[NFP] Who WON'T change in the April update?

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

Egypt was recently buffed, so I don't see it getting anything new. Sumeria has always been a strong civ and I've never really noticed anyone calling it dull to play. The King of Dullness is unquestionably Korea and I am looking forward to seeing how the devs can turn around that snore fest.

100% agree, Korea is one of the top offenders for dull and bland play.
Not only is their Seowon super boring, but so is the flat % based culture/science increase from having a governor.
This civ was a massive letdown after playing Korea in civ 5, as it's just completely braindead to play.
Not fun in the slightest, and up until recently (when I can now ban certain civs), it would be pretty much an instant reroll if I got Korea when playing with random leaders.

 

[IvoryPavane]

Theoretically you can, but in practice it doesn't always hold up.
It also confines you to settle near large sections of river, and I generally dislike being dictated by terrain features on where I settle (the bias may give you a 3 tile stretch of river if you're unlucky, with no real expansion settlement spaces nearby).
I've heard talk about the "insanely strong campuses", but I hardly if ever see them from the Netherlands.
Sure, if you get a stretch of river nearby some mountains that happen to form a sort of cove, absolutely, but it just doesn't happen that often or consistently.

That's however besides the point:
I'm not saying it is weak in this case, my main problem is just that it's dull.
Simple district adjancency from rivers? Whoop dee doo...

The campuses are quite luck dependant but I rarely see a game where I don’t hit a few +4/5. The Theatre squares and particularly the Industrial sites are within your control and pretty potent.

I always settle on rivers anyway for the housing bonus so I don’t feel constrained by the terrain requirements.

It is a bit passive, I’ll grant you, but it’s hardly the only Civ to fall foul of that. Australia and Korea are dull as dishwater.

I agree about Polders. Either make them insanely potent, or relax the restrictions and make polders count as “land” for other polders

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

It is a bit passive, I’ll grant you, but it’s hardly the only Civ to fall foul of that. Australia and Korea are dull as dishwater.

Korea is absolutely bad as well, don't get me wrong.
Not only bad, but worse in that Korea is perhaps the blandest of all civs to play.

I do somewhat like Australia however as you can influence the appeal, and I like things I can influence.
Granted, it's bit dull at times for sure.
The problem with Australia rather is that it's quite broken if you abuse the +100% production boost by making sure that a hostile/captured city remains in the middle of your empire, while you repeatedly let it flip to a free city and liberate it, before loyalty turns it back into another free city and you repeat the process.
It's fun, but broken so ideally I'd see Firaxis changing Australia as well to be both more fun, and less broken under the right circumstances.

 

[bengalryan9]

I've been thinking about it some more and I think I'd add the Inca, Australia, America, and Sweden to my list of civs that I don't think will be changed. I think they've got pretty well rounded kits with no glaring weaknesses while also providing small changes to how you might play your game.

Regarding the discussion of "dull" civs... I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that some civs are fairly plain and don't involve the player making large changes to their play style. These are useful for new players or for players who might be bumping up to a higher difficulty level. I think it's ok if some civs play a more "vanilla" game than others, so I'm not sure that alone is enough for me to think that civs like Korea and Greece need to be changed.

Also, I really disagree with the notion that Australia is dull to play. This boils down to personal preference, but I find trying to maximize appeal for my districts to be quite fun. There's been a lot of talk about "removing Cassus Belli-based abilities"... I think I'd be perfectly ok with them leaving Australia's as is because it's pretty easy to make use of. I'd say the same thing about Chandragupta, too.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Er what?? Babylon are one of the most beautifully designed, unique Civs - I really hope they don't touch them!

Beautiful? It's just a generic science-mongerer that doesn't feel Babylonian at all. Probably even worse than Korea as far as thin mechanical gimmicks amounting to a total flavor fail.

 

[DavidPBacon]

As a Brazilian, I would like a little more love shown to my country. I would like a change in UU and one more leader. And a change in civ ability. I would suggest a unit called bandeirante, which would be a renaissance scout with the ability to prospect and enslave. The prospect charge would be a 20% chance of finding mineral resources(iron, copper, silver, stone, salt etc., ahh, and gold, please introduce gold without mods) which would trigger a cultural bomb. This territory could be claimed by other civs if no cities are founded 4 tiles near it, but would be a nice way of securing land in advance. The enslavement would be similar to the Astec ability. The new Brazilian ability could be colonial powerhouse, giving Brazil one more trade route for each 2 plantations and each 3 mines (over resources), plus a bonus in gold and production for the sending city with such resources. And for leader, I would suggest Getulio Vargas, with desenvolvimenstismo(developmentism?) with a bonues toward industrial districts and its buildings if Brazil is in a Golden age. This I think would represent better our history than whats current in play. But it´s only a Pipe dream, I guess.

