[DLL] (8-NS) Austria Alternative

[pineappledan]

I think it’s fine if Austria can marry everyone. We already have a soft cap with the scaling gold cost. If players feel it is still worthwhile to marry every CS then maybe they aren’t expensive enough?

Re: the quest, I think you’re misreading what I proposed. Are you suggesting that Austria only be allowed to marry CS when there is a quest for it?

 

[DoveCDog]

I think it’s fine if Austria can marry everyone. We already have a soft cap with the scaling gold cost. If players feel it is still worthwhile to marry every CS then maybe they aren’t expensive enough?

Re: the quest, I think you’re misreading what I proposed. Are you suggesting that Austria only be allowed to marry CS when there is a quest for it?

Marrying everyone in a 40 City State game is huge and way too strong. That's what my proposal is trying to address. I think 8 or so marriages by the end of the game is ideal, across all map sizes.

Yeah, I thought you were proposing that Austria can be given quests to marry. After being given the quest, the player has to ally the CS for 5 turns and pay the Gold.

 

[pineappledan]

I'm proposing that we significantly reduce the value of marriages by removing the era scaling and dislocating the stacking %GPrate, but we also add a quest where CS will ask you to marry them. This ties the CS quest reward and the marriage parts together.

 

[DoveCDog]

Not on board with that. The %GPrate is THE reason to marry. 150 influence is not worth much at all in the second half of the game where emissaries give half that.

Marriages should have weight; I'm for having a smaller number of strong marriages than having a larger number of weaker marriages.

 

[pineappledan]

I disagree. +100 resting influence is more than 3x as powerful as the permanent bonus of a Great Diplomat action. It is very consequential, but not so overwhelming in size that it makes other resting influence bonuses irrelevant. Also, if the UA currently consumes Austria's entire power budget. There is no room in the rest of the kit for any of the tech-unlocked components to have any impact.

 

[DoveCDog]

Nothing wrong with that, not every civilization needs to have each unique component be equally powerful. It's when everything is added together that they need to be equally powerful, and importantly fun to play. I mentioned in another one of our conversations that Syria's UNW more or less consumes his entire budget - he's still fun to play as.

 

[pineappledan]

It's a problem when the civilization in question is chronically top tier and the only part of their kit that does anything is their UA.

One of the easiest ways to balance that situation would be to simply tech lock some of their existing power by offloading parts of their UA onto their components.

To put it another way, the marriage mechanic would not be too weak if the GPrate was moved to a UNW. That's just a false assertion as far as I'm concerned.
Not only is it not weak, it resolves a long-standing issue with Austria which is that we have only 1 lever we can use to balance this civ, because the only relevant component is the UA.

 

[DoveCDog]

It is too weak, because you wouldn't get the bonus for the first half of the game. You wouldn't get any bonus besides +100 influence for the first half of the game.... As I said before, I think at the very least it should be something like +10% GP from UA and an extra +5% from the building.

But anyway I don't like the idea of having the player marry every city state. For this proposal I want to try and limit the number of city states the player can marry. In my view that is a much better way to reign in the UA while still keeping it fun to play. I'll wait if a coder can share the Quest mechanics, so that we can have the player only marry when he gets the quest. Or just stay with what we have proposed now.

 

[azum4roll]

Even when that era scaling was originally proposed I considered it a poison pill for the rest of the proposal, which had the stuff I felt was even more important (removing the WC votes).

There was my version of the UA which didn't have the votes and was not scaling

You probably only voted on the one that freezes resting influence on marriage.

Moderator Action: Do not call out other people's voting records - see Vox Populi Congress Guide rules, "Decorum Requirements". - Recursive

 

[pineappledan]

There was my version of the UA which didn't have the votes and was not scaling

You probably only voted on the one that freezes resting influence on marriage.

You know you could just look up people’s voting record instead of making stuff up? I voted for 3 different proposals for the Austria UA rework, including yours. I voted for all the proposals that entirely removed the WC votes.

[Vote] - (5-25) Austria UA Change Proposals

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...

forums.civfanatics.com

 

[DoveCDog]

Since there were no replies in favour of keeping the scaling resting influence, I think its fair to assume we're mostly in favour of removing it.
As such, I've modified the proposal to switch it back to the original +200 influence. The influence decay mechanic is now a flat -2.5 scaling with game speed only. It will take 80 turns for your marriage to fully expire.

 

[Recursive]

@DoveCDog What icon will be used for the Printing Press replacement?

 

[pineappledan]

Can can sponsor the UNW art

 

[hokath]

I made this one for it the other week

ofc you can always make another one, I won't be offended

 

[Recursive]

Timestamp post to arrange all the threads in a neat order.