(2-08) Proposal: Reduce Mine Yields

[CrazyG]

The forge currently gives +2 production to mines. I propose it gives just +1 instead.

As is mines on empty hills are very powerful tiles, they can often reach more yields than tiles with resources and make lumber mills obsolete.

 

[stii]

It is a bit weird how bad farms are compared to mine, this fix won't fully close the gap but it helps.

 

[Deljade]

Don't agree

 

[balparmak]

Yeah, non-resource mines shouldn't be that good, I wouldn't mind taking one of their tech bonuses either. By the way, in the next version forge will also give +2 to engineer specialists to keep them on par with mines. You may want to reduce that to 1 in your proposal too.

 

[ma_kuh]

Could be +2 to mines on resources as well. Do mines have an adjacency bonus? Maybe something along those lines could help match them up with farms better.

 

[Stalker0]

This seems like a pretty major change that also weakens the south side of the tree. North side gives you lots of fancy toys but south give you the hammers to make it.

It also effects a lot of production times. I could see a later change perhaps but this early seems like a big deal

 

[cidk2000]

I disagree with this one hammers is sparse especially early game

 

[ma_kuh]

I want to write a counter to this, but workshop the details in this thread.

I'm thinking of addressing the farm/mine balance by moving some of the production from naked mines, but still leaving resource mines as-is.

Something like:

• Forge gives +2 to mines on resources.
  • [Makes the recent buff to engineers match resource-mines, and means we don't have to un-buff engineers.]
• Forge gives +1 for every 2 mines worked by the city.
  • [I was going to suggest something like adding adjacency modifiers, but that seems more complicated, possibly impossible, and is functionally pretty similar. I would also suggest "for every 2 hills" to make it similar to herbalist/caravansary, but then it starts working for pastures and that seems weird.]
• Granary gives +1 (instead of ) to Wheat, Rice, Maize, Banana.
  • [Awhile ago there was a suggestion to do something more interesting with the granary bonus to new farm resources. I don't think production is very flashy, but this seems like a tool we could use for this problem.]

 

[CrazyG]

I want to write a counter to this, but workshop the details in this thread.

I'm thinking of addressing the farm/mine balance by moving some of the production from naked mines, but still leaving resource mines as-is.

Something like:

• Forge gives +2 to mines on resources.
  • [Makes the recent buff to engineers match resource-mines, and means we don't have to un-buff engineers.]
• Forge gives +1 for every 2 mines worked by the city.
  • [I was going to suggest something like adding adjacency modifiers, but that seems more complicated, possibly impossible, and is functionally pretty similar. I would also suggest "for every 2 hills" to make it similar to herbalist/caravansary, but then it starts working for pastures and that seems weird.]
• Granary gives +1 (instead of ) to farms on Corn, Rice and Wheat.
  • [Awhile ago there was a suggestion to do something more interesting with the granary bonus to new farm resources. I don't think production is very flashy, but this seems like a tool we could use for this problem.]

I'd be fine with 2 hammers to mines on resources but 1 on normal hills.

I'm of the view that mines on empty hills should be a weak tile I use in low production cities or when building wonders but otherwise just okay. Currently I'm frequently disappointed to discover sheep and virtually never use farms or lumbermills.

I almost never use farms on Corn/Rice/Wheat. Your version of the granary makes them more interesting but still bad IMO. The only purpose wheat serves by medieval for my games is making a slightly better great person tile.

 

[Rekk]

Currently I'm frequently disappointed to discover sheep and virtually never use farms or lumbermills.

I almost never use farms on Corn/Rice/Wheat. Your version of the granary makes them more interesting but still bad IMO. The only purpose wheat serves by medieval for my games is making a slightly better great person tile.

Would worse mines make you more likely to build farms and lumbermills?

 

[CrazyG]

Would worse mines make you more likely to build farms and lumbermills?

Lumbermills yes absolutely.

On farms, I see your point I probably still wouldn't use them.

 

[ma_kuh]

You're right, I think I misremembered that Granary doesn't require a farm, it just adds the yield for the resource. I'll update my post, it should be:

• Granary gives +1 (instead of ) to farms on Wheat, Rice, Maize, Banana.

Hopefully that makes it even just a little bit better. I think it's a fine line on whether the fix is to buff lumber[/logging]/farms or to nerf mines.

 

[Stalker0]

Just to showcase the current progression for discussion. I didn't include the late game bonuses because frankly they don't really matter for this discussion.

Mines
3 hammers
5 hammers with forge (iron working)
6 hammers at steel
8 hammers at steam power

Lumber Camp
1 Food,3 hammers
1.5 Food, 3 hammers (Herbalist)
1.5 Food,4 hammers with triangle adjacency
1.5 Food,5 hammers,2 gold at workshop (civil service + golden age)
1.5 Food,7 hammers,2 gold at Metallurgy
1.5 Food,7 hammers,2 gold,1 culture,1 science at Scientific Theory (zoo)

I personally don't think lumber camps are bad, they are just a more complex terrain. Its true that I don't work lumber camps on some forest out in the middle of nowhere. But a triangle forest is solid, and then later in the game I think lumber camps frankly beat mines for yields by a good margin. So generally when I'm settling, if I see a bunch of hills I'm excited. If I see a few forests I'm not excited. I see a nice big forest I'm very excited. That to me is a reasonable balance, not every terrain has to be exactly yield equivalent at every moment of the game to have balance.

 

[balparmak]

I want to write a counter to this, but workshop the details in this thread.

I'm thinking of addressing the farm/mine balance by moving some of the production from naked mines, but still leaving resource mines as-is.

Something like:

• Forge gives +2 to mines on resources.
  • [Makes the recent buff to engineers match resource-mines, and means we don't have to un-buff engineers.]
• Forge gives +1 for every 2 mines worked by the city.
  • [I was going to suggest something like adding adjacency modifiers, but that seems more complicated, possibly impossible, and is functionally pretty similar. I would also suggest "for every 2 hills" to make it similar to herbalist/caravansary, but then it starts working for pastures and that seems weird.]
• Granary gives +1 (instead of ) to Wheat, Rice, Maize, Banana.
  • [Awhile ago there was a suggestion to do something more interesting with the granary bonus to new farm resources. I don't think production is very flashy, but this seems like a tool we could use for this problem.]

This could be a nice middleground, you should keep Granary changes separate though.

 

[Deljade]

I don't usually work mines. There's just not enough pops -early- to work generic hills mines tiles in addition to the actual good resource tiles, the specialists the farm triangles etc. And if you are prioritising mines you won't have enough pop probably. Unless it's on a fat tradition capital with Hanging Gardens. But there is still a lot of specialists to work. This would also mess up settings with lower resource densities.
Honestly, I can't see where this suggestion is coming from.

And a nerf to microing for those wonders as well, just why

 

[CrazyG]

Mines
3 hammers
5 hammers with forge (iron working)
6 hammers at steel
8 hammers at steam power

Lumber Camp
1 Food,3 hammers
1.5 Food, 3 hammers (Herbalist)
1.5 Food,4 hammers with triangle adjacency
1.5 Food,5 hammers,2 gold at workshop (civil service + golden age)
1.5 Food,7 hammers,2 gold at Metallurgy
1.5 Food,7 hammers,2 gold,1 culture,1 science at Scientific Theory (zoo)

So early on mines (with forge) are clearly better, until you have adjancency and herbalist but no steel.

Beyond that I guess we just have really different build orders. I build workshops pretty late (usually not before renaissance).

While after zoos the lumbermill is better, you give up chopping the forest for 40 hammers in the classical era. That is a long wait for a small payoff in my opinion.

I sometimes use lumbercamps in situations where I have a big forest that isn't chopped (so pretty much jsut with furs or truffles) but that's it. I would rather lumbercamps just default to +2 hammers rather than depend on adjacency bonus to be viable.

 

[Stalker0]

I build workshops pretty late (usually not before renaissance)..

So this reinforces my notion about trees vs forest. Your right that if I don't have a lot of forests, or no good triangles, then the workshops (and the herbalist) flounders, so lumbermills are "even worse". However, if I have a true "forest", than workshops pay for themselves pretty quickly. So a few tree hexes are not innately valuable, but if they come en mass they suddenly become highly valuable.

 

[beginner_]

While after zoos the lumbermill is better, you give up chopping the forest for 40 hammers in the classical era. That is a long wait for a small payoff in my opinion.

I think this probably heavily depends on difficulty level. If you need the hammers to survive till zoos then yes you need to chop. If not, better keep it for latter. Culture from tiles is always good.

In my case (king) I'm probably missing something as I hate micromanagement and leave cities mostly to themselves (except avoind great merchants to some degree). The automatic governor doesn't always seem to favor mines over food but then I never stop growth.

 

[balparmak]

Sponsored

 

[pineappledan]

It’s my opinion that the balance between mills/mines/manufactories is actually pretty solid right now.

The more we talk about any of these tweaks to any of these 3 the less I want anything to change, with the exception of the logging camp (jungle), which is the obvious loser in all this.