Is this standard speed? I couldn't disagree more. In my opinion universities are generally the best medieval building. A university with extra yields is awesome. What medieval buildings are you putting ahead of it?
Korea
- Thread starter Der_Zorn_gottes
- Start date
Melchizedek
Prince
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2007
- Messages
- 324
I think he might mean that a Seowan, arriving in the late classical, is competing with basic infrastructure buildings in all cities except the capital. You're not going to build it until you get to Universities anyway, so unlocking early is nearly useless. Generally, tradition is weaker for UBs because your expos are fewer and further behind your capital compared with Progress. However, I'm not one to talk. Lately I've been feeling like Tradition is just inferior to Progress on higher difficulties (emperor +) so there must be something to it that I don't understand.
To be honest, you should build the Seowon ASAP atleast in your Capital...
Universities are just too good. They keep your science up. And getting them fast will make you competitive on Science. In the case of the Seowon, you unlock it earlier, that is an advantage that you need to exploit.
Universities are just too good. They keep your science up. And getting them fast will make you competitive on Science. In the case of the Seowon, you unlock it earlier, that is an advantage that you need to exploit.
chicorbeef
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2017
- Messages
- 1,548
I think the Seowon's cost could be slightly reduced to match the earlier unlock (eg. it should be about the same cost as an Amphitheater or Temple), since I'd tend to rush Education as Korea anyway. I wouldn't call it weak, especially for a Tradition Capital, +1
/
and the +15% from Golden Ages are solid boosts.
/ and the +15% from Golden Ages are solid boosts.
phantomaxl1207
King
The Seowon costing the same as a standard University isn't doing it any favors. You can get one in your Capital, but not your other Cities.
Korea feels too production starved every time I play them.
Korea feels too production starved every time I play them.
Standard. It's not competing with medieval but with earlier era buildings. My start was low production to begin with - mostly grassland with few jungle and flood plain tiles, coffee monopoly (Communitu map). I had to build Markets vs poverty, Libraries, some Herbalists, Lighthouses with Granaries for food cargo, Arena(-boredom) + Barracks(-distress) + Forge to get any production; later some cities needed Temple to fight religious unrest cause all my 3 neighbors turned out to be founders (which also shut down my apostolic founder, hence the need for cargo ships). University that only gives it's base science increase (couldn't run it's specialist slot anyway) is a low priority building.
As Korea you pretty much need a Garden to run the Seowon slot. The one free urbanization from Fealty is inaccessible since Artistry is preferred for GA synergy. The other free urbanization are from WW in Renaissance but because the tech lead is not significant, I'm not sure Korea can secure them consistently. So you will end up with universities with specialist slot unused before Gardens in most of your expansions. And even with Garden you are likely to spend that urbanization on guild slots rather than Seowon.
Tradition also leads to this "strong capital weak expos" setup, so I think having a stronger National Wonder would make more sense, instead of UB that you only build in the capital anyway.
Last edited:
It does seem to depend a lot on map size as the number of players doesn't directly scale. So if you play on 6/8 player maps progress is a lot worse than if you play on bigger maps. Progress is just miserable if there is only space for 4-5 cities but if you play on bigger maps and suddenly have room for 8 it is a lot better.
This particular game sounds like a really poor situation due to happiness problems. That isn't because of Seowon.
Korea's UB coming earlier than you build it isn't a problem. You can pretend it unlocks at education if you really want to, it's extra yields still help in expansion, and it helps a lot in the capital.
Well, the problem with Seowon is not that it's strictly bad, it's better than the building it replaces, sure, but it comes too late due to production cost vs benefit ratio, and the bonus for expansions is not significant until your cities grow big. So basically it's a late game building even if it unlocks in Classical. Korea has nothing for the early game. Compare it to Maya whose Kuna at Math skyrockets it's science.
Seowon's production cost has to be lowered, and it's not enough, I would also provide 1 free urbanization to allow expansions run the slot. At that point it would become a UB that I like and want to build ASAP everywhere. Currently, it's low priority everywhere except the capital.
Both UA (ability to run specialists) and UB should work in expansions. Currently, it's not so much. The capital gets all the benefits, and expansions very little if at all.
Seowon's production cost has to be lowered, and it's not enough, I would also provide 1 free urbanization to allow expansions run the slot. At that point it would become a UB that I like and want to build ASAP everywhere. Currently, it's low priority everywhere except the capital.
Both UA (ability to run specialists) and UB should work in expansions. Currently, it's not so much. The capital gets all the benefits, and expansions very little if at all.
Last edited:
The idea of making the Seowon a replacement of the School of Philosophy NW is great it is more suited for Tradition.
And since your sattelite cities usually will not be able to build, benefit and work the specialist as soon as your capital is a good deal.
And since your sattelite cities usually will not be able to build, benefit and work the specialist as soon as your capital is a good deal.
chicorbeef
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2017
- Messages
- 1,548
Assyria already has a School of Philosophy replacement, so that's not an option (no two UBs replace the same building).
The Seowon's cost should be reduced. 1 free Urbanization wouldn't be bad because Korea wants to work as many specialists as it can anyway.
The Seowon's cost should be reduced. 1 free Urbanization wouldn't be bad because Korea wants to work as many specialists as it can anyway.
Melchizedek
Prince
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2007
- Messages
- 324
It seems the odd thing about giving the University a tech early is that both D&P and Philosophy are techs you already want bad if your main bonus is to specialists, and once you're there you might as well get into the Medieval because your specialists get better by era. This conversation almost makes me think that Korea isn't weak, but it's really a civ that should be using free beakers to help win tall culture, which already has a lot to gain from science. And you really can't force the Seowan into your expos too soon, just be glad you've got a small boost from it later.
They were top tier science civ in vanilla, but in VP because of urbanization unhappiness I think they are not anymore. Sure their science is higher than average but nowhere near as high as top performers like Maya. Seriously comparison with Maya makes Korea looks silly - Maya not only have much stronger religion, more GP for the first half of the game, but it's science also beats Korean science by a huge margin. Maybe this comparison could make us consider nerfing Maya, it's also an option, haha
In my games Korea AI is usually in the middle of the scoreboard. And I haven't seen them at the top at all.
Last edited:
Korea has a much stronger UU, and while Mayan get more GP, Koreas can focus on more GS for even more science and more GWs for culture. A Mayan will beat Korea in early science, but Korea scales better in the late game especially with rationalism and good golden age management.
I am not saying Korea is greatest of all civs, but its quite solid and I've played them a fair amount, I still don't think any buffs are warranted.
That is very situational, and who needs UU when you are 1-2 eras ahead of competition ? That is usually the case with Maya.
It's true in the long term Korea will get more GP but it will take quite some time to get there.
Rationalism is also accessible to Maya, and because of it's jungle boost actually Maya benefits from it even more than Korea. Golden Ages I agree but it will depend much on things like Chichen Itza which you can't secure reliably cause your tech lead is not high enough in Renaissance.
Regarding scaling, it's not true at all. Kuna gets so many buffs over time that in the endgame it's almost like a mini Academy. And you can go really wide with Maya - unlike scientist slots, your Kuna works well in every expansion. Just to give an example - my last Maya good game where I had 8 cities most in a jungle/forest mix with a mix of tradition/progress/fealty/rationalism/industry, around turn 200 my science per turn reached 500. My last Korea game where I expanded to 6 cities I reached about 300 science per turn (which is still good result in my book, just not really close to Mayan).
I would agree Maya is a more flexible civ over all, but not every civ has to be flexible to be powerful. Mayans are a great civ as well, I like them both
Honestly I don't think either one needs a buffDoes Mayan science actually beat Koreas by a huge margin? Kuna are strong but require a citizen. It's hard to use them and large numbers of specialists.
I'd be interested in a bunch of experienced players taking Babylon/Korea/Maya/other science civs for a spin, sharing their games, and seeing how they compare
Maya seems very powerful on perfect lands but I'm a lot less sure if you don't have lots of jungle. While they do have a start bias you can't reply on that for all your cities. I also really don't have an issue with urbanization, there are plenty of sources of happy by mid game.
Similar threads
- Locked
