(9-WD) Remove Food on Farms bonuses from Civil Service and Fertilizer

[paul_soryu]

Proposal:

• Remove +1 on Farms bonus from Civil Service and Fertilizer Techs

---

Motivation:
The intention of this one is to be considered with 9-08 and its variants, and 9-73.

This will remove +2 Food from late game if you think Adjacency Bonuses proposed in 9-73 give too much Food in the late game, but if 9-08 or 9-08a are passed, then they will give those +2 Food earlier on with Aqueduct and Grocery. In this case, removing bonuses from Civil Service and Fertilizer will mean the overall base Food on Farms will stay the same, but they will gain +2 Food earlier in the game.

• If this passes together with 9-08 (or 9-08a), effectively what will happen is +2 Food will be moved from Civil Service and Fertilizer techs to Aqueduct and Groccer buildings, unlocked earlier.
• If this passes without 9-08 (or 9-08a) passed, but with 9-73 passed, then it will nerf only single Farm tiles past Civil Service compared to now, but also decrease overall gain of Farm tiles with new adjecency bonuses.
• If only this Proposal passes, it will nerf late game Farms by -2 Food.

Note that with 9-73 passed, gaining +1 Food past Civil Service will be easy with just 2 adjacent Farms, which will increase to +2 Food at Refrigeration, effectively giving back +2 Food if you can build at least 2 adjacent Farms.

This is how much Food per Tile you'll gain from Adjacency bonus if 9-08 (or 9-08a), 9-73 and 9-102 will pass:

And this is how Food per Tile will look like if 9-08 (or 9-08a) won't pass, but 9-73 and 9-102 will:

This is how much Food in total you'll gain from Adjacency bonuses if 9-08 (or 9-08a), 9-73 and 9-102 will pass:

And this is how Food in total will look like if 9-08 (or 9-08a) won't pass, but 9-73 and 9-102 will:

---

References:
This should be considered with 9-08, 9-08a, 9-08b and 9-73

 

[Stalker0]

MAGI: @paul_soryu If your saying that this proposal should only be passed if the proposals above are passed, in effect you are trying to counterproposal with those things and this one. Considering 9-73 is yours, that's a no no.

You could just update 9-73 to include this, or create a counterproposal to 9-08 that consolidates all of your thoughts together.

 

[paul_soryu]

MAGI: @paul_soryu If your saying that this proposal should only be passed if the proposals above are passed, in effect you are trying to counterproposal with those things and this one. Considering 9-73 is yours, that's a no no.

You could just update 9-73 to include this, or create a counterproposal to 9-08 that consolidates all of your thoughts together.

From Vox Populi Congress Guide:

Multiple proposals may be submitted by the same proposer which affect the same area of balance, as long as the proposals do not directly conflict. In that case, it is possible to include in one proposal a flexible part that depends on the outcome of the other ("If proposal B is passed, change X of this proposal will be modified as follows: …"). Flexible parts are to be used sparingly and may constitute only a small part of the proposal. The Magi may require that proposals be merged together if they are by the same proposer, if they deem that it is in the best interests of the community. They may request the merge of non-conflicting proposals by different proposers if they feel they would be better combined, but the proposers are not required to agree to this.

So do I understand correctly that I can just add "if 9-08 or 9-08a passes" to 9-73? I thought conditions like that weren't allowed. It would be the best solution in my opinion. Or is this impossible because 9-08 isn't mine?

It is becoming quite a mess, so I can make three new counter-proposals which combine (9-08, 9-73, 9-102) into one, (9-08a, 9-73, 9-102) into one and (9-08b, 9-73) into one, if you want me to.

 

[paul_soryu]

Actually I would need to create 5 new counter-proposals: add to the mentioned above one which combines (9-08, 9-73) and one for (9-08a, 9-73), for those who don't want late-game Farm being nerfed a little. Oh and a 6th one (9-73, 9-102), for those who want adjecency bonus without early-game Farm Food buff, and with late-game Farm Food nerf, and then the same for (9-08b, 9-73, 9-102), so 7 new counterproposals.

My only idea is farm adjacency, but I wanted to make it more compatible with other proposals for players to choose from. I think this proposal is a good balancing module for the players. If I don't say it is meant to be passed with anything else then it can stay and be considered with 9-08, 9-08a, 9-08b and 9-73?

 

[paul_soryu]

Proposal amended:
- Changed wording, now this proposal can go with all 9-08 variants, with 9-73, or on its own.

 

[Stalker0]

From Vox Populi Congress Guide:

So do I understand correctly that I can just add "if 9-08 or 9-08a passes" to 9-73? I thought conditions like that weren't allowed. It would be the best solution in my opinion. Or is this impossible because 9-08 isn't mine?

It is becoming quite a mess, so I can make three new counter-proposals which combine (9-08, 9-73, 9-102) into one, (9-08a, 9-73, 9-102) into one and (9-08b, 9-73) into one, if you want me to.

If you note that quote, the flexible part is meant to be used sparingly and is mainly for one small part of the proposal. Its not meant for "my entire proposal is void if proposal X doesn't pass".

The goal is for you to generate your vision of what you want the overall proposal to be and submit that. One proposal for the show.

 

[paul_soryu]

If you note that quote, the flexible part is meant to be used sparingly and is mainly for one small part of the proposal. Its not meant for "my entire proposal is void if proposal X doesn't pass".

If you're talking about 9-73, it wasn't supposed to be void in any of the cases. The flexible part would be used for one small part which is "remove +1 Food from two Techs or not".

I updated the text so that 9-102 doesn't sound like it is void unless 9-08 passes. Is it allowed now?

 

[Stalker0]

If you're talking about 9-73, it wasn't supposed to be void in any of the cases. The flexible part would be used for one small part which is "remove +1 Food from two Techs or not".

I updated the text so that 9-102 doesn't sound like it is void unless 9-08 passes. Is it allowed now?

So your saying you are comfortable removing 2 food from farms on techs if none of the other proposals pass?

 

[paul_soryu]

@Stalker0

I'll add an "if" part to 9-73, azum already did it in his proposal referencing 9-73, I can't see a reason I couldn't.

I  am withdrawing this proposal.

 

[Recursive]

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