1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

[GS] Maori, Did Firaxis Finally Learn Something?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by ArallanKing, Dec 12, 2018.

  1. ArallanKing

    ArallanKing Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2016
    Messages:
    135
    Location:
    Hong Kong

    1. Indeed it feels balanced, eventho they can set sail in ocean and colonise lands much earlier, those +2 culture jungles are just there in order to make the Maori able to progress on the Culture Tree, but that tweak plus the inability to get Great Writer means thatd be hard to go for Culture Victory.

    2. Thats why unique civ like this feels OP at some points, but if we immerse ourselves more with it, it's actually the special flavour given to them and noting too OP here.
     
  2. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,949
    Gender:
    Male
    The concept of balance went out the window in Civ a long time ago. The game rules are too obtuse to attempt to properly balance even the vanilla civs without years of playtesting.

    Civ 6 is also not designed around creating a difficult challenge for you to win on single player. The AI can't competitively play the vanilla rules, let alone the expansions, and again, given the layers upon layers of different systems with different rules, couldn't be taught to play the game well until players have had a significant amount of time with the final rule set to figure out the best strategies, which even then will vary from civ-to-civ based on the complexities of their uniques.

    What Civ 6 has going for it is what it's marketed as: win the game your way playing as lots of different leaders.

    From that perspective, the main consideration for a new civ therefore shouldn't be whether it's OP or UP versus existing civs, nor whether the AI can play it well. The main consideration should be "does this civ offer a different game experience for the player compared to existing civs?"
     
    Kmart_Elvis, Ziad, Wizard-Bob and 5 others like this.
  3. pokiehl

    pokiehl Emperor

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2017
    Messages:
    1,435
    I think Maori's design is very interesting and it looks fun. I hope more of the designs in GS are this bold.
     
    Guandao and Trav'ling Canuck like this.
  4. SammyKhalifa

    SammyKhalifa Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    6,020
    Yah, it's certainly the most complicated iteration of Civ thus far . . . would fans pare that way away in order to make the AI "better?" I don't know. They could certainly make the AI more difficult with fewer choices and systems to game.

    but yeah, I want to play with the rules in different ways using different Civs. That's why I think Hungary is interesting (for example) because it takes an almost-unsued game mechanic (levying) and turns it into a main feature. I'm hoping Canada flips diplomacy on its head--I think that's the mostly likely way it will be interesting to play civ.
     
  5. Leyrann

    Leyrann Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2015
    Messages:
    4,016
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Netherlands
    1. Oh? How?
    2. So is map generation. Placement of other civilizations. Tons of other stuff.
    3. AI Maori will probably settle on the first land they find and be completely fine.
    4. Only like 3% of the playerbase plays multiplayer, stop demanding 100% multiplayer balance for a game that has it as extra, while the main focus is single player.
    5. Stop being rude.
     
    Kjimmet and SammyKhalifa like this.
  6. ArallanKing

    ArallanKing Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2016
    Messages:
    135
    Location:
    Hong Kong

    It is very well said, but the core of the game would be The Uniqueness of Each Civ right? Then more civs designed like Maori should be better..
     
  7. Equilin

    Equilin King

    Joined:
    May 8, 2017
    Messages:
    633
    Gender:
    Male
    The first iterations of Civ does not have uniques, and IV only have a small pool of traits for everyone, so I argue that the uniqueness of each civ is not the core of the game, but the uniqueness of each game (which civ uniques contributes to). Too much totally-different civ like Maori (by too much i mean 5-6) is not good imo, it should be considered extra so players can enjoy the general mechanics of the game (shared by every civ) as well.

    Balance should be done primarily on these general mechanics e.g. district&building, tech&civic, chopping, combat, etc.
     
  8. SammyKhalifa

    SammyKhalifa Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    6,020
    I would argue that if Firaxis would try to go back to the more generic civ traits (or none at all), it would not go over well at all.
     
  9. UWHabs

    UWHabs Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,780
    Location:
    Toronto
    I'm more or less on this. It's great to have some civs like the Maori that basically play a totally different game than everyone else does. Like sometime, I would love to see a "nomadic" civilization that could actually move cities or districts over time.

