[Vote] (1-41) Proposal: Give authority science through producing units instead of for gaining cities

Approval Vote for Proposal #41 (instructions below)


  • Total voters
    118
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Recursive

Already Looping
Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
3,881
Location
Antarctica
Voting Instructions
Players, please cast your votes in the poll above. Vote "Yea" if you'd be okay if this proposal was implemented. Vote "Nay" if you'd be okay if this proposal wasn't implemented. You can vote for both 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 41

Proposer: @josh4
Sponsor(s): @josh4
Previous Discussion Thread: https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...g-units-instead-of-for-gaining-cities.679886/

Proposal Details
Proposal:

Remove science from Imperium policy (free settler and culture from gaining cities remains).​
Add science for producing military units, naval and land, 20% of production on Discipline policy.​

Rationale:
The first problem is currently Authority AIs are not competitive because of their low science and may actually become the easiest to conquer in the mid-game cause of their outdated units. Situations when an authority AI conquers nothing are common. The second problem is the current structure of Authority policy tree: gaining yields for success, is inherently better for a player who will always outplay AIs in war micromanagement and is a simple win-more mechanic. Proposed change will address both as it will give Authority AIs a lot more science cause they have a bonus military cap and they lose and recreate more units than the player. It will not give a lot of buff for authority human players cause play to lose a units and retrain them for science is not viable as you need to build actual buildings which give you production, culture, specialists, etc., and as human ways of winning war is to keep units alive and get them as high promoted as possible, throwing them away is never a better option. It is also a more realistic, while culture for conquering or settling new lands is understandable as propaganda success and source of national legends and history and mythos, science is more realistically gained by engineering and designing trials and errors of military production, from the Roman naval boarding devices, to German and Soviet tanks which battlefield and logistic limitations informed new designs.​
 

dpshw

Chieftain
Joined
Sep 12, 2015
Messages
41
will this be limited to producing units, hence excluding buying units with gold/faith?
 

Recursive

Already Looping
Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
3,881
Location
Antarctica

andersw

Emperor
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
1,466
Location
sweden
Sounds like this will be close to zero yields for human authority and a lot of yields for AI, dont even have to lose units for warweariness making unit production extremely slow.
Good idea but no thanks unless warweariness/unit production malus is also adjusted for authority.
 

josh4

Warlord
Joined
Oct 15, 2022
Messages
122
will this be limited to producing units, hence excluding buying units with gold/faith?

Sounds like this will be close to zero yields for human authority and a lot of yields for AI, dont even have to lose units for warweariness making unit production extremely slow.
Good idea but no thanks unless warweariness/unit production malus is also adjusted for authority.

Yeah, sure we can discuss stuff like that and resubmit new congress, maybe it's just too crude, simplistic in its current version.
 

andersw

Emperor
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
1,466
Location
sweden
Yeah, sure we can discuss stuff like that and resubmit new congress, maybe it's just too crude, simplistic in its current version.
Problem is that as a human player you (or atleast I) make a certain amount and thats about it, dont lose units or you lose the game these are supposed to gain a LOT of exp.
Units after that are purchased (gold/faith), (rarely CS gifted units) or per 10 pop free units.
 

azum4roll

Deity
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
2,243
This is exactly what Siege Foundry does. Let's not take away from Ottoman's unique component.
 

ma_kuh

Prince
Joined
Sep 13, 2022
Messages
340
It's not like Heal On Kill is taking away from Aztec's unique component just because you can double-down on it in the tree.
 

caudheur

Chieftain
Joined
Aug 26, 2021
Messages
10
I like the general idea (because as said, the current mechanics favour snowballing), but I feel the execution would be too drastic of a change of balance in favor of the AI, severely punishing human players. Maybe including bought units would be more balanced, and even making that upgrading units gives science (I don't know if this is doable)
 

BornDownUnder

Chieftain
Joined
Feb 4, 2018
Messages
91
Location
Australia
I vote a tentative yes for this.

I like the idea in general, I think the scope of changes to Authority policy are not nearly enough though.

As @dpshw and @andersw noted, the inclusion of faith purchased units would make it more balanced for the human Authority player.

As @andersw stated, war weariness and production malus really needs to be looked at, as I feel this is predominately where Authority driven civs are being crippled in mid to end game.

Perhaps the war weariness can be reduced by 50% instead of 25% for the Honour policy, this would aid in long term battles, especially in siege scenarios.

Maybe a war fervor buff for x amount of turns when initiating war instead of the doubling of tribute yields finisher bonus? The war fervor buff would boost the likelihood of gaining ground/capturing quickly if the Authority civ units are close to a city when the declaration of war is issued. This would also aid in mid to late game progression for Authority civs.

Maybe the production malus can be negated entirely for the finisher policy bonus? Typically production is boosted in times of war.

With the tribute policy, instead of bullying CS states only it could be a bonus inclusive of tributes from other civs? The culture gain slows quite a bit for Authority once barbarian encampents and units dry up.
 

Circe

Chieftain
Joined
Feb 25, 2021
Messages
40
I think Authority AI's hyper aggressive behavior is as much of a problem for them as the policies are. It's fine as an early-game check on human players but it does lead to alienation and underdevelopment later. And I think the snowbally nature(win war, get yields; lose war, no yields) is somewhat baked into the tree and the game as a whole. I don't like rewarding losing units and replacing them, and the AI is going to produce a lot more than the player under any circumstances.
I'd be open to a general overhaul of the tree to give it more certain yields like most policies get but I can't get behind this particular proposal.
 

Deljade

Prince
Joined
Jun 24, 2019
Messages
312
No, let's find another way to make authority AI competitive. Authority Feels good as it is to play, as the more active of the three starting trees, no reason to make them all samey.
 

Recursive

Already Looping
Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
3,881
Location
Antarctica
Proposal failed on November 1, 2022.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom