Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by bite, Jan 16, 2019.
What the heck, Matt?!
Mattias might become one of my favorite leaders if all his lines are that snarky.
So pillaging increases based on era now. Is it the era of the Civ doing the pillaging, or the era of the Civ being pillaged? It would be cool if it were the latter.
The Huns got way more out of sacking Rome than Rome would get out of sacking a Hun camp.
Most things era-dependent rely on "world era" since R&F.
What are those numbers that only Harald and Mattias have? Are those grievances? If so I had previously thought they were civ specific (you have 100 grievances against Norway) not universal (Norway has 100 grievances).
So why the heck were they declaring war on a player (as Kristina)?
Wow. I wasn’t expecting that response. I thought you were going to say something like ”different time zone” or something.
Well that joke backfired.
Yes, they are grievances, and I suspect those are the grievances Sweden has against them. They're probably a different color if that civ has grievances against you.
Ahh, so that’s why it seemed he had a bunch of fun fielding the Car(o)leans...
(Couldn’t resist, sorry )
Anyway Karl = Carl = Carol ( = Charles = Chuck ). It was indeed the dominant name in the stream...
And should work with great wall and I believe the unique improvement alcazar.
I will miss her +4 amenities promotion, I used that one a fair bit.
I felt quite confident already but based on their discussion of the WC being a first iteration and therefore not tied to all diplo mechanisms in the game, it seems more obvious than ever that a 3rd expansion is planned.
Didn't think it was the most revealing of live streams but the change to pillaging is a nice tweak. I'm guessing Norway will still be considered garbage by pro players though?
Please, grant this guy his “h”.
He deserves it and for personal reasons I insist!
If you are at war, I doubt you could enter a hex with an enemy ship in it. Would be my guess.
Hmmm .... This could set up some battles for control of a canal, even before a city is captured.
Well, they are fixing the production overflow exploit, so that will certainly be considered a negative for Norway.
When you talk about Norway being garbage, I assume you mean in terms of power, as it seems many like to play as it, in spite of its relative weakness. That said, I don't think it has been that weak since the last couple of buffs, if you play on a water map. The Longship is a pretty good UU for early exploration, raiding, and popping goodie huts. The production bonus for melee ships is nice and synergistic with the Longship, as is the ability to use those for coastal raiding/pillaging. Early exploration is nice, although that ability is vastly overshadowed by the Maori in GS.
The Berserker is a bit cheaper than it used to be, and the melee line got a general buff when Commando was changed to give an extra movement point. It still suffers from having to be hard built, but Berserkers are hard hitting, very mobile units in coastal territory, especially thanks to free embarkation and disembarkation. Now that pillaging is going to be more powerful, it might finally be a pretty nice unit, even if it is nowhere near top tier.
The Stave Church is...well, probably the worst part of Norway's powers. The extra production from sea resources is good, but it should have been available earlier, and not from a tier 2 Holy site building.
Overall, Norway has a set of bonuses which are "pretty good", but it requires that you are playing on the right map type. I would put Norway in the mid to low tier in terms of overall power.
I hope you're right. I'd rather they keep building on what they've got than hit the reset button with a features-bare sequel.
God I'm so hyped for this expansion between all the new updates and Phoenicia possibly being mechanically insane if being saved for so late into the reveals.
It's possible and more likely that he was talking about patches, there still another year of development if they don't release a third expansion, plenty of time to add to the mechanic like they did in previous patches like the religion overhaul. I hope they release a third expansion but I'm not holding my breath. Into concrete evidence shows up that say otherwise, I'll assume we'll get a last patch this fall and then Civ VI development will be over for good.
So, when my 16 production Hansas build power plants really good things happen? Seems a bit OP to get the crazy german Hansa adj bonus twice.
Can we get a compilation of the most usefull questions someplace for ppl who can't get to the stream
So I was hoping there would be some discussion about the first World Congress, specificylly the outcome of the World Religion vote.
It says that "World Religion" passed with Outcome A and the Elected Target "Eastern Orthodoxy".
Behind we see that Outcome A got 7 votes and Outcome B 3.
Now let's tally up the individual votes for the elected targets that are listed below:
Outcome B: 3 Votes for Elected Target "Protestantism" (Kristina)
Outcome A: 2 Votes for Elected Target "Protestantism" (Kupe, Harald)
Outcome A: 2 Votes for Elected Target "Eastern Orthodoxy" (Laurier, Peter)
Outcome A: 1 Vote for Elected Target "Islam" (Mansa Musa)
Outcome A: 1 Vote for Elected Target "Shinto" (Inca)
Outcome A: 1 Vote for Elected Target "Catholicism" (Hungary)
So the way I listed these, already reveals that I'm of the opinion that Outcome B should have won.
But it seems that first the Outcome votes are tallied up and then the Elected Targets are tallied up.
This changes the way you should vote significantly. Look at the Mercenary Example:
Outcome A: +100% cost for the Elected Target (Faith, Production, Money)
Outcome B: -50% cost for the Elected Target (Faith, Production, Money)
I know that my opponent has a lot of Faith and I want to prevent him from getting Outcome A (Faith).
In fact I want to hurt him with Outcome B: -50% (Faith). I pour 5 Votes into it costing me a lot of favour.
But the rest of the Congress votes for Outcome A: (Production) with 4 votes and my opponent votes Outcome A (Faith) with two votes. So even though I was hell bent on preventing it, my voting Outcome B had nothing to do with the failure of the proposal.
Even worse, imagine the AIs would have voted for Outcome A: (Production) with 3 votes and Outcome A: (Faith) with three votes and the tie would have gone to Outcome A: (Faith).
So if you want to prevent someone from getting Outcome A: (Faith) it makes more sense to vote Outcome A: (somehting else) to prevent him from getting it, than if you vote Outcome B.
Am I the only one that finds this counter-intuitive?
I like that they wanted to give us a lot of options with the World Congress, but I fear they might have overshot the target a little bit. With the religion thing alone there are 10 proposals, when you have 5 religions. That's often more possible proposals than civs, who are voting/proposing.
You are not really voting on issues, you are putting things forward, and whoever puts something forward the most, wins. Unless it's from a different sub-category (Outcome A or Outcome B) then you're out of luck. The system is just really messy and hard to understand. I like the World Congress, but I find the implementation to be needlessly confusing.
What are your oppinions on the voting mechanism?
Separate names with a comma.