[R&F] Civ Overhaul - Reworking the Civ Bonuses

[DJ_Tanner]

So with the new expansion some of the old civs WILL be reworked. So I thought I would start a place to discuss who, what, and how to change up some of the civs currently in the game. Which civ is too strong and needs to be brought into line with the others, who is too weak and needs some lovin'. The changes would have to assume no new mechanics, since the civs will have been released under the vanilla game and therefore some could own the civ and not the new mechanics.

So go ahead and let the speculation begin! And when this train inevitably runs wayyyyyy off the tracks just remember, they asked for it:

"We look at fan evaluations and rankings in this process, as well. We are not afraid to go back to leaders we have already finalized and rework their bonus entirely – so keep telling us what you think about leaders. We are always listening."

 

[bite]

Look I know it is leader based, but I never liked that Kongo could not accesses one of the victories, indeed, even if it does help them out perform the other AI

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I think the loyalty thing, with cities going independent if they don't have enough, and having to be reconquered or reabsorbed, sounds like it could lend itself to Barbarossa.

 

[DJ_Tanner]

I think the loyalty thing, with cities going independent if they don't have enough, and having to be reconquered or reabsorbed, sounds like it could lend itself to Barbarossa.

I think that would have to be saved for an alt leader maybe, maybe Bismark, since the loyalty mechanic will be part of the expansion so not everyone that owns Barbarossa will necessarily have access to the loyalty mechanic.

 

[Remmert]

I think the loyalty thing, with cities going independent if they don't have enough, and having to be reconquered or reabsorbed, sounds like it could lend itself to Barbarossa.

Or a tweaked bonus for Victoria, who likes to settle on other continents

 

[JacquesBquick]

it could be that barbarossa or any other leader keeps their original vanilla bonus and it only changes upon purchase of expansion

 

[DJ_Tanner]

it could be that barbarossa or any other leader keeps their original vanilla bonus and it only changes upon purchase of expansion

They are releasing 9 leaders, if an old civ needs a new mechanic themed bonus they would just add that in via alt leader.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

I think Pericles and Peter are good candidates for a change.
Pericles' ability is a mechanically boring percentage bonus, and he would be a good fit for something relating to golden ages.
Peter's ability is practically useless unless you play very high difficulties where you naturally fall behind. I'm not sure what he could get that ties in with new game mechanics.

 

[ombak]

They are releasing 9 leaders, if an old civ needs a new mechanic themed bonus they would just add that in via alt leader.

This isn't necessarily about needing a new mechanic-themed bonus, but simply making the leader more competitive or attractive if, in their evaluation, the current bonus just doesn't see enough play.

You could have both, a new leader that focuses on new mechanics and an old leader, revamped, that just happens to touch upon a new mechanic because it's now available.

I'd speculate, as another poster above, that you could have the same leader or civ with different bonuses depending on your expansion level.

having said all of that, the only reason I see to rework Barbarossa is that I don't like his AI agenda or his strength against civ-states, only because I don't play that way. I don't really think it seems likely to change.

 

[DJ_Tanner]

This isn't necessarily about needing a new mechanic-themed bonus, but simply making the leader more competitive or attractive if, in their evaluation, the current bonus just doesn't see enough play.

You could have both, a new leader that focuses on new mechanics and an old leader, revamped, that just happens to touch upon a new mechanic because it's now available.

I'd speculate, as another poster above, that you could have the same leader or civ with different bonuses depending on your expansion level.

having said all of that, the only reason I see to rework Barbarossa is that I don't like his AI agenda or his strength against civ-states, only because I don't play that way. I don't really think it seems likely to change.

Again I don't think having an expansion based bonus makes any sense. Under your scenario basically what you are saying is: we noticed this leader isn't in a good spot so we created a fix for him/her, however you can't have that fix unless you buy this expansion. Instead if they think a civ/leader is not in a good spot I think they will simply rework it to fit within the game as it currently stands, THEN if they want to address other areas of a civ with an alternative leader to match the new mechanics they will do so.

 

[ferretbacon]

I think the loyalty thing, with cities going independent if they don't have enough, and having to be reconquered or reabsorbed, sounds like it could lend itself to Barbarossa.

