[Vote] (9-019) Policy Tweaks V: Rationalism Rework

[hokath]

Motivation:
Industrial Policy trees are in a weird place. The previous 6 trees all have really strong character, for me. But then you get to choice #3 and it feels the design goes downhill a bit.
I think some of this can be blamed on the fact these trees come later and so fewer people have cared about it compared to more pressing, early game problems.
In brief, Rationalism is king due to the high value of Science (and Great Scientists), and then Imperialism has a niche for Warmongers (and has some fun effects for them). Industry is left a bit behind; there are some rare use cases, and it does have some strong modifiers for multiple yields, but I think it's generally not considered competitive.
Here I present the changes from my proposal mod that significantly overhaul the trees with a view to creating a lower powerlevel Rationalism and Industry where the trees have a food/sci versus prod/gold flavor sitting on a number of general yield bonuses with varied hooks. There are minor changes to Imperialism.

This does not address one big issue which is about the abundance of Great Scientists for bulbing in the later part of the game.
By being able to Faith purchase GS, Rationalism becomes undisputed king for anyone without To The Glory of God (itself also incredibly powerful).
I think that should be treated separately.

Here the main thing to take aim at is the possible +45% Science modifier you can acquire, which I think is just far too centralizing when ideologies are supposed to be that point where you "pick" a victory condition (or set of conditions) to pursue from a policy point of view.
Of course, it's fine to have some Science beats in the tree, and I have those (I hope in a more engaging way than before?), but the tree is more versatile, now.

---

Proposal:
Rationalism

• Change flavor text to
  "Rationalism unleashes a wave of new Citizens by providing large Happiness and Food bonuses. Simultaneously boosts the output of the resulting Golden Ages and Specialists, especially Scientists."
• Tree Structure is now
  
  
  • Liberalism
  • Mass Education
  • Secularism (requires Liberalism)
  • Emancipation (requires Liberalism)
  • Employment Law (requires Emancipation and Mass Education)
• Opener
  • +2 Production and +3 Science from all Strategic Resources.
  • +5% Science in all Cities.
  • +1 Science and Culture from Scientists
  • +33% Great Scientist Rate
  • +10% Growth in all Cities
• Scaler
  • +2% Science.
  • +5% Growth in all Cities
• Liberalism (was Scientific Revolution)
  • Can construct Observatories (+6 Science, +1 Science from nearby Mountains, 2 Scientist Slot).
    • Anyone can build an Observatory, now.
      • 4 Science (down from 6)
      • 0 Scientist slots (down from 2)
      • 1 Sci per Mountain within 3 tiles
  • +2 Science from Jungle and Snow.
  • +2 Gold and +1 Production from Specialists
  • Gains +25% GP Rate during a Golden Age
• Mass Education (was Enlightenment)
  • Receive 1 Free Tech
  • +1 Happiness from Universities.
  • Gains +3 Food, +2 Culture, and +1 Happiness from Public Schools
  • Gains +100% Production towards Public Schools
• Secularism (was Free Thought)
  • -5 Religious Unrest
  • +25% Instant Yields from Great Scientists.
  • Earn Great Scientists +33% faster.
  • +10% Science during a Golden Age
  • +3 Production and Gold from Academies
    A bonus to Great Scientists before you bulb them
• Emancipation (was Rights of Man)
  • -1 Unhappiness from all Needs in all Cities.
  • +2 Production and Gold from Villages.
  • +10% Science during Golden Ages.
  • Gains: Receive Instant Culture and GAP boost equal to 5 times the number of citizens in the empire, scaling with era
    it's like the old free policy/free golden age policies but more measured
  • +1 Happiness from Zoo, Hotel, Museum
  • 10% Food during a Golden Age
• Employment Law (was Empiricism)
  • +1 Food for every Citizen and +25% Growth in all Cities.
  • +3% Science in a City for every Great Work present (up to 20%).
  • -1 Food cost of Specialists (SpecialistFoodChange)
    I used to keep this but opinion has become negative on this sort of flat food
  • +1 Production per 2 Citizens
    Nerfed from old 1:1
  • 50% of Happiness converted to Culture
• Finisher
  • (Purchase GS with Faith)
  • (12 Security in all Cities)
  • +25% Yields from GS Bulb

---

Implementation notes:
This is all done by database changes.
You can play it here.

---

References:
The change to the tree description of Rationalism overrides the change in

[Vote] Thread '(9-014) Policy Tweaks 0: Tree Descriptions'

Jan 1, 2026

Motivation:
Some of the policy tree descriptions are quite minimal and don't really provide enough detail to discern functions of their trees. I think a bit of a rewrite could be helpful for new players (while experience players don't need to read them).
This has no gameplay effect.
However, I think this is worth a proposal because the descriptions themselves are a representation of the design goals, and not everyone will agree.
We can workshop a little or you can counterpropose if we reach a point of strong disagreement.

