Artistry and Tradition are too stacked on each other.

[pineappledan]

Artistry and Tradition have too many of the same bonuses and focuses:
- both trees are the tallest option in their respective eras
- both trees specifically give bonuses to GP generation and to Golden ages

Tradition gives GAP on GP expend and Artistry gives gold on GP expend

Tradition gives +25%GP rate in the capital while Artistry’s opener gives +25%GP generation in All cities

Tradition’s finisher also has +25%GA length

so, there are a few points of glaring overlap, and in the case of Tradition it would take removing 2 weak bonuses to entirely remove the GA focus.

The triple overlap of tall GP and GA makes an overly-optimal path for certain civs which have any of those bonuses. The mutually reinforcing nature of these trees forces a civ like Brazil, who cares a lot about golden ages, but not so much about tall/GPs, to play as if he does, and ignore the parts of his kit that reward wide play. Likewise, a GP-focused civ like Arabia is induced to adopt Artistry to maximize their GP generation, even though they aren’t really geared towards caring about golden ages.

thoughts?

 

[rkkn]

agree that it's bad for playing towards several different things to all play more or less the same

a GP-focused civ like Arabia is induced to adopt Artistry to maximize their GP generation, even though they aren’t really geared towards caring about golden ages.

I don't know how you'd fix this, though. with a limited number of trees, there's always going to be stuff in it that you don't care about

 

[Legen]

The golden age bonuses on Tradition are not necessary for the tree to function, its focus is on the capital having early specialists already in Ancient Era. If anything, Tradition could give up the GA bonuses in favor for more early food, which I think is a bigger concern for its consistency.

Artistry isn't the only tree that gives GA bonuses, Fealty and Rationalism also provide extra yields during a GA. Unlike these two, Artistry gives GAP, and in large quantities. The mere fact that GAs happen way more frequently under artistry means a GA oriented civ won't find Fealty to be attractive enough, doubly so if the civ is a cultural one.

Artistry is considered a Great Person tree because it buffs generation of all GPs, while other trees buff only one; Statecraft gives +50% GGP to diplomats only, Industry gives +50% GGP to merchants, Rationalism gives +33% GPP to scientists, Imperialism gives +33% GPP to generals and admirals. To differentiate from Tradition, Artistry could be focused on specific specialists, namely writers, artists and musicians, just like the other trees do.

 

[Cebrudras]

Completely eliminating overlap seems too ambitious, I would rather just focus on the GA stuff. Your example of Arabia would still be 'forced' into Artistry anyway, since the non-GP parts of the tree also have great synergy with it.

The thread where this subject first came up also had a great suggestion for a replacement effect for Tradition: +1 city working range for the capital. Flashy, flavourful and will probably mostly be used to reach any great food tiles in the fourth ring, since most of the population should be doing specialist stuff anyway. The usual technical troubles caused by that effect are apparently solved by only giving it to capitals with specific policy paths.

 

[pineappledan]

Eliminating the GA bonuses from Tradition is the easiest part, yes. I also like @BaldSamson's idea of +1 tile work range in the capital, because it is the only imaginable place where a tile range modifier could work.

Here is what I propose:
Tradition
Splendor - Expending a Great Person grants 50 Culture (currently 50 Golden Age Points and Culture)
Finisher - Add +1 City working range. Remove +25% Golden Age length

Artistry
Opener - Add Earn Great Artists, Writers, and Musicians +25% faster. Remove +25% Great Person Rate in all Cities
Scaler - +2 Golden Age Points in all cities and -5% Golden Age Meter size. (ie. shrinks the number of GAP needed to trigger golden ages by 5% per policy. remove +1 in all cities)
National Treasure - Free Great Person of your choice. 33% of Happiness produced in each City is added to the City's Science per Turn. (used to be 50 gold for GP expend. happiness to science works the same as fealty's happiness to culture)

 

[Rekk]

I'm pretty against +1 tile work range; it's a performance hit (even if small) for a placebo.

 

[DeAnno]

I agree Tradition could use more (early) food for consistency. There are a lot of starts with 0 food luxes that I really fear going Tradition on right now.

Maybe on the not-very-splashable Engineer policy that almost always comes 3rd? It'd be nice if it was more often a harder choice between that and the Artist policy when playing full Tradition.

 

[Cebrudras]

I'm pretty against +1 tile work range; it's a performance hit (even if small) for a placebo.

It might be a placebo on some level, but it is fun and flashy. This is still a video-game and not some math exercise to optimize balance.
Like, my interaction with VP almost exclusively consists of playing a round Arabia once or twice a year and I am totally into this bonus. I look forward to spending way too much time on the city screen searching for ways to gain tiny advantages using it.

 

[Stalker0]

The triple overlap of tall GP and GA makes an overly-optimal path for certain civs which have any of those bonuses. The mutually reinforcing nature of these trees forces a civ like Brazil, who cares a lot about golden ages, but not so much about tall/GPs, to play as if he does, and ignore the parts of his kit that reward wide play. Likewise, a GP-focused civ like Arabia is induced to adopt Artistry to maximize their GP generation, even though they aren’t really geared towards caring about golden ages.

thoughts?

I don't think this is a problem exactly, or at least to the degree noted. I mean its fine for two trees to have overlap on bonuses, and then a civ that wants to optimize a specific bonus would pick both trees. That just how bonuses work.

I think the bigger factor is that tradition and artistry have so MANY overlaps, so that Tradition + Artistry seems like the default behavior. Its not a problem if brazil wants to go Tradition + Artistry, or Arabia wants to go Tradition + Artistry. Its more that everyone that goes tradition probably wants to go artistry....that's when you hit a problem.

 

[Legen]

Completely eliminating overlap seems too ambitious, I would rather just focus on the GA stuff. Your example of Arabia would still be 'forced' into Artistry anyway, since the non-GP parts of the tree also have great synergy with it.

It is simple, actually. Tradition has only 2 bonuses to GAs (Splendor, finisher), and Artistry has only 2 bonuses to GPs (opener and National Treasure). Changing these are enough to remove the GA+GP overlap.

Artistry having bonuses related to all GPs is why it overlaps with Tradition, just restricting it to specific ones is enough. Meanwhile, Tradition could forego the GAs for a better emphasis on its growth + early specialists theme.

 

[pineappledan]

I'm pretty against +1 tile work range; it's a performance hit (even if small) for a placebo.

In the context of suggesting that +1 work range replace 25% GA length (which rounds down to 2 more turns of GA on standard), we are talking marginal gimmicks, yes. However, for a small performance hit, I would much rather have a unique gimmick ability rather than a half-power version of an ability that is also available on a trait (Persia), a wonder (chichen Itza), and another policy (Universal Sufferage).

 

[Cebrudras]

Artistry also has stuff for WW and Archeology. Currently that is all more-or-less combined together into a coherent identity by it being the 'Historic Moment'-tree. If we restrict which GP are supported then that gets weirder. That isn't some huge issue, but it kinda bothers me.
Which Civs would even be no longer forced into Tradition-Artistry once we restrict the latter? Even if, like, Sweden and Babylon - I have no idea and am just making an example - are currently going into Artistry to boost their preferred GP, they are not really tradition Civs. Is there a Brazil equivalent for the Artistry change?

 

[pineappledan]

Is there a Brazil equivalent for the Artistry change?

Any civ that is focused on GEMs, or has bonuses towards them, but doesn’t particularly care about GWAMs.
- Babylon has bonuses towards GScientists. He can be played for a CV too, but this would loosen up his medieval tree choice, which is very optimally Artistry
- Venice has GMerchant bonuses, and can be played towards a CV, but has the flexibility to be Diplo or domination too
- not a base civ, but this very obviously frees up Cambodia, who are focused on GEngineers

As an aside, this would also allow us to tone down Artistry’s +50% towards GDiplomats, which feels like it’s only that high the first place because it would otherwise be swamped by artistry’s +25% rate boost to EVERYTHING. It also helps make the freedom and Order GP rate bonuses a little more unique

 

[Rekk]

Previously, you just advocated removing the Tradition Golden Age Length bonus with no replacement; have you changed your mind on that now?

 

[pineappledan]

Yeah, I don’t think the +1 working range is anything more than a gimmick, but it’s interesting, totally unique, and it would at least see some value in certain games, especially OCC

 

[azum4roll]

happiness to science works the same as fealty's happiness to culture

Could be new code, actually. Yield conversions are pretty hardcoded per yield type.

 

[pineappledan]

True. I thought that the science code had already been changed in light of the local happiness change, but apparently not

 

[Thibix Magnus]

does it mean no one goes from tradition to another tree than artistry at higher levels? trad-statecraft would seem ok for many civs, fealty I don't know.

also accessing 4th circle tiles would indeed be amazing to OCC, also to help reach monopoly before east india company.

 

[SpecifiedUsername]

does it mean no one goes from tradition to another tree than artistry at higher levels? trad-statecraft would seem ok for many civs, fealty I don't know.

I think tradition is nigh impossible to pull off on higher levels without an amazing start. Statecraft is just a no-go for tradition IMO, while fealty is very good for tradition with extra production, faith and science, exactly the things it needs desperately. For science victory tradition I would go always fealty, going artistry is too brittle, only for games that you are already safe or winning. I also select artistry after authority or progress with authority (and some fealty) mix sometimes but mostly with Rome.

I agree artistry seems too weak and too narrow in effects compared to statecraft or fealty.

 

[SpecifiedUsername]

Opener - Add Earn Great Artists, Writers, and Musicians +25% faster. Remove +25% Great Person Rate in all Cities
Scaler - +2 Golden Age Points in all cities and -5% Golden Age Meter size. (ie. shrinks the number of GAP needed to trigger golden ages by 5% per policy. remove +1 in all cities)
National Treasure - Free Great Person of your choice. 33% of Happiness produced in each City is added to the City's Science per Turn. (used to be 50 gold for GP expend. happiness to science works the same as fealty's happiness to culture)

All are bad ideas, that would make artistry much worse for both tradition and wide. What it needs is a more culture (guaranteed base culture, not more percentage from golden ages) to be more available to wide and boost tradition slightly. Artistry shines at free GP (useful for all), gold for GPs (for tradition), science per city (esp. for tradition as it has the least science in its tree), and especially +10% culture for golden ages (extra useful for all). Taking away +25% GPPs is extremely bad idea, it lies at the heart of the tree, especially for traditon GPP bonus stacking.
Another golden age modifier is not needed, authority has hero worship, tradition has wonders and golden age points for great works and theming bonuses.

I would give +10% production to golden ages along with culture and remove GA bonus for fealty. It was bugged and fealty is already too powerful and flexible.

Happiness from guilds and great works is the most unneeded policy both for tradition and wide. I would replace this policy with some science or science and gold % scaler for great works that would be great to all policies. It's artistry you don't go there to make the masses happy directly, but to advance culture and science and create golden ages (by making or conquering great works), while making some small profit from exhibiting it.

Next policy I would change if needed is heritage, GAPs for wonders and universities, it adds very little to the tree, is redundant in giving just more GAPs and is very focused on tradition.