Voting Instructions
Players, please cast your votes in the poll above. Vote "Yea" for every proposal you'd be okay with if it were implemented. Vote "Nay" if you'd be okay if these proposals weren't implemented. You can vote for any number of 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 4, Proposal 18
Discussion Thread: (4-18) Pledge to Protect Military Power Requirement Reduced From 60% To 50%!
Proposer: @Enginseer
Sponsor(s): @Recursive
Proposal Details
Timeline:
Proposal: Based on this chart, reducing the military power requirement will make some neighboring civilizations more likely to pledge at least 1-3 more civs depending on the amount you have available! We could establish a vote to reduce this requirement to 50%.
Indirect Effect
This will cause a little more drama to happen to warmongers, bullies, and greedy city-state hoarders.
This will cause city-states likely to resist bullying due to more availability of a pledge.
This will make city-states stronger due to more availability of a pledge.
It will make quests stronger a tad bit, however, the number of major civilizations being able to pledge would help those who are in the middle get that extra yield than snowballing players who are already ahead of the game.
This will make amplified influence decay more common especially when city-states feel attacked, weakening a civ's grip when they are pledging their protection to them.
Those who play on higher difficulty should enjoy an easier requirement to pledge and not suddenly lose their requirement to pledge just because the AI lost units that got replaced with a higher level.
Thoughts?
VP Congress: Session 4, Proposal 18a
Discussion Thread: (4-18a) Pledge to Protect Military Requirement - Require Median Military Power
Proposer: @Recursive
Sponsor(s): @Recursive
Proposal Details
Currently, 60% of the highest military power is required in order to make a pledge to protect. However, the highest military power can sometimes (especially on higher difficulties, since promotions increase military power, and AI has substantial XP bonuses and production discounts) be very high compared to other civs, unreasonably limiting civs' ability to make a pledge.
I propose that we use the median of civs' military powers instead of requiring 50% of the highest power. If a civ has military power equal to or greater than the median, they are allowed to make the pledge. This means runaway civs will have much less impact on everyone else's ability to make a pledge, which would be an improvement over the current system.
Math Explanation:
Players, please cast your votes in the poll above. Vote "Yea" for every proposal you'd be okay with if it were implemented. Vote "Nay" if you'd be okay if these proposals weren't implemented. You can vote for any number of 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 4, Proposal 18
Discussion Thread: (4-18) Pledge to Protect Military Power Requirement Reduced From 60% To 50%!
Proposer: @Enginseer
Sponsor(s): @Recursive
Proposal Details
Timeline:
- Vanilla BNW: Anyone could pledge to protect.
- CSD: Pledge to Protect increases the City-State's combat strength
- VP: Pledge to Protect now requires 1 of the 3 requirement (being allied, connected with roads, or a trade route with them) making it harder to pledge.
- VP: Now requires 60% military power.
Proposal: Based on this chart, reducing the military power requirement will make some neighboring civilizations more likely to pledge at least 1-3 more civs depending on the amount you have available! We could establish a vote to reduce this requirement to 50%.
Indirect Effect
This will cause a little more drama to happen to warmongers, bullies, and greedy city-state hoarders.
This will cause city-states likely to resist bullying due to more availability of a pledge.
This will make city-states stronger due to more availability of a pledge.
It will make quests stronger a tad bit, however, the number of major civilizations being able to pledge would help those who are in the middle get that extra yield than snowballing players who are already ahead of the game.
This will make amplified influence decay more common especially when city-states feel attacked, weakening a civ's grip when they are pledging their protection to them.
Those who play on higher difficulty should enjoy an easier requirement to pledge and not suddenly lose their requirement to pledge just because the AI lost units that got replaced with a higher level.
Thoughts?
VP Congress: Session 4, Proposal 18a
Discussion Thread: (4-18a) Pledge to Protect Military Requirement - Require Median Military Power
Proposer: @Recursive
Sponsor(s): @Recursive
Proposal Details
Currently, 60% of the highest military power is required in order to make a pledge to protect. However, the highest military power can sometimes (especially on higher difficulties, since promotions increase military power, and AI has substantial XP bonuses and production discounts) be very high compared to other civs, unreasonably limiting civs' ability to make a pledge.
I propose that we use the median of civs' military powers instead of requiring 50% of the highest power. If a civ has military power equal to or greater than the median, they are allowed to make the pledge. This means runaway civs will have much less impact on everyone else's ability to make a pledge, which would be an improvement over the current system.
Math Explanation:
Spoiler :
Last edited:
