A Guide to Proposal 4-21 Espionage Rework Proposals


Baller Magnus
Dec 31, 2005
So if you have starting your voting, you might have come across Proposal 4-21 (the espionage reworks, and found it a bit....complicated). Don't worry, your not alone:)

In this thread, I try to break down the basics of each proposal to make it easier to understand. I will also include my vote in this guide, so you can note any possible biases I might have.

This proposal is mainly about "tuning" the existing Spy mission durations. While it may seem to use a complex formula, the change is not all that different from what is used today in the game. The biggest differences are noted below.
  • England's spy boost UA is more definitive here, now speeding up missions by a full 25%.
  • How city security is calculated is probably the biggest difference. First, it's a straight 25 before someone hits renaissance, and then it starts shifting turn by turn after renaissance begins. It is now more directly impacted by your city strength, making that an important lever in how resistant your city is to spy work.
  • How many more techs and policies the enemy has matters more for reducing your spy durations (4% per tech/policy they are ahead). While this mechanic exists now, the proposal will make it more consistent across all types of spy work.

Why should I vote for this? - If you generally like the style of mission durations today and want to see it tuned rather than dramatically changed, this is the proposal to pick.

This takes mission durations in a new direction. The big changes:
  • Security levels no longer effect mission durations.
  • Target having more techs and policies no longer effect some missions.
  • Most modifiers to spies (such as statecraft/rationalism policies or spy buildings like the police station) are now a static adjustment of turns rather than a %. So for example, a constabulary increases all mission durations by 1, rather than X%.
Why should I vote for this? - If you would like to simplify the duration system this is the proposal to pick. Its a bigger change which means it will probably be more imbalanced at first, so pick this if you think its the better direction to go and don't mind seeing further adjustments in the future. On the flip side, it reduces the levers you can pull in the spy system, so its for people that would like the system a bit "more in the background".

NOTE: Stalker0 included this in his vote.

This adds a new mission to the spy list, "Surveillance Established". Its effectively a delay of your spy, letting your spy staying in a city but not do any spywork, so you can select a mission later.

Why should I vote for this? - There are times when you land a spy in a city but it can't do what you want (for example, if a city is in rebellion, you can't siphon any yields). In the current game you just have to leave and start over again, or choose a suboptimal mission. This proposal gives you a lever to pull if you want to leave your spy and wait out whatever thing is happening in the city so you can get your mission in.

Note: Stalker0 included this in his vote.

This changes the way the siphon X yield missions work. The general overview
  • In simplest terms, the missions work a lot like the "kidnap" mission now.
  • The mission duration hasn't changed (though it could be modified if some other of the 4-21 proposals are voted in).
  • When the mission finishes, you no longer get a "lump sum" of yields. Instead, for 30 turns (modified by game speed), you get an X per turn of that yield (and the opponent loses X each turn). So if the city was getting on average 50 science per turn during the mission duration, when the mission finishes you would get 25 SPT (50% of 50) for the next 30 turns, and the city for that opponent would lose 25 SPT.
Why should I vote for this? - If you would rather siphon missions produce more of a behind the scenes trickle rather than an immediate hit, vote for this. Also if you don't like spending your money and faith continuously to avoid steals, vote for this. Note the flip side though, in the longterm this makes gold and faith stealing stronger, as in the current version if I don't have the gold....then its not stolen (the opponent always gets the full sum of gold, but you ultimately lose less). In the new version, that GPT hit to my economy will be there no matter what (the opponent will always get the full amount of gold, and you will always lose the full amount).

This makes counterspy missions easier to use. The overview:
  • All counterspy missions work at Spy level 1 now. So effectively any spy can counterspy without much trouble.
  • The kill chance to take out a spy is lowered if the mission spy is stronger than your counterspy (Example: If the mission spy is level 3 and my counterspy is level 1, its 3-1 = 2, 2 * 10% = -20% kill chance).
Why should I vote for this? - If you would like counterspying to make more flexible and easier to do, vote for this.
NOTE: Stalker0 included this in his vote.

And that's it, while there is a lot going on, most of the proposals are self-contained. If your struggling with all of the combinations, what I do is just select at the top which options I liked....then I can look down and find the combination that hits my selections, I check the new box, and uncheck the previous ones.
Last edited:
Uncheck the previous ones? Why would you do that? You don't like it if only some of the options you like get implemented?

You should vote like this if the proposals are mostly independent, i.e. there isn't a group of proposals that you don't want to partially pass:
1. Figure out your preference for each proposal (Yea, Nay, Don't Care)
2. Check all boxes that contain any of the Yea or Don't Care proposals
3. Uncheck all boxes that contain any of the Nay proposals
4. Uncheck all boxes that DOES NOT contain all of the Yea proposals
5. Check Nay if there isn't any Yea proposal
Last edited:
I'm going to redo this proposal as I made a mistake with it and it was too complicated.
Top Bottom