Thoughts on Byzantium's awesome adaptability and why religion is an awesome system.

[WeneedmoreCivs]

@ GamerKG:
What you say is that now the game has been made somewhat artificial to make tough decisions possible. But don't you think in real life civilizations had to make tough decisions? And I don't like tough decisions like: my UU is a horse but there are no horses nearby. This is nonsense and makes me quit the game. Or: I am going to research straight to Printing Press: this is not how history works. I would like to see a game developed in the way I described, if this game will be tougher or not I don't know. But I get your point.

While I do like the idea of UUs and UBs and UAs tailoring to the world around us, I also like the challenge of a bad starting spot and figuring out how to win despite it. I usually "disable start bias" when I'm playing a civ I've used before. Some Civs have UUs/UBs/UAs which require a revealed resource that you can't see until you've been playing for many turns.

In the end, I tend to adapt to the world around me. If I'm on a small island with just 1 or two other civs, I'm usually 100% focused on conquering them so I can peacefully build up after that. If I'm on a pangea-type world, I set up my empire to best defend the many invasions I will face.

 

[wandmdave]

Byzantinums weakness is their rather low early faith production. They don't generate more faith than anyone else.

So If you play on a map with the celts and ethiopia and have some bad luck regaring faith-ruins, then that whole "I built my perfect religion"-thing, kinda starts to become relative.

So huts do provide faith sometimes. I knew it. I was playing as the Byzantines and people kept founding pantheons and I could figure out how they got their faith so quickly. I didn't get one faith hut. By the time I got to found my pantheon my options were pretty limited. Fortunately my situation was unique so the beliefs I wanted where still there but if they hadn't my advantage would have gotten neutered.

 

[Randall_Flagg]

This. Plus, FIRE!

I'm underwhelmed by Cataphracts. I still kind of feel they would be more worthwhile as Knight replacements. Even on mid to high difficulties it seems you need to really make a point of getting Horseback Riding as early as possible to make good use of Horseman units as the AI seems to beeline for Civil Service now. Pikemen = minced Cataphracts.

Might just be me, but do you not rush to HBR most games? I cannot be the only one who uses them for early fast barb hunting. While the Caraphract is not the greatest UU I play with, it is good for early barb hunting, this is normally my 4th tech to make good use of it before land becomes scarce and no more barbs.

 

[OmniPotent42]

I indeed would like to create a unique civ from scratch! But it's not my intention to make it 'fair' as you say. I think you don't understand me: to play the hand you are dealt is just what I want, and this hand is the environment you start. And I do have the book Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond.

ps @El Caballerion: sorry if this discussion is not in line with the OP.

So you would like it if you could just find iron and then instantly get iron working tech? What would be the perameters of your flexibility? And what if you never find any iron, can you get any techs after it on the tech tree? Or is there even a tech tree?

 

[blackcatatonic]

Might just be me, but do you not rush to HBR most games? I cannot be the only one who uses them for early fast barb hunting. While the Caraphract is not the greatest UU I play with, it is good for early barb hunting, this is normally my 4th tech to make good use of it before land becomes scarce and no more barbs.

Depends. I've only played 3 games of G&K so far so it's a bit early to tell how most games are going to go. I went for early Riding on some games in vanilla, usually as the Mongols, but to be honest in vanilla I tend to blitz through the upper half of the tech tree to get myself kitted out for the space race. I'm not much of a warmonger though.

Since picking up G&K I feel like I have *a lot* to learn/re-learn about the tech tree and teching paths. It's a whole other game, but feels similar enough to vanilla that you can easily find yourself getting caught out of the science race with no easy way back. I thought I was ahead in my current game and before I knew it Arabia built the Apollo Project and I'm not even in Atomic yet...

 

[JanghanHong]

Cataphracts are deceptively powerful UU, I disregarded them, but actually using them + plus noticing that having terrain bonuses makes them a solid UU. Since Cities bombard horse units first, just park them in a forested hill close to the city and let it be a tank for the artillery and the archer units.


Now, if the Byzantines got +1 faith at the capital or something, they would become the most flexible civilization ever.

 

[Harv72b]

I indeed would like to create a unique civ from scratch! But it's not my intention to make it 'fair' as you say. I think you don't understand me: to play the hand you are dealt is just what I want, and this hand is the environment you start. And I do have the book Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond.

I understand what you're saying, and if you designed a game along those lines I'd absolutely play it.

That said, one of the things I like about Civ (and hate, at times) is that your choice of a civilization can force some decisions that you make in-game. For example, you're playing as the Mongols and realize that there's only two horse tiles around, and they're both in Chinese territory...well, here comes an early war that you weren't planning to fight, but you've got to have those horses & it's better to fight now than once those Chinese UUs get into play! Hell, if you need a real-world example, the driving reason behind Japan's attack on the United States in 1941 was a lack of oil resources.

 

[Roxlimn]

In general, the UAs and the UUs are a big improvement over Civ IV, IMO. I'd lump the Social Policies and Religion into the bag as well. Civics and Attributes meant that an average Civ IV game with the same Civ plays mostly the same; the civilization didn't feel like a living, breathing, adaptable thing.

With Social Policies and Religion, each Civ's UA and UUs are really just a small part of what makes them unique. A Pious Persia with a focus on Tradition and wonder building feels radically different from one with emphasis on Liberty, Honor, and Faith Healers. A good chunk of what used to be attributes in Civ IV find analogues in the Social Policies.

That said, I think there's something to be said about having UAs and UUs. Most of the UAs aren't really dominating, and the UUs, whlie strong, still often require preparation and planning outside availability just so you can make use of them. Sometimes, it's best to just ignore the UUs, actually. If you're Rome and you've got no enemies in sight, best be makin' those Settlers.

 

[Waywocket]

Is it just me or is the Byzantium start bias to give them an awful awful start? I've reloaded 10 times and there's no sign of a decent city location. One load was just forest/jungle and a single gem.

I've definitely found that. Figured it was just bad luck.

Since G+K I've started probably a little more than a dozen games; most of them I finished, but I did have a run of five or six in a row when I was trying as Byzantium that I had to give up on, mosly within 100 turns - they always seem to start right next to a vast expanse of desert with hardly any resources for miles around.

Byzantium aside, I've only had one other map where I had to reload the turn 0 auto-save and change my strategy; all the others have been manageable. (And in that case it was because I was sandwiched between three other civs, with Washington 5 or 6 tiles away and no direction to expand except into me, plus the only luxuries were calender resources, in jungle. I hate those.)

 

[Furycrab]

I find religion to be infuriatingly random.

Granted this is a game that has had goodie huts and wonder fails for a hell of a long time, but you can make something out of a game where you get no wonders... heck because of the hammer costs, you can outplay someone who thought that getting as many wonders possible would make him better.

My deal with it, is that sometimes I play to get a religion, and it falls flat. I don't get one, I get one late at the party, my neighbors get one earlier and improve it earlier which means that by the time I spread it............ You get the picture. Play a game with 8 players wanting to play a game of having the best religion and someone is going to be unhappy.

Now you might say... Wonder fails. Strategy.... Yes I get all that, but here comes the randomness and frustration.

Sometimes you make a game, and all the sudden a religion falls on your lap. No massive shrine building, no picking up piety, no Free GP from Liberty. Just poof! You have a religion!

For example. This is my current game.

Average start, trapping based resources, no marble, a river, a few flood plains. I'm aiming for a 2-3 city National College, I build my first city, completely ignore shrines, explore a little, find 6 CS, 5 of the 7 Civs. 2 of em are faith based. 8 faith.

Few turns later get my second city as well as an archer at some point. Barb quest not "too far". Go kill it. Bam 2 faith per turn. Shrine count: Zero.

2 Pantheons go at 10 and 15. I get mine at 20. Oh look, Desert Folklore still there.
6-7 faith per turn. Total number of shrines and Social policies involved to get it? Zero.

Turn 101, I get my Great Prophet and found my religion. First one on the map... Go ing figures. Total hammers invested: Zero. Total deviations from a standard approach to the game: Zero. Civ UA or UU used to get there first: Zero.

Oh and I'm playing on Immortal. Currently staring at the religion picking screen going: How the did this happen when all I wanted was to mess with builds to try and make a tech based opener with zero religion in it.

I know this is a game where random is spiced in for fun all the time, but I could be playing as Byzantium trying to desperately get a religion off the ground as fast as possible, and still not get one. I could build Stonehenge and not come quite this fast.

It doesn't even have the Wonderfail feeling where if someone steals a big wonder from under my nose, he better damn defend it. I could kill everyone and they will still hang on to the precious enhancer and founder beliefs.

There's some work to be done with it for sure. Maybe look at some of the faith giving pantheons. Maybe look at how faith based CSs work. Maybe give Piety tree a ridiculous/I'm getting a religion before the Rational guys even if you don't like it. Right now it's just a little too random for my taste... This coming from a guy who plays with goodie huts on.

 

[Option]

Something to keep in mind is that the game gives you civilizations that have had certain things that made them stand out historically. The game tailors the civilization-unique things specifically towards the history of that civilization. With England it's the fleet and secret service, with India it's cities with huge population, with Japan it's the warrior caste and honor codex, etc.

I can see where you're coming from, but your idea would only work in a game where every faction is simply a blank slate. The civilizations in this game, however, are based around empires that actually existed. If I play a culture that isn't known for having a huge navy (e.g. Austria), it would be weird if the unique unit or trait would be related to ships. Or, other example, if I played the Mongols or Huns and their unique stuff was based on diplomacy and trade, that would be just as weird.