Minor Annoyance
Deity
I've played one and a half games and I've come up with a lot of thoughts on possible improvements.
Trade routes are redonkulous. I think we can all agree. I haven't seen a civ game with this much unbalance in trade since Civ World where I could single handedly win economic multiple victories instantly by selling overvalued food.
I've had cities that send out more production than they generate themselves too three other cities and others taking in six times what they can generate themselves and they were already generating 10+ production on their own. Many of my cities had undeveloped terrain but were still over 10 population and building buildings every two to thee turns, allowing me to build every culture building very quickly and get a policy in <15 turns. I could fill all for trees at that rate. What are these cities trading anyway? They make little for themselves but they have so much to contribute to others.
Three trade routes per city is too much. It should be one with maybe an extra in the capital, and the autoplant option should be to get two more in the capital the same way Polystralia works. Then the energy option has most use for wide empires and the extra trade for tall empires. Although the way things are the trade routs would still be too good to pass up. So while on the subject of tall v wide, some have suggested that the number of trade routes should be based on population so bigger cities get more. I think we should lower the number to one per city and just make the bigger cities much better at trade. It doesn't make much sense that your underpopulated, undeveloped dust farms and dirt mines provide such huge benefits to your sterling, emerald city metropolises. I like that the difference in two cities determines the internal trade output because it encourages specialization. But this has resulted in small cities being able to super boost big cities. Maybe a cities population should cap what it can send out via internal trade. So a big city can still pump up a small one but a small city can't do so much for a big one. I also miss having resources be relevent in trade. So I would like for improved basic food resources to increase the output of food sent out and the non-food resources add to production on top of the cap. This way large cities with many farms or mines/manufactories contribute their large output to others while the small cities can still contribute their raw materials.
For international trade it should probably be the opposite with same type cities being the best choice. Big science cites get the most by connecting to other big science cities and energy to energy. I don't know how it should be calculated but right now I can get 1/3 of my science from trade and that's still with having some internal trade routes.
Somewhat related to trade, there's the aliens. I haven't seen them be all that aggressive. My first game I didn't a good amount of killing, attacking on sight once I got the policy that give science from them but never sat them get passed green level aggression. Also there's the Ultrasonic Fence which seems like it would make them irrelevent anyway. Even to trade units with the quest choice. I at least thought the originating city would have to have the fence to protect it's trade units but it seems to be universal so the description saying '...from ultrasonic fences" is misleading. Also there's the option of having command centers give you +1 covert agents but the wording makes it should like you get +1 for every command center which would be crazy. Now although I don't no for sure there's a problem with aliens as they are now I'd think that having such an easy to get building make them irrelevant seems too good. It's change it to work for mid and low aggression but not high, and/or require a city to have the fence to protect it's trade units and not just make the first one cover all of them.
On to health! It's largely irrelevant. In my first game I got to -50 health, far into panic level and I was far from panicking. Assuming it was a design choice that having unhealth was not to be as crippling as it was in Civ5 it should still be worse at the extreme negative. The key problem being that once you're below -20 there's nothing to prevent you from letting it go lower. So the lowest level needs to scale with the unhealth. Like making the -10 science, culture, production into - 1/2 unhealth. It would still be -10% at -20 health but it would get worse the lower you got. Also the growth penalty could be -30% plus your unhealth. It would still be -50% at -20 unhealth but would increase the lower you got.
Another way to go would be to factor health into fixing trade. Have internal trade routes decrease in value when health is below -20 due to panicked citizens looking out for themselves and being unwilling to share. Also increase the profit other civs get from sending trade to your cities while decreasing what their routes add to your cities to simulate profiteers taking advantage of your panicked population to sell them overpriced necessities, creating a large trade gap that will strengthen others and weaken you.
Since there are no golden ages there's little reason to shoot for high health other than to keep away from low health which is not that bad anyway. So like I suggested for panicked level, I would change the science, production, culture bonus from +10% to +1/2 health. I don't know if that would be overpowered because I've never tried to get high health but it would make tall colonies good since they would have the most health and population and would get the most from a %age based bonus.
Now for specialists. They're not that special. With the large tiles yields that are possible and without great people they're not all that attractive unless your trying to super specialize your city for one yield to the detriment to others. One thought I had was to make them a factor in trade. Having them directly add the amount the city sends out (internally) or receives (internationally). That would leave artists out in the cold since culture is not traded at all, so they'd have to have some other use, like adding health the same way having artist colonists does. Another idea is to give them the effects of the Civ5 tenants of Civil Society and Universal Suffrage innately, so specialists eat less food and add less unhealth. I'd think these future people would have universal suffrage and be reasonably civil, and also it would make some sense in that working inside the city would likely be safer than working outside in the hostile environment, making city workers less taxing on resources.
About those stations. They're annoying. My first game the one I approved sat itself where my second city was going to go so I had to destroy it. My second game it disrupted my planned placement but I adjusted and let it be but it disappeared before I could get a trade route to it. This is another reason why I think the headquarters or whatever your capital building is called should add a trade route. First to make up for the lowering of trade options with fewer routes per city, and to give you a chance to use a station before it closes shop. The stations are also too easy to destroy. When I did trade with one (in my second game because all but two were destroyed in my first) it didn't last long because someone destroyed it. So I say have active trade routes add to a station's hitpoints, strength, and healing. I might also get rid of the one route per colony restriction since you'll have fewer routes anyway and it would allow you to really beef up a station that is in a rivals way and keep them busy. On a side not about the AI, I saw an AI unit suicide attack against a station when it was not that close to taking it down. No reason for that much desperation when the station doesn't have a ranged attack.
Now to deal with the first one always being in the way, the simplest solution would be to shrink their no-settle radius to 2 or maybe even 1 tile and then have that first station that you get from a quest appear in the third ring of your city. You'd lose the use of one tile but it would free up enough space such that unless you wanted to overlap a lot (which you'd probably be trying to avoid) you wouldn't be too restricted by it.
And lastly affinities. The terraforming vs. not terraforming ideological divide hasn't really materialized. Purity has no more reason to want terrascapes than anyone else and harmony no less. There are plenty of room in affinity levels to add more stuff though. Purity should get lower maintenance or faster building terrascapes so they're easier get more of. Harmony should have some bonus from having naturally occurring features like forests and miasma around their cities and maybe the ability for workers to create them. As for Supremacy, they're more about the artificial, and a networked military so I'd have the more technological improvements like the Generator, Node, Array, and Manufactory increase the city's strength and HP.
Added: Having thought about how one gains affinity points I think the lowest level affinity restricted buildings, xenofuel plant, xenonursery, feedsite hub, and genegarden should give points rather than require levels. Maybe through a quest choice. They're at level 2 which is so low that it's not if but when you get them so they should contribute to affinity progress towards the levels that show more of a commitment to advancing in that affinity, which seems to be level 4 since that's when you can use unique units.
There was something someone pointed out about the difference between BNW ideologies and BE affinities. IN BNW there were roleplay reason why AI empires would dislike others who don't share and ideology and like their own but also a gameplay reason. The tourism of another ideology would incite unhappiness while tourism from the same ideology would counter act that. However in BE there is no gameplay reason why they couldn't get along. I thought of covert agents automatically spreading propaganda and decreasing health proportional to the intrigue level but since that's secret it might not really create conflict.
Lastly, going up in affinity levels for supremacy I've gotten quotes from levels and tech that hint at how my society is changing, and a quest implying we're linking into a group consciousness but I don't really feel that robotic. I think we could use something like SMAC's 'interlude from the book of planet' that would give some detail of what the colony is like. For example a Purity colony starts building coffee shops and movie theaters to try and replicate like on old earth. I don't know what the other two would do, that's for a writer to decide.