Proposal:
Replace the initial text (before the actual effects) on...

• hokath
• Replies: 11
• Forum: Vox Populi Congress

• 

The other changes can be found in

[Vote] Thread '(9-049) Policy Tweaks VI: Rebalanced Industry'

Jan 3, 2026

Motivation:
Industrial Policy trees are in a weird place. The previous 6 trees all have really strong character, for me. But then you get to choice #3 and it feels the design goes downhill a bit.
I think some of this can be blamed on the fact these trees come later and so fewer people have cared about it compared to more pressing, early game problems.
In brief, Rationalism is king due to the high value of Science (and Great Scientists), and then Imperialism has a niche for Warmongers (and has some fun effects for them). Industry is left a bit behind; there are some rare use cases, and it...

• hokath
• Replies: 43
• Forum: Vox Populi Congress

and

[Vote] Thread '(9-048) Imperialism Change'

Jan 3, 2026

Motivation:
Industrial Policy trees are in a weird place. The previous 6 trees all have really strong character, for me. But then you get to choice #3 and it feels the design goes downhill a bit.
I think some of this can be blamed on the fact these trees come later and so fewer people have cared about it compared to more pressing, early game problems.
In brief, Rationalism is king due to the high value of Science (and Great Scientists), and then Imperialism has a niche for Warmongers (and has some fun effects for them). Industry is left a bit behind; there are some rare use cases, and it...

• hokath
• Replies: 23
• Forum: Vox Populi Congress

• 

 

[FPXI]

This is very big. I think well beyond a balance tweak. I'm opposed to it for now unless there is overwhelming interest in it and a lot of discussion. I'd be interested in a smaller counter proposal though, and I'll put together more detailed thoughts after i've had time to mull it over.

 

[Brackenspore]

This is very big. The new names are especially well chosen.

 

[redrum68]

So I generally like the direction but a lot to digest here. Definitely feels like a nuke to Rationalism which maybe isn't a bad thing.

Can you clarify this: "Gains Culture and GAP per citizen oneshot boost. 5/citizen, scaling with era"

 

[Stalker0]

@Magi @hokath at initial glance I see no reason these shouldn’t be broken up into 3 proposals, one for each tree. Is there some dependency here that has to be maintained in one thread?

 

[hokath]

The reason is that some of the effects move between trees.
So Strategic yields move from Rationalism to Industry, Farm yields move from Imperialism to Industry, etc.
I felt it probably doesn't make sense to have effects duplicated.

Gains Culture and GAP per citizen oneshot boost. 5/citizen, scaling with era

Yes, sorry, that's not very clear.
You receive 5 Culture and GAP for every Citizen in the Empire when you adopt the policy, scaling with era. It's tuned to be around around (bit less than) 10 turns worth of output.

 

[azum4roll]

Finisher

• (Re)Gains "Reveals Hidden Antiquity Sites" from Artistry finisher
  Ideological pressure can be a huge problem for Imperialism, this helps fight that
  Hidden sites on Artistry doesn't make great sense, since archaeology won't be unlocked for a long time

Artistry gets hurt a lot without this

Industry has lost all % bonuses. Literally unplayable.

 

[redrum68]

The reason is that some of the effects move between trees.
So Strategic yields move from Rationalism to Industry, Farm yields move from Imperialism to Industry, etc.
I felt it probably doesn't make sense to have effects duplicated.


Yes, sorry, that's not very clear.
You receive 5 Culture and GAP for every Citizen in the Empire when you adopt the policy, scaling with era. It's tuned to be around around (bit less than) 10 turns worth of output.

I see. Does it really need to scale by era since generally you should be unlocking it around a similar time each game? That would simplify it a bit and make the amount you are getting easier to estimate.

Also, PDan is gonna come by and tell you to stop adding GAP everywhere

 

[paul_soryu]

I like how currently Industry is good both for wide and tall empires, and whenever I considered Rationalism it looks as not that bad for wide either. I like both of them to be viable for both wide and tall play, it gives choice instead of being Tradition 2 and Progress 2. I don't think it is necessary to differentiate T3 Policy Trees by wide vs. tall. The way I think about those trees is what yields I want to get: hugefor Rationalism and huge (plus some) for Industry, not if they are better for wide or tall. Imperialism is clearly a wide conquest option, so I don't want to have the other 2 options chosen for me. After very strict design of T2 Policy Trees, I like to have more freedom in T3 and consider finer details of what I need. That's not to say current T3 Trees don't need any changes, for sure they can be made better, but not by making them strictly wide vs. tall.

Thematically I like to imagine a thick infrastructure of different buildings multiply your industry output instead of just adding to it to be multiplied by something else. The larger the industry, the larger the yields. Wide empirs have "smaller" industries, but more of them.

I think +5 /// per city instead of +15% is too low, you get +5 with Artistry, +6 with Fielty, +6 with Statecraft, +6 with Tradition (+4 without Baths). It doesn't feel like T3, and you're still getting these yields gradually starting with only +2 or +3 if your tech is good. I also don't like how it is very similar to Progress per-city bonuses, even "+4/+4 / from City Connections" is straight out of Progress. Now, I do understand that +2 to Bonus Resources is a gigantic bonus, but again, it favors wide empires. I think a bonus to Bonus Resources is a cool bonus idea which is not used anywhere, but if it was added to Industry I would make it something like +1, but lower % bonus from buildings to +2% (total +10%), it makes sense that Industry wouldn't be as good with Science and Culture as it is with Production and Gold (+15%).

You say current Industry generally is not considered competitive, but then you say that +15% bonus is too strong and needs nerfing. Industry is special because it has good overall % modifiers before Ideologies. If you want big industry you go there, if you want big science you go Rationalism, if you want big conquest you go Imperialism.

Overall I think it is too much information condensed into one proposal to have a meaningful discussion about. I'd need to play with those changes at least for a month to have an opinion about everything. Also I think it is very important to know what was the design and justification for the current Policy Trees to determine if the design goals were wrong all along and need to be changed, or if the goals were good but the implementation needs some changes. Currently we have numbers and text for both variants, but we have justifications only for your proposed variant, I think that's unfair to the current design. For example, it may have been designed that way to be beneficial to both wide and tall play, but here we disregard it from the get go. Maybe +2 on Specialists from Industry finisher was somehow intentional. I just don't know any of it. Currently I often go Industry -> Freedom to have some disgusting Specialists.

I am open to discussing implementing some of these changes gradually, but definitely not all in one go.

 

[Zuizgond]

Some good things, some bad things. Hard to accept this proposal as a whole

 

[jarcast2]

That social policy branch icon is not from the base game but from a JFD mod. The Industry branch from the steampunk scenario uses the Order image.

Steam Workshop::(RTP) (Content) Additional Policy Trees

steamcommunity.com

Steam Workshop::(RTP) (UI) Social Policy Screen

steamcommunity.com

 

[hokath]

@jarcast2 thanks for searching. I could have sworn this was in a scenario.

You say current Industry generally is not considered competitive, but then you say that +15% bonus is too strong and needs nerfing. Industry is special because it has good overall % modifiers before Ideologies.

Yes, but you have to also take into account that the Rationalism bonuses are also changed (nerfed). They've lost 15% + 20% (with Great Works) ~ 35% Science bonus.
The target power level is lower, because frankly some of these effects (like the remove +20% Science from stacking Great Works, or +15% to two yield types) are equivalent to, or better than, effects in ideologies.

If you want big industry you go there, if you want big science you go Rationalism, if you want big conquest you go Imperialism.

But what is big industry? At this point many buildings are already built. You are not far removed from working processes. It's kind of a hybrid where you can maybe make some units, maybe buy some diplomats, etc., but because it isn't focussed it's not as effective as the other two.

Does it really need to scale by era

Yes, there is no option atm for it not to.

Also, PDan is gonna come by and tell you to stop adding GAP everywhere

A free golden age would be too much (vanilla game effect on Liberty!)

Industry has lost all % bonuses.

No, it has 10% Gold/Culture on WLTKD. To compare, Rationalism has 10% Food/Science during Golden Age (and GPP).

I sympathize with people seeing this for the first time that it's a lot to digest. I've been looking at it since 2023 so I forget it's quite ambitious.
If you feel you have to vote it down, that's fine. It can come back in April and you'll have had time to formulate feedback or counterproposals.

 

[redrum68]

Yes, there is no option atm for it not to.

Ah ok so limitation on the current table. I still think long term not having the era scaling makes it simpler and more straightforward.

 

[pineappledan]

Wow this is big. I need to come back later and read this. Or maybe I won't have time and I abstain.

Also, PDan is gonna come by and tell you to stop adding GAP everywhere

I'm fine with 1-offs and global effects on rare triggers. I am not fine with per-turn and per-city effects. And heaven forbid you do per-turn, per city bonuses (I kill you, Stupa)

 

[FPXI]

I like how currently Industry is good both for wide and tall empires, and whenever I considered Rationalism it looks as not that bad for wide either. I like both of them to be viable for both wide and tall play, it gives choice instead of being Tradition 2 and Progress 2. I don't think it is necessary to differentiate T3 Policy Trees by wide vs. tall.

I'll go one further. T3 policies should be entirely playstyle agnostic. All three should work equally well for wide or tall, just differently (or as close to this as possible).

 

[Recursive]

Some of these policy breakdowns (particularly this one) are very dense. The explanation of the changes feels appropriate for a changelog, but for a proposal I feel like it's necessary to compare new vs. old more explicitly to make a meaningful decision.

The proposal must provide adequate background information to allow the community to make an informed decision, including explaining the current state of whatever is being modified. As a general rule of thumb, more complicated proposals should provide more detail. Supporting facts (not opinions) made during a proposal post must be accurate. If a proposal contains misinformation as a basis for its approval, this is grounds for it to be vetoed.

As-is, the current effects are not all listed, and the new effects are not all listed either - only the ones that are changed.

 

[paul_soryu]

I'll go one further. T3 policies should be entirely playstyle agnostic. All three should work equally well for wide or tall, just differently (or as close to this as possible).

I think it is entirely reasonable to have like 5 cities, take Imperialism, and then annex only enemy Capitals and large cities with good Resources/Wonders, so you end up with ~10 tall cities and everything else is Puppets. So I think you already can play "tall Imperialism" if you came into it with something like Tradition -> Artistry or Tradition -> Statecraft. High Happiness associated with Tradition helps maintaining a lot of Puppets, which still give 40% of their yields.

 

[paul_soryu]

But what is big industry? At this point many buildings are already built. You are not far removed from working processes. It's kind of a hybrid where you can maybe make some units, maybe buy some diplomats, etc., but because it isn't focussed it's not as effective as the other two.

Industry in my understanding is Gold+Prod being converted into everything else. They allow you to invest in every building in every city (also triggering Bank's Science bonus) and construct it in 2-4 turns. When I am not playing Industry I typically struggle to build everything in time, I have 4-5 buildings which I don't have time and gold for, and they take 6-8 turns to build. With Industry I can build everything and then either switch to Military and conquests, Diplomats, or work processes like Science to compete with Rationalism or Culture to advance faster towards Cultural victory.

Is working Processes considered boring and unfun? It's the same as if you were building buildings with Rationalism or Imperialism, but... they would take you longer to build, in both cases you just wait until something happens. I often work Culture Process during my Golden Ages starting in Renaissance simply because GA gives both (at least) +20% Culture and (at least) +20% Production, which sums up into a big number in a good city. Industry gives you a choice to do anything, and I think that's a good and fun thing, not bad. You can't control and adjust your yields the same way with Imperialism and Rationalism, there you will definitely struggle with something.

Even with Processes it gives you choice in what direction to advance (I wouldn't mind if Industry had a +10% conversion bonus for Processes, currently it is only used in Power Plant buildings which come extremely late), and then you can choose Ideology to really specialize into what you want. Also as far as I understand working Processes also boosts instant yields from GWriters and GScientists. I can't even say that I am forced to work processes that much with Industry, there's still always something to build.

One problem for sure is that at some point more Gold can become useless as there is nothing to spend it on, with Great Merchant's active ability and Town's Gold bonuses being not that great. But if you have a big army, then you will definitely need a lot of Gold to constantly upgrade units, prices go up very quickly.

 

[hokath]

I'll go one further. T3 policies should be entirely playstyle agnostic

It's a valid design, just not the one I have chosen.
The reason I don't really like this route is because it's very tough the achieve meaningful choice. Ok, for some civs there will be a big selling point like +2 TR in Industry (although atm you can nab that for free #abuse the AI) and it can tip the scales, but right now if you don't pick Rationalism you give up to +45% Science modifier (before you even start on Great Scientists) so clearly we are far from balance at the moment. There is a need to do something imo.

As-is, the current effects are not all listed, and the new effects are not all listed either - only the ones that are changed.

I will amend the proposal to contain all information like the Celtic one.

 

[FPXI]

It's a valid design, just not the one I have chosen.
The reason I don't really like this route is because it's very tough the achieve meaningful choice. Ok, for some civs there will be a big selling point like +2 TR in Industry (although atm you can nab that for free #abuse the AI) and it can tip the scales, but right now if you don't pick Rationalism you give up to +45% Science modifier (before you even start on Great Scientists) so clearly we are far from balance at the moment. There is a need to do something imo.

Absolutely agree something should be done, but maybe for now a plain nerf to rationalism is in order. And then we can revisit this...maybe alongside Enlightenment era integration o_0