Also, I agree with Filthy's commentary @ around the 32nd minute. Honor is so crippling early, with the likely negative GPT, and the weak border expansion, and the negative H. I feel like Courthouses or some building should provide a major H boost, or something should happen with the policies to where it's profitable in terms of H to conquer new lands, making Honor players have an H advantage, to where the H can be a net positive per city capture. Maybe not immediate net gain, but within a reasonable time frame. It's already bad enough with the many turns of unrest on larger city capture.
Tradition, Liberty, Honor, and Piety, as far as dynamic game changes are concerned, should be balanced and viable for opening strategies that lend themselves to specific particular win strategies. Payouts like Great Engineers from Tradition fill are more of a benefit than a 1-time Great Person finisher with Liberty, for example. Also, Science in this game is on a much larger and OP level than the other yields, in terms of both necessity and comparative thresholds. Beakers tend to be anywhere from 2x-5x in total per-turn yield compared to Culture points ... and part of that problem is that there are so many buildings that magnify the Beaker output compared to what can be built for Culture-related buildings. Why isn't there a National College for Culture? Something that boosts Culture output by 50%, as early as Science? The other problem with playing on Quick Turns as far as the Science boosts are concerned ... is that Civs with early-era UUs lose value due to the faster time to being obsolete. It also tends to slightly boost the value of mid-late era UUs for other Civs, in the sense that you have more ability to pump out, say, Minutemen for America, compared to say Maori Warriors for Polynesia. So either nerfing or balancing the various outputs is probably something that has to be done as far as making what I feel is a needed change in Civ 5 in general, that being, de-emphasis of Tradition and Rationalism as the strongest route in most cases to a win.
Chris Sauce The problem of obsolete UUs is prevalent in a lot of game speeds. Even on marathon no one is making an army out of maori warriors. No one builds an army with warrior replacements.
I think the rearrangement the mod makers made where Oligarchy and Aristocracy were switched was perfect, however i do think the walls are a good idea because of the two warriors other players get from early in honor now.
How about units have more movement for the first turns so you have done more scouting when you must choose first culture. Also; wouldnt the 'You dont lose influence with trade routed CS' make Greece a LOT weaker?
+John Doe Greece still has its bonus without the trade route. Besides that, trade routes in multiplayer can be tricky, as human players can plunder them "just for fun" (Filthy talked about it once), so this can be unreliable if not done properly, and, honestly, if the city-state is in the other side of the map, it is not a practical way of maintaining the alliance. Also, gold is not the easiest commodity to have in multiplayer, so buying city-states or going for the diplomatic victory can be something tricky. And to top all of that they have very good early military units, can recover faster the favor of city states after tribute demand in the early game. And can do it ALL THE TIME, without investing culture in it (and you can still grab the policy). So, no. If Greece is played early well, it'll snowball.
Late to the party but here is a suggestion for the piety opener. +1 Faith per (2 or 3) pop empire wide. I think this strikes a balance between piety giving a bonus to getting and having a pantheon, but not guaranteeing first pantheon. Also it gives so parity between tall and wide faith empires.
Creepercraft2000 Means when you not worrying about war, so just keeping your cities production/growth/economy maximized by tile managing, tile improvements, tech three planning etc. Basically playing sim city with your civ =P
Absolutely agree with Yoruus saying "50% of the time map decides everything". Why talking so much about policies when almost everything is decided whether you have a good game or not? And having a good game depends on whether you have a good spot or not. It's not really matter what policies you pick, if you up against guys with 5 salt per city without any good resources you're fucked. Mod have to focus hard on starting spot changes and map generation changes. Everything else like policies and stuff doesn't matter that much. And problem with war in civ is not balance it is the concept. This shit with generals wars is ridiculous and stupid. Especially while all the games now are played with simultaneous turns.
In order to make piety viable, it needs 3 things. It needs a bonus to getting a quick religion It needs strong bonuses to spreading spread religion It needs strong bonuses for spreading a religion. Some bonuses based around how many followers there are and/or how many cities that religion as a majority in.
if any of you wondering: here are the changes in nq mod v5 they are talking about: docs.google.com/document/d/1me025Vepd3qXN5QqQtqakPUuSfQmk8D5Jv15SZp9ly8/preview?sle=true&pli=1
Something I've wondered about mod capability- can first turn (for war) be modded in anyway? Also wondering a similar thing for wonders going strictly to highest player number- can it be randomized or configured in some other way?
I feel like god of craftsmen is ridiculously OP - 2 hammers per city, esp in liberty is like 50 % of your entire production if you get out like 6 cities in liberty, not to mention making wonders faster (it's basically entirely better than classical/ancient wonder prod)
CIV IS NOT JUST A WAR GAME. WHERE ARE THE TIMES YOU HAD THE OPTIONS TO KILL, SPACE, CULTURE? And as I told fruit in the beginning, the mod is broken because of this thinking. Baba, Arv, and you trying to make the game more and more war. I miss how you won as America and Yoruus had great wins to space. I get it, it is much a better show for you to stream war and not sim city, but with the NQ map one more time SPACE is death. Btw honor opener as the mod game are just about war is as it was with rationalism a must.
Bigmarian The war game has the strongest interaction with the other players. Therefore it is favored by ppl who play this game intensely. It never grows "old" or "stale". Therefore they prefer war as the centerpiece in Civ games. All other win conditions cancel out the wargame. There is a balance somewhere for a non-dominating player to outdo the warring gameleader and snatch the win. If it is to easy though it will become the default path to victory and that will make war extremely prohibitive in everyones mind. For me science victory is often the solution to break a lategame stalemate. To be able to go to space before someone starts their world domination tour is rare and it should be. Tourism is a victory condition that warps everyones agenda against that one player who dares to go for it. It is exciting if it happens. And if you can pull of a diplo win, wow, just wow. You can only do that by getting the votes of the city states and that is also a very specific target and can normally only be kept with mass war declarations against all players... The mod is not adjusted for those victory conditions as he said in the video. We will see if he can find the balance to keep all those conditions relevant without creeping into the spotlight.
MrVlonk War was always a big part of the game, it was the main part, but know with the NQ mod and map it is the only part. War was never something that was not in the game. 95 percent of the games ended in cc, because one player dominates the game with war. The game was balance in this way and devs made a good game, that is why it is one of the top played games on steam. THe mod as it is broke the balance and with the combination of the NQ map (CMON HOW DID filthy not address that) the game is getting very boring and in 99 percent of the games ends in modern era, were landships are (changing anti tanks will I hope fix this). The mod is that much one sided on war that economy in the game is not present. Games where you make 100+ gpt on turn 85 are very common and games where you make 450 + are not that of a problem (600 also), that is I would say double before the mod. This gold OP was made because people around fruit told him, that they want to spam units and war. I get it. That is the same with happiness, one of the best part of the game. There are no limits on any resources in the game as it is now. As I said, the mod brakes the eco part and civ is just at the end a copy of Age of Empires fast game style. And BTW with the first moves in the game, fast clicking with the mod became even more important, not less.Yes, rationalism was broken and the mod is addressing that very nice, but the way it does is to kill space, tourism and culture games. That is not ok. Maybe I am wrong, but the community wanted (Imo) a mod that makes the game more balanced, but maybe I am wrong and they want a Age of Empire game that is called CIV 5.
Bigmarian You're simply wrong. The unmodded game is 100% a war game. In "vanilla" BNW tourism and diplomacy don't exist (because (1) war them, (2) war their cs), and science is only possible if you have either extreme isolation, so much military people can't kill you in time, or so much war in the game you can sneak a science victory out. Basically, the multiplayer game is already 100% a war game. The goal of the mod is to make it a game with more OPTIONS for social policies, tech paths, unit diversity, and yes, eventually, win conditions.
Bigmarian Fruitstrike says so in the video himself, that the other win conditions are not taken care of in the balancing at the moment. I can't find the spot anymore in the video but I think it was regarding someone proposing a 50% buff on all tourism production sources to balance against the increased culture gains in the mod. It will take some time to tune this, but I am certain you can only start with this process AFTER you finished the balancing of science, production, income, happiness and the wargame of all timeperiods. The mod could serve many purposes after achieving a good balance in those things. Personally I would like to see relevancy for small to medium amounts of tourism. It hurts other players in their happiness, it makes annexing their cities faster and more profitable. That is some pretty nasty stuff that helps an active and dynamic player! What an aggressive mechanism. So why does nobody use it? In the existing version (unmodded) it needs high investment of GP and hammers and only serves as a win condition. That could be changed by spreading tourism on other things but "wasted" great persons, high end/ high hammer buildings that serve no other purpose and some very specific conditions. That mechanism is "broken" at the moment and rarely sees play because those hammers could have been used for building units or core buildings. Some of those almost core buildings could be buffed with small amounts of tourism. Gardens for instance. Maybe some GP could generate a fixed amount of tourism when they are popped, not only the musician. Ah well "tourism" is anyway the wrong label for those negative attributes that crush down other civs. Firaxis probably tried to adapt the phenomenon of "westernization" and the ideological fights of the cold war in one concept and could not find a unifying term for "cultural pressure".Tourism in Civ does not boost your economy but rather cripples everyone elses. I dont think that is what tourism in our world does at all.
FilthyRobot funny how you now have less options to win. And it is not just a war game even in MP. But ok, just saying you should be as in real civ be limited to less. Less money, less happiness, less gold. How it is now a better game with tons of happiness, gold, hammers liberty hammers), resources? That is not civ. ANd more options should not mean all the policies in the game (with 300 - 450 culture per turn no problem) And sorry, but even you had science games and tried culture. Try it now. And not addressing the nq map combination. Yes, sneak in a science win was possible as it was one of the options and SHOULD NOT be nerft for the war part. Just saying at this moment it looks very much that just the war part should be in the game. Options ok, but balance the game. But ok, just saying Age of Empires has no science, culture or tourism wins. Perfect game. BTW best players are that are good in war and can manage the resources, that was before the mod. Now just the war part is important. Would very much like to get a feed back from Tommynt on this mod
I also like Yoruus's suggestion at the 40th minute of allowing every player to found a religion. Part of the problem with the religious beliefs is that desert faith tends to be OP compared to a lot of the rest of the pantheons ... There's a mod I use in single player that expands and edits beliefs to provide many more valuable beliefs within the choices. It's so nice to the point that I just don't enjoy playing with religion in a vanilla non-modded game.
Beans Does it work that way though? There will still be defense of religions, and if one overpowers another whose other owner is using it very specifically for benefits in their local area, the result is likely another reason for war.
I largely agree with Filthy about the rationalism tree coming too early. I like his idea about putting patronage, aesthetics, commerce, and exploration all in classical and balancing them in relation to each other. Why not do the same with rationalism then? Put it in the industrial era, and balance it against the ideologies instead. Also, you said aesthetics is unbalanced because rationalism is unbalanced. I think rationalism is unbalanced because stealth bombers are unbalanced. All late game war seems like is drop enough XCom to survive opponents stealth bomber ball, bomb city flat, win. Since stealth bombers can fly with impunity, whoever can bomb out the others melee units first wins. Wouldn't making stealth bombers interceptable change this? Then even if I am beaten to stealth by 10 turns, opponents might have to use fighters to air sweep and ground units to push back SAMS to take my cities.
I never think Civ need balancing, because it follows the history. If a civ (real) follows to crazily on war (germanic tribes) or religion (aztec) they would die off eventually. Replubic (rome) can't last forever because one great leader and it would be an Empire. After all only traditional empire can grow at lot. However I feel that the policy trees should be followed up by another. Like Tradition can't pick rationalism, and Liberty can't pick Aesthetic or something
Rationalism should be required for people who are way behind everyone else on tech, so they have chance to keep up but also have 1 or 2 policies from making sure a top science player can stay on top with science. Like e.g. Opener: +15% great Scientist generation. | - 1. Science buildings 50% cheaper. | - | - 2. All science buildings provide 1 food and 1 local happiness | - | - | - 3. +20% less science needed for already researched techs by known civs. | - | - 2. Spies are 25% better at stealing tech. | - | - 2. Spies are 25% more likely to catch enemy spies. Finisher: 2 free techs already researched by someone else and purchase great Scientists with faith.
How to nerf desert folklore: double all faith-outputs and costs, +2 faith becomes +4 faith pagodas cost double the faith, so do prophets and scientists and so on... and then u say that desert folklore gives +2 faith on desert but only +1 faith on floodplains this makes balancing other stuff easier as well, cause u have more room to play with, as u are only using natural numbers edit: essentially u make floodplains give +0.5 faith
But religion isn't a finite resource. There have been all sorts of religions, in reality, and not all of the cultures that made them were leader in demographics. I don't like hopw religion works anyways. How can Islam and Christianity predate Judaism? Those 3 all the same region, basically. Weaker civs should be able to bastardize other religions and add some stuff to it. Instance, Christianity has tithe, a weaker civ can change Christianity into Mormonism, but lose Tithe for a different follower belief. Also, using faith to purchase great scientists makes sense, Newton. Weaker Civs should be able to take top tier religions and change them into something similar.
Yoruus should not get a vote on the mod, he is wrong on piety and patronage and I am not at the end. He wants to make the game easy, very easy. Strongly disagree with him on his mod opinion. EDIT. At the end Yoruus got better :). YES the MOD "killed" (ok, cleftor won, but that was ... ) a science win and is ALL about the war. If you want war, play I dont know, total war, starcraft. Civ is not just about war as human history is not just about war.
Honestly, I gave up on Firaxis long ago... The only reason I still play civ is this community. All you need to do is take a look at the games they've been making and compare them to others in the genre to see that they really couldn't give less of a shit about their players. Everything is badly optimised and unbalanced with essentially no multiplayer and needs multiple expansions and community support to even be fun... Yeah, as much as I love this game I may not even buy civ 6.
Why the ... don't you talk about this mod in reference to the NQ map script???? Sorry of my language, this made me very mad, as that makes the beginning of the video BULLSHIT. I talk about this in chat, but as I see people don't get it. With the NQ map liberty as it is in the game would be ok without the mod, maybe v6 liberty could be ok. But if there would be still as YORUUS said just space for 4-5 cities yes liberty needs a boost, but NQ players play on a map with space for 7-8 cities (NQ map). Firaxis made the policies for a map with 4 cities for a player, NQ group needs to address this problem.
I love Civ and I play it every day, but I can never stand just how much war people need to wage in order to get ahead. The game is built around two things: more cities is better; and capturing cities is better than making new ones. In lower difficulties or lucky starts, it's not too difficult to get another type of victory. But in multiplayer, the warmongering really shows. If you're not willing to kill, you don't deserve to win the game. Simple as that. And that's always rubbed me the wrong way.
23:40 I really like this idea of giving time to scout for information allowing players to make an informed decision
Also, I agree with Filthy's commentary @ around the 32nd minute. Honor is so crippling early, with the likely negative GPT, and the weak border expansion, and the negative H.
I feel like Courthouses or some building should provide a major H boost, or something should happen with the policies to where it's profitable in terms of H to conquer new lands, making Honor players have an H advantage, to where the H can be a net positive per city capture. Maybe not immediate net gain, but within a reasonable time frame. It's already bad enough with the many turns of unrest on larger city capture.
Just watching filthy during Yoruus points. Best thing ever.
With free walls included in tradition, new goddes of protection will always be picked by tradition player first to get a pantheon.
Tradition, Liberty, Honor, and Piety, as far as dynamic game changes are concerned, should be balanced and viable for opening strategies that lend themselves to specific particular win strategies.
Payouts like Great Engineers from Tradition fill are more of a benefit than a 1-time Great Person finisher with Liberty, for example.
Also, Science in this game is on a much larger and OP level than the other yields, in terms of both necessity and comparative thresholds.
Beakers tend to be anywhere from 2x-5x in total per-turn yield compared to Culture points ... and part of that problem is that there are so many buildings that magnify the Beaker output compared to what can be built for Culture-related buildings.
Why isn't there a National College for Culture? Something that boosts Culture output by 50%, as early as Science?
The other problem with playing on Quick Turns as far as the Science boosts are concerned ... is that Civs with early-era UUs lose value due to the faster time to being obsolete. It also tends to slightly boost the value of mid-late era UUs for other Civs, in the sense that you have more ability to pump out, say, Minutemen for America, compared to say Maori Warriors for Polynesia.
So either nerfing or balancing the various outputs is probably something that has to be done as far as making what I feel is a needed change in Civ 5 in general, that being, de-emphasis of Tradition and Rationalism as the strongest route in most cases to a win.
Chris Sauce The problem of obsolete UUs is prevalent in a lot of game speeds. Even on marathon no one is making an army out of maori warriors. No one builds an army with warrior replacements.
Cool stuff, when will you upload games played with the mod on youtube ?
Quentin Litzler Very soon
I think the rearrangement the mod makers made where Oligarchy and Aristocracy were switched was perfect, however i do think the walls are a good idea because of the two warriors other players get from early in honor now.
Exploratiin should give bonuses to founding New cities later on like three extra pop, free monument, workshop and granary etc.
How about units have more movement for the first turns so you have done more scouting when you must choose first culture.
Also; wouldnt the 'You dont lose influence with trade routed CS' make Greece a LOT weaker?
+John Doe Greece still has its bonus without the trade route. Besides that, trade routes in multiplayer can be tricky, as human players can plunder them "just for fun" (Filthy talked about it once), so this can be unreliable if not done properly, and, honestly, if the city-state is in the other side of the map, it is not a practical way of maintaining the alliance.
Also, gold is not the easiest commodity to have in multiplayer, so buying city-states or going for the diplomatic victory can be something tricky.
And to top all of that they have very good early military units, can recover faster the favor of city states after tribute demand in the early game. And can do it ALL THE TIME, without investing culture in it (and you can still grab the policy).
So, no. If Greece is played early well, it'll snowball.
QUIET! :D Love the chaotic format
Filthy, what advice would you give for a strong tradition player against a strong liberty one? Early war? Turtling?
On the NQ mod i mean
+Ben Pickett Turtling, you have way, way less hammers early, offensive war as Tradition vs Liberty is going to be extremely hard.
FilthyRobot ah okay thanks, i'll give it a go :)
Late to the party but here is a suggestion for the piety opener.
+1 Faith per (2 or 3) pop empire wide.
I think this strikes a balance between piety giving a bonus to getting and having a pantheon, but not guaranteeing first pantheon.
Also it gives so parity between tall and wide faith empires.
They often mention the term "Simcity". Can somebody please tell me what this means. Sorry for not understanding these terms i am an SP player :P
Creepercraft2000 Players that act isolated and just spend the whole game building buildings instead of units
Creepercraft2000 Means when you not worrying about war, so just keeping your cities production/growth/economy maximized by tile managing, tile improvements, tech three planning etc. Basically playing sim city with your civ =P
Creepercraft2000 Boring as fuck
Rip baba
Absolutely agree with Yoruus saying "50% of the time map decides everything". Why talking so much about policies when almost everything is decided whether you have a good game or not? And having a good game depends on whether you have a good spot or not. It's not really matter what policies you pick, if you up against guys with 5 salt per city without any good resources you're fucked.
Mod have to focus hard on starting spot changes and map generation changes. Everything else like policies and stuff doesn't matter that much.
And problem with war in civ is not balance it is the concept. This shit with generals wars is ridiculous and stupid. Especially while all the games now are played with simultaneous turns.
In order to make piety viable, it needs 3 things.
It needs a bonus to getting a quick religion
It needs strong bonuses to spreading spread religion
It needs strong bonuses for spreading a religion. Some bonuses based around how many followers there are and/or how many cities that religion as a majority in.
if any of you wondering: here are the changes in nq mod v5 they are talking about: docs.google.com/document/d/1me025Vepd3qXN5QqQtqakPUuSfQmk8D5Jv15SZp9ly8/preview?sle=true&pli=1
Something I've wondered about mod capability- can first turn (for war) be modded in anyway? Also wondering a similar thing for wonders going strictly to highest player number- can it be randomized or configured in some other way?
I feel like god of craftsmen is ridiculously OP - 2 hammers per city, esp in liberty is like 50 % of your entire production if you get out like 6 cities in liberty, not to mention making wonders faster (it's basically entirely better than classical/ancient wonder prod)
calze6 Yeah, it's a little too strong at the moment
how you do a video explaining all your mods
CIV IS NOT JUST A WAR GAME. WHERE ARE THE TIMES YOU HAD THE OPTIONS TO KILL, SPACE, CULTURE? And as I told fruit in the beginning, the mod is broken because of this thinking. Baba, Arv, and you trying to make the game more and more war. I miss how you won as America and Yoruus had great wins to space. I get it, it is much a better show for you to stream war and not sim city, but with the NQ map one more time SPACE is death. Btw honor opener as the mod game are just about war is as it was with rationalism a must.
Bigmarian The war game has the strongest interaction with the other players. Therefore it is favored by ppl who play this game intensely. It never grows "old" or "stale". Therefore they prefer war as the centerpiece in Civ games. All other win conditions cancel out the wargame. There is a balance somewhere for a non-dominating player to outdo the warring gameleader and snatch the win. If it is to easy though it will become the default path to victory and that will make war extremely prohibitive in everyones mind. For me science victory is often the solution to break a lategame stalemate. To be able to go to space before someone starts their world domination tour is rare and it should be. Tourism is a victory condition that warps everyones agenda against that one player who dares to go for it. It is exciting if it happens. And if you can pull of a diplo win, wow, just wow. You can only do that by getting the votes of the city states and that is also a very specific target and can normally only be kept with mass war declarations against all players... The mod is not adjusted for those victory conditions as he said in the video. We will see if he can find the balance to keep all those conditions relevant without creeping into the spotlight.
MrVlonk War was always a big part of the game, it was the main part, but know with the NQ mod and map it is the only part. War was never something that was not in the game. 95 percent of the games ended in cc, because one player dominates the game with war. The game was balance in this way and devs made a good game, that is why it is one of the top played games on steam. THe mod as it is broke the balance and with the combination of the NQ map (CMON HOW DID filthy not address that) the game is getting very boring and in 99 percent of the games ends in modern era, were landships are (changing anti tanks will I hope fix this). The mod is that much one sided on war that economy in the game is not present. Games where you make 100+ gpt on turn 85 are very common and games where you make 450 + are not that of a problem (600 also), that is I would say double before the mod. This gold OP was made because people around fruit told him, that they want to spam units and war. I get it. That is the same with happiness, one of the best part of the game. There are no limits on any resources in the game as it is now. As I said, the mod brakes the eco part and civ is just at the end a copy of Age of Empires fast game style. And BTW with the first moves in the game, fast clicking with the mod became even more important, not less.Yes, rationalism was broken and the mod is addressing that very nice, but the way it does is to kill space, tourism and culture games. That is not ok. Maybe I am wrong, but the community wanted (Imo) a mod that makes the game more balanced, but maybe I am wrong and they want a Age of Empire game that is called CIV 5.
Bigmarian You're simply wrong. The unmodded game is 100% a war game. In "vanilla" BNW tourism and diplomacy don't exist (because (1) war them, (2) war their cs), and science is only possible if you have either extreme isolation, so much military people can't kill you in time, or so much war in the game you can sneak a science victory out. Basically, the multiplayer game is already 100% a war game.
The goal of the mod is to make it a game with more OPTIONS for social policies, tech paths, unit diversity, and yes, eventually, win conditions.
Bigmarian Fruitstrike says so in the video himself, that the other win conditions are not taken care of in the balancing at the moment. I can't find the spot anymore in the video but I think it was regarding someone proposing a 50% buff on all tourism production sources to balance against the increased culture gains in the mod. It will take some time to tune this, but I am certain you can only start with this process AFTER you finished the balancing of science, production, income, happiness and the wargame of all timeperiods.
The mod could serve many purposes after achieving a good balance in those things. Personally I would like to see relevancy for small to medium amounts of tourism. It hurts other players in their happiness, it makes annexing their cities faster and more profitable. That is some pretty nasty stuff that helps an active and dynamic player! What an aggressive mechanism. So why does nobody use it? In the existing version (unmodded) it needs high investment of GP and hammers and only serves as a win condition. That could be changed by spreading tourism on other things but "wasted" great persons, high end/ high hammer buildings that serve no other purpose and some very specific conditions.
That mechanism is "broken" at the moment and rarely sees play because those hammers could have been used for building units or core buildings. Some of those almost core buildings could be buffed with small amounts of tourism. Gardens for instance. Maybe some GP could generate a fixed amount of tourism when they are popped, not only the musician.
Ah well "tourism" is anyway the wrong label for those negative attributes that crush down other civs. Firaxis probably tried to adapt the phenomenon of "westernization" and the ideological fights of the cold war in one concept and could not find a unifying term for "cultural pressure".Tourism in Civ does not boost your economy but rather cripples everyone elses. I dont think that is what tourism in our world does at all.
FilthyRobot funny how you now have less options to win. And it is not just a war game even in MP. But ok, just saying you should be as in real civ be limited to less. Less money, less happiness, less gold. How it is now a better game with tons of happiness, gold, hammers liberty hammers), resources? That is not civ. ANd more options should not mean all the policies in the game (with 300 - 450 culture per turn no problem) And sorry, but even you had science games and tried culture. Try it now. And not addressing the nq map combination. Yes, sneak in a science win was possible as it was one of the options and SHOULD NOT be nerft for the war part. Just saying at this moment it looks very much that just the war part should be in the game. Options ok, but balance the game. But ok, just saying Age of Empires has no science, culture or tourism wins. Perfect game. BTW best players are that are good in war and can manage the resources, that was before the mod. Now just the war part is important. Would very much like to get a feed back from Tommynt on this mod
Can we have a what we want from Civ 6 please?
I also like Yoruus's suggestion at the 40th minute of allowing every player to found a religion.
Part of the problem with the religious beliefs is that desert faith tends to be OP compared to a lot of the rest of the pantheons ...
There's a mod I use in single player that expands and edits beliefs to provide many more valuable beliefs within the choices. It's so nice to the point that I just don't enjoy playing with religion in a vanilla non-modded game.
Chris Sauce If all civs could have a religion then there is no competition.
Beans Does it work that way though? There will still be defense of religions, and if one overpowers another whose other owner is using it very specifically for benefits in their local area, the result is likely another reason for war.
Chris Sauce Yes I know, but then there is no incentive to rush for a religion.
Beans Unless the beliefs are all made juicy (they currently aren't), there's still a rush for the better beliefs.
Filthy's opinion on Piety, I feel is exactly on point. It is exactly my opinion on Piety as well.
Those traffic cone jokes never get old
Dirtyrobot should have to pay to even talk to the goat yoruus and his sidekick babyyoda
Game needs a flame thrower for heavy jungle starts. Regular jungle is fine, heavy not so much.
Conans River Yeah, jungle starts are a pita
FilthyRobot What does "pita" mean?
Jon Arne Karlsen
Pain in the ass
What mods do you normally run when playing civ 5?
He has a list of all mods he uses while streaming on his twitch page
Richard Condit Thanks
I largely agree with Filthy about the rationalism tree coming too early. I like his idea about putting patronage, aesthetics, commerce, and exploration all in classical and balancing them in relation to each other. Why not do the same with rationalism then? Put it in the industrial era, and balance it against the ideologies instead.
Also, you said aesthetics is unbalanced because rationalism is unbalanced. I think rationalism is unbalanced because stealth bombers are unbalanced. All late game war seems like is drop enough XCom to survive opponents stealth bomber ball, bomb city flat, win. Since stealth bombers can fly with impunity, whoever can bomb out the others melee units first wins. Wouldn't making stealth bombers interceptable change this? Then even if I am beaten to stealth by 10 turns, opponents might have to use fighters to air sweep and ground units to push back SAMS to take my cities.
I never think Civ need balancing, because it follows the history. If a civ (real) follows to crazily on war (germanic tribes) or religion (aztec) they would die off eventually. Replubic (rome) can't last forever because one great leader and it would be an Empire. After all only traditional empire can grow at lot. However I feel that the policy trees should be followed up by another. Like Tradition can't pick rationalism, and Liberty can't pick Aesthetic or something
Rationalism should be required for people who are way behind everyone else on tech, so they have chance to keep up but also have 1 or 2 policies from making sure a top science player can stay on top with science.
Like e.g.
Opener: +15% great Scientist generation.
| - 1. Science buildings 50% cheaper.
| - | - 2. All science buildings provide 1 food and 1 local happiness
| - | - | - 3. +20% less science needed for already researched techs by known civs.
| - | - 2. Spies are 25% better at stealing tech.
| - | - 2. Spies are 25% more likely to catch enemy spies.
Finisher: 2 free techs already researched by someone else and purchase great Scientists with faith.
Tradition little weak??? With the NQ map this tree is death
Piety opener should dubble your pantheon, with all the other faith in Piety picking a faith generating pantheon is not needed,
How to nerf desert folklore:
double all faith-outputs and costs, +2 faith becomes +4 faith pagodas cost double the faith, so do prophets and scientists and so on...
and then u say that desert folklore gives +2 faith on desert but only +1 faith on floodplains
this makes balancing other stuff easier as well, cause u have more room to play with, as u are only using natural numbers
edit: essentially u make floodplains give +0.5 faith
Over three hours of this thing. OMG. :D
But religion isn't a finite resource. There have been all sorts of religions, in reality, and not all of the cultures that made them were leader in demographics. I don't like hopw religion works anyways. How can Islam and Christianity predate Judaism? Those 3 all the same region, basically. Weaker civs should be able to bastardize other religions and add some stuff to it. Instance, Christianity has tithe, a weaker civ can change Christianity into Mormonism, but lose Tithe for a different follower belief. Also, using faith to purchase great scientists makes sense, Newton.
Weaker Civs should be able to take top tier religions and change them into something similar.
Oh snap! He just said that Mormonism is a bastardization of Christianity.
LIMBER MILLS ON JUNGLE
This video is hilarious. That humor :)
Yoruus should not get a vote on the mod, he is wrong on piety and patronage and I am not at the end. He wants to make the game easy, very easy. Strongly disagree with him on his mod opinion. EDIT. At the end Yoruus got better :). YES the MOD "killed" (ok, cleftor won, but that was ... ) a science win and is ALL about the war. If you want war, play I dont know, total war, starcraft. Civ is not just about war as human history is not just about war.
Hmm yes i agree
Honestly, I gave up on Firaxis long ago... The only reason I still play civ is this community. All you need to do is take a look at the games they've been making and compare them to others in the genre to see that they really couldn't give less of a shit about their players. Everything is badly optimised and unbalanced with essentially no multiplayer and needs multiple expansions and community support to even be fun... Yeah, as much as I love this game I may not even buy civ 6.
Yoruus basically wanting to create a whole new game is annoying as fuck..
41:08 LOL.
Great vid
2:01:46
Fruitstrike
Lategame infantry gonna be useless with this mod
Im sorry sir but 3 hours is most definitely not manageable.
TheRealDeadRock was manageable for me ;)
TheRealDeadRock if it fixes 1000 hours of gameplay then id spend a day going over stuff.
1:02:50, lol that reaction: "wat?"
Why the ... don't you talk about this mod in reference to the NQ map script???? Sorry of my language, this made me very mad, as that makes the beginning of the video BULLSHIT. I talk about this in chat, but as I see people don't get it. With the NQ map liberty as it is in the game would be ok without the mod, maybe v6 liberty could be ok. But if there would be still as YORUUS said just space for 4-5 cities yes liberty needs a boost, but NQ players play on a map with space for 7-8 cities (NQ map). Firaxis made the policies for a map with 4 cities for a player, NQ group needs to address this problem.
I love Civ and I play it every day, but I can never stand just how much war people need to wage in order to get ahead. The game is built around two things: more cities is better; and capturing cities is better than making new ones. In lower difficulties or lucky starts, it's not too difficult to get another type of victory. But in multiplayer, the warmongering really shows. If you're not willing to kill, you don't deserve to win the game. Simple as that. And that's always rubbed me the wrong way.
What a cringy video.