• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

[Vote] (1-23) Early Game Building Proposals

Approval Vote for Proposal #23 (instructions below)


  • Total voters
    129
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Recursive

Already Looping
Moderator
Supporter
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
4,835
Location
Antarctica
Voting Instructions
Players, please cast your votes in the poll above. Vote "Yea" for every proposal you'd be okay with if it were implemented. Vote "Nay" if you'd be okay if these proposals weren't implemented. You can vote for any number of options.

All votes are public. If you wish, you can discuss your choice(s) in the thread below. You can change your vote as many times as you want until the poll closes.

VP Congress: Session 1, Proposal 23

Title: Return Granary Food
Proposer: @DeAnno
Sponsor(s): @Recursive
Previous Discussion Thread: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/31a-counterproposal-return-granary-food.679519/

Proposal Details
Very simple proposal here.

Re-add +25 :c5food: instant yield to the Granary, just as it had in 2.6. Also improve the +1 :c5food:base yield to +2 :c5food:.

The instant food is quite important to get dry cities up past the first couple pop easily, and without it a dry capital especially can present a lot of problems. It's a fiddly bonus that some may have seen as worth less than the code it was printed on, but in its own way it was necessary for the health of the game, and without it and with deer and bison taken from the granary, they are in a sad state and are a very weak building now. The extra base yield is intended to compensate for the loss of those common resources to keep granary at the same balance level as it was before.


VP Congress: Session 1, Proposal 23a
Title: Change to 2.7 Granary/Herbalist/Lodge
Proposer: @Stalker0
Sponsor(s): @pineappledan
Previous Discussion Thread: https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...2-7-change-to-granary-herbalist-lodge.679531/

Proposal Details
The 2.7 versions of this buildings have some issues with them:

Herbalist: Is now an expensive building that doesn't generate a lot of bang for its buck.
Granary: Losing the instant food removes most of the reason to build the granary early. This also throws off a lot of settler timings in the early game. It also slows down science due to less pop in the capital.

The Proposal (changes in Bold)

Lodge:

65:c5production:
1:c5gold:
2 Border Growth Bonus
+1:c5production: camp
+1:c5food: bison/deer
5:c5food: on border expand/era scaling

Herbalist:
65 :c5production:

1:c5food:
+1:c5production: plantations and Marshes
+1:c5food: for 2 forest/jungle
No Maintenance

Granary:
65:c5production:
1:c5gold: maintenance
1:c5food:
15%:c5food: food kept
+1:c5food: wheat/rice/maize/banana
25:c5food: on construction
:c5food: ITR unlock

The idea is that we give the lodge some border growth power but remove its food, as we are giving the instant food back to the granary. The herbalist is giving a slight buff to the marsh (which is more of a ribbon but marshes could use some love), no Maintenace, and MOST important.... we are cutting the cost in half. So now the herbalist is a weaker niche building, but with a cheap cost that makes it easy to build when needed. this also means that the hammer demand in ancient doesn't increase too much when building all 3 buildings.
 
Again, I'm hard against anything that allows for snowballing. I don't see the point of reverting this change.

Imagine you're building your first second city, third city. You choose a first building. You can either try to grow the city fast with one of these food buildings, get some culture you need with a monument, or get production for units. The granary is already the most optimal building since forests are the most common for new cities. No need to buff it.
 
Again, I'm hard against anything that allows for snowballing. I don't see the point of reverting this change.

Imagine you're building your first second city, third city. You choose a first building. You can either try to grow the city fast with one of these food buildings, get some culture you need with a monument, or get production for units. The granary is already the most optimal building since forests are the most common for new cities. No need to buff it.
optimal play is not granary first (and I do mean the old granary). most people build monument first in new cities, followed by shrines (or sometimes even shrine first)
 
optimal play is not granary first (and I do mean the old granary). most people build monument first in new cities, followed by shrines (or sometimes even shrine first)
But why wouldn't you prioritize food gain over culture and faith?
 
Because you race to found a religion and policies are powerful.
You give up 1-2 population advantage in exchange for 0.3 of a policy? Faith makes even less sense considering the milestone you need to hit is pantheon and you usually have that before your 3rd city

You know you can just build a shrine right after the granary? You only miss out 5 turns on faith
 
You give up 1-2 population advantage in exchange for 0.3 of a policy?
I'm not sure about the 0.3 of a policy calculation, but yeah, it's very popular to build a monument before a granary for earlier policy and faster border growth
Faith makes even less sense considering the milestone you need to hit is pantheon and you usually have that before your 3rd city

You know you can just build a shrine right after the granary? You only miss out 5 turns on faith
It's more about founding a religion than a pantheon. Few turns can make a difference if you can found at all.
 
The Herbalist will be the only early building that doesn't follow the production cost of the same tier buildings.
 
You give up 1-2 population advantage in exchange for 0.3 of a policy? Faith makes even less sense considering the milestone you need to hit is pantheon and you usually have that before your 3rd city

You know you can just build a shrine right after the granary? You only miss out 5 turns on faith
I'd happily give up 1-2 population for 0.3 social policy in a heartbeat. Also I don't think granary-shrine ends up 2 population ahead of shrine-granary barring extremely unusual circumstances.

The Herbalist will be the only early building that doesn't follow the production cost of the same tier buildings.
I noticed this too. Not sure if its an issue, but if it passes next congress I might propose the market also drops to 65 hammers.
 
I noticed this too. Not sure if its an issue, but if it passes next congress I might propose the market also drops to 65 hammers.
I could get behind that, I really struggle to justify the market in the early game, there are just so many other things I would rather spend my hammers on.
 
I noticed this too. Not sure if its an issue, but if it passes next congress I might propose the market also drops to 65 hammers.
I think leaving market as it is and moving herbalist to trapping for consistency is a better idea. It also buffs plantation starts a little, which is I think fine. Why camps can get +1 production easier and faster than plantation where it's plantation starts that are production starved and already the worst?
 
You know you can just build a shrine right after the granary? You only miss out 5 turns on faith
pantheons and religions are first come first served, so if you want to get a specific belief then 5 turns can make or break your plans.
that said, if I strongly desire a certain pantheon, my usual move is to rush stonehenge. if my starting land allows

but if there aren't any specific beliefs that you want then it is indeed fine to hold off on the shrine for a bit
 
I think leaving market as it is and moving herbalist to trapping for consistency is a better idea.
It was considered, but that would make Temple of Artemis give a building that's almost always already built.
 
It was considered, but that would make Temple of Artemis give a building that's almost always already built.
IMO the Temple should have barracks as it has military unit production bonus too and Statue of Zeus should have a forge as it is weak now and it would synergise with mining lux starts which might be tempted to go iron working.
 
IMO the Temple should have barracks as it has military unit production bonus too and Statue of Zeus should have a forge as it is weak now and it would synergise with mining lux starts which might be tempted to go iron working.
Interesting ideas, worth a proposal I think
 
How will this herbalist change affect the Iroqouis? They should definitely get one :c5production: on marshes as the unique should never be weaker than baseline building. But a one :c5food: and :c5production: on all forests, jungles and one :c5production: plantations (they don't get :c5production: on camps IIRC) for 65 :c5production:? I think we should think about that.
If Iroqouis would be OP after this change, they could be nerfed on the next proposal stage.
 
If Iroqouis would be OP after this change, they could be nerfed on the next proposal stage.
Sure, I'm not against buffing the Iroqiouis. I'm aksing more for clarification as it seemed to have slipped from considerations during discussion.

I'm also for giving them all that herbalists have normally (+1 :c5production: plantations and marshes), just replacing +1 :c5food: from BOTH base building and 1/2 forests, into upgraded +1:c5food: and :c5production: for forests and jungles, for 65 production. They can now benefit from further + 1:c5production: to camps from the lodge for another 65 production.
In other words, I suggest:

Longhouse
Unlocked at Calendar
65 :c5production:
+1:c5production: plantations and Marshes
+1:c5food: and :c5production: for every forest and jungle
No Maintenance
 
Proposal "Change to 2.7 Granary/Herbalist/Lodge" passed on November 1, 2022.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom