Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Eagle Pursuit, Feb 8, 2019.
I don't either.
Agreed. It comes with some serious weaknesses. Yes, played well, you'll be able to steamroll the AI, but which civ is that not true for?
Also, to the extent the AI can make use of the ability, Hungary could at least potentially represent a dangerous opponent, one who forces you to adapt your game to deal with their challenge. The game needs more of that, not less, for my tastes.
I have to say though, I think they really did nail the Civilisations in this expansion. Both thematically and mechanically.
Almost every Civ has been Schrodingered as similtaneously the strongest Civ evah and Norway tier trash.
To me this means that they’ve done a much better job at creating Civs that resonate with particular play types and not others.
Rise and Falls Civs (while I do think they are cool), did have a lot of “well yes, that’s obviously quite powerful, and quite obvious”
What difficulty setting were they playing in?
Carl has conceded defeat on Twitter.
Great stream. I really enjoyed watching it. Thank you Firaxis, I appreciate it.
As for Hungary, I don't think they need a nerf at all. We seen the limitations of Hungary today. On certain maps, yes they will indeed be very strong. Like the one Marbozir played (and we don't know how many rerolls he did behind the scenes to get that map). This map was more challenging with many mountains and rough terrain, not to mention online speed which slowed down levied units. Losing steam in your attack when you are only 1/3 of the way complete is very rough.
As for religious victory mentioned above, I'm happy that there is a defense against religious victory like that. I thought that was very cool to levy troops to prevent religious victory. I see no problem with the condemn heretic mechanic. It was just the right amount of tension that they could very well have lost that game.
Ed and Carl were on Prince. AIs were both on Emperor
I still don't quite understand this setting. What difference does it make what difficulty level Carl and Ed were on? This isn't SMAC where player difficulty level incurs happiness penalties and such. Only the AI gets bonuses or penalties based on difficulty level. So does it make any difference what difficulty Ed and Carl were on? Isn't this effectively an Emperor game?
I think he’s implying they didn’t play well haha?
Although they stopped the game before definitive victory, Ed certainly won. He would have been able to eliminate Eleanor soon enough, and at that point, his empire would be completely dominant.
EDIT: It was a really fun stream. I wish they would do more duels. Sarah versus Pete, maybe?
I'm guessing humans are always set at Prince difficulty, so essentially they were playing on Emperor level.
Ed was certainly in much better position, and with better play could have coasted to a victory. A lot of times in his battles against Eleanor he was attacking to redline his units, which she came back and defeated, instead of taking a turn to use a promotion to heal. He didn't have battering ram or siege towers or even siege units at the start of his invasion. And then he started attacking a city in the middle of her empire that he has no chance to keep, although that was pretty inevitable given the setup. He would probably have had to capture all 3 of her cities on that mountain range on the same turn to have a chance of keeping Liverpool, and even then, he probably would have had to rush to London and grab it within a few turns to have a chance.
I really dont see any weaknesses to Hungary in this particular stream. Ed messed up Carl’s game, which is already a victory - doesn’t matter that he didn’t conquer anything, Canada is not coming back from that. And Eleanor was pretty much falling under his military pressure in the end.
As for religion - the issue here is that it clearly shows that it’s just Domination in disguise - with units dying in one turn and you losing all your religious pressure in the process. This is the only VC that is pretty much dead in the water once you are at war. Just because AI doesn’t realize that doesn’t mean all is fine.
True, but Canada is a pretty weak civ to begin with. Probably the weakest in Gathering storm? I would say so. Mali with the 51% prod. nerf is close, but that is supposedly fixed now. Phoenicia is pretty weak, but still has a better early game than Canada. Canada is extremely weak in multiplayer especially.
I think if one was a lower level they'd get bonuses and such. I don't know that it makes a difference for a level above prince (except for determining what level of AI replaces you).
I don’t like the word “weak” because it’s extremely subjective, and I think all the Civs have a niche to fill.
And I truly think Phonecia is going to surprise a lot of people. She has to play smart in the first few eras, but she can crank out cities very fast, half price harbours and a guaranteed classical golden age are going to give her a massive boost to early science and then she is going to get 15% growth, 25% gold and 10% production in all of her many cities around midgame. I think she is definitely an example of a Civ who is more than the sum of her parts. (And an early game might be helped by a choice coastal city state because the bireme looks strong). And that’s all before some cute situational loyalty shenanigans with capital moving, loyalty immunity, naval full heals. She’s not Persia, granted but she has a lot going on!
I haven’t looked close enough at Canada but I have to assume they have some cool interactions and things to do that are potent. I don’t think any Civ is weak, just situational.
When having the ability to settle more cities than normal then being able to do it again on another continent while basically owning the seas that have double trade route yields without having to go to declare war is considered weak.
My understanding, and it might be limited, is that Ed and Carl had it easier. If this is true, then the AI had to really work up digital sweat to get where they got. And they got close to winning. But, anyone correct me if I’m wrong.
I get it though because her abilities at first glance do look a little “that’s nice but gimmicky” . I had to sit down and have a think about her before I started thinking about how all her parts come together and where her power lies.
But if you aren’t particularly invested in the Civ, you probably won’t do that. I certainly didn’t with Canada for example, and while I wouldn’t say they are “weak”, I don’t know where their cool little interactions are so I can totally see how it happens.
Heck look at Hungary, they were written off somewhat early by a few until it was seen in action!
It probably happened less in Rise and Fall because it was much more “X% buff to this”.
It's inevitable when the civilization doesn't have +1 yield somewhere in its description.
But apparently getting double trade route yields from ocean trade while basically owning the seas with a nigh immortal navy and sonic settlers is weak tbh.
Haven't even brought up the potency of up to +40% gold, +25% production, and +15% growth in multiply those already doubled trade route yields in your core cities.
Inspired by "My Civilization Fanart" thread.
Separate names with a comma.