OmniPotent42
King
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2012
- Messages
- 921
Did you put it on production focus, though? Because I couldn't change the focus manually like I could do with my capital.
The Merchant of Venice needs a limiting factor
- Thread starter turingmachine
- Start date
Did you put it on production focus, though? Because I couldn't change the focus manually like I could do with my capital.
Yzman
Deity
I wonder what the TC would say for this scenario
I want to play a cultural game. I am going to focus only on culture and ignore the other civs.
Oh crap, the real world ( game world) called, and I am next to Shaka.
Shaka sees me as easy pickings and now FORCES ME to defend myself otherwise he wipes me out.
The developers should think of people like me who don't want to be attacked by the AI. In this case, there is likely NOTHING you can do except defend yourself. No other options, no oh hes making me change my strategy. Adapt or lose.
When Austria was originally brought in it was a problem because they could literally prevent a diplomatic victory. With the new mechanics, Venice can't do that. A diplo winner will be awarded no matter what eventually.
Actually, there was just a topic about this very situation.
Guy playing as Venice, thought he was having fun and bought all of the City States on the map. Guess what? Diplo victory was still active and those were worth NOTHING to the person. Instead SHAKA of all people won the diplo vote because of other diplo bonuses, no CS needed.
So no, you can't say they take a fundamental part of the game away. They don't. You can still do any victory you want. If you allow Venice to take that many CS, you probably deserve a loss anyway ( not that it is directly helping them towards any win...)
With that in mind, your situation is no different than the one I just described. You want to play with CS allies, I want to play a purely peaceful game. Other AI strategies will try to stop that. They are trying to win afterall too. The point of the game is to adapt to it. Its a STRATEGY GAME. If Venice somehow disabled a victory condition, then yes by all means, they are broken as Austria once was. However with the new mechanics, they literally lock you out of nothing vital to winning, so you have no basis to stand on.
I am done with this topic, so if you still don't understand that you are just complaining about how they can counter your playstyle well, then nothing will get across to you.
All victory styles are still open, you just have to get there differently. ADAPT.
I want to play a cultural game. I am going to focus only on culture and ignore the other civs.
Oh crap, the real world ( game world) called, and I am next to Shaka.
Shaka sees me as easy pickings and now FORCES ME to defend myself otherwise he wipes me out.
The developers should think of people like me who don't want to be attacked by the AI. In this case, there is likely NOTHING you can do except defend yourself. No other options, no oh hes making me change my strategy. Adapt or lose.
When Austria was originally brought in it was a problem because they could literally prevent a diplomatic victory. With the new mechanics, Venice can't do that. A diplo winner will be awarded no matter what eventually.
Actually, there was just a topic about this very situation.
Guy playing as Venice, thought he was having fun and bought all of the City States on the map. Guess what? Diplo victory was still active and those were worth NOTHING to the person. Instead SHAKA of all people won the diplo vote because of other diplo bonuses, no CS needed.
So no, you can't say they take a fundamental part of the game away. They don't. You can still do any victory you want. If you allow Venice to take that many CS, you probably deserve a loss anyway ( not that it is directly helping them towards any win...)
With that in mind, your situation is no different than the one I just described. You want to play with CS allies, I want to play a purely peaceful game. Other AI strategies will try to stop that. They are trying to win afterall too. The point of the game is to adapt to it. Its a STRATEGY GAME. If Venice somehow disabled a victory condition, then yes by all means, they are broken as Austria once was. However with the new mechanics, they literally lock you out of nothing vital to winning, so you have no basis to stand on.
I am done with this topic, so if you still don't understand that you are just complaining about how they can counter your playstyle well, then nothing will get across to you.
All victory styles are still open, you just have to get there differently. ADAPT.
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2010
- Messages
- 3,410
Nope, I tried but it behaved like a normal puppet, just on prod instead of gold.
The end result is not the same. In this situation, I can buy the city-state back. Or, I can preemptively raise my influence high enough so that I'm buffered against a trade mission. Either way, at least I can do something.
With Venice in its current state, there really isn't anything that I can do. That's why the ability needs to be changed.
You're entirely missing the point. There's a huge difference between "adapt" and "I can't do anything at all because the city-state is permanently gone and there is no viable defense against a Merchant of Venice." Venice might not prevent me from winning by buying up city-states, but that doesn't make its ability any less infuriating. It's just not fun to play against. It's cheap, cheaty, lame.
The scenario I quoted is one in which someone is extremely dependent on a CS in late game. If Venice does a trade mission + dumps the all the gold from that mission into the city state, it's unlikely you'll be able to keep up anyway. I mean this is a ~150 influence swing from just the MoV, we're not even considering Venice's incredible economy. If the CS is that crucial to your survival, Venice is in a good position to take it from you either way.
whyidie
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2003
- Messages
- 1,187
Hah! My thoughts when reading the scenario were similar, souns like fun gameplay!
This thread makes me want to start a "Free Austria" thread. I loved playing against them before the nerf. Only rolled them 4 times, twice they were CS monsters. Lasting memory of this version will be the first time they showed up on a map. The first wedding bell was novel, the second as well, the third alarming. Then she DOW'd my rival Sweden. I was thrilled until it dawned on me she had no intention of stopping with Sweden. I was beaten and smitten.
They offered a very unique experience when they were on the map at full strength. I enjoyed her run as the bully much more than Hiawathas....Free Austria!
As an avid Venice player, I must say there are some great debates here.
Venice's UA is perfect, especially their aggressive style of stealing cities from you. Historically around Enrico Dandolo's time, they funded a whole crusade to sack Constantinople.
That being said, if you really want the UA changed a bit to be historically accurate then, it would be something like this:
MOV: GM trade missions give double the amount of gold and 25% more influence
Venice can puppet conquered CS's
Crusade Rhetoric: 50% reduction in purchasing military unit cost, 10% increase attack against CS.
Sacking: Venice gets 200% more gold from destroying cities.
personally I think the ORIGINAL UA is better, and please PLEASE don't forget that I start near Oceans, which means my PRODUCTION is low.(and can only have 1 city)
I often have to restart my games becasue i end up near warmongering civs that WILL destroy me, and half the time my MOV's have to traverse dangerous terrain to buy or TM with another CS
I always play with Angry Barbarians on which makes my game hard.
I try to play a peaceful game but 70% of the time I have at least THREE civs at war with my city state allies because they want puppets. HALF OF MY TREASURY is often gobbled up by purchasing military units for my CS ALLIES and myself
Take your time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Crusade
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Crusade#Sack_of_Constantinople
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrico_Dandolo
we funded a whole crusade. let us swim in our riches...which mean nothing playing against a civ with 20 cities and 100 military units at my border
Protip: as stated before, if you want venice to have a hard time developing turn on angry barbs. I lost 2 MOV once becasue i wasnt careful
Venice's UA is perfect, especially their aggressive style of stealing cities from you. Historically around Enrico Dandolo's time, they funded a whole crusade to sack Constantinople.
That being said, if you really want the UA changed a bit to be historically accurate then, it would be something like this:
MOV: GM trade missions give double the amount of gold and 25% more influence
Venice can puppet conquered CS's
Crusade Rhetoric: 50% reduction in purchasing military unit cost, 10% increase attack against CS.
Sacking: Venice gets 200% more gold from destroying cities.
personally I think the ORIGINAL UA is better, and please PLEASE don't forget that I start near Oceans, which means my PRODUCTION is low.(and can only have 1 city)
I often have to restart my games becasue i end up near warmongering civs that WILL destroy me, and half the time my MOV's have to traverse dangerous terrain to buy or TM with another CS
I always play with Angry Barbarians on which makes my game hard.
I try to play a peaceful game but 70% of the time I have at least THREE civs at war with my city state allies because they want puppets. HALF OF MY TREASURY is often gobbled up by purchasing military units for my CS ALLIES and myself
Take your time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Crusade
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Crusade#Sack_of_Constantinople
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrico_Dandolo
we funded a whole crusade. let us swim in our riches...which mean nothing playing against a civ with 20 cities and 100 military units at my border
Protip: as stated before, if you want venice to have a hard time developing turn on angry barbs. I lost 2 MOV once becasue i wasnt careful
Gyra Solune
King
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2013
- Messages
- 942
The thing with Venice is that it's very powerful...but requires a lot of risk to make use of that power. It can completely ruin your day as an opponent, but is also always in a very precarious spot. Obviously, the way you want to play with them is by gearing your focus to as many Great Merchant points as possible, dipping heavily into gold boosting bonuses. Played right, they are capable of amassing absurd amounts of gold and getting some fairly nice territory in a fell swoop, especially if that CS starts near a Natural Wonder.
But here's the thing. That comes with a hell of a lot of limitations. The most obvious being that your initial settler is all the city choice you get. All the land that you explore from then on, all the optimal city sites you're trained to see, you just have to look at those and sigh as the AI maybe settles those but probably in dumb places. For a good portion of the game, you're very defenseless. You often don't appreciate the value of having a barrier of cities protecting your capital until you have Genghis Khan and Napoleon founding cities right at your doorstep. It's not like city-states are founded in circles around you. On most maps, they will be at the far corners of the land, isolated and detached, often on spare islands away from the mainland.
