(4-VT) Nerf the Siheyuan's yields

[Revolutionist_8]

Counterproposal to this: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/4-44-proposal-nerf-the-siheyuans-yields.683278/

Current Siheyuan
1 1 1 1 (doubled during WLTED)
+1 at Civil Service
+1 at Architecture
+1at Electricity
(these extra yields are not doubled during WLTED, just for clarity)

New Siheyuan
1 1 1 (doubled during WLTED)
+1 ONLY during WLTED (so it is not doubled) ---> this is the only change, otherwise same as currently
+1 at Civil Service
+1 at Architecture
+1at Electricity
(these extra yields are not doubled during WLTED, just for clarity)

While I agree with pineappledan's intents, I think his proposal goes too far away in the sense that it's a colossal nerf and it guts the entire UI, because it takes away the most important and interesting yield from the mix: the culture .

Arguably this is also the strongest part of the UI, because that early on putting culture to a spammable improvement has the potential to make the civ snowball out of control. I remember the old days when China had the culture as part of her UA and how insanely broken that was, so I'm really trying to not make the same mistake here. Putting culture to a UI (if I remember correctly it was also pineappledan's idea and work) is an elegant way in my opinion to try to find a middle-ground: the civ has the culture that early, but it's gated behind techs and its amount is much more limited.

One important thing to also keep in mind is that Siheyuan has a placement restriction: it must be built on flat land without resources, either adjacent to a city or to 2 other Siheyuan. While this is not that harsh of a restriction, it is certainly not as spammable as maybe first looks like. How many times there are resources next to cities, hills or mountains breaking up huge swaths of flat lands, it's not that difficult to break the chain of such improvements. While I also agree that WLTED is pretty common, it is by no means a guarantee and takes effort for getting it (expand or do trade), which is always fun (having interaction that results in positive and visible gains, that is).

Another positive thing is that it takes low effort for implementation, could be done in a simple Lua hook if there are no DLL support for such things.

Last but not least, this would be a gradual, one-step change, that while is a serious nerf, does not try to alter too much at once, so we can have a more gradual sense of feedback if this is a right direction, or we have to go further.

 

[N.Core]

Too late to make a counterproposal, sadly.

Now it's the sponsorship phase and you cannot make any proposal, counterproposal, or any changes.
Expect Mr. Recursive to veto this.

 

[N.Core]

could be done in a simple Lua hook if there are no DLL support for such things.

Also, you cannot do this. VP isn't accepting any gameplay mechanic through Lua trickery, only UI stuff is acceptable. A new gameplay mechanic must be done through the DLL.

 

[Revolutionist_8]

Too late to make a counterproposal, sadly.

Now it's the sponsorship phase and you cannot make any proposal, counterproposal, or any changes.
Expect Mr. Recursive to veto this.

Ah, you're right! Apparently I always forget the dates for these, my bad.

Also, you cannot do this. VP isn't accepting any gameplay mechanic through Lua trickery, only UI stuff is acceptable. A new gameplay mechanic must be done through the DLL.

Hmm, my idea was something like adding an extra function to PlayerDoTurn, where you iterate through the cities, check if they are in WLTKD, and if yes, then change the plots of the city with ChangeYield(YieldType iYield, int iChange) where there is a Siheyuan. A bit performance-heavy with worse-case scenario (= there are lot of WLTEDs and Siheyuans) but I don't think it would be that bad. Or is there DLL support for such things already?

 

[Recursive]

Proposal vetoed.

Reason: Made during the Sponsorship Phase.