(3-VT) increase science from Citadels (also a bonus to the growth of borders)

Status
Not open for further replies.

alchx

Prince
Joined
Nov 29, 2016
Messages
358
It seems to me that science from Citadels should be increased. Now there is absolutely no reason to place a citizen on this tile. It is better to put it in the university slot, get the same amount of science and more Great Scientist points.

Considering. that citadel bonuses are in the lower 'military tree' it seems normal to give them at least 6 science. Tiling requires a citizen to work. Any science building from the top 'science tree' passively gives 3 sciences and +3 more per slot (and +3 Great Scientist points, which in itself allows you to build an Academy or make a breakthrough in the future). And breakthroughs will be stronger the more Academies.

This will allow military civilizations to progress down the lower branches for longer, instead of switching to opening universities and schools. Authority certainly gets a science bonus for killing, but active bonuses never compare to passive ones from buildings. Now an AI that has chosen the path of Authority starts to fall very far behind in science at some point in time when compared to Tradition or Progress.

If you move along the lower branches, then without universities and schools you can forget about the Great Scientists and Academies - they will be too late. Therefore, the citadels should be some analogues of the Academies.

It would also make sense for the Citadel to speed up border growth.

The parameters of the Citadels are being discussed, for now I will offer:
+6 science
+2 border growth - this will indirectly give production spikes when playing through Authority


Spoiler :

20221218022103_1.jpg

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is one policy, colonialism on the imperialism tree, that improves citadel yields.
There are three techs that improve science from citadels but other than chemistry they come online very late.

I tend to work citadels after chemistry since wide authority cant afford the happiness of working all science specialists this stage or offensive ones where I havent built a library yet.
Its also land grab and defence.
Do they really need more?
But I'd be ok with a bit more bonus to citadel only (not fort) from colonialism.
 
A citadel is not often a great tile to work but it'll steal tiles that are. I think as long as it retains the steal ability it's better for it to have the mediocre yields it has now.
 
Yeah, the Citadel already does a good job, and it can become a really strong tile with policy investments.

I think they don't need to be changed
 
Yeah, the Citadel already does a good job, and it can become a really strong tile with policy investments.

I think they don't need to be changed

Empires that choose the path of Authority are very far behind in science after the mid game, as the reward for killing a unit becomes negligible compared to the cost of technology. It's a way to make them equal with Progress and Tradition without making major policy changes and adding or removing free science.

Howling empires rarely switch the focus of cities to research, preferring to produce units they need in abundance. By starting to build Citadels, these empires will be able to maintain their scientific pace.

In my current game, Japan and the Zulus are at war almost permanently, both have chosen Authority. Japan has only 4 cities, the Zulus have about 10. At turn 420, Japan is 10 technologies behind the leaders (4 cities in total), the Zulus are 13-14 technologies behind. Leaders have 6-10 cities.

It is obvious that the path of Authority is a path to nowhere without free science from policies. Science for killing .units is not enough.

I also took Autority and had to switch cities to research for a very long time to catch up with the leaders. At the same time, I have many Academies, the Leaning Tower of Pisa and Great Scientists breed like rabbits. However, I had to shift my focus to research.
 
Last edited:
Then fix Authority by giving the tree more science.
 
Then fix Authority by giving the tree more science.

The authorities want to fight, why deprive them of the pleasure of constant battles? Having free science, they can just sit in the cities.

Also good science from Citadels will be an incentive to spend Great Generals not only to capture border tiles. Now it is not uncommon to see 4-5 generals wandering around idle or relaxing in cities.
 
The authorities want to fight, why deprive them of the pleasure of constant battles? Having free science, they can just sit in the cities.
Wow exactly having more science would prevent them from fighting? It'd help them fight at the very least.
 
I can sponsor this.

For clarification, the base production on citadels is set to zero? Their current base yields is +1 :c5production::c5science:. Also, New Deal currently treats citadels as a production improvement, giving them +6:c5production:; under this proposal, it should then give them +6:c5science: science instead?
 
So is the idea to scrap the base production and give it the same base science as an academy?
 
Also, do you have a plan to change the Ordo, Mongolia’s unique citadel replacement?
 
Considering. that citadel bonuses are in the lower 'military tree' it seems normal to give them at least 6 science
No it doesn’t “seem normal” to make both sides of the tree give equal amounts of the same yield. We have no use for a separate lower tree science path and an upper tree science path; it will never work like that in practice. Furthermore, it doesn't work like that for citadels, because they aren't unlocked on the bottom of the tree. It's not necessarily true that the civs that prioritize the bottom of the tree are the ones that will generate the most GGs.

In the end, more science in the game is more science. If you think that Citadels are too weak then say that.
 
Last edited:
Proposal sponsored by Legen.
 
I still don’t know what this proposal actually means. Do you want to remove the existing starting yields from the citadel (1:c5science: :c5production:), and replace them with your proposed yields (6:c5science:, 2 BGP), or are you proposing toADD yields to the existing improvement (7:c5science:1:c5production:2 BGP)?

Both are completely unnecessary changes that don’t fix the problem you cite, but it’s not clear what you want to change either.
 
After looking this over more closely, you are correct, the proposal is not clear as to whether it adds or replaces yields, and OP has not clarified when asked.

Proposal vetoed.

Reason:
Not specific enough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom