Civics Improvements Suggestions

Afforess said:

I like the idea. The only thing I would advise against is making a civic give negative yields (that can cause immediate starvation, which is enough to turn away any player from the civic). Instead it is better to make city growth require, say 33% more to grow.

Click to expand...

Good point. Anything else you can think of?

Might be the correct place here to bring it up again:
Would it be possible to create some kind of "prediction?"
Often, I have no idea if the changes I do will do me any good. I guess they will or I wouldnt switch, but most of the time I cannot be sure.
Or am surprised that after the anarchy many cities have unhappy citicens.

Ideally, you would make your changes, leave the civic screen, and see your empire with all new effects. Then, if oyu end your turn, you will be prompted "ending this turn will lead to X turns of anarchy, yes/no?" and only by clicking yes your turn will end and from next turn on there would be anarchy.

Could this be done?

Zorn said:

Might be the correct place here to bring it up again:
Would it be possible to create some kind of "prediction?"
Often, I have no idea if the changes I do will do me any good. I guess they will or I wouldnt switch, but most of the time I cannot be sure.
Or am surprised that after the anarchy many cities have unhappy citicens.

Ideally, you would make your changes, leave the civic screen, and see your empire with all new effects. Then, if oyu end your turn, you will be prompted "ending this turn will lead to X turns of anarchy, yes/no?" and only by clicking yes your turn will end and from next turn on there would be anarchy.

Could this be done?

Click to expand...

This sounds very good. Afforess tried to do something similar.

Sogroon said:

This sounds very good. Afforess tried to do something similar.

Click to expand...

With maintenance, yes. Not other factors... yet. I'm guessing he's still trying to figure it out. Might be hard to do because civics affect entire nation and few affecting relations with other nations.

Fascist has been removed, but the Checkpoint building still claims that it requires 'Civics to be Active' in its description. None of the civics I am currently running say anything about allowing construction of it, so I'm going to assume that it's not tied to any particular civic anymore and if so should it be tied to one, removed all together, or left as a building that can be used any time?

Secondly, Junta as a civic says +1 Happiness with Barracks in a city, but this doesn't carry over to Garrisons and Army Bases right? I haven't double-checked so I can't be certain if they do or do not, but it seems strange to me if they don't.

What a coincidence because I found another one too. There's another building requiring Civic to be active, Reeducation Center, and there's no Communist civic now.

os79 said:

What a coincidence because I found another one too. There's another building requiring Civic to be active, Reeducation Center, and there's no Communist civic now.

Click to expand...

I suppose we should be thankful we can use them instead of them simply remaining locked and vanishing though

I wonder, will they be assigned to different civics, be made natural buildings, or just get axed? I'm voting for the former two honestly

Here is another ancient military civic I had in mind.

Mercenaries
Category: Military
Tech: Horseback Riding
Upkeep: Medium, possibly High

Effects:

• New units start with +2 XP
• Increased local rebelliousness
• Decreased war weariness

The choice of Horseback Riding for the tech prerequisite is because HBR is a weak 1.5 on my trick rating scale. The 1 is from the Horseman unit, and the 0.5 is because it is required for the Royal Tournament, which is 2 full eras down the line at Heraldry. It is just possible to get to Heraldry without Horseback Riding, but not likely. I would sooner give HBR something else and bump the Tournament to Stirrup + Heraldry.

Historically, I am trying to represent some of the original sources of mercenaries as hired barbarians from outside one's empire. Mercenaries were definitely used by the ancient Greeks (think Xenophon and the Ten Thousand) and the ancient Romans, so this civic should be available in the Classical Era or earlier. The rest of the Classical Era is very solid for tricks, so there isn't much need there, and Horseback Riding is close to the end of the Ancient Era.

What I originally had in mind for this civic was to combine Low Upkeep or even No Upkeep with +1 per military unit cost, representing direct payments to mercenaries instead of investing in your own armies. Since we are not using that mechanic any more, I would instead use a higher upkeep than any other civic available during this time. I would definitely include lowered war weariness (it's not your people fighting) and most likely an XP bonus (you are getting career military warriors), but the big drawback is that it is expensive to maintain.

You could always do a combination of low upkeep and increased supply costs. Supply costs only come into play when you move a unit outside of your friendly territory.

Afforess said:

You could always do a combination of low upkeep and increased supply costs. Supply costs only come into play when you move a unit outside of your friendly territory.

Click to expand...

I think that would be too attractive to a civilization playing defense. The point of the civic is that the bulk of your military is mercenaries, so you need to maintain them wherever they are.

So an update on this. I coded most of the new civic xml tags needed for the Foreign Affairs Policy civic category. So far I don't have any of the AI coded.

Any more thoughts on the actual civics? I thought about a Manifest Destiny civic but I am uncertain what the effects might be.

Afforess said:

So here are more or less my ideas for Foreign Affairs civics:

Isolationism (Starting Civic, no Tech requirement)
No Upkeep

Appeasement (Available at Currency)
Low Upkeep
Pay 5% of as tribute to most powerful civilizations
+2 relations with most powerful civilizations

Imperium (Available at Feudalism)
Low Upkeep
Seizes 50% of foreign connectedness profits with your cities from civilizations weaker than yourself
+33% from foreign connectedness yield
-4 relations with civilizations weaker than yourself

Protectionism (Available at Mercantilism)
Low Upkeep
No Foreign Trade
+33% from domestic connectedness yield
-2 relations with all civilizations


Interventionism (Available at Political Philosophy)
High Upkeep
-50% War Weariness
+1 relations with other interventionist civilizations
-1 relations with isolationist and protectionist civilizations
Civilizations can not cease relations with you
Civilizations at war more likely to allow diplomacy
+25% from foreign connectedness yield

Redevelopment (Available at Social Contract)
Medium Upkeep
Pay 5% of to weakest civilizations
+2 relations with the weakest civilizations
Forces "Rite of Passage" agreement with weakest civilizations

Yes, now you can be a jerk with your civic choices. To be clear about the Pay 5% of options, you pay 5% of your gross income, and that 5% is split amongst the eligible civilizations, it is not 5% each.

Click to expand...

I think Manifest Destiny is just cloaking term for Imperium that USA used to justify conquest of the land.

Maybe jack up happiness because of above mentioned cloaking in addition to whatever other effects?

EDIT: Maybe one extra happiness per five cities added through conquest?

More or less I agree with os79; is there any need for another civic beside those you've already mentioned? What made you think about Manifest Destiny?

I have all the foreign policy civics coded and AI logic added. I am now testing. I was entertained to see weak AIs switching to appeasement in the early game. I saw the strongest player getting 41 gold per turn total in tributes, with contributions from 6 civs.

So Foreign Policy civics are in as of Revision 791!

Notable changes from my posted outline:

Redevelopment also gives +25% Foreign Connectedness income.
Redevelopment was moved to Imperialism instead of Social Contract, Social Contract was too early.

Interventionism gives +25% Domestic Connectedness instead of +25% Foreign Connectedness.

Protectionism also gives +10% in all cities.

Imperium seizes 50% of all connectedness income, not just Foreign connectedness.

What about making Imperium suffer from relations penalty with other civs using Imperium? Sounds to me this should be kind of a competitive civic. As it is, it looks like it's making strong civs even stronger without any real penalty.

45°38'N-13°47'E;13413221 said:

What about making Imperium suffer from relations penalty with other civs using Imperium? Sounds to me this should be kind of a competitive civic. As it is, it looks like it's making strong civs even stronger without any real penalty.

Click to expand...

The -4 relations with weaker civs pretty much draws Imperium players into war with nearly everyone from games I've seen.

Mmm, I've seen a -3 IIRC, I've made just a single test. I'll test more.

Is it intentional that when a civ with appeasement becomes another civs vassal and their master is stronger than me, I still get gold from that civ? I would say that by becoming their vassal, they should stop giving me gold but maybe that's just my opinion.

Edit: by the way, if I'm the strongest civ and I use appeasement I lose some gold: where is it flowing if I'm the strongest one? I suppose to the next strongest civ, but is it so?

45°38'N-13°47'E;13415653 said:

Is it intentional that when a civ with appeasement becomes another civs vassal and their master is stronger than me, I still get gold from that civ? I would say that by becoming their vassal, they should stop giving me gold but maybe that's just my opinion.

Click to expand...

The way vassal relationships work are counter-intuitive. The "master" of the relationship gains power/score from being the master. The vassal makes the master stronger. The converse is not true. The vassal is not given any additional score or power, they remain just the same strength as before.

The vassal partner is still one of the weakest civs, regardless of the fact that the scoreboard is hiding this fact. I did in fact consider rewriting the way this worked, but it would mean rewriting how the entire vassal relationships mechanics worked, and it seemed simpler to leave things as they are.

Remember, the vassal may lose their vassalship at any time, it is probably smarter for them to continue to appease.

45°38'N-13°47'E;13415653 said:

Edit: by the way, if I'm the strongest civ and I use appeasement I lose some gold: where is it flowing if I'm the strongest one? I suppose to the next strongest civ, but is it so?

Click to expand...

When you pay tribute, you pay to a shared pool that the top 33% in score nations that have met you, divide evenly and receive. You do not receive your own tribute from the pool.

AI's have been coded in such a way that the strongest would not choose appeasement, nor the weakest, redevelopment.