Exploration Policy Discussion

[Ikael]

All the happiness on buildings has been moved to tenets *except this one* - it's going to be one of the only ways to easily boost happiness before the industrial era assuming a large amount of coastal cities. It's also a first-tier SP and therefore easy to cherry pick.

Agree the tree could have used some more originality overall though.

It is present in not only one, but 3 tennants plus one world wonder too (neuschwanstein castle). It is like giving yet another bonus at units fighting in your own territory (helloooo Soshone's UA).

Not to mention that it does not make sense tematically at all, since only 2 of its policies rewards actual exploration (the opener and the finisher). It is less of an exploration theme and more of a "Wide maritime empires" type of SP tree. Which is a pity, because it seems that exploration is recieving a much needed boost on this expansion trought archeology and units like the Nau and the Pathfinder.

 

[Barathor]

If anything, the picture on the policy screen looks awful. Typical British twit stumbling through the jungle--"dear me, I say!"

In my opinion, the Commerce portrait should go to Exploration (perhaps, the image of the ships can be tweaked so they're not carrying so much cargo), and Commerce could have some kind of image involving gold coins and other accessories (Aesthetics-style), or better yet, a caravan of camels or wagons.

 

[stealth_nsk]

In my opinion, the Commerce portrait should go to Exploration (perhaps, the image of the ships can be tweaked so they're not carrying so much cargo), and Commerce could have some kind of image involving gold coins and other accessories (Aesthetics-style), or better yet, a caravan of camels or wagons.

Yes, something like this would be much better.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I think Exploration should be renamed to Naval Tradition or something, because let's be honest it has very little with exploration but more with Naval stuff, the only problem is where would you shove Hidden Antiquity Sites?

 

[Big J Money]

No matter what angle we use to spin the theming of this tree, it seems we end up with at least one really odd result like that, King.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Yeah, Exploration is the new Piety xD

 

[Talcove]

Yeah, Exploration is the new Piety xD

In it's defense, doing Exploration doesn't block you from doing any other policies, such as Piety does at the moment.

 

[Justice1337]

Yeah, my problem with it is that it includes very little other than what the Commerce policy track currently includes. Happiness from the one policy poorly replaces happiness from Protectionism, and the Gold poorly replaces what's currently available from Mercantilism and the Commerce finisher.

So it's like saying, oh we thought Commerce was an OP Policy track, so we're going to greatly reduce its benefits. Only, what amount of people are currently going Commerce to support the conclusion that it's imbalanced? *Crickets*

The only thing that would make sense is if policy costs were reduced so far that one could theoretically get both Exploration and the new Commerce track at the same timing as one complete the current Commerce track as of now. It's hard to imagine that's the case however, since the benefits of the earlier trees are roughly unchanged. Slower escalating costs?

Right now, I'm not happy at all with the balance between the Classical and Medieval policy tracks. Even less reason to do anything other than full Rationalism every single game. Boring.

 

[Winston]

The gold policy for harbours etc is woefully underpowered - I'm amazed that one slipped past playtesting - like someone said earlier, it's boring and rubbish. Some of the other policies are better but uninspired considering the things they could've done.
Anyway, I'm sure someone will mod this tree so I'm not too bothered.

 

[mabalogna]

For everyone saying that Exploration tree is to 'naval' biased needs to look back on that particular period of time that this SP Tree is referencing; the Age of Exploration. For me as a Canadian, names like Jacques Cartier and John Cabot are crucial to our heritage as they were among the first to discover this land - both of whom were sailors, as were all the others who discovered America, Brazil, Carribean, etc. The 15th Century was the beginning of major exploration from the European powers, and all of it happened with mast and sail. Nations with the greatest navies were the ones who prevailed through the centuries commercially and militarily to dominate the world - G. Britian, Spain, Portugal and Neatherlands all being naval powerhouses at one point during this period; including their merchant marines. It wasn't until the 19th century - more than 3 hundred years AFTER the discovery of the Americas - that nations started to move inland in Africa to claim territory. Before that most of the contact with the tribes was done through major trading ports on the coast. So all in all it makes sense to have a tree that represents almost 500 years of Naval exploration and world domination by the European powers be comprised of benefits to Naval supremecy and trade.


As for Great Admirials. They are quite useless indeed and could really benefit from a buffed ability like the Citidel for GG. But spending them to quick heal naval forces does help keep them alive during all out naval raids - good for the Dutch to keep their uber-pirates from getting sunk by cities.

 

[seancolorado]

^^Amen to this.

The word 'exploration' is synonymous with naval exploration and development along the seas

 

[JSMCAG]

Yeah, pretty much that - it's not really the fact that it's naval that bothers me (and I'm only speaking for myself! ). It's the fact that the background image is COMPLETELY wrong! The background image should be the one currently used for Commerce, and not a 19th century based one (since the tree clearly doesn't reflect that), and the title the leader gains for the Exploration tree should be "the Navigator".

Some point out that the finisher wouldn't fit in this case, but between having a finisher that doesn't fit the theme set by the background image, or having the rest of the entire tree doing the same, I think I prefer the former...

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

True, true, regarding Harbors, I think it is clear they are the naval equilivent of Carvansary I believe, Lighthouses now provide Hammers (which I believe Harbors used too) meaning their ability has now changed.

 

[Winston]

Even just looking at it from a naval exploration point of view I think the tree could be more focused on actual exploration, though I'd also like to see a nod to the land explorers too - the chosen artwork depicts a Victorian explorer so that's a reason in itself.

Edit: Gameplay wise I could see myself getting the opener, the happiness, and the production upgrades if using a coastal map but I don't think I'd pick up any others because the next two policies are weak options and treasure ships seems to require all the other policies.

 

[Big J Money]

For everyone saying that Exploration tree is to 'naval' biased needs to [...]

We've already had this discussion; see earlier in the thread. The problem isn't that the word exploration doesn't fit with naval. The problems, if you look at it that way, are:

- Why is the picture a British man walking through the Jungle?
- What does the archaeology bonus have to do with the naval theme?

It's awkward regardless of which theme you try to pin on the branch, whether naval exploration, colonialism, commerce, etc, etc. No single theme is unified in the presentation.

It's not the end of the world, and it's unrelated to balance issues. It just stands out like a sore thumb for me and I guess for some other folks, too. The only reason this is the case is because until now we've been spoiled with such a strongly thematic game. But it's all relative. Everyone's immersion is broken by something.

 

[Big J Money]

Now I'm going to play devil's advocate. I think the issue with this theme is actually that it's so abstract. Each policy is less obviously and directly related to each other than something like Rationalism.

But honestly, all this stuff is related to exploring in one way or another:

Unlocks in the Medieval Era
Exploration because we're leaving the dark ages behind and the idea of exploring other lands is being birthed.

+1 movement and +1 sight to Naval Units.
Exploration because nations dedicating to naval explorers will focus on better means to do so

Unlocks building the Louvre
Exploration because a museum to show off foreign works of greatness will interest the population in finding out more about the rest of the world

Maritime Infrastructure; +3 Production in all Coastal Cities.
Exploration because this policy ramps up coastal production for the purposes of building exploration vessels, and hopefully one day trade vessels and harbors and ports to do the trading in

Merchant Navy; +1 gold for each Lighthouse, Harbor and Seaport; Requires Maritime Infrastructure and Naval Tradition
Exploration because exploring the seas in order to found coastal colonies is now more lucrative and easier to set up
(An interesting gameplay mechanic just jumped out at me actually that I'll post elsewhere)

Naval Tradition; +1 happiness for each Lighthouse, Harbor and Seaport.Requires Maritime Infrastructure and Merchant Navy
Same as above; coastal colonies are now more feasible

Treasure Fleets; +4 gold from all your Sea Trade Routes. Requires Merchant Navy.
Same as above; coastal colonies are now more lucrative

Navigation School; Free Great Admiral. +2 Movement for all Great Admirals. Earn Great Admirals 25% faster. Requires Naval Tradition.
Exploration because what naval exploration-based Empire can do without a fleet to support it?

Purchase Great Admirals with Faith in the Industrial Era.
Same as above

Finisher; Show hidden Antiquity Sites.
Exploration because antiquity sites refers to both indigenous and foreign sites. One would need to explore into other lands and cultures in order to find the most exotic treasures for your museums

The British chap in the Jungle
Exploration because the dude is obviously exploring.

I kinda wish this tree would let you purchase archaeologists with faith, come to think of it.

Anyway, I have to agree everything relates to the vague notion of Exploration. However, I don't have to agree that the theme is a strong one

Edit: I'll also add that I agree the link between naval exploration and "setting up monetarily lucrative coastal colonies" is totally stepping on the toes/ripping-off the Commerce tree, past and present. This weakens the theme for me as well.

Edit2: I recant that statement. That would be like saying the Liberty opener steps on the toes of Aestheticism. I think this ability makes sense actually.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

It would be nice if they had Chris Columbus planting a flag rather than the chap blithely stumbling through the jungle flora.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

- Opener; +1 movement and +1 sight to Naval Units. Unlocks building the Louvre.
It depends on how Louvre affects culture win.
Treasure Fleets; +4 gold from all your Sea Trade Routes. Requires Merchant Navy.
Venice must have. As for the rest 6 trade routes in renessance era will give you 24 per turn. Equals to 8 coastal cities income with full maritime infrastructure (Lightgouse, Harbor, Sea Port) from Merchant Navy.
The rest seems rather weak and situational imo. Navigation School for swedish UA for example.

 

[shaglio]

It would be nice if they had Chris Columbus planting a flag rather than the chap blithely stumbling through the jungle flora.

I was thinking they could change the picture to:

In the foreground: A guy dressed as an explorer (Christopher Columbus would work too) coming towards you through the jungle, perhaps with a trail of soldiers following (dressed in Conquistador-esque garb).

In the mid-ground: their rowboat beached on the shore.

In the background: a Galleon anchored just offshore.

That would satisfy both the land and naval themes of the Policy Tree.

 

[m15a]

It would be nice if they had Chris Columbus planting a flag rather than the chap blithely stumbling through the jungle flora.

i don't see any "blithe" or "stumbling" or "bumbling" in the image. i think people are placing some preconceived notions of british people or explorers or something on the image.

i see a guy pushing through some plants to a clearing, probably containing something impressive. it's the culmination of hundreds of years of naval exploration dominance that led to ability of explorers to discover these regions.

i don't see how it's any more immersion breaking than the other images. of course different people could see different things. but maybe the issue is just that the image is new. or maybe it's just personal associations, which the game obviously can't consider (without allowing custom images, which i guess is what mods are for).