Can't end turn without being forced to pick social policy?

[ViterboKnight]

Generating culture and building units are different.

The more units you build, the more it will cost you, so the increasing number is also an increasing cost and an empire that gets difficult to maintain.
Whatsmore, if you build enough units to fill up the entire map, you can still choose to disband the new one, keeping the current situation unchanged.

Culture is different, since it's not an expense, and logically it only makes things get better; it's a nonsense to think differently, stating that "I've TOO MUCH culture and now I must have a step back".
As with units, I MUST have a chance to keep the current situation unchanged. If I have enough points for another policy, I can choose to pick another branch losing the current progresses in another, but I should also be able to choose "I do nothing", actually spending culture points for nothing.

 

[wannabewarlord]

Agreed. My examples were a bit far fetched, I admit

Generally giving the player the choice is a good thing and I am not against this at all. Initially, I was arguing against the "mindblowing" thing, not the fact that you should or shouldn't be able to do it. If it were part of the normal course of a game that you'd be forced to this point, then I agree, a choice should be there. But if you only arrive there because you are having special circumstances (i.e. sandbox game) that are not intended to arise, then I can easily understand why it was not implemented plus I don't see it as a priority.

 

[eris]

I have read this thread and it is an interesting debate. Personally, I think the developers of a potentially open ended game should indeed give a thought or two to games that reach the year 5000. Whether they should be held to account for all unusual player choices is another debate, but the accrual of culture is an inevitable thing and some version of the "future tech" mechanic should be in place.

However, I don't understand why the suggested technique of enabling Policy saving doesn't meet the needs of the OP. Doesn't that do every thing desired? Did I miss something?

 

[ViterboKnight]

I have read this thread and it is an interesting debate. Personally, I think the developers of a potentially open ended game should indeed give a thought or two to games that reach the year 5000. Whether they should be held to account for all unusual player choices is another debate, but the accrual of culture is an inevitable thing and some version of the "future tech" mechanic should be in place.

However, I don't understand why the suggested technique of enabling Policy saving doesn't meet the needs of the OP. Doesn't that do every thing desired? Did I miss something?

"Enable policy saving" is not a solution... is a way to hide an issue.
This is an option.... so, I can choose wheter to turn it on or off. And the game should work in BOTH cases!

Apart that, I agree that it's definitely a low-priority.
First, let's fix the issues of regular games. Then, we'll think about who "plays.. just...one...more...turn" up to 5000AD!

 

[Dennis Roos]

Maybe there could be a "Future Policy" option that works just like the Future Tech. It wouldn't provide any benefits to your empire, it would just increase your score. This would allow players who have all the policies they need to have a use for culture instead of being forced to choose policies they don't need or to unlock a tree they don't want.

 

[gozpel]

Gozpel, do you decide also what resource your cities demand? Hmm, so you are not making all decisions, are you?

I get your point. But I am still arguing in the favor of the game not being able to think of each and every way a player could screw it up. If it is explainable with "logic" or not is not even relevant. Some things are not meant to be, so why force it?

Anyway, in the end, situations like described here are rather the exception than the rule. So I don't see the need to argue over it. There are much more pressing situations where argument is in fact needed.

EDIT: by the way, pumping out 3000 culture is also a choice (as a reply to you stating making units is a choice).

I can't help if my citizens wants gems, but I can make an effort to get some, by trading something for it.

But I don't see my people rioting and shouting: We want Autocracy NOW!!!!

When you've filled up your trees and the next tree you choose will make an impact on the game that is not desired by you, then it's wrong. It turns linear IF I have to choose Autocracy and have no chance to get back to my old system without anarchy.

So I hug my yes/no-button until someone topples me over

But, I see your points too and I'm not very upset over how things works now. It's just another little annoying bit, that could've been sorted beforehand. And yes, there are quite a few things in the game that I would like to be sorted before my button.

 

[thadian]

I agree with culture policy like future tech. i hate it when i have all the policies i need and am forced to make a decision i don't want to make or when my game is wrecked by being forced to enter anarchy and lose policies i invested in because i had to enter anarchy and lose the benefits of a tree i had completed.

maybe they should allow an in-game option to turn culture off or a slider to convert it to science or gold. even just turn it off to gain no culture is better than what we have now.

I like the idea of replacing forced policy selection with "cultural oppression" penalty to happiness. The game would count ahead how many policies you sandbag and apply an appropriate penalty. This would encourage but not force - you to choose.

 

[wastecan]

The option is slightly broken too: I finished The Oracle on the same turn my culture count went over the limit for a new policy, and I was forced to pick two policies instead of one.

I'd like to know if this has been submitted and confirmed as a bug. You enable Policy Saving on a game (this is early on and you want to save up for, say, Rationalism...) You have enough culture saved to grant two policies then you build the Oracle. Great! A free policy.

However, the interface requires that you assign the two social policies you were saving before the interface allows you to assign the free policy.

That's the real bug in my opinion. I'm fine to use the Free Policy upon completion of the Oracle, but I'm not fine with having to use the policies I was saving.

Thoughts?

Thanks!

 

[TW_Honorius]

I'd like to know if this has been submitted and confirmed as a bug. You enable Policy Saving on a game (this is early on and you want to save up for, say, Rationalism...) You have enough culture saved to grant two policies then you build the Oracle. Great! A free policy.

However, the interface requires that you assign the two social policies you were saving before the interface allows you to assign the free policy.

That's the real bug in my opinion. I'm fine to use the Free Policy upon completion of the Oracle, but I'm not fine with having to use the policies I was saving.

Thoughts?

Thanks!

it has to be a bug, maybe a oversight, but yeah it sucks, just have to ignore oracle for right now. or build it first to get it out of the way.

 

[myshkinlol]

Hey this seems to have changed:

I can't save a free tech after getting Great Library by pressing SHIFT+ENTER. Is there any way to save a free tech for later please?

 

[householder]

I, and only I decide when I want Autocrazy before Piety or whatever, ONLY I can decide what is best for my people.

If the people wanted me gone, then it would end up in an instant fail.

I still should have the choice as a ruler, do I want Piety or something else. Very simple.

Isn't there a mod which allows for this? I haven't used it, but here is a link to the BNW version of Adaptive Policies:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=159473182

G&K or Vanilla versions are also available.

 

[cain3456]

Way to necromance a three-year-old thread!