Not to mention that when he invites you to see one of his nearby cities, he drops the caveat (paraphrasing) "if they're not rebelling again." An update to his LUA could simply be to extend his +7 strength vs city-states to include the same bonus against independent or flipped former German cities.

The new governor mechanic would fit perfectly for Persia with its satraps. Though it's pretty unlikely they'll get a change considering they're a DLC civ and that there current UA is perfectly fine and doesn't need a buff.

Or a tweaked bonus for Victoria, who likes to settle on other continents

Considering the aim of England is to make colonies (which are almost always forward settled near another Civ's territory), I could see England getting some sort of ability tweak that insulates their far-flung cities from culture-flipping.

 

[JacquesBquick]

Again I don't think having an expansion based bonus makes any sense. Under your scenario basically what you are saying is: we noticed this leader isn't in a good spot so we created a fix for him/her, however you can't have that fix unless you buy this expansion. Instead if they think a civ/leader is not in a good spot I think they will simply rework it to fit within the game as it currently stands, THEN if they want to address other areas of a civ with an alternative leader to match the new mechanics they will do so.

you asked folks at the start of the thread to speculate away, and this seems like reasonable speculation. its entirely possible a civ even seems fine now, but when in the context of expansion mechanics it is either over or underpowered and thus needs adjustment catered to those mechanics

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

My first thought was Persian satraps when I heard of the governors.

 

[Returning Lurker]

Since there's been no talk of an espionage overhaul Catherine de Medici needs an overhaul as her ability is so tiny as to be almost unnoticeable. What's that you say? She literally didn't do anything else?... then that 9th leader better be French. Or a Corsican. I’d also accept a pseudo-Italian leader of France over a full blooded spaghetti slurper.

 

[ombak]

Again I don't think having an expansion based bonus makes any sense. Under your scenario basically what you are saying is: we noticed this leader isn't in a good spot so we created a fix for him/her, however you can't have that fix unless you buy this expansion. Instead if they think a civ/leader is not in a good spot I think they will simply rework it to fit within the game as it currently stands, THEN if they want to address other areas of a civ with an alternative leader to match the new mechanics they will do so.

I agree with your idea that if they notice a leader is not in a good spot now, the solution is not to give them a bonus they only get in the expansion.

I think that's a narrow view. They could see a leader that is not in a great spot now but who they don't want to change. However, in testing the expansion they find the leader is in an even worse spot and something has to be done. (Again, just as Jacques suggests above).

In short, we agree on some general ideas, I'm just suggesting there are perfectly valid reasons for revamping an old civ or leader with a new bonus that do not ignore players without the expansion. I also think it's much more fun to just speculate on the changes than why this type of change might happen or not, so I'll stop nitpicking this issue for now.

I'm most excited about some of the potential new civs, notably Korea, but as for Civs I would love to see revamped, selfishly just to play more of, I'd go with Russia (Peter), France (Catherine) and Greece (Pericles).

 

[Returning Lurker]

Again I don't think having an expansion based bonus makes any sense. Under your scenario basically what you are saying is: we noticed this leader isn't in a good spot so we created a fix for him/her, however you can't have that fix unless you buy this expansion. Instead if they think a civ/leader is not in a good spot I think they will simply rework it to fit within the game as it currently stands, THEN if they want to address other areas of a civ with an alternative leader to match the new mechanics they will do so.

They did that in civ 5. France got an entirely new ability in BNW (crap “City of Light”) while in vanilla it kept its original bonus (amazingly versatile if mechanically dull “Ancien Regime”) due to changes in the culture system necessitating an overhaul of their abilities.

 

[bbbt]

Anyone with an ability dealing with a game mechanic being expanded could have that ability revamped. Having said that, I don't know that Barbarossa's would get much of a revamp ala France as just expanding the combat bonus to include independent cities.

I agree that replacing a unrelated bonus with an expansion based one would be a little odd.

 

[Hawke9]

Maybe rome could get some loyalty rewards since they're all about establishing a great land-empire.

 

[Vahnstad]

I think Spain is the most likely candidate for an overhaul, since it's currently weak, and the newly introduced governor mechanic seems like it's made for Spain.

 

[Inhalaattori]

It would make a lot sense for them to change Persian Satrapies -unique ability. Satrapies were literally governors. Also the bonus Satrapies now has is pretty boring trade route bonus.