pineappledan
Deity
Patch 3.8 contains a handful of bug fixes and changes that have balance impacts that were never discussed in Congress. This is the thread to discuss those changes and vote on them.
@Recursive has indicated he is willing to hotfix or alter these changes without waiting for next congress.
If Byzantium adopts a 2nd founder belief he can build 2 different reformation wonders in her holy city. Reformation wonders do the following:
Access to a reformation belief(does not stack)
Some base yields
Maybe some other small bonus (eg great altar gives % military unit production in the city)
+25% passive pressure in this city
+5 yield to holy sites on empire
1 WC vote for every 10 cities following your religion
Byzantium has always been able to build 2 founder wonders, but the WC vote effect did not stack. The recent change fixed the ability so the effect stacks additively. This means that if Byzantium builds 2 reformation wonders they get 1 vote for every 5 cities while other founders get 1 per 10.
There are 3 potential actions I see, but I don’t see the current state of Byzantium’s bonus belief as stable enough to be “gold” with this new steroid. founders have been much, much stronger than other belief types for a long time, but doubling byzantium’s access to WC votes pushes them over the edge:
- block Byzantium from building 2 reformation wonders. I’m the future, Nerf founders back into line with the power of other belief types
- block Byzantium from adopting a 2nd enhancer, Pantheon or Follower as her bonus belief. They are already blocked from adopting 2 reformations, and founders are so much stronger than the other options that the UI is crowded with bad options that just make the obvious choice harder to find. There is no point in giving players and AI access to wrong choices.
- 2 congresses ago border growth bonuses from monuments, Angkor Wat, etc were changed from tile cost reductions to yield modifiers.
- Russia’s UA was kept as a tile cost reduction.
- There was 1 pre-existing border growth modifier prior to the change: fealty’s Fiefdoms policy (+100% during WLTKD).
- The stated reason for making this change was because separate sources of cost reduction scale multiplicatively with each other, and made tile claims too fast when combined.
- A secondary effect of this change is that tile cost reductions augment sources of instant yields while yield modifiers do not. This was not mentioned when the original proposal was tabled.
- instant sources of Culture still contribute to border growth, but they weren’t being multiplied by the effect of monuments etc. this has minor ramifications for things like progress and authority’s early border expansion, because they get instant From tech unlocks and unit kills.
This change has minimal balance effects either way. This is more of a vote as to whether you think that border growth should behave like every other yield modifier, whether the rules should be respected, or whether border growth should be its own animal.
This vote depends on whether you think that conquistadors should be treated as settler units, or if you think they should be treated as military units that just happen to have a settler-like ability
@Recursive has indicated he is willing to hotfix or alter these changes without waiting for next congress.
Spoiler “Byzantium Founder change” :
Clarification:Founders General - Multiple Founder National Wonders (Byzantium only) now stack their Religious Authority votes with each other
If Byzantium adopts a 2nd founder belief he can build 2 different reformation wonders in her holy city. Reformation wonders do the following:
Access to a reformation belief(does not stack)
Some base yields
Maybe some other small bonus (eg great altar gives % military unit production in the city)
+25% passive pressure in this city
+5 yield to holy sites on empire
1 WC vote for every 10 cities following your religion
Byzantium has always been able to build 2 founder wonders, but the WC vote effect did not stack. The recent change fixed the ability so the effect stacks additively. This means that if Byzantium builds 2 reformation wonders they get 1 vote for every 5 cities while other founders get 1 per 10.
There are 3 potential actions I see, but I don’t see the current state of Byzantium’s bonus belief as stable enough to be “gold” with this new steroid. founders have been much, much stronger than other belief types for a long time, but doubling byzantium’s access to WC votes pushes them over the edge:
- block Byzantium from building 2 reformation wonders. I’m the future, Nerf founders back into line with the power of other belief types
- block Byzantium from adopting a 2nd enhancer, Pantheon or Follower as her bonus belief. They are already blocked from adopting 2 reformations, and founders are so much stronger than the other options that the UI is crowded with bad options that just make the obvious choice harder to find. There is no point in giving players and AI access to wrong choices.
Spoiler “Border Growth Modifier change” :
Clarification:- Instant yield border growth (from Culture or BGP) from all sources is now increased by border growth rate modifiers Modifiers include Monuments, God of the Expanse, etc. Instant Culture must be awarded to a city for it to receive the bonus, of course
- 2 congresses ago border growth bonuses from monuments, Angkor Wat, etc were changed from tile cost reductions to yield modifiers.
- Russia’s UA was kept as a tile cost reduction.
- There was 1 pre-existing border growth modifier prior to the change: fealty’s Fiefdoms policy (+100% during WLTKD).
- The stated reason for making this change was because separate sources of cost reduction scale multiplicatively with each other, and made tile claims too fast when combined.
- A secondary effect of this change is that tile cost reductions augment sources of instant yields while yield modifiers do not. This was not mentioned when the original proposal was tabled.
- instant sources of Culture still contribute to border growth, but they weren’t being multiplied by the effect of monuments etc. this has minor ramifications for things like progress and authority’s early border expansion, because they get instant From tech unlocks and unit kills.
This change has minimal balance effects either way. This is more of a vote as to whether you think that border growth should behave like every other yield modifier, whether the rules should be respected, or whether border growth should be its own animal.
Spoiler “Conquistador penalty change” :
Military unit production penalties and settler penalties are similar, but settler ones are a little more punishing in most cases. This change makes conquistadors cost more to build if your empire is unhappy.- Fixed the Conquistador being immune to the unhappiness and war weariness cost penalties that other Settler units have
This vote depends on whether you think that conquistadors should be treated as settler units, or if you think they should be treated as military units that just happen to have a settler-like ability