 

[Xandinho]

These ones are very well balanced: Australia, Babylon, Byzantium, Gaul, Gran Colombia (maybe it can get a minor nerf, but I don't think it's very necessary), Hungary, Mali, Inca, Ottoman, Portugal, Sweden and Vietnam.

These ones can get some minor buffs: America, Arabia, Aztec, Brazil, Cree, Ethiopia, Germany, Greece, Indonesia, Japan, Kongo, Macedon, Maori, Maya, Mongolia, Netherlands, Nubia, Persia, Phoenicia, Rome, Russia, Scotland, Sumer and Zulu.

These ones can get major buffs: Egypt, England, France, India, Norway, Poland and Scythia.

This one should be totally reworked: Korea, I think it should be less scientific and more cultural and religious, because everything about Korea is science and I particularly think it's quite boring.

 

[FinalDoomsday]

Babylon is a game mode not a civ, but it has its fans and I have a mod that totally reworks them into something that feels thematic so no problem with them being left alone.

 

[Haig]

People generally think Peter the Great's and Wilhelmina's abilities as lacklustre so I would see that changes.

Also Robert the Bruce and John Curtin for the same reason.

I think Carlbarian and co. have been closely examinging fans' most common requests.

 

[Vargas1]

Inca (no real bias towards any win condition, except maybe science or religion since he starts with many mountains. Gets big cities, but that's a really bland gimmick trait. People who love yield porn might like it, but yield porn isn't necessarily great on it's own, and the civ is rather weak on the whole)

I could not disagree more with this, other than saying no real bias towards any win condition - but that's not a bad thing when they're strong at every win condition (other than diplo, where they are just like everyone else). They were always fairly strong given their mountain bias, ability to work mountains (extra production/faith w/ Earth Goddess), and strong growth/production from terrace farms and internal trade. Then they got a major boost with the preserve. Slap down a preserve/grove in the middle of mountain tiles and each one becomes a 2 prod, 2 food, 2 faith (or 3 w/ EG), 2 culture yield, beginning in the ancient era. Plus it culture bombs so you get those tiles right off the bat. Put a terrace farm on the other side of those mountains and you'll have enough population to work each of those tiles by turn 50. Big cities isn't a gimmick when they can be big, productive cities - it's not like the Inca are filling up flat grassland tiles with their population; they are working mountains or hills or other productive tiles. That means lots of production towards wonders/districts (good for cultural or science), plus good adjacencies (science or religion), plus good faith generation (good for cultural, religion, domination). And if you do want to go domination with them, they have one of the best power-spikes in the game when the Warak'aq comes online - if you haven't tried them, try a game slotting in the 100% exp card for scouts and get a couple recon units up to the ambush promotion. The damage they can put out is absolutely nuts. Also, if you can find a city without walls, it's super easy to get them trained up to ambush since you can just park them next to it and get two attacks a round.

People generally think Peter the Great's and Wilhelmina's abilities as lacklustre so I would see that changes.

Also Robert the Bruce and John Curtin for the same reason.

I think Carlbarian and co. have been closely examinging fans' most common requests.

The problem with Peter and Curtin is that the other abilities for those civs are so strong, it would make them even more overpowered to add on a strong leader ability. So I do hope they rework them, but not adding too much power creep.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I am really, really hoping that was just making room for Burma next door. But if not, I definitely agree that it was a flavor nerf. Also, I'm still trying to wrap my head around Khmer as the "population" civ.

Well wasn't Ankgor supposedly the most populous city in the world in the Medieval Era, reaching close to 1 million people?

As a Brazilian, I would like a little more love shown to my country. I would like a change in UU and one more leader. And a change in civ ability. I would suggest a unit called bandeirante, which would be a renaissance scout with the ability to prospect and enslave. The prospect charge would be a 20% chance of finding mineral resources(iron, copper, silver, stone, salt etc., ahh, and gold, please introduce gold without mods) which would trigger a cultural bomb. This territory could be claimed by other civs if no cities are founded 4 tiles near it, but would be a nice way of securing land in advance. The enslavement would be similar to the Astec ability. The new Brazilian ability could be colonial powerhouse, giving Brazil one more trade route for each 2 plantations and each 3 mines (over resources), plus a bonus in gold and production for the sending city with such resources. And for leader, I would suggest Getulio Vargas, with desenvolvimenstismo(developmentism?) with a bonues toward industrial districts and its buildings if Brazil is in a Golden age. This I think would represent better our history than whats current in play. But it´s only a Pipe dream, I guess.

That kind of feels like too much change personally.
I do think under the Amazon ability Brazil should be able to build lumbermills on rainforest faster and gain +1 science for unimproved rainforest tiles.

 

[Hellenism Salesman]

And if you do want to go domination with them, they have one of the best power-spikes in the game when the Warak'aq comes online - if you haven't tried them, try a game slotting in the 100% exp card for scouts and get a couple recon units up to the ambush promotion. The damage they can put out is absolutely nuts. Also, if you can find a city without walls, it's super easy to get them trained up to ambush since you can just park them next to it and get two attacks a round.

