Leader Discussion - Sayyida al Hurra First Impressions

[stealth_nsk]

Yeah Antiquity naval civs and leaders do not feel good because you lose all ships on Regroup which is my preferred setting but at the same time starting Exploration on Continuity with tons of Ocean going ships also feels too OP. The middle ground solution would be that ships are not upgraded to Exploration ships on age transition so you would need to spend gold to update your navy at least.

I think Sayyida is the first leader which clearly shows that Continuity is the default setting now.

 

[Krikkit1]

She is super dependent on your Age transition settings. I have only played her with Regroup meaning I lost all my ships going from Antiquity to Exploration, which is such a loss for her.

They really ought to make it so that naval units stick around during that transition with Regroup on.

They should probably change the Regroup in general…have all units carry over as “Tier 0” which will cost as much to upgrade to “Tier1” as it would to buy a Tier 1…and then give X free upgrades. (or free units if not enough carried over)

You could do the same with Continuity…apply it to Civilian units as well (Antiquity Merchants and Settlers need to be upgraded to be able to make Exploration Trade Routes/Towns, Antiquity Scouts can’t use their abilities or ignore terrain in Exploration…and the upgrade gives them the Defense boost….You could let them upgrade in neutral territory.)

That way the big difference would be relocating the units or not.

 

[disjointaccount]

I'd say I generally prefer regroup to continuity, if not for the massive dealbreaker that is all my packed units randomly being shuffled for no reason. Having played since launch, I've long been in the habit of packing everything into commanders right before age rollover to make sure I have the right amount of units (ie. enough to fill them all without any excess). The problem is that on regroup (or, as was the case before continuity was introduced, the default), despite the fact my commanders are always loaded with an actually useful composition of troops, the game seems to redistribute them across commanders by type. So all my ranged or siege units end up in one commander while the rest are stuck with only melee units. As a result, I lose 10+ critical turns at the start of the age just rearranging my troops so my commanders actually have usable compositions. I get assigning troops wherever if they weren't in commanders, but if I have my troops packed before rollover, the commanders should really just keep whoever's in them.

I like there being a bit more impact to age rollover, but this is such an annoyance for me that until it's fixed I'll be sticking with continuity.

 

[uppi]

They should probably change the Regroup in general…have all units carry over as “Tier 0” which will cost as much to upgrade to “Tier1” as it would to buy a Tier 1…and then give X free upgrades. (or free units if not enough carried over)

You could do the same with Continuity…apply it to Civilian units as well (Antiquity Merchants and Settlers need to be upgraded to be able to make Exploration Trade Routes/Towns, Antiquity Scouts can’t use their abilities or ignore terrain in Exploration…and the upgrade gives them the Defense boost….You could let them upgrade in neutral territory.)

That way the big difference would be relocating the units or not.

Please no. The entire reason I am playing regroup mode is that it gets rid of all the unit spam. I certainly don't want to spend the first turn of Exploration sorting through a heap of outdated units.

 

[UWHabs]

It's one of those annoying cases where everyone has a slightly different view of what they want. Like I don't mind the game punting away all my settlers etc, but wouldn't mind my other units sticking around as like a "level 0". And yes please leave them where I left them. The full continuous mode IMO encourages you too much to prep for the transition. But yeah, there's gaps in the current regroup model which does frustrate me at times.

 

[Leucarum]

Honestly, I'm feeling more and more like a classic mode is where Civ7 should head.

I've been on a trajectory from "I can what they were aiming for and it's worth pursuing", to "Civ switching just feels bad, especially for modern civs. It should go.", and now I think I'm coming round to "The age system is creating more problems than it solves".

 

[pjotroos]

Honestly, I'm feeling more and more like a classic mode is where Civ7 should head.

I've been on a trajectory from "I can what they were aiming for and it's worth pursuing", to "Civ switching just feels bad, especially for modern civs. It should go.", and now I think I'm coming round to "The age system is creating more problems than it solves".

Horses for courses, for sure. I've gone back to Civ VI for a game over the weekend, and - to my surprise - I really missed the natural milestones that ages provide. From medieval on, it just felt like a lot of "next turn, please".

They ages are not perfect the same way 1UPT wasn't perfect when Civ V first introduced it. It has tons of the potential to be much better, and it's already very moreish. But they need to properly commit to it, especially the limitation aspect. The system is creating problems largely in the bits where their vision is fuzzy. Perishable antiquity boats were fine when they were basically fancier scouts, and their perishability was priced into civ & leader design. It was also one of the selling points of Exploration era under that model - this is where naval combat really opens up, with admirals and added range. It's only with leaders like Blackbeard and Sayyida, where their design is based around amassing fleets, that the eras start to creak - they have very different power spikes on Continuity & Regroup, in a way most of the other leaders don't.

