China

[BiteInTheMark]

Cities always starve on era change regardless of civ for me because of increased specialist cost.

They didn't starve for real. The UI isn't actualized after the tech is researched. In most cases it's actualized, if you hover with your mouse over the city name. Clicking end of turn do the same, the change to the citizen placement is done before the yields are calculated.

 

[Gazebo]

I don't understand why the bonuses 100% disappearing on era change now is a "bug fix" as if that was always intended. Wasn't the decaying by half the intended behavior? Even just looking in posts in this thread, it always seemed the bonuses declined on era change, and you even have a post discussing the exact formula for that decay rate. When exactly did the "intended behavior" change from decay to 100% erasure?

If anything, having cities that now suddenly start starving on era change is the real bug.

Originally no, but China was too strong on release so I changed it to 100%, but when doing so I messed up the change and it made the decline only about 25%.

 

[pineappledan]

Originally no, but China was too strong on release so I changed it to 100%, but when doing so I messed up the change and it made the decline only about 25%.

This was also in an age where specialists didn't scale food consumption on era though. The combination of the two effects could be really upsetting, though I understand the massive upheaval certainly has roleplaying value.

If you decide to keep it at 100% degradation, 2 observations:

• The UA text could definitely be altered to better communicate the bonus going down to 0 on era. 'Degrades' doesn't imply completely lost, and is a very imprecise/misleading way of communicating what actually will happen.
• Adding an extra trigger would might be fair. Maybe add world wonder construction as a / trigger?

 

[Gazebo]

This was also in an age where specialists didn't scale food consumption on era though. The combination of the two effects could be really upsetting, though I understand the massive upheaval certainly has roleplaying value.

If you decide to keep it at 100% degradation, 2 observations:

• The UA text could definitely be altered to better communicate the bonus going down to 0 on era. 'Degrades' doesn't imply completely lost, and is a very imprecise/misleading way of communicating what actually will happen.
• Adding an extra trigger would might be fair. Maybe add world wonder construction as a / trigger?

I’m open to 75% or whatever. It was at about 25% before.

G

 

[tu_79]

I don't mind losing 100% of the bonus accumulated in the era, but it needs to not be food. See? Extra food plus WLTKD leads to city growth very easily. Huge population that you need to deal with after the dynastic thing. Very thematic, but a PITA.
Maybe production? That would be the best starting wide play ever, though.

 

[Gazebo]

I don't mind losing 100% of the bonus accumulated in the era, but it needs to not be food. See? Extra food plus WLTKD leads to city growth very easily. Huge population that you need to deal with after the dynastic thing. Very thematic, but a PITA.
Maybe production? That would be the best starting wide play ever, though.

With 100%, we get a pretty solid model of the High Level Equilibrium Trap, though. The economic historian in me just got ever so slightly excited by that.

G

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

100% seems excessive to me too. They were top tier for sure, but not really out of that tier.

With 100%, we get a pretty solid model of the High Level Equilibrium Trap, though. The economic historian in me just got ever so slightly excited by that.

G

I didn't know you liked traps that much

 

[pineappledan]

If it was only degrading by 25% on era switch, maybe halving on era change is all that's needed, but we can start with increasing to 75% loss to start.

I like the idea of effectively pulling the rug out from under an economy too. I'd be interested in keeping the degradation high, 75-80% lost, but adding 1-2 more triggers. Maybe Heavy Tributes as an additional WLTED trigger, to reflect how China's Kowtow system conducted trade relations with client states, and so there's even more expansion/contraction with the era yields?

 

[civplayer33]

High Level Equilibrium Trap

At the same time, an intellectual paradigm shift from Taoism to Confucianism among the intelligentsia moved the focus of academic inquiry from natural science and mathematics, which were conceived of under Taoism as investigations into the mystical nature of the universe, to studies of social philosophy and morality under Confucianism. According to Elvin, this produced an intellectual climate that was not conducive to technical innovation.

Hah! Social scientists ruining yet another civilization

Ahem...sorry. Carry on

 

[Stalker0]

If it was 25% before, lets make it 50%. That's what a lot of thought it was, that fulfills the "small nerf" checkbox for me. This isn't a Denmark, just a slight tune should be good.

 

[pineappledan]

The biggest thing to commend about making it 50% is the UA description can be very specific and easy to understand:
"Bonus is halved on Era change."
"Bonus is quartered on Era change" doesn't actually mean reduced to 1/4. English doesn't actually have a word for that.

 

[Gazebo]

The biggest thing to commend about making it 50% is the UA description can be very specific and easy to understand:
"Bonus is halved on Era change."
"Bonus is quartered on Era change" doesn't actually mean reduced to 1/4. English doesn't actually have a word for that.

I think it's "scattered, covered, and chunked" on era change.

G

 

[BiteInTheMark]

Reducing it to 50% per era sounds fair.
If you go for 75-100% reduction per era, you could maybe increase the gained yields from 1 to 2 in industrial age? 1 more / in a city in atomic age doesnt sounds that great. But I may be wrong, I never played china.

2 funny but not quite serious suggestions would be:
- Gain yields dependant on the era. / in ancient till medieval, / from renaissance to modern, and / from atomic age on.
- The yields you gain are randomized, maybe with some weightening to deny too much yields of high value.

 

[infidel88]

"Bonus is quartered on Era change" doesn't actually mean reduced to 1/4. English doesn't actually have a word for that.

What is hard to understand in "25% of bonus stays on era change"? It's certainly more clear than "When you complete a favorable Peace Treaty, a Golden Age begins."

 

[tu_79]

Decay means it is lowered every passing age. Lost or kept means it happens just once.

It is not the same.

 

[Gazebo]

We can try 50%.

 

[tu_79]

And please, remove food.

 

[chicorbeef]

And please, remove food.

Just Culture would be boring. I like receiving Food and it makes sense with China's kit.

 

[tu_79]

Just Culture would be boring. I like receiving Food and it makes sense with China's kit.

But it causes major happiness issues. Population grows too much while the player thinks everything is fine. It is an unfun trap.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

But it causes major happiness issues. Population grows too much while the player thinks everything is fine. It is an unfun trap.

Hit the stop growth button?
I mean, why do we have the information, how much unhappiness will be generated with the next citizen?