[R&F] Post Spring Patch: what does FXS still need fix / rework?

[whyidie]

AI Unit refresh - I think the reason AI doesn't build air units is because its like city states, they build an initial set of units and then upgrade them. Once you kill that initial set, they don't re-prioritize military. Remember the AI running around with ancient units in vanilla ? Cause is the same. AI doesn't hard build units in modern eras on lower levels, production just isn't there.

UI - Between spies and trade routes any game with a large empire is a slog. When I'm within 50 turns I start killing spies. When I get to within 20 I kill trade routes. Please set these to function like governors. Assign spies, then interrupt to re-assign. Same for trade routes. Give us a screen that allows us to re-assign and tells us how long we have to wait if we can't. Its probably the biggest killer of the mid to late game.

UI - Have great generals/admirals/support units inherit the same number of moves as whatever unit its joined to and go to sleep once it has been joined. So irritating moving them around that more often than not I'll just leave them at home or immediately activate their special effect.

Overall I like what they're doing, just want more focus on click reduction.

 

[Karmah]

I don't see the production overflow on bonus boosted by policies being part of it , as it is the higher abuse of the game mechanics and makes the game both a bit tedious and easy. My biggest concern right now.

So I put it on 'policy cards' since 'lime and others' are the best tools to abuse it. But it's not the policy that is my concern in itself but the code interacting between the bonus and the overflow of production

 

[acluewithout]

@Karmah Added "Production Overflow".

BTW, if anyone knows how to amend categories (rather than just add new ones), please let me know. AI use of units should probably be AI building and using land units, and the second category should be AI building and using Naval units.

I'm slightly shocked Air Units is at 26 votes. If we're not careful, the next expansion will be "Rise & Keep Rising (and then maybe shoot some stuff up and land again)".

Maybe the next DLC could be Top Gun related... "Ridin' into the Danger Zone".

 

[sonicmyst]

On the topic of AI and air units, i still believe it is tied up to having air units require aluminum. Civ without this resource will have very little chance of building air units. Some games I have played have seen some AI units build bombers and some even can drop nuke from them.

Another issue is how AI uses these air units. Some bombers are just attacking the same target even though the tile is completely razed or destroyed.

 

[Tech Osen]

On the topic of AI and air units, i still believe it is tied up to having air units require aluminum. Civ without this resource will have very little chance of building air units. Some games I have played have seen some AI units build bombers and some even can drop nuke from them.

Another issue is how AI uses these air units. Some bombers are just attacking the same target even though the tile is completely razed or destroyed.

That doesn't excuse them for never, ever building AA units. This was never an issue in Civ V.

 

[acluewithout]

I don't really get why air units require Aluminium in terms of gameplay. Planes are so expensive to build, it seems an unnecessary speed bump.

And then, in terms of flavour, surely the only strategic resource that actually matters is oil. Maybe Uranium, but Civ really only lets you use that for tanks and atomic bombs.

 

[RealHuhn]

What about the silly resource requirement for upgrades? Why can I still build chariots when I have knights unlocked? Makes no sense. Upgrading units is way too easy.

Other than that I voted aircraft because planes are cool, easier dark ages because they would add a whole bunch of new tactics and production overflow with Limes etc. because it feels like an exploit and is basically an I-win-button.

 

[sonicmyst]

That doesn't excuse them for never, ever building AA units. This was never an issue in Civ V.

I agree with you. AI should be able to build AA if gossip tells them that a rival civ has built aerodromes. More so if they were attacked by a bomber.

 

[Ellerby]

I'd like to see Harbours and Holy Sites disassociated from one another.

Maybe introduce another tech (fishing) at the same level as pottery etc and giving the ability to work sea resources. Then move harbours to sailing.

Also would like more ways to improve ocean/coast tiles as the game progresses.

I just think coastal cities should be way better than they are.

But my 3 from your list would be

Air force
Navy
England

 

[Flaxton]

I would rejig the units:

• Melee - only unit that can use ram and siege tower
• Cav - increase the maintenance cost, it's cost more to maintain horses than a man with a stick
• Anti - cav, reduce the cost to build and have as the cheaper units to maintain. Swap military tactics and mathematics around, make maths a pre-reg of mass-production.
• Scout units, introduce the explorer between scout and ranger, better outcomes on villages (perhaps linked to rank)
• Ranged - generally ok, but increase range of machine gun!
• Artillery units - increase damage after first shot.

This re-balances a lot, and stops the Cav horde (rams and cavalry??). Melee would be slower and cheaper. but are the city attackers. Berserker as built with the patch is worse than a knight for almost the same cost and the same maintenance.

 

[shaglio]

This is a very long and comprehensive list, so I don't know if you're willing to add another. But one of my biggest gripes I didn't see on the list: the inability to upgrade into some UUs.

 

[Rosty K]

Seriously, how hard is it to give CS 5 starting warriors on par with deity AI? If anything they say instead that Fred will be even more of a jerk to CS...

Give CS 5 starting warriors, a palace guard, and make them beeline for walls would be a good start... Also buff them to +3 city strength per envoy.

Why overcrowd the map? Just give them bloody walls from the start I say, so those who like an early CS conquest think twice.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

I would rejig the units:

• Melee - only unit that can use ram and siege tower
• Cav - increase the maintenance cost, it's cost more to maintain horses than a man with a stick
• Anti - cav, reduce the cost to build and have as the cheaper units to maintain. Swap military tactics and mathematics around, make maths a pre-reg of mass-production.
• Scout units, introduce the explorer between scout and ranger, better outcomes on villages (perhaps linked to rank)
• Ranged - generally ok, but increase range of machine gun!
• Artillery units - increase damage after first shot.

This re-balances a lot, and stops the Cav horde (rams and cavalry??). Melee would be slower and cheaper. but are the city attackers. Berserker as built with the patch is worse than a knight for almost the same cost and the same maintenance.

Lots of nicely thought out ideas here. Would improve warfare greatly.

I'd actually rather see the range of Archers and Crossbowmen reduced to 1 to match Slingers and Machineguns, rather than bumping Machineguns up. Would put more emphasis on Artillery to soften up cities. To compensate, I'd give Ranged units a free attack against one incoming melee attack each turn. So then they become primarily a defensive unit, along with Anti-Cav.

I'd also give Light Cavalry units an extra movement point to compensate for their higher costs, or make that available as a promotion. Heavy Cavalry units can stay as is.

Altogether, you could invest in Anti-Cav and Ranged units if you're just worried about defence, would need to invest in Melee and either Artillery/Siege for attack, and then add in a few Cavalry for support of either.

 

[Flaxton]

Lots of nicely thought out ideas here. Would improve warfare greatly.

I'd actually rather see the range of Archers and Crossbowmen reduced to 1 to match Slingers and Machineguns, rather than bumping Machineguns up. Would put more emphasis on Artillery to soften up cities. To compensate, I'd give Ranged units a free attack against one incoming melee attack each turn. So then they become primarily a defensive unit, along with Anti-Cav.

I'd also give Light Cavalry units an extra movement point to compensate for their higher costs, or make that available as a promotion. Heavy Cavalry units can stay as is.

Altogether, you could invest in Anti-Cav and Ranged units if you're just worried about defence, would need to invest in Melee and either Artillery/Siege for attack, and then add in a few Cavalry for support of either.

Good thoughts too, I like the free fire for the ranged units. Light cav should be used for attacking ranged and seige, flanking, finishing damaged units, defending flanks etc, not for storming walled cities... Also I like siege warfare but in VI it's not the easiest way. I would also argue that a ram should only affect the hex it's on.

 

[eleven11]

• Spears and Pikes need some love, along with the Military Tactics leaf that is a drain on time.
• AI not using Air power (and to a lesser extend naval power) is a huge problem for the end game. Currently there is nothing the AI can do that will derail my end-game progression. I remember a few times in Civ 5 where an AI would stack airpower near my cities which forced me to respond to the threat. Besides, air and naval game is different, it's already in the game.. and completely neglected.
• AI is passable for most the game but is atrocious starting in Industrial.
• AI
• AI
• AI

I would love to just play with human opponents but my life gets in the way.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

I remember a few times in Civ 5 where an AI would stack airpower near my cities which forced me to respond to the threat.

The AI in Civ 5 was tactically inept with land and naval units, but quite efficient with its use of airpower (and to a lesser degree artillery). And it attacked like a Russian general ("Casualties? Bah! There's more where those men came from. Grind them down, boys!").

The AI in Civ 6 is tactically more sound with land units but ignores the air. Also, it attacks like an Austrian general (reference: Frederick the Great or Napoleon versus anybody wearing all whites prior to the Archduke Charles).

 

[Sylfea]

Lots of good points here.

I voted for AI diplomacy - because interactions with them are unsatisfactory on so many levels and I really want to have the diplomatic option to place suzerained city states under my military protection.

I also picked UI (other) since I have multiple gripes with it - I want to see both the Spear and Baracks promotions, eg, and frankly use the report screen addon since it's so hard to find some of your stats ingame.

And ofc production overflow - I'm fine with chopping but there's clearly an exploit here.

Having said all that, very happy to read some of the changes already announced.

 

[BenZL43]

What's the issue with Bandar Brunei?

It still use Jakarta's icon.. despite replacing it many moons ago. I'm hoping to see distinctive Bruneian icon, like their red symbol from their flag.

 

[acluewithout]

One question to chew on is whether, Post-Spring Patch, the time might be ripe for a community balance patch.

I can't see the AI issues could be seriously addressed, although it might be possible to give the AI some free units in certain circumstances (i.e. to reflect what the AI should have been building in the first place). But other than the AI, I think a lot of the other issues in the game could probably be addressed fairly easily (or at least a good chunk of them).

 

[Kinestic]

The problem with the AI is it is tactically sound, but strategically useless.