1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

3rd and 4th Unique Components for VP - Official thread

Discussion in 'Mods Repository' started by pineappledan, Apr 22, 2018.

  1. Enrico Swagolo

    Enrico Swagolo Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Messages:
    2,379
    I'd prefer if both Tundra and Lake feature was axed, replaced with base yields or something else. This way, Sweden'd be closer to what they were in vanilla in that they'd care not what terrain they start on. As it is now, a Sweden start can differ greatly as in one case, you basically just get slightly better Baths, in other you have super Science as soon as you get the building.
     
  2. amateurgamer88

    amateurgamer88 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2018
    Messages:
    859
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't mind if the Tundra and Lake feature were axed. However, I don't think they should get anymore base yields. A slightly better Baths available in all cities is already pretty good and Sweden isn't really struggling with their kit. While the Skola is pretty pitiful, their entire kit is good enough that they don't need more buffs like more base yields.
     
  3. Enrico Swagolo

    Enrico Swagolo Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Messages:
    2,379
    I disagree - the building costs production after all, just having it available everywhere is not enough. It'd be by far the weakest classical era building. It's pointless to nerf something nobody complained about - in fact, IIRC some have previously stated Sweden's kit is weak which I disagreed with. Most complaining I think was about the UU and I might be mistaking it with some other civ, but I am almost certain I'm correct. I don't see much "Sweden is OP" in vanilla either, so I doubt there's a purpose in 4UC nerfing Sweden's current kit rather than simply changing it while keeping the power level around the same mark.

    It giving you access to Baths in cities that normally don't get them won't mean much when UBs of Classical Era can have more yields over their replacement than the Baswish will as a whole, with the regular Baths one included.
     
  4. amateurgamer88

    amateurgamer88 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2018
    Messages:
    859
    Gender:
    Male
    I think you underestimate the power of having this UB available for all cities. Let's talk about the capital city. If you settle off river and fresh water, you get +1 :c5gold: Gold as a result. Is that extra :c5gold: Gold a big deal? For certain! Is the bonuses from the UB worth it in the capital when it would otherwise be unavailable? Definitely! Regarding other cities, you can settle wherever necessary and you will still build this UB. We're not talking about a terrible building that people feel like is optional. The bonuses, especially the extra :c5culture: Culture and :c5gold: Gold for Temple, Amphitheater and Garden, can definitely be felt. While it's true Sweden doesn't go Tradition unless someone does it for fun, the bonuses aren't as weak as you seem to be suggesting.

    Is this UB the weakest? Maybe you can give some examples because I don't know all the Classical Era UB off the top of my head.

    In addition, this isn't a huge nerf. Imagine how often you get Tundra starts and/or Lakes nearby compared to other starts. Basically, we are, as you stated, making it so it's more consistent for all games instead of certain starts being really broken. Will people feel that bonus removed? They might if they get the perfect start but they more than likely won't even notice.

    As for there being no Sweden is OP threads, that's a good thing. We don't want an OP civ. Therefore, the suggestion of making them even better isn't justified. Sweden had good and bad games in my playthroughs. When I play them, I can feel their entire kit being quite balanced with no time when they are really weak. Why are we giving this UB more yields when no one complained and the nerf won't be felt for most of our games?
     
  5. adan_eslavo

    adan_eslavo Archmage of all Pixels Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,511
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Łódź, Poland
    @pineappledan Check main project file because I had this problem and fixed it and how I have it second time. There are changed ids for required mod (VP). I downloaded changed files from github and got again:
    Code:
    <Mod id="eead0050-1e3f-4178-a91f-26cf1881ac39" minversion="89" maxversion="999" title="(1) Community Patch - Core" />
        <Mod id="d1b6328c-ff44-4b0d-aad7-c657f83610cd" minversion="13" maxversion="999" title="(2) Community Balance Patch" />
        <Mod id="eead0050-1e3f-4178-a91f-26cf1881ac39" minversion="27" maxversion="999" title="(3) City-State Diplomacy Mod for CBP" />
        <Mod id="c7bf7064-d1b1-4708-9e93-7a1560868582" minversion="11" maxversion="999" title="(4) C4DF - CBP" />
        <Mod id="be2d13ee-d18d-410e-8f04-7cd19cd99a98" minversion="155" maxversion="999" title="(5) More Luxuries - CBO Edition" />
    First two are wrong.

    Logs are clear so tell me when I will push v44 update.
     
  6. pineappledan

    pineappledan Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2017
    Messages:
    3,990
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alberta, Canada
  7. adan_eslavo

    adan_eslavo Archmage of all Pixels Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,511
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Łódź, Poland
  8. Enrico Swagolo

    Enrico Swagolo Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Messages:
    2,379
    It being worth it doesn't make it a real unique building. In most unique building cases, you want them built ASAP. Remove the Science and replace it with nothing and it's good, but nothing to change your plans over - if you have river heavy start, then the UB's power over the replacement is almost non-existent. That is NOT the case for Floating Gardens or Nilometer, which'd both outyield this one quite heavily. It is a nerf to a civ that doesn't need it. If you feel they're balanced now which you do admit, why nerf them for no reason? The RNG-based yields can just be changed to be reliable - worse than if in the optimal case, better than in the worst.

    You ask why give this UB more yields when all I want is a change in how they're given so it stops being RNG-based, and I ask - why are we taking away yields from this UB when no one complained at it's strength and the nerf will be felt in every single one of our games, assuming you don't play a map without any lakes or tundra around? Even an average Sweden that doesn't start near Tundra's going to be losing tens of Science over it and prioritising expansion there, while being lame and weird, means you get a super-Science city. Of course, it's far weaker than if you started on Tundra or near a huge Lake, but you will feel it anyway, it'll just be something instead of carrying you. In both cases it'll feel wrong as it isn't what a warmongerer should be doing. Right now if I don't spand there, I'd definitely expand to decent-sized Tundra which typically also has enough sustaining resources just to get this Science, so yes - this nerf will be most assuredly felt, and it'll be very harsh.

    On the other hand, if I start near Tundra now, I expand in the Tundra further knowing that I will be rewarded for doing so. Similar occurs with big lakes, or even smaller ones - as Sweden, they're prioritised and fought over. My gameplan changes because I can potentially receive more Science from this city than I will from my capital in late classical. You cannot honestly expect me to believe I, who sometimes play Sweden, won't feel the change when it was such a strong, UB-carrying feature, that I changed my decisions based on it's very existence, and while claiming that you also admit the civ is balanced as it is now. I felt the yields, I did things I wouldn't otherwise to some degree based on it every Sweden game, so your post just cannot resonate with me because it's wrong. What I hated was that where you start impacted it greatly - and just giving it stronger base yields while cutting out the terrain dependency, or changing it's features, would make it closer to okay. Right now it's too RNG-focused. It ranges from okay to bordering on broken, all depending on the map, and that isn't fun. There's too many map RNG lottery civs already, what with Siam (what CS you start near determines everything), Inca (self explanatory), Polynesia (to a degree), etc. While the Science per lake/Tundra is potentially mighty and it changes my gameplan, it doesn't do it in an experience-enriching fashion is what I'm trying to say.

    To add to the previous points, I'll reiterate that the only complaints I remember in this thread were that the Swedish uniques are weak. There's very many civs in vanilla that, just like Sweden, nobody complains about being OP that got TWO good or very good uniques here, so why should Sweden in 4UC get two additional ones that would as a result be arguably worse than China's 4UC which people sometimes do complain about being OP? Even Songhai has superior 4UC uniques.

    The UB isn't the weakest now, but after this nerf it'd be as it's only strong advantage would be being buildable outside of fresh water areas which, while nice, won't help on many starts and maps. You say your desired nerf to a civ you consider balanced wouldn't be felt on most maps, but Bastu as a whole wouldn't have any noticeable impact on just as many maps.The +3 :c5gold::c5culture: is delayed and regular Baths have it meaning it's not impossible for Sweden to have access to it regularly, and you'll in most cases only get all this in medieval outside of super productive cities as you won't be getting an Amphitheatre/Garden/Temple before that (Garden's not available before Theology anyway).
     
  9. Rafs

    Rafs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2016
    Messages:
    114
    Don't know if this is intended, but Monolitic church isn't giving the appropriate yields when built onto hills (when you build it on stones all the yields are correct). Anyone else experience this or is this how it's supposed to be?
     
  10. amateurgamer88

    amateurgamer88 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2018
    Messages:
    859
    Gender:
    Male
    What's your proposal for change then? I can see us getting nowhere as I still disagree but I don't have time to keep arguing on this. If your suggestion isn't going to put Bastu over the top, then I'll go along with it and happily test it out when I get the chance.
     
  11. pineappledan

    pineappledan Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2017
    Messages:
    3,990
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alberta, Canada
    We have discussed this before. It is not intended. Please post the bug on the github
     
  12. Enrico Swagolo

    Enrico Swagolo Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Messages:
    2,379
    I have several ideas, after a removal of lake/tundra feature:
    1.Buff the Science/Culture per birth. It's not much as it is now. It could just be a 5:c5science::c5culture: (scaling with era?) per birth instead of 15%, that will never amount to that much. It might get crazy, though, and there's quite a few yields per birth mechanics.

    2.Just add a base 2:c5science:. If not enough, remove maintenance too, or improve :c5food: as well. Simple, straightforward.

    3. Bastu comes earlier, provides more yields, add another building to :c5culture::c5gold:. The amount of such uniques is increasing though, maybe not the best idea.

    4. Something every time a Great Scientist (because Skola has bonus slots?) or Great General is born? Some way to get Golden Age points?

    5. Don't know
     
  13. pineappledan

    pineappledan Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2017
    Messages:
    3,990
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alberta, Canada
    keep in mind that the choices of bonuses are, to the best of our ability, tied to the actual history, usage, etc. of the IRL building. Bastu got their tundra/lake bonus because I felt that was flavourful and relevant to the building.

    For my part, I don’t see much wrong with adding a single environmental element to a civ that previously had none. Much of this discussion has issued from ESwagolo’s assumption that Sweden’s lack of unique settling preference is a virtue unto itself, and that this is a self-evident truth. I have yet to be convinced on that matter.
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2019
  14. Enrico Swagolo

    Enrico Swagolo Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Messages:
    2,379
    I think Bastu's a bit too RNG/start based right now, though. The bonus's too big and determines the power of the UB a lot by how you start. Compare it to Caravansary's 1:c5food::c5gold: per 3 Tundras - of course they shouldn't be compared, but the UB favours certain terrain too much, overincentivising it. 1:c5science: per 2/3 Tundra/Lake tiles worked, with a base yield of 1/2:c5science: (+ something?) or something else would reduce the impact of RNG, if that's even possible.
     
  15. pineappledan

    pineappledan Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2017
    Messages:
    3,990
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alberta, Canada
    i think this strikes a fine balance. We can certainly reduce the power difference between tundra by making it 1 for 2 tiles. I’m not sure if we can do the same for lakes, since lakes are a feature subcategory unto themselves, but it might be possible. They are rare enough that a full :c5science:per tile shouldn’t be a problem unless you are using specific map settings.

    I’ll up the % yields per birth to 20% for each then?
     
  16. Gordon Ramesses

    Gordon Ramesses Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 5, 2019
    Messages:
    13
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Egypt
    I am not a fan of the Mayans' second Unique Unit, the Holkan, from a design perspective and I would like to see what others have to say about it.

    To begin, let’s review the unique traits that make the Holkan special:
    These are fine bonuses on paper, but the issue I have with them is that their effectiveness significantly worsens in the hands of high level AI opponents.

    From King difficulty upwards, all AI owned Pathfinders begin with the Trailblazer I promotion by default, meaning that the Holkan starting with Trailblazer I provides no additional benefit to the CPU. In addition, I like disabling Ancient Ruins in my games, but doing so renders the Holkan’s Lost Codicies promotion meaningless.