    But I don't want every civ playing by unique rules, since if everyone is, nobody is. But I want every civ playing their own style of game, and I think in general, VI gets that pretty good. There's sometimes that it's really annoying (having to go for religion as Georgia while you don't get any bonuses to it), but generally speaking, if I start a game as a new leader, to use their abilities that's going to draw me in a certain direction.
     
    SammyKhalifa likes this.
  10. PhilBowles

    PhilBowles Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    5,323
    How? We have no gameplay experience to go by so all we have is Firaxis' comment on the stream that they spent a lot of time on the civ for that very reason - whether they succeeded or not is something we'll only learn when the expansion is released, but we do know they had balance high on list of priorities for the Maori.

    Any starting position has an element of luck. The Maori have ways to mitigate it (production while not settled, and potentially greater choice of settlement spots). At the very worst they'll have a 50% chance of missing on land for a long time (since with two units they can cover half the available directions), and map selection will obviously mitigate that. TSL maps are effectively devoid of luck, while continent/pangea maps ensure large landmasses that are hard to miss and archipelagos will have settleable large islands basically in any direction. In an Inland Sea map the Maori have to start in the middle, with land in every direction.


    How well the AI uses a civ is not a Firaxis priority. Why would this be worse than the AI's inability to use Venice in Civ V? Anything that deviates from the norm is intrinsically going to be tough on the AI.

    Why?
     
    Kjimmet likes this.
  11. row2infinity

    row2infinity Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2018
    Messages:
    85
    Gender:
    Male
    Maybe I'm an idiot, but I read this entire thread and I still have no idea why people are so angry about the Maori. If they don't fit your play style, don't play them. I don't play a solid 50% of the current civ ever because of that very reason.
     
    jddods, TomKQT and OmegaDestroyer like this.
  12. Equilin

    Equilin King

    Joined:
    May 8, 2017
    Messages:
    633
    Gender:
    Male
    I meant that Civ was fun even without uniques, so uniques is not the main reason Civ is fun even if it does add a lot to the current fun.
     
    SammyKhalifa likes this.
  13. AriochIV

    AriochIV Colonial Ninja

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,963
    Location:
    Nehwon
    The mechanic is very similar to Polynesia in Civ V, which I thought was fun to play. I think they should make more asymmetrical civilizations, not fewer. For example, I'd like to see raiders and nomadic "civilizations" play more like raiders and nomads, and less like city-builders.

    My bet is what they're worried about is multiplayer balance.

    I couldn't care less about multiplayer balance. Worrying about multiplayer balance is one of the best ways to ruin what is first and foremost a single-player game.
     
    Wizard-Bob likes this.
  14. DJ_Tanner

    DJ_Tanner Emperor

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Messages:
    1,092
    This is nothing "new", it is just Venice all over again. Extremely unique civs like this are either loved or hated, as such they need to be offered with a light touch, because they are great for those that like them, and ruin the game for those that don't.

    They take so much more work than others, so I understand why they are added into full xpacs, but I really think these "game breaking" civs are best suited for the DLC model.
     
  15. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Virago

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    6,373
    Location:
    Climbing Kero Fin
    Not sure why they would ruin the game for those who don't like them.
    There are several civilisations that I either don't like aspects of or that I wouldn't have chosen for inclusion.
    Thats the way it goes. Nobody is going to get exactly what they want because we all want different things.
    However civs that play differently to the others are always interesting even if sometimes they are harder to take full advantage of.

    The one thing I think Firaxis should add is an option to not have certain civs appear in your game at all. Atm if I don't want a civ to appear the only way to do that is to select all the civs that will appear.
     
    Guandao and Trav'ling Canuck like this.
  16. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    2,949
    Gender:
    Male
    That would solve a lot of issues. I hope this gets added.
     
  17. TomKQT

    TomKQT Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2010
    Messages:
    525
    Yep, and I don't think this must automatically be bad. Sure, balanced game would be better, but does it really matter in this type of game? I think that most people play the Civilization games in single player and then balance really isn't important (the AI itself is not "balanced" against human brain...). And limiting the variety of civs for everybody only because of MP games? Why? MP players always can pick just a part of the civ that they consider balanced and limit the choice.

    Civilization (6) cannot be really balanced if you introduce civs that are better in some situations, because that situation may or may not occur based on luck (map generation etc.). You may have a civilization with a kinda great bonus, but you will be not able to use it at all, because the circumstances don't trigger...
     

Share This Page