Kel A
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2015
- Messages
- 11
That's fair. What about the Slater Mill then? That's a bit earlier, but it seems just as appropriate and not too strong of a wonder.
Changelog for upcoming version
- Thread starter Gazebo
- Start date
-
- Tags
- upcoming vox populi
My thoughts:
- Tradition - ok (but I would remove the free Monastery)
- Progress - I don't think blocking the free Great Prophet from Hagia Sophia into a policy tree (that isn't piety) is a good idea; what about Notre-Dame with a bonus like -5~10% to all needs in cities?
- Authority - so ok
- Piety - ok, Cistine Chapel is a good idea too
- Statecraft - ok, but what about Summer Palace? (just put it a bit later on the tree)
- Aesthetics - ok (finally!)
- Imperialism - ok, I agree that GMerchant points is strange
- Rationalism - ok, isn't Bletchley too late?
- Industry - pls no, probably Eiffel Tower is a better call (with some matching bonus)
Edit: or Slater Mill for Industry (as Kel A said)
Too early - the entire point of slater mill is to get you an early free factory. Locking it behind industry removes that value.
G
I find it extremely weird to have the renaissance era policy-tree wonders unlock later than the ideology wonders. Have you truly slowed SoPols down as much as you make it sound, then I believe you've severely overdone it.
Txurce
Deity
He said it's probably around 15%. Hard to call that severely overdone.
Last edited:
JungleBucks
Warlord
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2015
- Messages
- 187
That does make me a bit concerned that I will have to choose between completing my final branches of social policies vs ideological tenets. On the one hand, ideological tenets are stronger, but on the other hand, I don't want to just leave a social policy tree unfinished because it's taking too long to complete and the ideologies are already available.
Maybe Gazebo will do something with era based policy cost or something, but the fact that Imperialism's and Rationalism's finisher is an entire era past the start of Ideologies is a touch concerning. I'm sure G will think of something though.
Last edited:
Enrico Swagolo
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2013
- Messages
- 2,387
Well, it was already very slow to begin with, even arguably too slow. Sometimes a straw may break a camel's back, and 15% is no straw. 4 to 5 change should make it more of a 25% increase though as 1 is 25% of 4, and if you add to that the fact every city now increases policy and tech costs way more, 30% slow down is probably more likely. Every city now increases tech/culture costs by 2-3% more each. Add the higher costs to that and for wide empires 30% should be an understatement.
Slowing down something that's probably too slow to begin with makes no sense as a way to remove snowballs and/or slightly de-power early buff civs when something like adding +2 Culture to Palace and slightly increasing policy costs would've done the same thing without disrupting the balance and making it so ren trees unlock later wonders than ideologies which really is strange.
ElliotS
Warmonger
I'm willing to give it a try, but my assumption would have been to make the first trees take longer to complete and later trees faster too.
Enrico Swagolo
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2013
- Messages
- 2,387
I'm going to give it a try too though that'll be hard with how many games I've purchased lately, but the policies go so slow already that I find it extremely unlikely to enjoy the change. I'd rather see the opposite turn taken to be honest, and judging from this thread and some others I probably am not the only one. I mean, it's already sluggish on civs without any innate culture bonuses if you don't get Inspiration or something similar, it's going to take millenia to get social policies as those. Especially if those civs are also those who enjoy being wide - they'll be severely punished as the changes are going to be very hurting to both their problems. The fact that it was stated wonders for first three trees must be in medieval as otherwise they're going to be too early to build is a dead giveaway something is seriously wrong. It's obviously ithose civs with the early culture bonuses who got to them first, and they got there in medieval. If we logically extend that train of thought to piety/state/aesthetics and imperialism/industry/rationalism and the wonders actually are there to be in the eras they'll be available on average, that's going to be slowed down to a crawl, with the second tier ones finishing in industrial/late renaissance and the last tier in modern/information era. And that's probably for those with cultural bonuses, too.
If what's implied is the impact of 15%, then even 0.15% increase would probably be too much. Shortening the gap between guys with early culture and those without by making everyone a slug doesn't seem like the right solution when something like "civs severely behind in culture get reduced policy cost, up to 25% total" could be done, that and increasing the base yields of the palace with a small policy cost increase of the first few.
When did the mod change wonders prerequisite to be the tree completition rather than just the opener? I would give a read to the old discussion because thinking about it I like the vanilla version as well (or simply don't have any strong feeling for either), especially if that means that in the next patch we get to unlock wonders of the appropriate era and industrial ones don't come that much later than the ones unlocked by ideologies.
Some finishers are already quite strong, and where they're not the tree is receiving a buff, so having the wonder as cherry on top is not that necessary imo, especially if it's not that rapresentative anymore.
Some finishers are already quite strong, and where they're not the tree is receiving a buff, so having the wonder as cherry on top is not that necessary imo, especially if it's not that rapresentative anymore.
tu_79
Deity
Here's a crazy idea. Have some policies unlock wonders, instead of just finishing the tree.
Some of those wonders are not that worthy to be beelined and using second tier policies can speed up their production something between half the tree and the end of it.
Some of those wonders are not that worthy to be beelined and using second tier policies can speed up their production something between half the tree and the end of it.
All wonder-related decisions were made based on current unlock averages. Big Ben in the 1900s, Parthenon in 1200 AD, etc. It was anachronistic. Don't read into it.
It is a singular algorithm, I'm not going to hard code numbers. I hate hard-coded numbers.
Wonders are already delayed a bit - since we moved openers to finishers it makes much, much more sense for the finisher to unlock wonders ahead of you, not behind you. In general (based on current build) policy wonders are unlocking about two/three techs before the tech is researched for the wonder. So it is strategy now, not delayed reward.
Rubber-banding is bad.
This was done when we reworked how branches unlock - there needs to be incentive to finish the tree.
G
Enrico Swagolo
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2013
- Messages
- 2,387
That makes sense, unless it doesn't - which is why a beta would be needed to further our glorious research into the next step on the precipice of pies. and improve the galleas part
Done right it makes you go broom broom on mario kart with the big bullet shill
To assuage concerns, here's a log of policy selections by the AI. You can see the average lag-time between policies here. The number after Line x: ## is the turn.
Spoiler :
Similar threads
- Locked
