C2C - Civics Discussion Thread

[Snofru1]

Inform me why it would be better (if only probable) to switch from Div Cult to just Prophets? Seems way worse, or am i missing something here, but WHY would i even use Prophets?? When you have DC above? Just wondering.

One free priest in each city is a great thing to have. Especially for small or new cities, so most of the time I would go for Prophets.

 

[strategyonly]

One free priest in each city is a great thing to have. Especially for small or new cities, so most of the time I would go for Prophets.

Yes but then you lose the which in the beginning is very important?? And to me Prophets are too vastly important and should not be?? IMPO

Which brings me to this area:

Can Spend to Finish Production:

Since early man doesnt really know what gold is (PreH times) and just thinks of it as a shining object and just gives it away, why not have an earlier one before Mercantile Civic?? Or again am i way off base here?? I believe after Ancient Era then things can change to appreciate more spending for etc, just MPO

 

[JosEPh_II]

Inform me why it would be better (if only probable) to switch from Div Cult to just Prophets? Seems way worse, or am i missing something here, but WHY would i even use Prophets?? When you have DC above? Just wondering.

Because somewhere in the tech tree shuffle the tech that gave prophets is now After the Tech that gives DC. Which was not the case before. You got Prophets "choice" before you got DC "choice". So you got a Civic tree shuffle as well.

I used to beeline to Prophets so I could Convert to my Best Religion. Now I beeline DC so I can Convert. Which in effect has neutered Prophets.

JosEPh

 

[strategyonly]

Because somewhere in the tech tree shuffle the tech that gave prophets is now After the Tech that gives DC. Which was not the case before. You got Prophets "choice" before you got DC "choice". So you got a Civic tree shuffle as well.

I used to beeline to Prophets so I could Convert to my Best Religion. Now I beeline DC so I can Convert. Which in effect has neutered Prophets.

JosEPh

thats what i mean, it essentially is really (useless) except for the right??

 

[BlueGenie]

No it has not neutered Prophets in any way. I still go for Prophets when it become available as for my play-style and preference I prefer using Prophets over DC.

Big points being:
-10% in every city. I play expansionisticly so that means a bunch less over time.
+1 per non-state religion. I like to mix and have several religions in my cities. With expanding way over City Limits I need those extra (yes Joe, some of us do like playing with City Limits on, options ya know *wink*).
-10% Great Person Growth vs +20% GP Growth. This is a must if going even a little on Specialist economy/strategy.
+1 Priest in every city. This is great for new cities, +1 helps a lot and the +1 is not to be frowned upon.

Cheers

 

[JosEPh_II]

@BG,
If you are "I play expansionisticly " and "yes Joe, some of us do like playing with City Limits on" aren't you at odds with yourself? Kind of like "I'm on a Diet to lose weight and become trim. So I eat chocolate cake for every meal!"

I bypass Prophets anymore. I used to use them all the time till State becomes available. Now I use DC, which before all the Civic and Tech tree shuffles I detested. Now I don't.

JosEPh

 

[Flinx]

What is the base for city limit scaling?

Reason for my question is the fact that i'm currently playing a giant map and checking the Civic info against the city limit numbers ingame always gives me the smaller number.

Anarchy in CivicInfo - 3 cities - ingame 2 cities
Chiefdom in CivicInfo - 7 cities - ingame 5 cities
Despotism in CivicInfo - 25 cities - ingame 21 cities
Republic in CivicInfo - 20 cities - ingame 17 cities

I have nothing against city limits and scaling them, but i think the base numbers in the civicInfo should be tied to normal map size. Playing bigger maps should give greater values, not a decrease.

 

[BlueGenie]

@BG,
If you are "I play expansionisticly " and "yes Joe, some of us do like playing with City Limits on" aren't you at odds with yourself? Kind of like "I'm on a Diet to lose weight and become trim. So I eat chocolate cake for every meal!"

I bypass Prophets anymore. I used to use them all the time till State becomes available. Now I use DC, which before all the Civic and Tech tree shuffles I detested. Now I don't.

