Acken's Minimalistic Balance for singleplayer (and AI improvements)

[chumchu]

I would argue that moving rationalism to industrial was a good change for the following reasons:

1) It was used way too often in a way detrimental to replayability. It constrained most other policy strategies since you wanted as much and as fast rationalism which meant minimising the policies you got before renaissance. This made the majority of policy trees in the game into very niche choices. The dominant choice in most cases were tradition or liberty plus 2-3 policies from one of the other. With the higher culture in this mod you can comfortably complete 2 early policy trees before industrial, which makes a range of policy strategies competitive.

2) As many have noted, rationlism now competes very directly with ideology. I can not think of a better solution, because the strong and flexible bonii ideologies give are the only thing that can compete with the general utility of science in BNW. All victories except early domination runs require high late game science, so most attempts at fast times will still be helped by ationalism. Having a tech edge also gives you safety through better units. The other option was to nerf it into the ground so that we would not see point 1 again. In the base game you could get the most important part of rationalism in renaissance, fill out your ideology and then complete rationalism for the scientists and free technology late game. It was very programmatic. The choice between level 2/3 tenets and rationalism is hard.

3) In the base game all culture buildings except monuments and guilds can be skipped with little problems if you are going for a non-culture victory. With the change, building culture for the late game is relevant if you want to get rationalism as well as ideology. This will make for tougher choices as you want to get more culture from buildings, works, religion et cetera,

 

[Nigel_Tufnel2]

Small changes to the policy trees can have pretty big effects - my opinion is that the shifts in Rationalism policies are enough of a nerf in themselves. I would favor either the old tree available in the Industrial, or the new tree in the Renaissance.

AI military - my experience on Demi-God (7) is the same, just outrageous numbers of AI troops and Settlers very early. As is I am likely to drop down to Immortal (6).

 

[Phukit]

AI military - my experience on Demi-God (7) is the same, just outrageous numbers of AI troops and Settlers very early. As is I am likely to drop down to Immortal (6).

(LV6 IMMORTAL) Teching luxes, beelining construction then seeing AI churn out Xbs not but a few turns after i just finished construction is a bit disheartening.

some of the AIs early bonuses may need to be toned down.

 

[Acken]

The case for industrial Rationalism.

1. It is simply not true that Rationalism standas on its own. Rationalism WAS competing with Explo, Commerce, Aesthetics, Patronage. It IS the main argument why people think X or Y tree is poor. It is why you cannot use Piety as a good secondary tree. etc etc.

Anyway, my main point is that (assuming a player works through their opening tree until it is finished) the SP come in batches. The net effect is that Patronage, Aesthetics, Commerce, Exploration all compete with each other. (And even Piety really, since it is too weak in standard BNW to be an opener.) This is good design.

It is the case now. These tree are well balanced between themselves and compete with each others BECAUSE Rationalism is not among them.
Slinging into Renaissance to spend as little time as possible in the other trees is one of the fundamental technique of having a strong game in Civ5. Tradition 5, Extra 2/3, Rationalism.
Rationalism was viewed as an option only for domination game that are already half there. Like the HCA strategy suggesting to keep conquering all game long.

Making Rationalism compete with Ideology is the point of that change. You now have a hard choice to make. Some strategies will simply skip it without looking back, like HCA but others will have a hard time deciding if they want more science or ideology bonuses. The game is also longer and tougher so a science bonus in Industrial will give its bonus for a longer time than it used to.

2. Early in development because of #1, rationalism was getting nerfed left and right, making the bonus weaker or a lot harder to acquire. Now it is in better shape than how I would make it at Renaissance. I even considered removing all science bonus from it and putting bonuses to other stuff ! But it was not elegant nor thematic and so delaying it is more elegant.

3. I am willing to see if Rationalism doesn't compete with an Ideology though. If it's too weak for someone wanting a boost in science. If your game doesn't care as much for science and you don't pick it, then it is fine, that's the choice.

Comments:

i agree,cities seem to be gaining back 7hp per turn.

I have also noticed since the update that it has become maddeningly frustrating trying to get out just one expo never mind two or three and thats on LV6 immortal.

I haven't changed how early the AI would expand. I find that comment surprising if you expand normally in the 25 to 55 window (standard). I'll launch a test game on Immortal to see how things are.

I am constantly stuck with 5-6 other civs on the same landmass on continents.

I cannot see why continents position would be different than in the original game.

