + buildings. So you're just trading production of a unit for production of a building which pops out a unit. Plus entertainment districts and buildings are kinda mediocre by themselves.

 

[Sostratus]

My main concern: +3 by Holy City. The Combat Strength formula is not linear.

It’s based on an exponent but all that really means is every time you acquire a new holy city, your units get a 13% boost in combat, regardless of how strong they were before; 13% better regardless. For those wondering it’s because x^(a+b) = x^a * x^b. All the combat bonuses and penalties you get end up added together in the same exponent.

[The holy city ability] is interesting in that it boosts religious strength, so every holy city in your collection makes it harder and harder for the unholy barbarians to maintain their own religions.