And all that focus towards MoVs means there's a good chance you'll detract from other Great People. You have to shy away from the immense bonuses Great Scientists and Engineers give you because they will increase the costs for your most important unit. And even then, you have to utilize your MoVs to gain territory peacefully, period. Buy out a city and you get no money from that action. This tempts one to instead do a Trade Mission possibly, taking away opportunities to control land. And forget about Customs Houses, you can't afford to utilize those. Pretty much you have far less opportunities to plant GTIs. Where other nations have their capitals filled with academies and manufactories, yours is left humble by comparison. Great People are no trifle to get. Sure, you can acquire about three merchants by dipping into Liberty, but that gets you four cities at a time where most players could get five or six, and choose where they are.
There's also the matter of Venice's biggest monetary advantage being entirely eradicated by embargoes and war. If you block Venice's trade routes, that's basically it. Their economy is crippled and most of what they have going for them is gone. They're reduced to a poor country with one moderately powerful but very precarious city, and scattered city-state puppets that they can't directly control except for buying in. Oh, and there's another thing. That buying in puppets may well eat most of their cash. Let's face it, puppets always produce things stupidly. They will spend 138 turns building a Stock Exchange when they don't even have a Workshop. And those city-states will comprise most of your territory. You will NEED to buy in them if you're to adequately defend them. 250 GPT is great for a normal civ, but less amazing for Venice when you need to constantly buy things in the great percentage of their cities. Still pretty powerful and versatile, but you have a lot more you need to buy.
Honestly, a thing I'd like to have them do is put the MoV's abilities in the UA and give them the Arsenale, a UB that replaces the Seaport and gives more production bonuses for boats and other things in general, a bit of defensive bonus, and maybe even does something cool and spawns two of any naval unit produced, though that could definitely be way too overpowered. But I like UBs and think the Arsenale would be cool and is very iconic of their culture and prowess with naval abilities, while the MoV's abilities feel like they could be moved to the UA since...let's be honest, the aesthetic concept of a Merchant of Venice feels a bit of a lame cop-out. The Great Galleass is also pushing it a little, to be honest. I like unique things that are immersive of a culture, and those two are...not.
But here's the thing. That comes with a hell of a lot of limitations. The most obvious being that your initial settler is all the city choice you get. All the land that you explore from then on, all the optimal city sites you're trained to see, you just have to look at those and sigh as the AI maybe settles those but probably in dumb places. For a good portion of the game, you're very defenseless. You often don't appreciate the value of having a barrier of cities protecting your capital until you have Genghis Khan and Napoleon founding cities right at your doorstep. It's not like city-states are founded in circles around you. On most maps, they will be at the far corners of the land, isolated and detached, often on spare islands away from the mainland.
And all that focus towards MoVs means there's a good chance you'll detract from other Great People. You have to shy away from the immense bonuses Great Scientists and Engineers give you because they will increase the costs for your most important unit. And even then, you have to utilize your MoVs to gain territory peacefully, period. Buy out a city and you get no money from that action. This tempts one to instead do a Trade Mission possibly, taking away opportunities to control land. And forget about Customs Houses, you can't afford to utilize those. Pretty much you have far less opportunities to plant GTIs. Where other nations have their capitals filled with academies and manufactories, yours is left humble by comparison. Great People are no trifle to get. Sure, you can acquire about three merchants by dipping into Liberty, but that gets you four cities at a time where most players could get five or six, and choose where they are.
There's also the matter of Venice's biggest monetary advantage being entirely eradicated by embargoes and war. If you block Venice's trade routes, that's basically it. Their economy is crippled and most of what they have going for them is gone. They're reduced to a poor country with one moderately powerful but very precarious city, and scattered city-state puppets that they can't directly control except for buying in. Oh, and there's another thing. That buying in puppets may well eat most of their cash. Let's face it, puppets always produce things stupidly. They will spend 138 turns building a Stock Exchange when they don't even have a Workshop. And those city-states will comprise most of your territory. You will NEED to buy in them if you're to adequately defend them. 250 GPT is great for a normal civ, but less amazing for Venice when you need to constantly buy things in the great percentage of their cities. Still pretty powerful and versatile, but you have a lot more you need to buy.
Honestly, a thing I'd like to have them do is put the MoV's abilities in the UA and give them the Arsenale, a UB that replaces the Seaport and gives more production bonuses for boats and other things in general, a bit of defensive bonus, and maybe even does something cool and spawns two of any naval unit produced, though that could definitely be way too overpowered. But I like UBs and think the Arsenale would be cool and is very iconic of their culture and prowess with naval abilities, while the MoV's abilities feel like they could be moved to the UA since...let's be honest, the aesthetic concept of a Merchant of Venice feels a bit of a lame cop-out. The Great Galleass is also pushing it a little, to be honest. I like unique things that are immersive of a culture, and those two are...not.
well said
turingmachine
Emperor
- Joined
- May 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,438
I'll say the same thing I've been saying, which obviously seems to go over your head. I'm not suggesting the game always allow to play peaceful nor am I against playing aggressive. I'm also not advocating removing the MoV ability in it's entirety.
The difference with starting near Shaka and the MoV, is that if you see Shaka its a situation you can adapt to and you have options within the game to defend against it. With the MoV, on the other hand, you have absolutely no way to defend it an no recourse. Even all the methods to defend against it suggested on the forums involve either abusing the game mechanics, build 18-24 units and have them circle the city-state, or doing so in such a way that the game is actively punishing you for trying to defend (being forced to declare war even when you weren't the aggressor and having to suffer the diplo hit). Meanwhile, Venice can play the aggressor with no ramifications. Honestly, I've suggested a simple modification as minor as just adding a diplo penalty for stealing an allied city-state.
you don't need a crap ton of units to defend a city state ally from an MoV. 1 ranged unit or something with high LoS and movement works fine.
I just played a game as OCC Ethiopia and took Venice down by the classical era.
not to mention, Playing as Venice with a high emphasis on MoV rather than other GP, is severely limiting. Sure, I'm swimming in money and am allied with 6/10 CS, but I'm behind in Science, great works, tourism, and of course culture. IF the AI was smart i'd be dead, but they seem to want peace after i defend their attacks using my border city states against them for 15 turns.
Eunomiac
Chieftain
I read the first few pages of this thread, where this point was made again and again, then skipped to the end to see if I could capture the thread well-enough to weigh in. I was stunned to discover that this simple and clear distinction still requires explanation eight pages in.
The central---only?---issue with the MoV buy-out is its total infallibility: It is entirely unilateral, entirely consequence-free, and entirely indefensible. There is literally nothing that can be done once the MoV lands in your rock-solid-ally of a City State. To my (admittedly incomplete) knowledge, the MoV buy-out is the only ability in the whole game with such one-sided characteristics.
As for "adapting"... the only way to "adapt" to the MoV is to not play the CS game, which isn't "adapting" at all---it's being forced to pick up your toys and go home, at least for the other civs whose unique units and abilities encourage CS interaction.
Ironically, I'm looking forward to playing Venice the most, but mostly because I enjoy One-City-Challenge and am looking forward to playing with the new trade routes. I'm going to feel very, very dirty the first few times I nick a fully-allied CS from another Civ, though.
turingmachine
Emperor
- Joined
- May 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,438
That was referring to stopping it without declaring war, where people actually suggested that building enough civilians to completely surround the city-state to prevent the MoV from moving into it was a reasonable defense.
budweiser
King of the Beers
If its puppeted, cant it be liberated?
Santa Maria
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2011
- Messages
- 135
I think Venice and MOV are ok, would let it as is.
turingmachine
Emperor
- Joined
- May 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,438
No, it turns the city-state into a normal city, meaning you can't capture it and re-liberate it after (similar to Austria's UA).
Thank you.
The MoV is hard to defend against whether it uses the puppeting or its normal trade mission. In the middle game, the MoV gives 60 influence and 1000 gold, which you can gift to the city state for another 70-80 influence. Most other civs don't have 2000 gold lying around to counter that.
Yzman
Deity
My point, of which I am 100% positive, is that you don't need ANY UNITS to stop them. A simple declaration of war makes your allied CS be at war with them too and a MoV can not take a CS it is at war with. Diplo is locked.
That is what I mean by blocking by war, not all of this surrounding it with units nonsense.
Edit: I confirmed it. I can not do a trade or take a CS I am at war with. If you care about your long time allies, declare war on Venice, no need to even attack. They literally can't take the CS.
I'd also like to point out what you claim to do to "balance" them would do nothing. A diplo hit? Since when in this game has a diplo hit prevented the AI from doing ANYTHING? The only people that may care about a diplo hit is a Venice player themselves, but once again that would do nothing in a multiplayer match and nothing if the AI is using them.
It would only affect people playing as Venice in single player, of which you are not complaining. You are complaining about the AI as Venice.
I think you really need to play as Venice and against them before you do all of this. I have done both and Venice does not come across as anything terrible. I play heavily CS too and Venice still didn't bother me. In fact, they were wiped out of the game for being weak by one of the AIs.
Polisurgist
King
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2011
- Messages
- 630
You had a wall of troops and none of them could kill the Merchant?
Similar threads
- Locked
