[NFP] What Civs could be adjusted?

[bengalryan9]

My problem with Canada is that they are just not that fun to play. The Surprise War thing, while sometimes useful, does not make playing as Canada exciting - on the contraty, it makes the beginning of the game more boring than usual. The tundra thing makes tundra better than for all other civs except Russia, but it still is tundra, it still is terrible, and buying tiles cheaply doesn't feel exciting either. The Mountie and Hockey Rink come too late - playing as Canada I will get bored well before I can use either.

Perhaps Canada is not as terrible a civ as I subjectively feel they are, but why would anyone chose to play a game as them rather than some more exciting civ?

What's "fun to play" varies from person to person, so I'll go ahead and disagree with you for a few reasons:
1) I find war to be far and away the most tedious part of the game, so not having to worry about it isn't a huge loss as far as I'm concerned. What's fun about a surprise war declaration from a deity AI who starts with 3 times more cities than I do? There's more than enough going on at the start of the game to keep it interesting even without war. This also makes Canada a good choice for new players or those who are moving up in difficulty for the first time as it makes it so much easier to learn how to actually play the game. It also opens up a lot of options for them. I can go for religion if I want to since I don't have to spam warriors/slingers at the start of the game, for example.
2) If you're primarily settling tundra cities at the start as Canada, you're doing it wrong. Push your settlers into the grassland and plains first. This will be easier for you to do since you can train settlers early as opposed to worrying about surprise AI declarations. You settle the tundra later on, grabbing tons of unclaimed land (possibly on multiple continents!) that the AI doesn't particularly care about, and as Canada you turn it into decent-to-good cities where most civs would be struggling to make them decent. These late tundra cities will start off with lots of high appeal tiles ready to be made into parks, and by the time you settle them you'll be a lot better equipped to get them up and running because you'll have unlocked lumber mills and farming triangles.
3) If I pick Canada, I love how much work needs to go into city planning. You should (IMO) be planning to maximize appeal to build as many national parks from the get go... to me, figuring out where I'm going to put my districts or my mines to accomplish this is fun. Placing my entertainment campuses so that they boost multiple hockey rinks which boost appeal to build more national parks is rewarding. Mounties allow you to spam national parks by using production, gold, or faith (since Canada can still buy naturalists, too), giving you options.

It's personal preference, sure, but I think Canada has a nice niche as a pure "builder" civ.

 

[Leucarum]

What's "fun to play" varies from person to person, so I'll go ahead and disagree with you for a few reasons:
1) I find war to be far and away the most tedious part of the game, so not having to worry about it isn't a huge loss as far as I'm concerned. What's fun about a surprise war declaration from a deity AI who starts with 3 times more cities than I do? There's more than enough going on at the start of the game to keep it interesting even without war. This also makes Canada a good choice for new players or those who are moving up in difficulty for the first time as it makes it so much easier to learn how to actually play the game. It also opens up a lot of options for them. I can go for religion if I want to since I don't have to spam warriors/slingers at the start of the game, for example.
2) If you're primarily settling tundra cities at the start as Canada, you're doing it wrong. Push your settlers into the grassland and plains first. This will be easier for you to do since you can train settlers early as opposed to worrying about surprise AI declarations. You settle the tundra later on, grabbing tons of unclaimed land (possibly on multiple continents!) that the AI doesn't particularly care about, and as Canada you turn it into decent-to-good cities where most civs would be struggling to make them decent. These late tundra cities will start off with lots of high appeal tiles ready to be made into parks, and by the time you settle them you'll be a lot better equipped to get them up and running because you'll have unlocked lumber mills and farming triangles.
3) If I pick Canada, I love how much work needs to go into city planning. You should (IMO) be planning to maximize appeal to build as many national parks from the get go... to me, figuring out where I'm going to put my districts or my mines to accomplish this is fun. Placing my entertainment campuses so that they boost multiple hockey rinks which boost appeal to build more national parks is rewarding. Mounties allow you to spam national parks by using production, gold, or faith (since Canada can still buy naturalists, too), giving you options.

It's personal preference, sure, but I think Canada has a nice niche as a pure "builder" civ.

Agreed, other versions of civ implemented war much better than 6. Being able to mostly ignore that aspect of the game is fun and opens up some interesting options. Forward settling and other risky openers become a lot more safe as Canada. They aren't an aggressive civ but they are definitely a passive aggressive civ.

With feudalism and ancestral hall tundra cities become more viable - production and food will be on separate tiles but that is manageable, especially as your production on tundra is improved. My concerns are that when Canada gets a tundra start they can often struggle to get off the ground altogether, and their core gameplay loop of using national parks to generate tourism is very slow. Something to reduce the RNG of their start would help and I definitely think they could do with moving mounties further down the civic tree...

 

[The Civs 6]

There are three kinds of Civs. There are civs that snowball because they can get past bottlenecks faster (Korea, Greece, America, but also ones that do it slightly less strong like the Cree), there are civs that win harder (France, Brazil, China, the Khmer... America in the modern age), and then there are civs that just offer a totally unique way to play (the obvious ones - Maori and Mali, but also less obvious ones like England).

There are too many of the first two. There are too few of the last one. For example, I had an Earth map game with England where I was sort of sandwiched on the Indian peninsula with only 3 cities. But because I was England this was totally fine and I was able to exploit Indonesia and Australia. It's much more memorable than games with Greece or Korea (I built a lot of acropolises/seowons) or even a civ I like like Germany (I built a lot of hansa).

 

[Jewelrunna]

Not saying they are bad in terms of power.

I’m just saying that Tundra Farms and Mounties are really silly, and make the Civ feel like a joke. No Surprise War is also too gimmicky.

It’s a question of taste or feel, but Canada just seem really silly - ie they seem like a Canada meme. All they’re missing are beavers, moose and maple syrup.

I can agree with that. Though, I imagine that designing a Civ that's truly representative of Canada (like they did with America, which I feel is a pretty solid expression of the country while being as uncontroversial as possible) would be quite tough. What would be your suggestions for a better-designed Civ?

 

[Kung-Fu knight]

Regarding all this talk of adjusting civs, what civs should be updated to take advantage of mechanics introduced in the expansions? I'm surprised that neither China or Persia was updated for example. I guess the civs don't really need updating but I could imagine China getting something related to ages, replacing their Dynastic Cycles ability and Persia could get something related to governors for Satrapies.

 

[bengalryan9]

Regarding all this talk of adjusting civs, what civs should be updated to take advantage of mechanics introduced in the expansions? I'm surprised that neither China or Persia was updated for example. I guess the civs don't really need updating but I could imagine China getting something related to ages, replacing their Dynastic Cycles ability and Persia could get something related to governors for Satrapies.

I don't think it's likely to happen since you don't need those expansions to play those civs.

This is one of the things that is kind of odd about the new Frontier Pass civs... not all of them require every expansion, limiting their designs somewhat.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

ability and Persia could get something related to governors for Satrapies.

I've been waiting for something like that ever since they mentioned governors would be in the game. Something simple like the domestic trade routes yield more gold and culture if the origin city has a governor established.

I don't think it's likely to happen since you don't need those expansions to play those civs.

Persia did get updated with loyalty mechanics for R&F though.

 

[Kung-Fu knight]

I don't think it's likely to happen since you don't need those expansions to play those civs.

This is one of the things that is kind of odd about the new Frontier Pass civs... not all of them require every expansion, limiting their designs somewhat.

I wonder if it's possible to have specific patches for expansions. Probably not, as it wouldn't be very economical but it would be nice.

 

[Sostratus]

I wonder if it's possible to have specific patches for expansions. Probably not, as it wouldn't be very economical but it would be nice.

Having an expansion adds a folder to your game files that includes “overwrites” to base game content. So for example, if you own R&F you get the Dutch, if you have GS you get a set of files that include an update to her ability for cheaper Dams. In fact, the DLC2 folder includes a DLC1 folder in it.
Now given the number of NFP packs, controlling versions of which Civ has what ability under what expansion set would be the issue just from a design and keep track perspective.

 

[Navelgazer]

If I were to change Canada I would 1.) Change the CUA to prevent them from declaring wars against City States after enacting their first Tier 1 Government/After completing Political Philosophy. Perhaps prevent all aspects of the CUA from coming online until that point, actually. Make beelining that technology or not a strategic decision for the player, who might want to deal with a CS in a troublesome bottleneck or might want to curtail an early Aztec invasion as the game dictates.

I'd also rework the Ice Hockey Rink, changing it into the Ice Rink and making it available at Games & Recreation, but like some other unique improvements, making it get better as civics progress, until it becomes a fully-powered professional Ice Hockey Rink by the end-game.