Recent content by Voremonger

I am saddened to hear this but I 100% respect your decision. I am very grateful for open source developers using their time to work on community projects such as this at all, even when it is "easy" for them. Thank you for all you've done and best of luck!

Thank you for the update.

Just like science and culture thresholds unhappiness increases for every non-puppet city. Once you have factories though I think it's fine since they scale extremely well with empire size. Or if you found TwoKay Foods happiness largely becomes a non-issue.

I only post here sporadically but I just want to say that I really appreciate the years of effort that have gone into this project. Civ 5 was okay but with VP it has become my favorite game of all time and I keep coming back to find that it keeps getting better. I'm an open source dev myself so...

I recently played a few games as Spain (Emperor) where I went Authority -> Fealty -> Imperialism -> Autocracy with 40+ Cities and without any puppets and I think the Supply Cap situation was okay. There is definitely a squeeze in the early game but the 5 free Supply from Authority help a lot...

I like the current version way better. I like that I can immediately build ranged units for clearing camps and gaining XP without the need to get a technology that may otherwise be useless for my terrain or luxuries. Against barbarians I think the range doesn't really matter - in fact I want...

I would generally prefer trading with specific game entities rather than some anonymous global market since the former connects trade with the diplomatic layer of the game. So in terms of trading with city states I would prefer a system where you would e.g. buy yields + influence for some amount...

I don't find the idea of this system very compelling to be honest. I think there is also a fundamental problem with how a global lending market would interact with investing into buildings, which I would argue is currently the biggest gold sink. On the current version it is already possible to...

If I remember correctly the yields from trade routes have recently been made exempt from the calculation of the global median which determines needs. So reducing trade route gold would actually lead to an increase in unhappiness from poverty.

I had that thought too. Also maybe change the +2 production bonus that forge grants to mines to +1 production and +1 gold but I haven't really thought this through.

I would agree that additively is the better approach but I think it's also the approach that is less intuitive. Since by the time upgrade cost reductions kick in players will already by using armories and military academies the actual reduction they get on unit upgrade costs would be lower than...

This proposal would likely not be that effective at reducing the strength of leveled-up units though. The big power spike happens mostly at 100 XP which would only increase upgrade costs by 40% (assuming multiplicative stacking). Quite honestly even at double the current upgrade costs the only...

I would be fine with this counterproposal. Regarding the percentage increases to production/culture: maybe those should be flat bonuses that scale with era instead? So something like +X production/culture in your capital when you conquer a city. I'm not entirely sure how the duration of the...

Just use a bucket. So for example, if you scale the spawn rate with the number of players you could add one point to the bucket per turn and per player that was originally in the game. While the bucket contains at least 16 points on the barbarian turn, 16 points are subtracted from the bucket...

How is this intended to stack with modifiers from e.g. Imperialism? Is it going to stack additively or multiplicatively?