Death of Conventional Strategies? [11/18 Patch Notes]

The balance items, Ai improvements and diplomacy are really a step in the right direction. Looking at it, that part seems pretty good.

However, the SP and promotion changes seem, as others have pointed out, adressing the symptom rather than the disease, where the symptoms are that people are saving up SPs and promotions, but the disease is actually that the SPs are poorly balanced (hello +1 food in capital), and that the instant heal promotion probably could be taken out of the game alltogether.

This will just encourage me to spam MOAR cities early (like I wasn't before) and beeline renaissance so that I have some decent choices for SPs.

About to get another SP? settle another city or delete a monument! that seems wrong. It's like introducing another "beaker overflow" micro issue, which IMO is uncalled for. By the way, I was hoping that they had fixed beaker overflow, guess not.
 
Well what wasted oppertunity and effing lazy programmers.

Seems to be no real effort to address the core issues, I know some one from Firaxis will read this because thats what incompetent led programing teams do, browse the boards let the fans /fanbois tell you their issues then chuck out a patch to make them think your on the case. It's a cheap pulic relations trick and goes to demostrate the contempt 2k / Firaxis has for fans of the franchise.

If Firaxis are serious about sorting out Civ5 then they need to put together a proper test team and actually listen to the feedback, if not then this will always be a 2nd rate RTS, trading on the name of previous Civ sucess.

I'm not surpised that Jon Schafer and 2K Greg have not been seen recently, if I was in their shoes i'd be ashamed to show my face around here.
 
It's like introducing another "beaker overflow" micro issue, which IMO is uncalled for. By the way, I was hoping that they had fixed beaker overflow, guess not.
LOL no kidding. That's by far the easiest thing to change. I can't believe they're still not going to fix beaker overflow.
 
There's really no need right at this moment. A mod already has beaker overflow fixed in the mod components forum :)
 
(didn't read all the replies but) OMG i'm willing to bet some of these people who are complaining because these changes are "going the wrong way" are the same people who seem to love to complain about the game being unbalanced and broke to the point of not playing it. Then all of a sudden their broken paths to victory are gone and now are complaining that the game just got "nurfed to the point of unplayable"?

....... That not make any since to anyone else?

whatever i for one welcome each of those changes but to each their own i guess. I just find it funny how it seems sometimes i see these same names in different posts seeming to argue both sides of a point saying how it's broke.

Actually most of those complaining I've seen are some of the best players. Some people enjoy finding the best way to beat a game or achieve a certain aim. I don't get why you think this makes their point of view somehow inferior to what is casually refered to as the casual gamer's point of view, which is to just play the game to have fun. Maybe you should read their arguments first, even, to see if they have merit, rather than condescendingly pointing a finger at people?

I will not repeat them as Martin Alvito has already aptly pointed the issues out. I don't like the SP and promotion changes, at all. It's beaker overflow reloaded. This patch will definitely have me moving to mods completely.

Edit: Slowpoke, while I immensely value the effort of modders to improve the game, things like beaker overflow should be in the base game. There's just no good reason I can think of why having no beaker overflow sounds like a good idea.
 
stop complaining plz about late game SoPos.

heres a picture with german client in modern time to show you thats kinda easy to aquire enough culture to get auto/order without saving culture in early stages (look at liberty tree!)


there are 11 cities build by myself which still offer most of the culture i gain per turn.
 

Attachments

  • Civ5Screen0006.jpg
    Civ5Screen0006.jpg
    217.6 KB · Views: 287
  • Civ5Screen0008.jpg
    Civ5Screen0008.jpg
    257.2 KB · Views: 401
I absolutely love every one of those changes....except one.

The requirement to take policy changes immediately is completely terrible. Stinks. Yuck.

So, now we are all forced to take the early terrible SP paths? You can pretty much forget about getting the Order track now, since by that time, your SP cost will be huge.

edit: thinking on this, I am pretty sure post patch, I will not be building ANY early culture generating buildings. And forget about me playing France ever again.
 
stop complaining plz about late game SoPos.

heres a picture with german client in modern time to show you thats kinda easy to aquire enough culture to get auto/order without saving culture in early stages (look at liberty tree!)


there are 11 cities build by myself which still offer most of the culture i gain per turn.

That screenshot is from 1976! Most games don't last nearly that long. Even if they do go on that long, it's too late for an extra social policy to really matter.
 
Well, ICS is not dead, but is it optimal now?
ICS exist in Civ IV, but it wasn't optimal. if i remember correctly, it was this particular thing that was wrong in V.

Horse rush still exist, but is it universally optimal? not sure

I agree with the promotions comment:
-Insta-heal should be proposed only before the end of your turn and never be proposed the following turn

The abuse with SP is getting several late one that you saved when arriving in the late era. Why not conditionning the availability of an SP to the tech tree? Then, you still can save SP but with the first tech in an era, you will only unlock the tree, other SPs will need the tech...

Ex: the SP for ship bonus in the commerce tree is available with astronomy (thinks it matches with renaissance) and the following is available with navigation...
 
* Melee horse units combat value lowered, and now receive a penalty when attacking cities. (Added 11/18)
Nice change. Hopefully they dont lower the combat value too much cause i still want them to be useful.
* Lowered bonuses received from Maritime city-states. (Added 11/18)
Well better than nothing, but the whole system is flawed. Maritime CSs should not give a fixed amount of food for each city but instead a fixed amount for the whole empire to be shared among the X largest cities. This would also nerf ICS abit.
* Policies must be selected the turn they are earned. (Added 11/18)
* Promotions must be selected the turn they are earned. If it’s as a result of combat, then the beginning of the next turn. (Added 11/18)
Horrible changes. There should be some amount of leeway on these points. Here im not talking about saving multiple SPs or promotions but having to pick them the same turn seems over the top.
Less choices is bad.

And still no regenerate start option, or changes to national wonders requirements... ewww

EDIT: And still no fix for science beaker overflow.... ARGGGHH :(
 
Well, ICS is not dead, but is it optimal now?
ICS exist in Civ IV, but it wasn't optimal. if i remember correctly, it was this particular thing that was wrong in V.

Horse rush still exist, but is it universally optimal? not sure

I agree with the promotions comment:
-Insta-heal should be proposed only before the end of your turn and never be proposed the following turn

The abuse with SP is getting several late one that you saved when arriving in the late era. Why not conditionning the availability of an SP to the tech tree? Then, you still can save SP but with the first tech in an era, you will only unlock the tree, other SPs will need the tech...

Ex: the SP for ship bonus in the commerce tree is available with astronomy (thinks it matches with renaissance) and the following is available with navigation...

I never really saw the saving of SP as being abusive. There are some nice benefits to some of the early trees. A lot of people get great benefit from the honor tree - additional strength, faster promotions - good stuff. Piety for some nice happiness. etc. If you give up on these very useful benefits, you hamstring your empire for a long long time. The benefit you get for this cost is that eventually you can get some cool later game Sp (like the 2 free techs from rationalism, or the big late game production boost from communism). The current (old) system provides for choices, with costs and benefits.

With the change, your choices will be severely limited, as you'll have to take SP that you don't want and maybe don't need and which don't fit into your game strategy. This is bad design.
 
No offense, but I think some previous posters here are a bit confused about the term strategy.
The action of saving up combat promotions for when you need them is actually a tactic... an in-battle decision that can change the outcome dramatically.

Sure, it might be nice for your riflemen to find out that they're now suddenly the kings of guerrila warfare (or whatever) whenever you feel the need to pump some promotions into them, but let's be honest...that's not very realistic. It actually also completely kills strategy in that regard as saving up promotions for when you really need them is obviously always more powerful than spending them right away. Having to think ahead about how you are going to use your units in the future is actually the only strategy here... long-term decision making.

As to the SP change, I think that also is a step in the right direction. Social advances should (IMO) always feel like a slow but steady progress. It's not like empires broke into a new age and suddenly BAM...they had a whole set of social advances laid out ready for them when they were complete barbarians just 100 years before. The early-game policies will probably need to be made more desirable and the late-game ones less costly, but who's to say they won't work on that aswell in a future patch ?

Tuning maritime city-states down was also long called for. I hope they change it so that they actually provide a fixed number in food, kinda like cultured city-states already do, instead of just decreasing the numbers. Combine that with a tweak to let cities grow to higher size more easily by lowering the high-end food thresholds and opening up more specialist slots with late-game buildings and you got a nice fix for all that ICS-nonsense already.