(This is wildly off-topic, I know, but while I'm at it; the main reason I avoid Continuity these days is due to military units. In Antiquity, generals very quickly become very expensive compared to units. That limits how many units you transfer, but not how many settlements - and so you're actively encouraged to be more aggresive in combat. Trading a few units to capture a settlement is clearly beneficial, since the units are perishable anyway, and the settlements are not. It's a clean break from the very precious units carrying their own promotions in VI, and I'm sure it's by design. Continuity really breaks that principle, without doing anything to unit production costs. I really don't want that logic loosened for Regroup - thought al Hurra and Teach could have a small number of naval units carried over in Regroup as part of their leader ability).

 

[Leucarum]

Horses for courses, for sure. I've gone back to Civ VI for a game over the weekend, and - to my surprise - I really missed the natural milestones that ages provide.

I haven't been able to go back to 6 - but it's mostly because of the builders/army commanders and town/city split. I much prefer how Civ7 handles micromanagement.

They ages are not perfect the same way 1UPT wasn't perfect when Civ V first introduced it. It has tons of the potential to be much better, and it's already very moreish. But they need to properly commit to it, especially the limitation aspect. The system is creating problems largely in the bits where their vision is fuzzy. Perishable antiquity boats were fine when they were basically fancier scouts, and their perishability was priced into civ & leader design. It was also one of the selling points of Exploration era under that model - this is where naval combat really opens up, with admirals and added range. It's only with leaders like Blackbeard and Sayyida, where their design is based around amassing fleets, that the eras start to creak - they have very different power spikes on Continuity & Regroup, in a way most of the other leaders don't.

I hear what you're saying, but I am starting to think the new stuff added with ages all has baggage that might be unsolvable.

They wanted each age to feel unique, so mechanics are tied to ages. But that also has the effect of railroading each age, and making it so that some ages are better than others. Sayyida's also good case in point as to why locking mechanics more rigidly than before might not be great.

They tried to straddle a line between wanting players to feel like they keep momentum (you still have your empire) and restraining players. But it's just exacerbated snowballing by a huge margin, and too many players hate the feeling of the speedbump that they can't assume it's the default any more.

And when you put that together, the quality of each age drops pretty dramatically. Exploration is more salvageable than modern... And I see what the devs wanted to do... But I think I am starting to come around to the idea that ages are causing more problems than they solve.

I agree that they'd need to commit to the limitation aspect to make it work, and that that is the most fundamental issue... but I also think that boat has sailed. It's just too unpopular with the casual playerbase that they've already had to dial it back. Really each era needs to almost be a complete restart - late starts/single era games are surprisingly good. - but that ain't happening I think. I think 1UPT didn't really have these fundamental issues. It was more tradeoffs... Not sure it's the best comparison.

From medieval on, it just felt like a lot of "next turn, please".

This is how I feel in 7 after Antiquity ironically. I very rarely play past it.

 

[UWHabs]

Back to the topic on Sayyida, I mostly got through antiquity with her, and I I think she's a pretty meh leader, all things considered. Like, it's fun switching things up a little, and really leaning into the espionage game, but as mentioned before, it takes a while really to get going with it. Parking boats is great, but you're still paying 2 gold in exchange for 2 culture and 1 influence for each one you have parked on a district. At least you can park them on fishing boats, that gives you a lot more that you can use.

I think she could probably use just a little more to get you started. Maybe give her a free boat whenever you construct a water building too? If you started with 2 cogs when you got your early fishing quay/harbor down, that would give you a much better early momentum, either to get you started on collecting influence until you actually unlock those espionage actions, or to use those boats for early exploration.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I think the best thing is not to rely on espionage to get your first boat. You should build it to prime the influence pump.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I think the best thing is not to rely on espionage to get your first boat. You should build it to prime the influence pump.

Yes, I tried playing her in more traditional way and it's quite bad. You need to invest into boats, which is not great...

 

[Leucarum]

She may have also fall prey to other balance changes moving around her. +1 influence for a ship is not as much when a monument gives you double that

 

[stealth_nsk]

She may have also fall prey to other balance changes moving around her. +1 influence for a ship is not as much when a monument gives you double that

Monument gives exactly the same amount of Influence, although more culture (especially with adjacencies). On the other hand, monument is almost twice as expensive as galley (although base cost is the same as for Quadrireme) and increases cost of buildings. Plus galleys count in military strength and could be used in defense. You also could stack multiple galleys per settlement. So, I'd say, gaining influence with galleys is overall beneficial.

But the ability is still weak, though.

 

[Leucarum]

Monument gives exactly the same amount of Influence, although more culture (especially with adjacencies). On the other hand, monument is almost twice as expensive as galley (although base cost is the same as for Quadrireme) and increases cost of buildings. Plus galleys count in military strength and could be used in defense. You also could stack multiple galleys per settlement. So, I'd say, gaining influence with galleys is overall beneficial.

But the ability is still weak, though.

For some reason I thought it was +2.

 

[Hellenism Salesman]

I think you all are really under-selling the fact that she can give you pretty much unlimited Culture and Influence.

As long as you keep building boats (which she has a memento to make cheaper, by the way) and fishing boats, you can keep scaling almost infinitely.

In a Town with just four fishing boats and a standard Fishing Quay + Harbor quarter in Antiquity, you can get +10 Culture and +5 Influence. It might set you back 10 Gold per turn, but assuming you’ve developed the Town properly you can absolutely come out of this with a Gold profit, in addition to the extra yields.

And if you had 3 of those Towns with 5 boats of their own? That’s 30 Culture and 15 Influence per turn. By Modern, that will be 90 Culture and 45 Influence. That’s a lot of extra Influence that no one else is generating. It can put you in the lead in a lot of ways.

Don’t think of her as being restricted by Espionage. She can give you as many yields as you are willing to earn.

 

[Leucarum]

I'd also add that playing her as Aksum was pretty fun as I got a free trade route with every boat. Again not super powerful but it was fun to get more free stuff.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I think you all are really under-selling the fact that she can give you pretty much unlimited Culture and Influence.

As long as you keep building boats (which she has a memento to make cheaper, by the way) and fishing boats, you can keep scaling almost infinitely.

Two limits - cost to build/buy and maintenance cost.

I tried playing as Carthage and it's really hard to do right. You have only one city, which also needs to build wonders and buildings like Library, so it's really hard to build more than 1-2 galleys in the first half of the game. Purchasing with money is also limited as you normally want to buy unique district in every town and spending money on galleys instead delays your income spike - both because you earn less and pay more maintenance. Again, it's hard to dedicate noticeable resources in the first part of the game.

I haven't tried Aksum yet, you probably have more freedom with additional cities, but if you don't do Hawilt spam, what do you do with Aksum? And if you do, you once again short in money and production.

 

[pjotroos]

I think you all are really under-selling the fact that she can give you pretty much unlimited Culture and Influence.

As long as you keep building boats (which she has a memento to make cheaper, by the way) and fishing boats, you can keep scaling almost infinitely.

It just goes back to the opportunity cost for me.

Production is extremely valuable yield. Thorough antiquity, you need to build up your cities, ideally at least three, get a number of settlers out, race to your preferred wonders, and establish some decent starting army. If I build land army, I can use it to fight off encroaching IPs, level up my commander, explore the home continent, and then conquer some settlements, if I feel like it. If I build boats, I can do some coast exploration, maybe a light siege support. They give me no XP in any scenario, and if I do any of the above, they also give me no added yields, because they're not stationed. Gold buying also competes with all of the above (bar wonders), and Sayyida has no economy boosts to support it. Her infinite scaling is very theoretical - in practice, getting 15 boats out will noticably criple your capabilities elsewhere. And then at the end of the era they vanish, whereas obsolete monuments still give you baseline culture and influence.

Two major caveats - I find yields extremely important in the antiquity and early exploration. From mid-exploration, you normally have more influence than you need regardless. And I play Regroup, because I find it much better balanced (snowball less big).

 

[Leucarum]

I haven't tried Aksum yet, you probably have more freedom with additional cities, but if you don't do Hawilt spam, what do you do with Aksum? And if you do, you once again short in money and production.

Hawilti unlock a lot faster than espionage actions and when you start your plan with them your money problems go away. Chalcedony seal is a must play for this route though. Still means that playing Sayyida/Aksum is 95% Aksum being generically good and 5% flavouring it with Sayyida.

 

[UWHabs]

Yeah, it's not like it's a negative or anything. I build a couple early galleys in my game to get things going. But you're still limited by both having them around, having tiles to park them on, and so on.

But if you compare to Augustus, for example, he can build monuments in towns for cheap, it's not until late in the age that I would probably have space/needs for more boats than just having towns and buying a monument in each one. And obviously Augustus gives you the cheaper other buildings in towns, production in the capital, etc.. 10 boats late in the era plus some random bonus influence (from not getting penalized for failing), I'm not sure really is there yet for a balance.

But, that said, if you want to build a navy, and want influence, she is strong there. Just because you don't get a ton out of her in the first 50 turns of an age, she does give you some yields later on. I like adjusting to maximize the leader yields, but she's definitely a leader where I need to be in a mood to play, you basically have to adjust your style to get anything out of her. She's not a leader where you can play your normal style and just expect her to boost it up.

Hawilti unlock a lot faster than espionage actions and when you start your plan with them your money problems go away. Chalcedony seal is a must play for this route though. Still means that playing Sayyida/Aksum is 95% Aksum being generically good and 5% flavouring it with Sayyida.

Yeah, I went Aksum for my game, and definitely what I'm doing well is 95% based on their abilities. Mass settling coastal cities with +3 gold on each resource and then later +2 culture on the coastal ones is still crazy, even without really spamming Hawilts.