It takes planning and some builder charges, but this can actually be magnified even further. Since they get Mountain Tunnels early, and have a strong spawn bias toward them, you can actually make teleportation stations so your promoted units can instantly appear at your enemies' door. Plus, Qhapaq Ñans can be built in neutral territory, meaning all you need to do to set this up is escort a builder to a Mountain adjacent to your next target.

And, you don't have to worry about enemies taking them, either. Just position your Warak'aqs around the tile where the Qhapaq Ñan ends and any unit that appears will get blasted by your double-shot crossbowmen, giving them more experience.

I badly want to try an Inca Domination game one day... it sounds so unique and fun!

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

It takes planning and some builder charges, but this can actually be magnified even further. Since they get Mountain Tunnels early, and have a strong spawn bias toward them, you can actually make teleportation stations so your promoted units can instantly appear at your enemies' door. Plus, Qhapaq Ñans can be built in neutral territory, meaning all you need to do to set this up is escort a builder to a Mountain adjacent to your next target.

And, you don't have to worry about enemies taking them, either. Just position your Warak'aqs around the tile where the Qhapaq Ñan ends and any unit that appears will get blasted by your double-shot crossbowmen, giving them more experience.

I badly want to try an Inca Domination game one day... it sounds so unique and fun!

You just need to put them on the same Mountain Range for the teleportation between different Qhapaq Nans work: Found this out the hard way.

 

[DWilson]

RE: Phoenicia

Agreed as to relocating the capital. I don't think I've ever used the ability given it's absurdly high production cost or really even having a need to use it.

I'll just say that this ability is incredibly potent if you invest in colonial bonuses (cards and wonders, and maybe other things- it was my first GS game, on release, so my memory isn't clear) or need to prevent a domination rush from a stronger foe. It's also super flavorful. I am happy with it as is, though I wouldn't mind a reduced production co

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Well wasn't Ankgor supposedly the most populous city in the world in the Medieval Era, reaching close to 1 million people?

I recalled seeing some claim to that effect somewhere but when I went back to look it up, Angkor doesn't show up on the most reliable "largest city" lists.

Based on some quick wikiing.

The city itself was speculated to accommodate 750K to 1M people. But that doesn't mean it was necessarily maxed out when it was abandoned in the early 1400s.

The most recent "biggest city list" in 2010 puts the cap from 800K to 1M people (Chang'an, Kaifeng, Hongzhou) from 800 to 1400, but then we see a sharp decline to 500K - 700K (Jinling, Beijing) through 1800. So while I think Angkor may have been competing for "largest city" alongside the bigger Chinese cities (and Baghdad), it's really hard to tell if it was the most populous. Although as far as urban sprawl and infrastructure, people seem to believe it was the "largest."

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

So while I think Angkor may have been competing for "largest city" alongside the bigger Chinese cities (and Baghdad), it's really hard to tell if it was the most populous. Although as far as urban sprawl and infrastructure, people seem to believe it was the "largest."

That's probably the reason why. Not to mention they probably didn't want to double down on giving food bonuses to India again, along with faith.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

That's probably the reason why. Not to mention they probably didn't want to double down on giving food bonuses to India again, along with faith.

Yeah it's fine, although really if we were being historically honest, China would be the civ with high population bonus (having consistently the largest cities from 600 - 1900 AD), and Khmer instead would have a high infrastructure bonus akin to what Babylon has. Or if we were talking total population, then Persia would probably deserve that bonus.

 

[The googles do nothing]

Things that have received a lot of discussion here that should be changed, but probably will not:

Oil being used by both Tanks and Infantry,
Coal power plant it the best power building.
Religious Settlements being the best pantheon because a free city is always useful.
Neighborhoods - not useful enough
Sewers - not useful enough

My personal list would add Railroads and aerodromes.

I don't think there will be any civs or leaders that change the focus. I would like to have see more differentiation in older multi-leader civs but I doubt that will happen.

 

[Menocchio]

With regards to Religious Settlements, the developers have specifically said that some pantheons are better than others, intentionally: it's an incentive to try to get enough faith to secure the first pantheon and have your pick. The problem is less with pantheon balance and more with the randomness of early-game faith.

 

[slavaskii]

Things that have received a lot of discussion here that should be changed, but probably will not:

Oil being used by both Tanks and Infantry,
Coal power plant it the best power building.
Religious Settlements being the best pantheon because a free city is always useful.
Neighborhoods - not useful enough
Sewers - not useful enough

Oil being a requirement for infantry is honestly such a stupid requirement. I get that every unit technically needs *something*, but why oil of all things when there’s no rational reason for it? It seems like they were trying to artificially raise the costs of infantry and this is what they decided on.

But I agree, this is unlikely to get changed when considering that some units (like the Digger) have bonuses of them *not* using the resource. If they reworked the oil thing they’d have to rework the Digger, too.