I, for one, am excited about the patch... it certainly won't turn everything golden, but I think it'll be a step in the right direction.
 
I think I can live with the SP changes. Most often I start off with liberty (complete right side). Then its usually Piety (if I want to go cultural), or save for Rationalism. I invest into these policies until Freedom becomes available, then put the next ones into the left side of freedom (SP cost reduction), then resume with whatever I want. Now I guess I'll get a bit of Tradition and Patronage earlier rather than later.

By the end of the game I often have 3-4 trees filled out completely, depending on how many cities I found. This won't change, but I suppose I'll have to get to the renaissance era quicker now (for freedom) before SP costs become too high. Perhaps I'll have to watch out more for ways to advance through eras (great scientists!) which I have not cared about much so far.
 
Not enthused by these changes. Has the patch been installed already? I just ran into the diplo nonsense, "You settled near our borders yada, yada, yada" when I annexed a city. Hogwash.
 
These changes are ******ed. -.-
"Hey lets nerf ever strategy used right now!"
Early game policies are insanely weak (1 culture per city for 1 point...seriously?)...and you are forced to grab them.

They need to fix the randomized starts.
1. Every Civ deserves iron.
2. Every Civ deserves horses.
3. Every Civ deserves a reasonable food/production start (I have had a start with one +2 food tile and the rest were +1 food...didn't even bother trying to play that)
4. Getting stuck surrounded by 3 civs and then having all 2 declare war on you before turn 20.
5. City states and types should be more evenly spread.
 
While reading this thread it occured to me that maybe the best way to fix this social policy issue is a two (maybe three) step process.
1. Lower the cost of social policies so that the player can purchase more through the entire game but then,
2. Make more of the trees mutually exclusive, forcing the player to make a strategic decision about which benefits they want at any given time.
3. (Maybe) create a few more social policy trees
 
That screenshot is from 1976!

Gasp! The game has 500 turns and some options are only available late in the game! Oh no! If I win before then, I'll have won! :rolleyes:

Once again, the myth of superior optimal play raises its ugly head.

You can still get a bunch of social policies. Given the number of people saying you couldn't, the screenshot is relevant.

And it's probably time to say this again. There is nothing wrong with winning a game later rather than sooner. If you decide you're going to aim to win in the Modern Era, fine. It's no different than deciding to win in the Ancient Era.

Soronery said:
These changes are ******ed. -.- "Hey let's nerf ever strategy used right now!"

I see nothing in the patch notes that nerf any of my strategies.
 
Should you be able to win in the ancient era, by turn 150, 250, etc?

Thats a game design decision and if people are winning too sooner than intended, its a design flaw.
 
I think everything looks good except forcing SP choices immediately. I really hope they revert that change as it's going to create some really annoying situations where the culture is earned one turn before an era is advanced. While I'm not entirely happy with the way that SPs are earned at the moment, I really think this is a step backwards. If they want to make it so that the earlier policy trees are more widely used, maybe they could have an SP cost that ramps up with era, and reduce the cost that ramps up with taking each SP? I can see that working to produce a similar result, without incentivising low culture early games.
 
In general I agree with Martin here.
I don't like forcing social policy purchase (there should never be an incentive to NOT earn culture now) and I don't like instant-promotion purchase requirement.

I disagree slightly on great scientists though.
While I'd prefer a change that removed the instant-tech regardless of the tech cost, reducing the GPP yield of a scientist specialist from 3 to 2 would still make a big difference.

I disagree that you would only ever want scientists, because a merchant or artist specialist will earn you that great person 50% faster than a scientist specialist. And then you could still use them for golden ages, where they're all equally effective. Though I would still rather see a buff to the great person building yields (especially at higher tech levels) and the unique abilities of the merchant and artist.

I'm slightly worried about reducing the open terrain penalty, but it might be fine at maybe -20% or so.

Most of the other stuff seems great.
Though I worry artillery are still going to be far too dominating, and that beeline to Mech Inf in the modern era is still going to dominate, and we're still never going to see tanks and AT guns.
 
Top Bottom