AI military - my experience on Demi-God (7) is the same, just outrageous numbers of AI troops and Settlers very early. As is I am likely to drop down to Immortal (6).

despite the AI not starting with an extra settler it still seems quite capable of getting its 3rd sometimes even 4th expo out by T30-35

The AI has always been capable of doing a ton of things. Their bonuses are really big. So once someone start to tweak their logic... it "pays off". I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do here ? If the difficulties are too frustrating, going down is an option. If on the other hand things get "impossible" then I will tweak them.

I ran two additional simulations just to look at the problem.
Here are AIs at Immortal after 60 turns, normal amount of cities (2 to 5) and classic era units (CB, spears, swords), no problem there:

Spoiler :

Here are AIs at DemiGod after 60 turns, normal but higher amount of cities (3 to 5) and classic era units, not seeing a problem either:

Spoiler :

Yes the AI expand. More than it used to probably. But it is on a scale similar to humans. Getting 4 cities on turn 60 is not difficult and Liberty can even go further.

And the windows version has even lessened the penalty for expanding like crazy !

Pedro (yes Pedro) had amassed an army of of 9 pikes and 8 Xbs and 4 swords by T60 in my last retired game.the same game where china seemed unwilling to to either expand or churn out any units.

On Immortal ? That sounds more like Deity which yes I have admitted multiple times is probably too hard and dicey. Or it may be Quick speed ?

All AIs seems to love to conquer CS early now too.It has become common place since i updated to see 1/3-1/2 of the city states on the map conquered by T100

Yes I know, I must try to make "peaceful AIs" less likely to eat as many. Will still keep warmongers on CS conquest. I have also bumped CS unit numbers to make them more likely to fend off an attack (next version).

 

[Acken]

Good news for next version:
The AI will no longer put worthless stuff in deals when you ask it to balance a deal ! Yay ! (windows)

Also a likely change to the Immortal+ AI is that it will no longer start with free pottery free wheel (deity), and free archery. Only free Mining and free AH. But I need to test if it works because with less stuff available there is a chance the AI will start settlers even sooner.

 

[Phukit]

Good news for next version:
The AI will no longer put worthless stuff in deals when you ask it to balance a deal ! Yay ! (windows)

Also a likely change to the Immortal+ AI is that it will no longer start with free pottery free wheel (deity), and free archery. Only free Mining and free AH. But I need to test if it works because with less stuff available there is a chance the AI will start settlers even sooner.

ya 5 starting techs plus their bonuses is a bit much.

i dont mind them having free techs to start but all the key techs that make beelining the military techs is a bit much.

i would much rather see them start with things like sailing pottery writing. especially since our catch up period has essentially been pushed back an entire era

 

[Phukit]

as far as my complaint about the map generator i dont know.

but on continents I am either completely isolated or i am on the same landmass as 5-6 other civs and quite often the smaller landmass.

i had Ghandi on my continent in my t298 dipV but again all the other civs were on the same landmass and the bulk of the CS had their own continent.

I cant explain why this is so but it is,in the base game this happens occasionally but with this mod for some reason it always seems unbalanced one way or the other.

granted i have only started about 15 games so its a small sample size

 

[beetle]

It is the case now. These tree are well balanced between themselves and compete with each others BECAUSE Rationalism is not among them.
Slinging into Renaissance to spend as little time as possible in the other trees is one of the fundamental technique of having a strong game in Civ5. Tradition 5, Extra 2/3, Rationalism.

I do not disagree with any of this. I will note that rushing Rationalism is not as important as rushing Ideologies.

Making Rationalism compete with Ideology is the point of that change.

Okay, but that puts this mod at odds with the whole Ideology emphasis of BNW. Have you considered using the GnK approach instead? One can imagine the developers embracing all your changes -- except for making Rationalism compete with Ideology.

If you really want Rationalism to be competitive with Ideologies, it needs to buffed quite a bit more IMHO. Make it more of post-Ideology tree. Lock Hubble behind it. Then it would be interesting and relevant to SV!

You now have a hard choice to make.

Not hard, because Rationalism is so underpowered compared to Level 2 and 3 tenets. You could just remove it altogether at this point for about 75% of the effect. I don't think it is sensible to start working Rationalism until at least 6 tenets are in place -- even for SV.

Early in development because of #1, rationalism was getting nerfed left and right, making the bonus weaker or a lot harder to acquire.

That sounds better to me. What is your response to my observation that historical birth of Rationalism and the wonder are associated with the Renaissance era?

I am willing to see if Rationalism doesn't compete with an Ideology though. If it's too weak for someone wanting a boost in science. If your game doesn't care as much for science and you don't pick it, then it is fine, that's the choice.

I would like to read more about people trying for SV. One gets more policies, so I think Rationalism can work late. I think it is the historical role that bother me the most. If I view it as an Atomic Age tree to eventually unlock XCOM and GDR it fits better.

 

[Acken]

I think you guys really underestimate it or don't realize how game breaking it is in the base game. Sovereignty will give you 3H 3G in your cities, making it pretty similar to FiveYear plan. Secularism is still 1 science per specialist, better than 1 food per specialist if you ask me (for example).
Then you have the 17% + trade post boost and the global 10% bonus. While these two are not as good as worker faculties I'm not sure I'd pick food or even weaker bonuses over it.
RAs are WAAY better than they used to because you're now in a real science competition with the AI. Hell with a powerful friend you're likely the weaker partner now and 50% boost plus 50% if you get the PT is worth quite a handful of turns ! How many ideology tenets can give you that many free turns of science or a free technology or comparable % science increase ?

Ideology main strengths is the happiness so you'll have to juggle between science or happiness. The tier 3 bonuses are strong but a lot of them can be delayed. This is where investing in culture is now worth it, higher great works, higher yields, lower costs, there is room to finish both rationalism and get a tier 3 ideology. I simply cannot believe someone would always pick Ideology 12 over Ideology 6 + Rationalism 6.

I will most likely pick it in the map consentient posted and I'm going for a culture victory.

Historical accuracy take a backseat in my decisions but for the sake of the discussion I'd argue that the classical era or the golden age of the muslim world were probably as scientificly enlightened as the early european renaissance which still gave us the persecution of galileo.
There is simply a huge difference between the renaissance of the 15th century, after the plague and the 100 years war and the end of it by 18th century and the american/french revolutions. A lot of stuff happened in the 300 years period labelled "renaissance". But it is true that scientific progress has picked up in the second part of it. But the game does not make this slow transition from an era to the next. You can go from classical to renaissance in 50 turns.

 

[Grendeldef]

On Immortal ? That sounds more like Deity which yes I have admitted multiple times is probably too hard and dicey.

Nononono - it's not too hard as I assume one purpose of the mod was to make Deity hard(er) though I gladly admit that it's vulnerable to bad RNG but that's fixable with some minor tuning. Keeping it as hard as it is now even with somewhat on/off early turns is still better than gimping it down to normal Deity with some slightly altered details.

 

[Acken]

I still think something should be done for the early game which a bit of a "lets pray I dont die" which is what I meant by dicey.

 

[Phukit]

Started a game as england.continents Lv6
Map made more sense this time with me etheopia and rome on a smaller landmass.


true to form however rome had 3 cities up T28.

T45 ceasar was on the move killing city states with an army of 7 legions a few pikes 6 Balistas and 5 CBs

by T55 he has conquered the two CS on my doorstep then denounced me,he went hostile a few turns later.

I only had room for 1 expo and my cities had little growth until cargo ships, T91 NC machinery i think T113

once longbows were up ceasar was chewed up pretty fast by me and little help from etheopia.

i am surprised he never DoW me early,he was at my front door with and army i had no chance of beating, ( i think by T55 i had 3 spearmen and 4 CBs)

I have made it out of the early game a few times in this mod but more often than not it seems due not to astute play on my part but the AI simply choosing not to wipe me out despite being able to do so with relative ease at that point.

I really enjoy the mod on a whole but it does seem getting out of the early game and/or not being crippled is more a matter of luck than skill on my part.

I dont consider myself a great player but i can beat Vanilla immortal regularly and have a few deity wins

 

[IronfighterXXX]

Also note that this mod also purposely make conquest a mechanic for all victories, like culture being a part of domination. And that if someone is interested in playing optimally then sitting around on 4 cities is not optimal. This is by design. However is things are simply too hard it's a problem I'll look into. But it is my deep belief that people have been spoiled by a game being too easy in BNW so if the last 2 are really hard I don't have a problem with it... Civ4 immortal and deity were a tough challenge. Ideally I want players to just find the level they are comfortable with and have the most fun with and also give back the feeling of having to learn new difficulties and be happy with a win rather than "bah just another deity win who cares" .

Yes, conquests as almost necessary part of victory seems good and realistic. It's pretty dumb that in BNW your victorious civ sits in spaceships era with few archers and never was in any war.

I don't have any problem with increased difficulty even to a point that some games (bad land, difficult neighbours,etc) on highest difficulties will be impossible to win. It will be really refreshing feeling that you can actually lose
It amaze me that people wants to play on highest difficulty and have 'easy' game - that's probably why games becoming easier and easier.

That said I haven't played any game with mod yet, but if all what people say is true looks really good. Shame that game is already five years old, so probably not many people will use it.

Personally I don't have time and mood to play many games now, so I will wait to your official challenge which I saw in other thread you gonna post (and probably after current GOTM).

 

[consentient]

Nononono - it's not too hard as I assume one purpose of the mod was to make Deity hard(er)

I will wait to your official challenge which I saw in other thread you gonna post (and probably after current GOTM).

Why does a challenge need to be official?

Let me throw the gauntlet for the two of you. DomV on Pangaea on Level 8 (ModAcken Deity) with all warmonger opponents, pre-T200, no cooked maps, no top tier human civ.

Like the one attached, for example.

If that can be done, it might help provide a benchmark. You two would be among my first five choices for such a challenge, along with Acken, blatc and bimblecrumbs.

 

[Acken]

I'd appreciate if people could wait a bit before sharing maps. Especially because of the different versions.

Ideally, no offence but I'd preffer (using windows) people spending time on the main mod than on the incomplete Mac version...

T45 ceasar was on the move killing city states with an army of 7 legions a few pikes 6 Balistas and 5 CBs
by T55 he has conquered the two CS on my doorstep then denounced me,he went hostile a few turns later.
I only had room for 1 expo and my cities had little growth until cargo ships, T91 NC machinery i think T113
once longbows were up ceasar was chewed up pretty fast by me and little help from etheopia.
i am surprised he never DoW me early,he was at my front door with and army i had no chance of beating, ( i think by T55 i had 3 spearmen and 4 CBs)

Rome can be out of control I know. It's one of the few civs the AI can win domination with right now. But civ specific problem will have to wait a bit. I also think you play on quick right ? Quick is always a bit harder than standard.

 

[IronfighterXXX]

Let me throw the gauntlet for the two of you. DomV on Pangaea on Level 8 (ModAcken Deity) with all warmonger opponents, pre-T200, no cooked maps, no top tier human civ.

I'm not gonna try, but I think ideally on highest difficulty with average map and civ DomV should be possible with OP late game units only
(what doesn't mean you can't take few capitals before), so no sub 200t victory - what also means risk of losing to eg SV by AI.

 

[Acken]

It will take more time before maps than I expected though. I want to do it for v3 which will see the following changes:
-Natural wonders (mostly making the crappy ones interesting)
-World wonders
-Buildings
-Technologies (minor adjustments, removing a few Prereqs)
-AI flavors for Techs, Wonders and Buildings (long and boring task)

I will push an experimental version soon for some of these. You can also suggest changes that you think would be worth doing

Also the first map probably won't be on Deity. But if you wish to test Deity I can make a map for you

 

[Phukit]

Rome can be out of control I know. It's one of the few civs the AI can win domination with right now. But civ specific problem will have to wait a bit. I also think you play on quick right ? Quick is always a bit harder than standard.

I play standard usually pangea or continents sometime random.

It hasnt just been a rome issue for me tbh.

when i see civs like brazil doing the same thing its frightening though the monger civs are still more prone to this than others.

The Shoshone also seem to dominate pretty hard putting their head start to good use.they often clear their continent in my games

 

[consentient]

@Acken: OK I won't share any more maps. I had wrongly assumed that you didn't mind, since you played the last one and finished it

 

[Grendeldef]

I tried that Consentient's map and yeah, I haven't been as busy in ages.

Spoiler :

Settled on site, double Scout Liberty start. Stole a worker from Suleiman T8, Monte denounced me T10, Shaka & Oda DoWed T18 so a lively start. Teching straight to Bronze Working & building only Spears.
2nd city near Lake Victoria and more Spears. 3rd city ~T40 to South near Suleiman so obviously he DoWed as well. White peace with Shaka & soon after with Oda, too.
CBs on line & Shaka DoWes again and brings troops, too - Mohawks prove themselves invaluable but happiness & cash are issues, nothing much to sell while being friends with Washy & Wu. T65 Poca appears on capital's border but turns away after denouncement but returning the favour meanwhile I'm trying to catch Istanbul, 2nd expo was an easy snatch.
Somehow I managed Pyramids as I needed workers, badly. Monte offers 2nd denouncement & Oda turns hostile.
Planted GP instead of taking crappy 4th religion, Liberty GS planted as well and NC T84. T92 CS & Shaka keeps on attacking - Impis came T72 and T84 Trebuchets but he has also taken 3 cities from Oda.
Most of my surplus gold has been going to Monte to pay his wars.
I'm teching towards Machinery ~T110 but I'm not sure what to do with them. Taking few cities from Shaka would be nice but that takes the troops far away from home and Monte and/or Poca will attack soon enough.

Haven't done a single CS quests nevermind barb camps and barely found my neighbours before Scouts were killed on duty.

For sure, a different type of game.