    This is a problem because if you are playing a game on King+ difficulty with no Ancient Ruins, the Holkan’s only benefits when in the hands of the AI are having 6 :c5strength: Combat Strength, up from 5, and no damage penalty against Barbarians. Now, the AI doesn’t really go around slamming their Pathfinders into Barbarians, nor does anyone else for that matter, and the Holkan does not succeed well enough at doing so anyway. So the Holkan, at best, survives specific situations where it otherwise would have gotten killed by barbs. These two bonuses alone are underwhelming to say the least. As a result, in games without Ancient Ruins, the Holkan provides very little, if any, tangible benefit to high level AI players. King+ AI Mayan opponents are essentially playing with 3 Unique Components to everyone else’s 4 (or Venice’s 5 but they deserve the extra one for obvious reasons).

    I would appreciate it if the Holkan was changed such that the AI could benefit more from its bonuses and it was less reliant on Ancient Ruins. Perhaps it could begin with 1 free promotion rather than simply Trailblazer I? The Maya could take such a Pathfinder down the Survivalism or Trailblazer routs however they see fit and would make it a very flexible UU as a result, and the AI would be able to make great use of that.
     
  17. adan_eslavo

    adan_eslavo Archmage of all Pixels Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,511
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Łódź, Poland
    @Gordon Ramesses:
    • If you disable ancient ruins then how you get Pocatello's bonus from UA? It is also cut some way.
    • We cannot provide features that make everyone happy. We designed the mod to be useful for ppl who use all base features. If you disable some, causing imbalance, then it is your choice.
    • Altough, I would agree that first issue can be managed some way. I didn't know about Trailblaizer bonus for harder AIs. I suppose Trailblaizer II will be too OP?
     
  18. FoxOfWar

    FoxOfWar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    403
    Location:
    Unimproved Forests of Finland
    Regarding Bastu, I would very much appreciate if it kept some of the terrain-dependency... maybe expanded a bit, since one water feature where a lot of bastus/saunas are next to, is sort of missing. (A lot of them are obviously also on the coast, but that would go beyond silly I think.)

    I would suggest something along these lines:
    +1 :c5science: to lake tiles
    +1 :c5science: per 2 worked tundra or river tiles

    Fun fact: when Finnish UN forces set up camp, the sauna tent is the second building to go up, after headquarters.
     
    adan_eslavo likes this.
  19. amateurgamer88

    amateurgamer88 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2018
    Messages:
    859
    Gender:
    Male
    I know that, for Immortal and Deity, AI Pathfinders will get Trailblazer II as they have enough experience to get 2 promotions from the start.

    Regarding ruins, it's actually more imbalance on higher difficulties if you enable it since AI can have 2 Pathfinders with Trailblazer I and/or Trailblazer II. However, I do understand the difficulty of making it work so everyone's happy.
     
  20. Gordon Ramesses

    Gordon Ramesses Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 5, 2019
    Messages:
    13
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Egypt
    The way I see it is that the Shoshone's ability to choose the reward they get from Ancient Ruins is a minor cherry on top of their UA that exists largely for flavor. Sure, they are impacted at least a little bit by disabling Ancient Ruins, but the Civ is still very much playable in both the hands of the player and the AI. The Mayan Holkan, on the other hand, basically becomes a standard Pathfinder in the hands of the AI assuming Ancient Ruins are disabled (although I would argue that it still works in the hands of the player).



    In addition, Ancient Ruins are a largely random element, in most cases, that many players chose to disable. I believe that turning those off isn't a significant change, yet it makes one of the Mayan UUs useless in the hands of the AI. It is a far cry from disabling something as impactful as the Espionage system and then running around going "England so weak!" or adding a load of City States to the map and then going "Austria so OP!".



    More importantly, the Ancient Ruins element of the Holkan's kit might not need to be changed. Depending on how the Holkan itself gets changed, the Ancient Ruins element could become a cherry on top like the Shoshone UA. I agree that the idea of giving the unit a free promotion might be a bit much in the hands of the AI, as they could immediately grab Trailblazer II and keep going from there. However, if such a change were made, than the UU would become so flexible that it would still have a presence (in AI hands, at least) assuming you didn't find any Ancient Ruins or they were disabled. Still, that free promotion idea was food for thought and I would agree that it could use a bit more time in the oven.
     
    Arthur Jama likes this.

Share This Page