9.9 thoughts

Playing 9.9:

DoF gives too much research bonus given that they have no gold cost, especially with Rationalism and the Porcelain tower, this can really get out of control. It also severely punishes you if your nearby neighbors are aggressive (and have no interest in DoFs). It is also still a bit too hard/non-transparent to figure out how to get a DoF; I have never been able to get a DoF that the AI didn't offer to me, and them offering them is non-transparent to the player.
I would suggest removing the PT and Rationalism effects and getting other ones instead (eg a flat bonus), as they get really nasty if you have lots and lots o fDoFs.

City healing is too slow. It shouldn't take me 15+ turns to heal a single catapult shot on my city.
I think we're back to defensive buildings being far too weak and not worth building, because city defenses are very weak, and your army is the only thing that can really save a city.
I would have walls increase city healing to 2 per turn.

I'm still undecided on Vanguard line. The promotions feel a bit weak.

I'm also not sure about the AT/AA gun units now. Specialist defensive units feel a bit weak, particularly in the AI's hands.

Engineers and artist specialists give too much hammers/culture.
I also really dislike the reduction of speicalists to only 2 GPPs. As I argued before, I think specialists should be more about great people and less about yields. You have done the reverse, which makes them too similar to tile yields, and makes terrain and improvements too unimportant.
I would prefer to lower yields and boost GPP income.

Some of the great improvements feel too weak. Only 5 gold for a customhouse?
It seems you're almost always better off to use them for a CS.

I worry that fascism is underpowered, but I need to test more.

*edit*
Also, policy costs seem too low. Some AIs have 25+ policies very early on.

Thanks for bringing up city healing, I'd forgotten to increase it when I scaled up the other damage/healing numbers.

We're unable to directly change the healing effect of defensive buildings. It's tied to the defense rating in a formula located in the game core only Firaxis has access to. I could increase the defense bonus of these buildings if you feel that would help?

Engineers give more production because total production income & costs were both scaled up by a roughly equal amount. This was done to bring the production:gold value ratio closer to 1:1. Mines also got more production as a part of this.

I could increase the defense bonus of these buildings if you feel that would help?

Click to expand...

It would, but I still feel that with the double damage and health for everything, defensive buildings and cities in general have been severely weakened.

Engineers give more production because total production income & costs were both scaled up by a roughly equal amount. This was done to bring the production:gold value ratio closer to 1:1. Mines also got more production as a part of this.

Click to expand...

I have to do more testing, but my general feeling is still that 1 production is worth significantly more than 1 gold, and that these specialists are providing yields that are too high.
Remember that in release-Civ5 artists only gave 1 culture; later this was increased to 2 which was justified, but now you have increased up to 3.

But I really see no need for GPP yields to have been reduced to 2.

Ahriman said:

It would, but I still feel that with the double damage and health for everything, defensive buildings and cities in general have been severely weakened.

Click to expand...

Strength ratios were not changed, so the value of the defense bonus itself is the same as before. What changed is the proportional value of the city heal rate. We're unable to directly alter that formula, so I've increased the base city heal rate and gave defensive buildings +1 to compensate. I could also alter base city hitpoints if you think that would be good.

The changes you've made seem decent enough.
I note that you didn't double the Mongol Khan healing rate either, but I think that is maybe still ok. The Khan is still powerful because it seems to stack with medic.

Honor tree seems to give too much happiness, as compared to Liberty.
With Honor I can get up to +3 happy per city (puppet, garrison, colosseum) whereas with Liberty I can get only +0.5 happy per city.
Not sure what the right fix is here. I am finding Honor very powerful though, I think I am getting too much gold from killing units (60 gold for killing a pikeman??)

The Khan's healing was scaled with the others, I just forgot to update the tooltip.

Liberty's happiness is free of restrictions, while each of Honor's happiness bonuses have costs or requirements associated with them. Still, if you feel it would help, I wouldn't be opposed to removing the puppet state happiness from the Honor finisher. That particular bonus is not a part of any of my major goals.

Liberty's happiness is free of restrictions, while each of Honor's happiness bonuses have costs or requirements associated with them.

Click to expand...

Connected to capital is a (mild) restriction, but so too having a Colosseum is pretty mild.

Still, if you feel it would help, I wouldn't be opposed to removing the puppet state happiness from the Honor finisher.

Click to expand...

That might be a good idea, but I'm not sure yet. I don't have enough experience with Honor games yet to be sure, so its just something to think about for now.

Of course, my actual preference is still for adding +1 happy to the Colosseum, Theatre and Stadium. I don't think you can get enough happiness from buildings.

Good point about the connected limitation.

I still need to play more to get a better feel, but it does feel like vanguard units are a bit too good relative to their counterparts. I think the "light" vs "heavy" would be even clearer if the light units were a strength point or two below their military-tech counterparts. Eg: strength 9 levies vs pikemen 10, strength 14 vs muskets 15, etc.
Maybe the differential promotion modifiers are enough, I need to test more.

More importantly I think, there are now some problems with techs, after various changes. Some techs are really strong now (Economics comes to mind; it gives you a strength 15 military unit, a good production booster, one of the best wonders in the game and a large economy boost to trading posts) and some are quite weak (Astronomy).
Given how weak the happiness buildings are now, the happiness techs (like printing press) also feel pretty weak.

Thalassicus said:

Vanguard Units have 25% lower strength, cost, and maintenance than elite melee counterparts. For example, 36 Infantry vs 27 Light Infantry. When a Vanguard unit unlocks between two units of the elite line (Levies are halfway between Swords and Longswords), I take the midway point of the two.

Click to expand...

The numbers are based on elite vs vanguard. Specialized units like vs-counters are also important, but not intended to be numerous mainline units. Pikes are very good at their role of countering mounted units.

One of the standards in Civ games is alternating powerful and weak technologies for variety. Astronomy is weak, but the techs it leads from and to are very powerful. Economics is powerful, but leads from and to somewhat weaker technologies. Economics seems competitive with others of its time period. Navigation is very useful for coastal empires, Acoustics for culture victories, and the bottom-row military techs for land wars.

Vanguard Units have 25% lower strength, cost, and maintenance than elite melee counterparts.

Click to expand...

Levy has same strength as pikemen. Skirmisher has same strength as muskets.

I don't think your conception of "elite" is reasonable. It is not fair to lump swords/longswords into the same category as rifles/infantry. Rifles/infantry are resourceless. Swords/longswords are not.
The appropriate unit to balance them relative to is the basic resourceless melee line; warrior/pike/musket/rifle/infantry/mech-inf.
Swords and longswords are different.

One of the standards in Civ games is alternating powerful and weak technologies for variety

Click to expand...

Understood, but you have boosted Economics a *lot*. I think it is now unquestioningly more powerful than other techs of its era. Compare it to gunpowder, or metallurgy, or rifling, or fertilizer (still a strong tech). I think Economics is clearly more powerful than Acoustics or Navigation. Many of the military techs give one unit. Economics gives 1 unit *and* a building *and* a wonder *and* a very large passive economy boost.
I also don't think that Banking is a weak tech. Printing press is weak only because theaters are underpowered.

These are how I categorize units: link. When a Vanguard unit unlocks between two units of the elite line (Skirmishers are halfway between Muskets and Rifles), I take the midway point of the two.

I agree Economics is powerful, but I'd say a Rifling + Military Service beeline is still stronger if we're involved in land wars at the time. I also feel the Astronomy -> Navigation line is better economically on Continents maps, since meeting the other continent doubles our trade opportunities. Economics is also less powerful if we have a Production or Specialist economy, or a leader with Elite-role UUs.

These are how I categorize units: link. When a Vanguard unit unlocks between two units of the elite line (Skirmishers are halfway between Muskets and Rifles), I take the midway point of the two.

Click to expand...

I understand how you're doing it; what I'm saying is, the way you're doing it is bad.
Your design here takes no account for the fact that swords and longswords are elite, resource-requiring units, not basic soldiers. It is not the case that there is a consistent line swordsman/longsword/rifle/infantry/mech inf. The first two are different.

It is very important that the levy and skirmisher be designed in comparison to pikemen and muskets, since these units are similar tier and are the clear "non-vanguard" counterparts. The pikeman is already a defensive unit, and early in the game you will have few promotions, so the higher-strength modifying promotions don't come into play so much - which means that the levy tends to be more cost-effective at basically the same role.

I agree Economics is powerful, but I'd say a Rifling + Military Service beeline is still stronger if we're involved in land wars at the time

Click to expand...

Economics is more powerful all-round, however.

I also feel the Astronomy -> Navigation line is better economically on Continents maps, since meeting the other continent doubles our trade opportunities.

Click to expand...

Navigation is not required to contact other continents.
I play continents all the time, and I find that navigation is a very low priority for me.
I also find that going for Astronomy early is rarely worth it, the trade advances from contacting other continents early aren't worth the opportunity cost of giving up other techs, and I am generally better off waiting and letting the other continents contact me.

Economics is also less powerful if we have ... a leader with Elite-role UUs.

Click to expand...

I don't think I understand this.

Leaders with elite UUs prioritize the military techs because that's where their UUs are located (or the upgrades from them). It wouldn't make much sense to go for Economics before Gunpowder->Metallurgy when playing Suleiman. Even with Japan I go for Rifling before Economics to upgrade my Samurai and breeze through an enemy's territory.

Leaders with elite UUs prioritize the military techs because that's where their UUs are located (or the upgrades from them).

Click to expand...

Ok sure, but that doesn't apply to most leaders. The point remains that Economics is super-powerful, and that the Levy and skirmisher are arguably a bit too cost-effective relative to pikes and muskets.