Only if city is on grassland or desert. City founded on plains cannot build stoneworks -- totally arbirtrary. City on hill or water not a factor for stoneworks.
Brave New World Patch notes! Version 1.0.3.276
- Thread starter MadDjinn
- Start date
- Status
Only if city is on grassland or desert. City founded on plains cannot build stoneworks -- totally arbirtrary. City on hill or water not a factor for stoneworks.
Doktor Vic Tim
King
You could have a city with 4 stone on plains, but the city itself was founded on a single Grassland Hill so you can build a stone works.
Your other city had 3 stone on grassland, but your city was founded on a single plains flatland. This makes it unbalanced so you're not allowed to build a stone works.
Your other city had 3 stone on grassland, but your city was founded on a single plains flatland. This makes it unbalanced so you're not allowed to build a stone works.
adcarrymaokai
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2013
- Messages
- 1,616
The Piety change is a step forward, but I think Religious Tolerance should have been a standalone policy instead of Mandate of Heaven. It situational and unreliable and generally wastes a policy slot, so players should be able to choose whether they want it or not instead of being forced to pick it if they want Reformation. Piety would be an excellent tree if they swapped Religious Tolerance with Mandate of Heaven.
Tradition has been nerfed very hard, though it's understandable why.
Tradition has been nerfed very hard, though it's understandable why.
At least in my experience, Religious Tolerance gets more useful the wider I play, and the higher the difficulty level I'm at. Given you're probably playing wide if you take Piety, this seems reasonable to me. And I'm tending to play wider with the nerf to Tradition.
When you're settling up in someone else's neighborhood, and that someone is likely to have founded their own religion, it can be quite handy to have your Founder benefits and their Pantheon.
If you go high enough in difficulty to the point where your cities will typically have others' religions, it's also nice to be able to get the benefits of your own Pantheon without having to flip a city entirely back to your own religion.
In the cases where I wouldn't want this policy - either I'm playing at a low level and completely dominating the religion game, or playing Tall and am unlikely to want someone else's pantheon - I'm probably not going Piety to begin with. (Sacred Sites ICS notwithstanding.)
My issue with the patch is that if I'm generating enough Faith to go Piety, I'm probably going Mandate of Heaven early anyhow, even if it's not a prereq for Reformation. 20% may seem small compared to the 100% buff to Shrines and 50% buff to temples . . . but if I'm going Piety I've probably got a Natural Wonder or Stonehenge/Hagia Sofia/Grand Temple, and I'm more interested in (effectively) boosting them sooner.
I actually think Piety was already fine as a 2nd tree, they just need to keep the AI from opening it first (silly).
When you're settling up in someone else's neighborhood, and that someone is likely to have founded their own religion, it can be quite handy to have your Founder benefits and their Pantheon.
If you go high enough in difficulty to the point where your cities will typically have others' religions, it's also nice to be able to get the benefits of your own Pantheon without having to flip a city entirely back to your own religion.
In the cases where I wouldn't want this policy - either I'm playing at a low level and completely dominating the religion game, or playing Tall and am unlikely to want someone else's pantheon - I'm probably not going Piety to begin with. (Sacred Sites ICS notwithstanding.)
My issue with the patch is that if I'm generating enough Faith to go Piety, I'm probably going Mandate of Heaven early anyhow, even if it's not a prereq for Reformation. 20% may seem small compared to the 100% buff to Shrines and 50% buff to temples . . . but if I'm going Piety I've probably got a Natural Wonder or Stonehenge/Hagia Sofia/Grand Temple, and I'm more interested in (effectively) boosting them sooner.
I actually think Piety was already fine as a 2nd tree, they just need to keep the AI from opening it first (silly).
More of a kludge than a fix. It was probably the least important thing they did. A single-player player just lost an option, and for multi-player players the game apparently just became unplayable, which makes tech overflow exploits moot.
The SP changes were a little clunky too. They're in the right direction but I'm not sure they will be effective. The window of conditions where the Piety improvement is effective is narrow. The modified Tradition tree seems one dimensional. That tired old Legalism trick died in the crossfire.
The early warmonger penalty nerf was the most important change.
So they finally close the science exploit huh? That's great!
Looks at how they did it. Wtf? The problem was that it was not a discount (as was said) but a multiplier instead. With the new change you might accidentally hit the limit and lose science especially when bulbing. There ha been a fan patch that fixes it correctly for a year now. How lazy are they?
The changes to piety and tradition are insufficient and the tradition one makes it less worthwhile to get a few policies in tradition.
Still no fix to the white peace bug?
Looks at how they did it. Wtf? The problem was that it was not a discount (as was said) but a multiplier instead. With the new change you might accidentally hit the limit and lose science especially when bulbing. There ha been a fan patch that fixes it correctly for a year now. How lazy are they?
The changes to piety and tradition are insufficient and the tradition one makes it less worthwhile to get a few policies in tradition.
Still no fix to the white peace bug?
Teproc
King
Sounds to me like that's pretty much what a tradition nerf would be trying to achieve...
kaspergm
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,572
Not necessarily. Policy shopping in Tradition (i.e. taking a few policies and leaving the rest) was never an issue with Tradition, problem was that overall tree was overpowered, and that remains pretty much intact. A tree that has issues with policy shopping is Rationalism, because who would ever not invest at least one policy to get +10 % science [when happy]?
If we look at the snowball effect, the change to tradition certainly slows down the game with much later capital growth and happiness needed for expansion. Remember how OP liberty was when free settler comes before Republic. The change is subtle but definitely heavy hitting.
Most of the "policy shopping" for all trees would be reduced if you needed the closer to unlock its specific world wonder instead of the opener.
I actually did see quite a few more posters than I expected that were taking middle of Tradition but skipping the rest and instead taking a full tree for something else.
Bingo. They should never have been multiplying beaker overflow by anything. They should have been dividing the tech cost. What they did to fix it tells me they don't have anyone who is on top of this section of the code.
Now that's a real exploit. Why do posters complain about people exploiting the science overflow bug, which requires skill and is not completely free from risk, yet stay quiet about this get out of jail free card? I never use it. I played around with the overflow bug a few times, but it gets old rapidly.
kaspergm
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,572
True, a delay by one policy does make a noticable difference in early game.
You might be right about Tradition. It is true that moving the wonder to finisher would obviously lessen policy shopping, on the other hand there is already a very powerful effect at the closer of most trees (the policy itself and the ability to faith-buy great person) so I think it's fine that wonder sits in opener. After all there's nothing wrong with policy shopping, it's just that some of the policy trees has so ridiculously powerful openers (Rationalism) and/or top level of trees (Patronage) that it's very hard to by-pass them, and that's not good for gameplay.
glider1
Deity
The white peace bug is an embarrassment for all who are involved in Civ5, everyone from the players to the company. Firstly the bug would cost money for Firaxis to fix so why should they? Secondly, a lot of players think that the bug is not a bug just a bad AI. Thirdly, the players who do know it is a bug use it because it means they can deceive themselves into thinking they are better players than they actually are.
This one was actually in the LUA side instead of the expected DLL side. (This is roughly the equivalent of a e-commerce site using hidden html field for the price listed and upon the user hitting the submit, reading that hidden field in to bill the users credit card.)
Buffed AI mod actually has a recent fix for it in Beta, however that version is pre Halloween patch.
I don't see what's wrong with policy shopping either. There was one guy who claimed he started with the Tradition opener and from there just worked his way through the openers from left to right!
To stop SPs getting stale I suggest the following mod. Randomly permute the policies (optionally including the opener and closer) in each tree at the start of the game.
reddishrecue
Some dude on civfans
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 6,213
I saw the one of the latest be videos and the player actually got caught trying to steal a tech. I used to find that embarrassing but now I see I'm not the only who has been caught stealing a tech.
You know you can edit the XML file to allow a stoneworks on plains. I have done that, I don't consider it cheating as the AI gets access to it also.
So if some stone has been converted to bison, I'm not sure I like that, it's a discreet nerf to Stone Circles and the Mausoleum of Halicarnissus. Stone Circles is already a mediocre pantheon because it requires early masonry, workers and tile improvements to get the benefit as opposed to other pantheons like desert folklore or earth mother which doesn't need any tile improvement.
And cocoa? They could have at least added in the chocolate house, albeit lowered the gold bonus. I would have liked to see luxuries be a bit more than just a terrain bonus and I think a mid-game bonus to an otherwise below-average luxury makes for good balance. My favourite luxuries are marble, gold & silver - I love the early wonder bonus and gold/silver gets mint and a great pantheon to go with it.
kaspergm
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,572
I agree, I have made the same Stoneworks change in a mod, and also agree with your point about luxuries being more than just terrain (and happiness) bonus. I have myself added a range of bonus buildings that interact with most of the luxuries, like the Loom (+2 gold on Silk, Cotton and Dyes) and Spice Market (+2 gold on Sugar, Spices and Salt (I have cut down Salts benefits overall to make it balanced with other luxes)) to parallel the benefits of the Mint and to make resources somewhat more even.
Mahi
Prince
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2010
- Messages
- 398
Can anyone please confirm that the patch has screwed up the multiplayer by resyncing almost every second turn?
I ask because me and my friends' connections can be a bit unstable on a bad day but the resync has never been so often before.
It seems like a game with only 2 players does not cause much resyncing but a game with 3-4 players causes the game to resync every 2 turn, which basically has broken the game for us as a game now takes twice as long as before.
Before we had like 5 resynchronizations in a whole game.
I ask because me and my friends' connections can be a bit unstable on a bad day but the resync has never been so often before.
It seems like a game with only 2 players does not cause much resyncing but a game with 3-4 players causes the game to resync every 2 turn, which basically has broken the game for us as a game now takes twice as long as before.
Before we had like 5 resynchronizations in a whole game.
- Status
