Spring Patch notes

[SupremacyKing2]

Joint wars/Third Party War Update

• • Players can now ask other players or AI to join wars they are already in.
  • Trade screen allows Casus Belli to be chosen when declaring a Joint War.
  • Joint War now requires one party to have denounced the enemy for 5 turns.
  • Leader screen makes it clear that war declaration is part of a joint war.

I really like these changes. They should get rid of the constant joint wars against the player.

 

[Tech Osen]

I really like these changes. They should get rid of the constant joint wars against the player.

Well, it would at least get rid of out of the blue joint wars against you from AI's that liked you the turn before.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

So if I'm understanding this correctly, I can use this in the following way: I'm playing as Greece, and my two closest neighbors are Rome and Egypt. I'm middle of the pack, Rome and Egypt are is pretty far ahead. I feel threatened by one or the other. I declare war on Egypt, war a little with them, and then bring Rome into the fold. I then make peace with Egypt (once the appropriate number of turns have passed) and let Rome and Egypt duke it out and feel less threatened. Does that make sense to anyone? Is that how this mechanic could work?

I hope not, that was one of the worst features of Civ IV :-( A joint war should be precisely that - you all stay at war or make peace.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

Well, it would at least get rid of out of the blue joint wars against you from AI's that liked you the turn before.

Yes, which is exactly what I want. I don't mind 2 civs that hate me to gang up on me but having two "friendly" civs suddenly DoW me because of a joint war, really broke diplomacy for me.

 

[WillowBrook]

I doubt the UU elimination thread influenced them. It's only been running for about a week. But there were threads a few months ago about how weak all those units are, and I bet that had an influence.

Except that all four of those units had been eliminated by April 30. And I don't recall them saying anything about buffing UU's in the video. But, yeah, likely the earlier discussions were influential.

 

[Ozymandias9891]

I hope not, that was one of the worst features of Civ IV :-( A joint war should be precisely that - you all stay at war or make peace.

I liked being able to bribe Civs into going to war with each other in Civ V. So I'm looking at it from that angle.

 

[shaglio]

Fixed a bug preventing the Hetairoi Great General bonus from being applied when in the same hex as a general.

Huh. I was just asking about this earlier today.

 

[Tech Osen]

On a side note: shame the patch is tomorrow and not today, tomorrow being Ascension Day and thus a free day, in Holland at least. Not that I am actually free, still have to work a few hours...

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Lots of positives. Most significant of those to me:

• Text error fixes: shows an improved focus on quality, which I hope flows through to the rest of the coding
• Immortals "re fix": ditto
• Yield priorities and era strategy fixes: ditto, plus having things work as intended should make it easier to tweak going forward
• Additional era scores generally look appropriate and flavourful
• AI will prioritize vulnerable cities: if this is the start of making the AI more aggressive and dangerous in later eras, that would be great
• Buffs to Berserker, Samurai and Khevsur show they are paying attention to issues raised here

Negatives are fewer. The ones of note to me:

• The way they buffed Berserker, Samurai and Khevsur suggests that the development team is not willing to address the underlying problems in the design for how different unit types interact and become available (upgrade vs build, AI ability to replace lost armies, etc.)
• England "buff": this has been addressed previously, but sad, truly sad
• Public Transport buff: ummm, this card was already so powerful I avoided it as an "exploit". And they doubled it? More surprising than a true negative, I suppose.
• Loyalty interaction with Religion: not the way I thought they were going with this. A negative to me because it suggests the development team will not flesh out the Loyalty system into something truly interesting, as I had hoped they would. This looks like a policy card rather than a general effect ("State Religion: +3 Loyalty to Cities following your faith, -3 Loyalty to Cities following a different faith")

Noticeable by their absence (not that I specifically expected them for this patch):

• Air Force
• "Cede"
• Free City constant state of war

Bottom line: after reading the patch notes, I have no interest in starting up a new game. From the changes announced, I have no confidence that the AI can pursue its own victory or interfere with your plans. I'll monitor the forum to see how people find the AI post-patch, and hopefully the experience will be positive. Otherwise, I'll wait for the next patch.

 

[Mojo85]

What time do these normally release? Have to work nights but free all day, would like to try the new changes before work

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

What time do these normally release? Have to work nights but free all day, would like to try the new changes before work

It should be about 1pm EST tomorrow.

 

[shaglio]

The way they buffed Berserker, Samurai and Khevsur suggests that the development is not willing to address the underlying problems in the design for how different unit types interact and become available (upgrade vs build, AI ability to replace lost armies, etc.

Or they could have linked Military Tactics to a tech further down the tree so it's no longer a dead end tech. That alone would buff Pikemen and it's replacements.

 

[BarbarianHunter]

I wonder if you can get an AI you plan to attack to join a long running war you have with one of its neighbors you intended to make a peace agreement with, make peace, then declare on the AI, leaving it with a 2 fronted war with both you and fellow you just made peace with. Let's find out...

 

[Temppu]

I wonder if UU elimination thread will re-evaluate 3-movement Commando Eagle Warriors. This change is probably the most influential IMO.

Other changes are nice but dont likely affect prevalent strategies much. E.g., I dont believe Magnus nerf is enough affect him being the first Governor for all situations.

 

[Mojo85]

Fixed era and yield strategies, as in no more single rainforest chicken pizzas or single deser tile Petra’s?

 

[Tech Osen]

Free City constant state of war

Free city units should stay within their own borders now. Wonder what ranged units would do though.

 

[RDomico]

AI Air Force == nothing...

I can't believe this. I guess I'll wait until I hear from others to see if this was improved. I don't want to start a game and get to modern times and be disappointed again.

 

[King of Prussia]

i like the patch notes overall.

still, leaves open the question if the AI can use planes even remotely.(its sad it has been this long since release and they haven't gotten it working let alone working well) i enjoy Civ 6 a lot, but this to me is just inexcusable.

some other pet peeve of mine. when they AI has troops in a city as a garrison, but they do not either shoot from the city with that unit, or they leave a full health melee unit in there that does not try and fight. i have taken so many cities knowing the AI wont use that unit, turning what would of been a hard siege into an easy siege. The unit in the city doesn't need to suicide.(perhaps if the city is about to fall, then it might as well die attacking then die when the city is lost) just needs to attack my melee units when it can, to soften them up.

other minor annoyances are the AI keeps moving their units around rather than attacking(especially with arty)

Or they could have linked Military Tactics to a tech further down the tree so it's no longer a dead end tech.

that would be nice.

 

[shaglio]

E.g., I dont believe Magnus nerf is enough affect him being the first Governor for all situtations.

I was just thinking about this. I don't usually chop, but a lot of people who do seem to think it's overpowered (not just Magnus' bonus). I was wondering if dropping it from 100% to 50% was enough of a nerf - or if they should have nerfed ALL chopping in general.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I was just thinking about this. I don't usually chop, but a lot of people who do seem to think it's overpowered (not just Magnus' bonus). I was wondering if dropping it from 100% to 50% was enough of a nerf - or if they should have nerfed ALL chopping in general.

I think they should have gone with all chopping. Chopping was too powerful even before Magnus.