'Ban Luxury' resolution improvement suggestion

[Edaka]

Hello guys! So, an AI proposed to ban a certain luxury the other day and I thought 'Yeah, that would cripple my rival, why not?' The proposal got passed, but then I noticed a peculiarity: my cities would still demand the banned resource as if they haven't heard the news. Real bummer.

In my opinion, your cities shouldn't demand banned resources. Gameplay wise that's counter-intuitive, not really beginner friendly and leaves a bad taste in the mouth if you accidentally screw yourself over.

If, on the other hand, the cities demanding a certain resource would start demanding a different one as soon as it got banned, that would also act as a buff to the resolution that's currently perceived as weak. For example, sometimes your cities will ask for a resource that's exceptionally hard to get, so being able to exclude such resources from the pool would be a nice thing to have.

So what do you think? Yea or Nay?

 

[ridjack]

It seems realistic enough that I'm generally okay with it being that way.

That being said, I'm going to be using that "Change VP Options" mod to disable the Ban Luxury proposal entirely going forward. The AI chooses it way too much when better options exist, and it's annoying to have those demands when the world has chosen to ban seven different luxuries to no tangible effect.

 

[ryanmusante]

To peace of mind

DELETE FROM Resolutions WHERE Type = 'RESOLUTION_BAN_LUXURY_HAPPINESS';

 

[Omen of Peace]

I like OP's suggestion; I've thought it strange too in the past when this happened.

 

[tommytoxen]

i actually dont mind the banned luxury mechanic. just adds to the fun.

and it does say "things that are considered endangered", so for roleplay reasons it makes sense. like if the world thinks crabs are endangered.

you can always just unban it.

 

[ridjack]

i actually dont mind the banned luxury mechanic. just adds to the fun.

and it does say "things that are considered endangered", so for roleplay reasons it makes sense. like if the world thinks crabs are endangered.

you can always just unban it.

Sure, but it's a complete waste of your proposal. For the most part, banning luxuries has next to no impact on the game. Exceptions exist, to be sure, but most of the time it's going to be mildly annoying at worst.

The real problem, though, is that the AI picks it constantly and with absolutely no actual goal. None I've ever been able to make out, anyway.

 

[tommytoxen]

Sure, but it's a complete waste of your proposal. For the most part, banning luxuries has next to no impact on the game. Exceptions exist, to be sure, but most of the time it's going to be mildly annoying at worst.

The real problem, though, is that the AI picks it constantly and with absolutely no actual goal. None I've ever been able to make out, anyway.

if you take notice carefully, you'll notice they ban luxuries that people have a monopoly over, or of civs they really want to be a thorn in their side

in my game russia has an 80% monopoly on jade. and every few congress sessions the celts keep proposing to ban jade. celts and russia are enemies

when you see luxuries being banned look at who's proposing it then look who has a monopoly and would lose out, you'll notice there is often reasons behind the madness

 

[ridjack]

Do you lose monopoly bonuses when a luxury is banned? I guess that would make sense, but I've never had occasion to notice.

 

[Stalker0]

Do you lose monopoly bonuses when a luxury is banned? I guess that would make sense, but I've never had occasion to notice.

Correct, that’s the real power of the ban

 

[ridjack]

Correct, that’s the real power of the ban

Curious that I've never felt it used against me, then.

 

[Edaka]

Correct, that’s the real power of the ban

To clarify just in case, I am aware of this effect as well. In my eyes it is actually at least on par with, say, Open Doors as far as weakening your rivals goes. I just find the side effect of some cities still demanding a banned resource inconsistent.

Yes, strategically targeting a certain rival with a certain luxury monopoly to disable it via the World Congress is fun. On the other hand, inadvertently disabling the WLTKD mechanic for some cities for potentially a very long time isn't fun.

• It's hard to plan for, especially the more cities you have;
• it's luck dependent when it comes down to what resources cities choose to demand;
• it affects the AI as well and I'm not sure if it's equipped to deal with it optimally;
• and finally, in my opinion, it's not a rewarding gameplay mechanic. For example, your capital with a Circus Maximus is demanding a banned resource, but you were the one who pushed to ban it in the first place because it's your aggressive neighbor's monopoly. The fact that you can't control what your capital asks for is what makes this sort of a double edged sword an unrewarding mechanic, even if it does make sense thematically.

 

[saamohod]

In my opinion, your cities shouldn't demand banned resources.

I look at it from a different angle. A realistic angle if you wish.
There are lots of prohibited or banned things in real life that people still desire. By banning gambling or ivory one doesn't magically eliminate the demand for it.
In game it's your duty as a ruler either to revoke the ban by putting your diplomatic effort, or waiting for someone to do it for you, or tough luck.
On the other hand, having cities waiting for a luxury to get unbanned may last the whole game and the cities may never experience another WLTKD till the end.

 

[azum4roll]

In that case I just pop a great merchant to reset all demands.

 

[4CV]

Yes, strategically targeting a certain rival with a certain luxury monopoly to disable it via the World Congress is fun. On the other hand, inadvertently disabling the WLTKD mechanic for some cities for potentially a very long time isn't fun.
...

So you better think twice, before you assist banning luxuries... that's o.k.

 

[Recursive]

Just as a note, the AI's valuation of Ban Luxury proposals was lowered in the latest beta, so they should be less likely to propose them.

 

[Recursive]

Hello guys! So, an AI proposed to ban a certain luxury the other day and I thought 'Yeah, that would cripple my rival, why not?' The proposal got passed, but then I noticed a peculiarity: my cities would still demand the banned resource as if they haven't heard the news. Real bummer.

In my opinion, your cities shouldn't demand banned resources. Gameplay wise that's counter-intuitive, not really beginner friendly and leaves a bad taste in the mouth if you accidentally screw yourself over.

If, on the other hand, the cities demanding a certain resource would start demanding a different one as soon as it got banned, that would also act as a buff to the resolution that's currently perceived as weak. For example, sometimes your cities will ask for a resource that's exceptionally hard to get, so being able to exclude such resources from the pool would be a nice thing to have.

So what do you think? Yea or Nay?

And as of the next version, cities should no longer demand banned luxuries. https://github.com/LoneGazebo/Community-Patch-DLL/issues/5727

 

[Edaka]

And as of the next version, cities should no longer demand banned luxuries. https://github.com/LoneGazebo/Community-Patch-DLL/issues/5727

Oh hell yeah! Thanks for reporting to Github, I haven't thought of that myself.