I think that's all I've got. Thoughts?
Trade routes are redonkulous. I think we can all agree. I haven't seen a civ game with this much unbalance in trade since Civ World where I could single handedly win economic multiple victories instantly by selling overvalued food.
I've had cities that send out more production than they generate themselves too three other cities and others taking in six times what they can generate themselves and they were already generating 10+ production on their own. Many of my cities had undeveloped terrain but were still over 10 population and building buildings every two to thee turns, allowing me to build every culture building very quickly and get a policy in <15 turns. I could fill all for trees at that rate. What are these cities trading anyway? They make little for themselves but they have so much to contribute to others.
Three trade routes per city is too much. It should be one with maybe an extra in the capital, and the autoplant option should be to get two more in the capital the same way Polystralia works. Then the energy option has most use for wide empires and the extra trade for tall empires. Although the way things are the trade routs would still be too good to pass up. So while on the subject of tall v wide, some have suggested that the number of trade routes should be based on population so bigger cities get more. I think we should lower the number to one per city and just make the bigger cities much better at trade. It doesn't make much sense that your underpopulated, undeveloped dust farms and dirt mines provide such huge benefits to your sterling, emerald city metropolises. I like that the difference in two cities determines the internal trade output because it encourages specialization. But this has resulted in small cities being able to super boost big cities. Maybe a cities population should cap what it can send out via internal trade. So a big city can still pump up a small one but a small city can't do so much for a big one. I also miss having resources be relevent in trade. So I would like for improved basic food resources to increase the output of food sent out and the non-food resources add to production on top of the cap. This way large cities with many farms or mines/manufactories contribute their large output to others while the small cities can still contribute their raw materials.
For international trade it should probably be the opposite with same type cities being the best choice. Big science cites get the most by connecting to other big science cities and energy to energy. I don't know how it should be calculated but right now I can get 1/3 of my science from trade and that's still with having some internal trade routes.
Somewhat related to trade, there's the aliens. I haven't seen them be all that aggressive. My first game I didn't a good amount of killing, attacking on sight once I got the policy that give science from them but never sat them get passed green level aggression. Also there's the Ultrasonic Fence which seems like it would make them irrelevent anyway. Even to trade units with the quest choice. I at least thought the originating city would have to have the fence to protect it's trade units but it seems to be universal so the description saying '...from ultrasonic fences" is misleading. Also there's the option of having command centers give you +1 covert agents but the wording makes it should like you get +1 for every command center which would be crazy. Now although I don't no for sure there's a problem with aliens as they are now I'd think that having such an easy to get building make them irrelevant seems too good. It's change it to work for mid and low aggression but not high, and/or require a city to have the fence to protect it's trade units and not just make the first one cover all of them.
On to health! It's largely irrelevant. In my first game I got to -50 health, far into panic level and I was far from panicking. Assuming it was a design choice that having unhealth was not to be as crippling as it was in Civ5 it should still be worse at the extreme negative. The key problem being that once you're below -20 there's nothing to prevent you from letting it go lower. So the lowest level needs to scale with the unhealth. Like making the -10 science, culture, production into - 1/2 unhealth. It would still be -10% at -20 health but it would get worse the lower you got. Also the growth penalty could be -30% plus your unhealth. It would still be -50% at -20 unhealth but would increase the lower you got.
Another way to go would be to factor health into fixing trade. Have internal trade routes decrease in value when health is below -20 due to panicked citizens looking out for themselves and being unwilling to share. Also increase the profit other civs get from sending trade to your cities while decreasing what their routes add to your cities to simulate profiteers taking advantage of your panicked population to sell them overpriced necessities, creating a large trade gap that will strengthen others and weaken you.
Since there are no golden ages there's little reason to shoot for high health other than to keep away from low health which is not that bad anyway. So like I suggested for panicked level, I would change the science, production, culture bonus from +10% to +1/2 health. I don't know if that would be overpowered because I've never tried to get high health but it would make tall colonies good since they would have the most health and population and would get the most from a %age based bonus.
Now for specialists. They're not that special. With the large tiles yields that are possible and without great people they're not all that attractive unless your trying to super specialize your city for one yield to the detriment to others. One thought I had was to make them a factor in trade. Having them directly add the amount the city sends out (internally) or receives (internationally). That would leave artists out in the cold since culture is not traded at all, so they'd have to have some other use, like adding health the same way having artist colonists does. Another idea is to give them the effects of the Civ5 tenants of Civil Society and Universal Suffrage innately, so specialists eat less food and add less unhealth. I'd think these future people would have universal suffrage and be reasonably civil, and also it would make some sense in that working inside the city would likely be safer than working outside in the hostile environment, making city workers less taxing on resources.
About those stations. They're annoying. My first game the one I approved sat itself where my second city was going to go so I had to destroy it. My second game it disrupted my planned placement but I adjusted and let it be but it disappeared before I could get a trade route to it. This is another reason why I think the headquarters or whatever your capital building is called should add a trade route. First to make up for the lowering of trade options with fewer routes per city, and to give you a chance to use a station before it closes shop. The stations are also too easy to destroy. When I did trade with one (in my second game because all but two were destroyed in my first) it didn't last long because someone destroyed it. So I say have active trade routes add to a station's hitpoints, strength, and healing. I might also get rid of the one route per colony restriction since you'll have fewer routes anyway and it would allow you to really beef up a station that is in a rivals way and keep them busy. On a side not about the AI, I saw an AI unit suicide attack against a station when it was not that close to taking it down. No reason for that much desperation when the station doesn't have a ranged attack.
Now to deal with the first one always being in the way, the simplest solution would be to shrink their no-settle radius to 2 or maybe even 1 tile and then have that first station that you get from a quest appear in the third ring of your city. You'd lose the use of one tile but it would free up enough space such that unless you wanted to overlap a lot (which you'd probably be trying to avoid) you wouldn't be too restricted by it.
And lastly affinities. The terraforming vs. not terraforming ideological divide hasn't really materialized. Purity has no more reason to want terrascapes than anyone else and harmony no less. There are plenty of room in affinity levels to add more stuff though. Purity should get lower maintenance or faster building terrascapes so they're easier get more of. Harmony should have some bonus from having naturally occurring features like forests and miasma around their cities and maybe the ability for workers to create them. As for Supremacy, they're more about the artificial, and a networked military so I'd have the more technological improvements like the Generator, Node, Array, and Manufactory increase the city's strength and HP.
Added: Having thought about how one gains affinity points I think the lowest level affinity restricted buildings, xenofuel plant, xenonursery, feedsite hub, and genegarden should give points rather than require levels. Maybe through a quest choice. They're at level 2 which is so low that it's not if but when you get them so they should contribute to affinity progress towards the levels that show more of a commitment to advancing in that affinity, which seems to be level 4 since that's when you can use unique units.
There was something someone pointed out about the difference between BNW ideologies and BE affinities. IN BNW there were roleplay reason why AI empires would dislike others who don't share and ideology and like their own but also a gameplay reason. The tourism of another ideology would incite unhappiness while tourism from the same ideology would counter act that. However in BE there is no gameplay reason why they couldn't get along. I thought of covert agents automatically spreading propaganda and decreasing health proportional to the intrigue level but since that's secret it might not really create conflict.
Lastly, going up in affinity levels for supremacy I've gotten quotes from levels and tech that hint at how my society is changing, and a quest implying we're linking into a group consciousness but I don't really feel that robotic. I think we could use something like SMAC's 'interlude from the book of planet' that would give some detail of what the colony is like. For example a Purity colony starts building coffee shops and movie theaters to try and replicate like on old earth. I don't know what the other two would do, that's for a writer to decide.
I think that's all I've got. Thoughts?
Thumbs up to everything that you said, specially these two specific suggestions:
