"Fall Patch" announced

Status
Not open for further replies.
What do they mean with that RA overflow? I dont get it.

It's like... leftovers. Leftovers from a really good meal that'll help bring you to the next stage of existence.

e: relevant

The amount of beakers provided can be increased by an additive 25% of the median tech in two different ways: by controlling the Porcelain Tower, and by having the social policy Rationalism. These only matter at the time of resolution, and getting both of these boosts RAs to providing the full value of the median tech.

If the beakers granted by a research agreement exceed the cost of the technology being researched, overflow is applied to the next technology queued (via shift+clicking on the technology tree) or applied randomly if no technology is selected. Each research agreement resolving on a turn can complete at most one technology, along with an additional technology completed by standard research after the agreements resolve. Any overflow beyond completing these technologies is saved for the next turn.
 
Yes i understand, butwhat is the difference then? With the new patch we dont get the leftovers from the agreement anymore? Just the own research leftovers?
 
Currently, saved overflow is still included in your science output of that same turn. Your science output determines how much science you get from research agreements.

This means, that it is incorrectly included multiple times and that by creating serious overflow you get ridiculous amounts of science from a RA.
 
I am a bit surprised that they didn't take a pass at buffing the Piety tree.
No happiness anywhere in the tree
The opener is lackluster as is the finisher
Tree needs to be AS STRONG as Rationalism is it remains opposed to Rationalism.
 
Currently, saved overflow is still included in your science output of that same turn. Your science output determines how much science you get from research agreements.

This means, that it is incorrectly included multiple times and that by creating serious overflow you get ridiculous amounts of science from a RA.

Yeah, there is a lengthy thread discussing the issue: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=468493
 
The fact that the AI will return a captured city to you if you have a defensive pact is really good. I wish STW2 did this.
 
The fact that the AI will return a captured city to you if you have a defensive pact is really good. I wish STW2 did this.

Wait what?

Seriously?

DoFs just got a lot more lucrative...
 
cant you just liberate the CS? or am i missing something? :crazyeye:

loving the new patch, cant wait for it to be released

You can liberate conquered CS's, but Austria doesn't conquer, Austria assimilates. >.>

Seriously, the CS becomes part of Austria, just like any other city. You can't liberate, but you can raze, just as if Austria had built that city. It acts as if that CS had never existed (including reducing the number of votes needed for a diplo victory) Thus, once Austria gets their hands on a CS, any lux under it will disappear....FOREVER!
 
Wait what?

Seriously?

DoFs just got a lot more lucrative...

An AI will return a city if the original owner of the city has a defensive pact with the player and they are both at war with the previous owner of the city, or, the AI and the original owner have a declaration of friendship and the AI is going for a diplomatic victory.

Here.
 
The fact that the AI will return a captured city to you if you have a defensive pact is really good. I wish STW2 did this.

Half the time in that game I seem to find myself racing against my allies to capture territory first... In a Fall of the Samurai campaign I just vassalled the Sendai and Morioka just to prevent my Kakegawa allies from taking them first...

Mind you, it's also something no previous Civ game has done - in Civ IV AI allies would randomly gift you captured cities they didn't need (usually barbarian cities in my experience), but they appeared to retain no memory of who the original owner was. I don't recall previous Civ games' AIs ever voluntarily gifting cities.

Wait what?

Seriously?

DoFs just got a lot more lucrative...

You don't need a DoF for a defensive pact. Though in any case, how often is it the case that you'll lose a city to an enemy AI that will then be recaptured by your ally?

And since you can't form a defensive pact with city-states, if one of those recaptures your city it won't give it back. Maybe this should have been included, if you have an allied CS (which, since they go to war when you do, is essentially equivalent to a defensive pact anyway).
 
I am a bit surprised that they didn't take a pass at buffing the Piety tree.
No happiness anywhere in the tree
The opener is lackluster as is the finisher
Tree needs to be AS STRONG as Rationalism is it remains opposed to Rationalism.

This is a good point. Rationalism is significantly stronger than Piety. I can't imagine ever selecting Piety unless I was going for a cultural victory, which remains the least interesting victory conditions in my opinion. Cheaper temples and shrines is a pretty insignificant ability since they are already pretty cheap buildings, and if you select Piety, you're probably not going to build that many cities anyway.

Like I said on a previous page, I'm a bit disappointed that there weren't more changes. It's a nice patch, but they could have done more I think.
 
You don't need a DoF for a defensive pact. Though in any case, how often is it the case that you'll lose a city to an enemy AI that will then be recaptured by your ally?

And since you can't form a defensive pact with city-states, if one of those recaptures your city it won't give it back. Maybe this should have been included, if you have an allied CS (which, since they go to war when you do, is essentially equivalent to a defensive pact anyway).

My experiences with having Defensive Pacts have mostly been with civs I am friends with. Anyone else would usually just say "I must decline" or some such self-interest deception - mainly because they are far more interested in stabbing me ("haha you got punked your weakness is MY opportunity!") or just plain disinterested to get entangled in closer diplomatics in future.

Though that is a good point, that allied city-states still won't be able to liberate your cities for you. This remains something to be worked on...
 
what a disappointing patch, so many things left undone. meanwhile with this huge change to pillaging it looks like we'll be playing beta testers for the next couple of months as we discover just how unbalanced this potentially (probably) will be, esp in the case of the Danes. while I'm all in favour of innovation I have zero faith in firaxis' ability or willingness to actually test these changes thoroughly before releasing them upon us. far more pressing issues were meanwhile left untouched, like the fact that half the units are never used/built, half the civs are rarely used/or liked, the policy tree is sorely unbalanced in favour of some very specific strategies, the wait times between turns are atrociously long and a long list of other complaints frequently voiced on these forums.
 
I am a bit surprised that they didn't take a pass at buffing the Piety tree.
No happiness anywhere in the tree
The opener is lackluster as is the finisher
Tree needs to be AS STRONG as Rationalism is it remains opposed to Rationalism.

There doesn't need to be happiness IN the tree because if you take piety then you are religion heavy. Religion heavy gets you really good happiness beliefs like Ceremonial Burial and pagodas.

The problem I see with piety is that it is split between tall (mandate of heaven) and wide (left side of tree). Half production cost of shrines/temples is really good for the wide player who focused on other stuff before deciding to go religious. The finisher, however, usually never helps me as I don't build too many great prophet sites and my religious buildings are already built by then.
 
There doesn't need to be happiness IN the tree because if you take piety then you are religion heavy. Religion heavy gets you really good happiness beliefs like Ceremonial Burial and pagodas.

The problem I see with piety is that it is split between tall (mandate of heaven) and wide (left side of tree). Half production cost of shrines/temples is really good for the wide player who focused on other stuff before deciding to go religious. The finisher, however, usually never helps me as I don't build too many great prophet sites and my religious buildings are already built by then.

Piety is still quite heavily culture. Only the opener and 1 extra faith from shrines and temples help faith production. You have temples giving +10% gold and the finisher giving more gold, culture bonuses for world wonders, happiness, and adopting policies (-10% culure needed), as well as in the finisher.

Really, Piety needs to be split into a religious policy tree and a culture policy tree. Then you could have a new triad (like the industrial era trees) and make all the trees potentially useful. Right now, it's just too split in piety.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom