You exaggerate creating a civ concept and act like you’re the only one who can come up with ideas when everywhere is already filled with a gazillion civ ideas.
1 Like
Keep in mind this is from a bygone era when it was unusual to see beyond the 18 we have now. In fact forgotten was iirc the first time it happened. But civ crafters especially to my frenzy were not really out there
You need to learn to take criticism without being personally offended, or you’re going to have a rough time on the internet. No one here wants you dead, so stop being so dramatic. You must also learn that sometimes, people never get recognition for their work.
interesting. cool to see that some of these bonuses actually got taken into the game as well.
I also find it interesting that there were already people saying that fewer civs is better. I wish the current devs also heard this
1 Like
As I mentioned above, there are some interesting ideas that have been taken up.
I imagine how I would play the civilisation I’m reading about on an Arabia/Arena/Hybrid map (taking these three most common archetypes as examples), and that is the correct way to evaluate it. Of course, the tech trees, unique units and unique technologies should remain historically inspired rather than purely fictional.
For example, the Berbers have been properly revamped, whereas the Vandals need to be completely scrapped.
That’s why I picked my places carefully.
I don’t see what the problem is. The date isn’t faked. I put this REAL effort into these. And mastering Genie engine is hard except for those who somehow know how to break the code down like magic with nobody to tell them how to do it
why so defensive? I’m not accusing you of anything
Force of habit. Its like a feeling of defensive maneuvering and cynicism that years of this and no results allowed by some… I don’t know who’s been preventing it honestly but it’s not my fault
preventing what? if you want to make a civ, create a mod that adds it (or find a modder who can). posting these ideas here will achieve little to nothing
Even good ideas aren’t enough to make a brilliant civ. There were far fewer civs in the past; coming up with something like “archers fire faster” wasn’t hard at all.
A good civ doesn’t just have good bonuses; it makes those bonuses and the tech tree synergize impeccably. The Ethiopians, for example, have a “micro-intensive, glass cannon” identity that makes them very different from other archer civs. Their archers, Shotels, Torsion Engines, and lack of a good meatshield all reinforce this unique identity. They are a high-risk, high-reward civ with immense replayability.
The “faster firing archers” bonus could have been wasted on a mediocre civ if the Ethiopians hadn’t been designed impeccably (though I’m still not happy about them losing free Halberdiers).
1 Like
And yet, almost completely ahistorical.
That’s true, which is why civs like the Burmese could do with a bit of fine-tuning.
Why even add the Mapuche?
They stole Frank, Viking, and Vietnamese bonuses and power-creeped these civs. Now all these civs feel damaged and not as unique as before.
Why add one civ at the expense of damaging the uniqueness of three existing civs? What makes adding Mapuche more important than preserving the uniqueness of existing civs?
Just scrap this civ or replace their berry and HP bonuses with something else.
4 Likes
This is just wrong.
- The Franks primary bonus is their Farm bonus. While the Mapuche don’t have a 2nd economic bonus.
- The Mapuche don’t have Champions and also the Viking Infantry have +5 vs. Cavalry which is a very significant bonus.
- The Vietnamese bonus applies to the Archer Line too (and their UU and Calvary Archers) which are a lot stronger unit in general. Also the Mapuche are missing Bracer.
Portuguese get 0.33 Wood per Food Collected from Cherry Bushes.
Mongols have bonus HP for Light Cavalry, did anyone ever complain that this ruins the Franks uniqueness?
Armenians have a UT that gives Infantry +30HP.
Turks have a UT that gives Cavalry Archers +20HP.
So all of those civs already have bonuses very similar to the Mapuche one. That’s nothing new.
3 Likes
Armenians having a better Champion than Vikings isn’t okay either.
Whereas the Portuguese berry bonus is unique and doesn’t step on the Frank bonus. The Turk Cav Archer bonus doesn’t step on anyone either. They also lack Elite Skirmishers and Onagers, so they would just auto-lose to enemy Cav Archers (and possibly to Arbalester - Halberdier combo) without Sipahi.
Vietnamese have a bonus for Archers, Skirmishers and Cavalry Archers. Mapuche only for Skirmishers and Turks only for Cavalry Archers. While Turks have awful Skirmishers, Mapuche have bad Crossbows without Bracer. Not much of a difference.
Armenians have very tanky Champions but again no bonus damage vs. Cavalry.
The Portuguese bonus is also just better then the Frank bonus. It’s essentially like +33% just Wood instead of Food. And the Portuguese have other bonuses like all units costing -20% Gold.
2 Likes
I disagree:
- Mapuche have a 2nd economic bonus, which is the settlement.
- The problem with the Mapuche berry bonus is not that it is there, but that is strictly superior to the Frank bonus, not only argubly superior.
So:
- If the Mapuche bonus is nerfed from 20% to 10%, it becomes okay
- If the Franks bonus is removed, it becomes okay
- If the Franks bonus is buffed to 25% (and potentially given to another civ), it becomes okay.
- If the Mapuche get another economic or non-economic bonus not strictly superior to an existing one, it is okay because it is irrelevant to the expectation that no UT/bonus should be strictly superior to another one.
These bonuses are not strictly superior. They are only superior in the late game.
It is okay, Vikings get it from Feudal age whereas Armenians get it from imperial age UT.
Just like nobody complain about Aztecs UT vs Burmese civ bonus: one is free and earlier whereas the other is stronger.
No, it is agubly better but not strictly better. If you really need food rather than wood, then the Franks one becomes better. It does not matter how rarely the Franks one is better, as long as there is one case where it is better.
3 Likes
Franks do need the berry bonus. The hp bonus might be about equal to the extra attack bonus (and also comparable to Jurchen scouts), but Magyars still have their scout discount as well and a better late game as well (FU hussars, arbs, and CAs is a potent combo). And Frank scouts will lose to generic scouts once they get bloodlines (something Magyars have access to). And as much as Magyars love their scout rush, they can also do a MAA rush (with free forging still applying) or an archer rush (generic, but any preemptive spears will be utterly wasted). The main advantage Franks have over Magyars is that Franks aren’t pushed towards aggressive gameplay because Franks actually have eco bonuses - but the farm bonus by itself isn’t enough (and doesn’t help with the initial scout rush either - it kicks in afterwards). Even with the berry bonus, Franks have been getting power crept. Take it away, and Franks will need something to compensate (like usable arbs - something they had historically but completely lack in-game)
I could see the bonuses getting “swapped”: Franks getting 10% more food from berries while Mapuche get 25% faster foragers. Or something along those lines. But a simple numbers adjustment would also work (Franks bonus could easily be increased imo)
And how have others evaluated the civ crafting? 20 years of experience isn’t any good if its 20 years of bad experience, and people are terrible at evaluating their own performances. If you’ve been receiving feedback from others over those years and continuously improving based on that feedback it would be a different story, but I don’t think that’s the case here.
4 Likes
Waiting for “Let me do the most fun and easy part of the job while others do all the boring chores, coding, playtesting, research, graphics, and animations” is NOT experience.
And what is going to happen if your civ isn’t liked? How will you compensate for the precious time these professionals used to put your civ in the game?
What’s the assurance?
- The settlement is barely a bonus at all. It costs 125 Wood which is a disadvantage if you only need a Lumber Camp that is a disadvantage. In most situations it’s a slight advantage but almost never as much as the Japanese bonus that makes all camps cost 50 Wood.
- There is no written rule that one civ is not allowed to have 1 bonus that is better then 1 bonus of another civ.
For the Franks the Farm bonus is the primary bonus while it is the primary bonus for the Mapuche. The Settlements are the secondary bonus for the Mapuche while the Berry bonus is the secondary bonus for the Franks.
Every civ has to do something that hasn’t been done before, so the whole argument about “unwritten rules” makes no sense. So having a better version of another civs bonus is not “illegal” just because it has never happened before.
Never claimed that they are superior. Just said that there is already a bonus overlap.