JosEPh

*laugh* Not at all. City Limits helps curb my overly enthusiastic expansionism and gives me to balance while playing too. All to their own. *smile*

Cheers

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Before you had the choice of Div Cult or Prophets on the same tech. However +30% GP production is what does it for me. I play the game to get the max GP.

Edit Thinking on it there used to be real choices in the civics but now it is almost just a progression until you reach the one right for your game play style. The only choice is do I change now or latter. Divine Cult/Prophets was one of these choices. Patriarchy/Matriarchy was an even better one - I used to find myself switching between the two because sometimes I needed the production and sometimes the culture.

 

[Yudishtira]

Inform me why it would be better (if only probable) to switch from Div Cult to just Prophets? Seems way worse, or am i missing something here, but WHY would i even use Prophets?? When you have DC above? Just wondering.

Divine Cult has quite a lot of negative modifiers associated with it. Prophets doesn't do much, but at least it does very little that's negative. And it's cheap. Your upkeep for DC is only 3gpt, but it can (and probably soon will) be much higher.

 

[strategyonly]

Thinking on it there used to be real choices in the civics but now it is almost just a progression until you reach the one right for your game play style. The only choice is do I change now or latter. Divine Cult/Prophets was one of these choices. Patriarchy/Matriarchy was an even better one - I used to find myself switching between the two because sometimes I needed the production and sometimes the culture.

Yes, i agree,some of the Civics NEED to be BACK the way they used to be, that why he is currently going ONE by ONE and asking for ideas/suggestions, i hope.

 

[GT Ranma]

I would still like to see a more gradual change, I switched from one civic to a different one (I forget which, but I remember being like, 'WTH?') and went from getting ~20 gold per turn to over 300 gold per turn... It seems like a little to big of a jump to me, from just changing 1 civic...

 

[ls612]

Because somewhere in the tech tree shuffle the tech that gave prophets is now After the Tech that gives DC. Which was not the case before. You got Prophets "choice" before you got DC "choice". So you got a Civic tree shuffle as well.

I used to beeline to Prophets so I could Convert to my Best Religion. Now I beeline DC so I can Convert. Which in effect has neutered Prophets.

JosEPh

I still take Prophets instead of DC. The 50% increase in GPP is just too much to pass up for me, and even though it comes after DC I still go for it first.

 

[CIVPlayer8]

Okay, pardon my absence. Lets tackle these issues one at a time. I'll post the overview for the final Government civics tonight.
Right now, I'll post what I think should be given Fixed Borders:
-Closed Borders
-Secure Borders
-Federal
-Nationalist
-Totalitarianism
-Martial Law
-Intolerant

Do these sound good? Did I add too many, or forget one?

I would still like to see a more gradual change, I switched from one civic to a different one (I forget which, but I remember being like, 'WTH?') and went from getting ~20 gold per turn to over 300 gold per turn... It seems like a little to big of a jump to me, from just changing 1 civic...

That was probably you adopting Coinage, and leaving Metals. But I agree, it is too big of a change.

 

[JosEPh_II]

If memory serves me, back in vanilla BtS each Civic category and each Choice in a category was used to give a direction for game play. But thru RoM and all it's evolution to C2C Civics have become more diversified and in each Category it's not about choice of direction for play purposes but choice of progression in that category. The expanded Categories trying to implement the "direction for game play" instead of the choice in the category doing it now.

Can you see the difference? Is that a good goal? Or have we just over complicated the process? Sometimes I wonder. And I don't envy CIVPlayer8's task because of it. Choices are good, but when the choices confuse or distort the direction you would like to go aren't they then too much?

As for FB I still say it's supposed to be a Game Set up Option.

For the list presented:
Closed and Secure get a yes.
Federal gets a No.
Nationalist - yes.
Totalit - No
Martial Law - yes
Intolerant - No

JosEPh

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Having Fixed Borders on the border civics would at least make me look at those again. I don't think I have ever moved off the start one.

There was the problem that having FB on different civic categories meant that if you had FB in two and categories and changed one of the categories you lost FB altogether. Is that still the case?

 

[CIVPlayer8]

If memory serves me, back in vanilla BtS each Civic category and each Choice in a category was used to give a direction for game play. But thru RoM and all it's evolution to C2C Civics have become more diversified and in each Category it's not about choice of direction for play purposes but choice of progression in that category. The expanded Categories trying to implement the "direction for game play" instead of the choice in the category doing it now.

Can you see the difference? Is that a good goal? Or have we just over complicated the process? Sometimes I wonder. And I don't envy CIVPlayer8's task because of it. Choices are good, but when the choices confuse or distort the direction you would like to go aren't they then too much?

As for FB I still say it's supposed to be a Game Set up Option.

For the list presented:
Closed and Secure get a yes.
Federal gets a No.
Nationalist - yes.
Totalit - No
Martial Law - yes
Intolerant - No

JosEPh

I hear you Joseph. I hope I have been doing a pretty good job with the discussion thus far. On the one hand, civics need to have multiple attributes, and on the other hand, they need to point towards a specific playstyle. Hopefully in the coming weeks, you will se more of this. And thanks for your feedback on Fixed Borders.

Having Fixed Borders on the border civics would at least make me look at those again. I don't think I have ever moved off the start one.

There was the problem that having FB on different civic categories meant that if you had FB in two and categories and changed one of the categories you lost FB altogether. Is that still the case?

I don't know why you don't ever touch the Border Civics, Dancing Hoskuld. They do have plenty of benefits.

And I was never aware of this bug. It probably hasn't been fixed, though.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Having Fixed Borders on the border civics would at least make me look at those again. I don't think I have ever moved off the start one.

There was the problem that having FB on different civic categories meant that if you had FB in two and categories and changed one of the categories you lost FB altogether. Is that still the case?

If it is, let me know and I'll be able to easily fix that.

 

[CIVPlayer8]

Democracy:
-Pros: +20% , -25% Distance Maintenance, 2 Local/National Stability, -35% Local Revolution, -10% Revolution sentiment, +1 all cities, +1 Largest cities, +10% , +10%
-Cons: +50% Number of Cities Maintenance, +1 per military unit, +50% War , +10% from taxes

My Thoughts: Aside from reducing maintenance modifiers and War Anger, I will make this civic focus less on , and more on . I like this civics revolution tweaking. It should be a stable civic.

Totalitarianism:
-Pros: Fixed Borders, Unlimited Spies, +15% military production, Free Military Units per 15% of population, +1 per military unit, -40% War , -10% Revolution sentiment, +10% , +15% , +1 per specialist
-Cons: -15% , +20% Distance maintenance, +75% # of Cities, 3 local instability, 2 national instability, +3 all cities, -8% National Stability, +1 per 20% taxes, -20% , -10%

My Thoughts: I'm going to remove much of the extra "fluff" of this civic, (Excess Bonuses/Downsides) and focus on the main points. Espionage, decreased crime (maybe), and less instability. however, the + x % Instability on this civic will be increased, meaning if instability does happen in your civ, it will be much worse.

Technocracy:
-Pros: +1 / from Scientists and Engineers, 2 free Engineers/Scientists, +10% , +15
-Cons: -15% , +30% distance maintenance, + 40% Number of Cities maintenance, 1 National instability, 2 local instability, + 2 all, -10% local stability, -20% National stability, per 20% tax, -25%

My Thoughts: I think this civic has waay too many cons to it, for what its worth. Like Totalitarianism, I would cut out much of the extra fluff, and focus on science, for this civic.

Well, the government civics are just about wrapped up! Now I have too more questions for you guys: What Category shall we discuss next? And are there any extra government civics you'd like to see added?

 

[Hydromancerx]

Could you guys please finally make a "Meritocracy" civic to go at Meritocracy tech?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy