City state interaction

[RichardB]

From my recent experience with VP, I just wanted to drop my opinion on some mechanics on the Forum. (playing immortal, epic gamepace)

The issues I see with the current state of the city state diplomacy overhaul:

• Completing city state quests is largely irrelevant for raising city state influence, which I suppose is by design and I think is completely fine - generally speaking. The problem I see is that quest rewards do not scale well at all as the game progresses. Take production or food bonuses for example. I don't know the traderoute curation on epic from the top of my head, but how is it worth considering to send a trade route if the reward is 12influence and 2 turns worth of the capital's food production? That way you will always go for trade routes based on gold,science and culture bonuses and the quest generated a non-choice (--> why have it?). The same holds true imo for almost all of the quests. While 8-12 experience for all units for capturing a city is good early into the game, why would a player bother to make a detour for another city or even consider declaring war on someone else for 10 experience if your core army is usually lvl 6++ by that time and units come out of production with 2-3 promotions already. I could continue like that to the point where, again, most of the city state quests are irrelevant non-choices and I don't even bother checking the new ones or going even slightly out of my way to complete one.
  
  
• Instead of raising influence with city states through quests (and or gold like in vanilla), VP introduces diplomatic units to do exactly that. The problem I have with that is the fact that later into the game AIs just go all-out on diplomatic units and have literally 1000s (thousands!) of influence with each and every city state in the game. This might be related to playing on immortal(?), but there should really be some mechanism to enable the player to stay in the race, e.g. less influence for subsquent diplomatic units or a cooldown or making quests relevant again in this regard. Even going full Statecraft does not really enable the player to compete with the AI for more than one or two city states without seriously damaging ones economy and risk losing the game for it. Together with the diplomatic penalty for raising city state influence this, again, makes city state interaction quite unappealing. Also since the bonuses you get are not super worth it. Hence, more often than not, I end up watching diplomatic units pile up everywhere on the map and just don't care.
  
  
• Somewhat related to the point above, Great Diplomats are supposed to have two functions, the embassy (strong thing, worth going for, all good) and raising influence with a CS while simultaneously lowering that of all other civs in the game. The issue is that a ~100 influence Great Diplomat creates an effective delta of 200 influence for its owner while a diplomatic unit at the same stage of the game generates what.. 50+ influence a pop? Meaning that 4 AI diplomatic units (effective build time = ?) just nullify the use of a great person. What this means is that it is imo not worth working great diplomat slots in favor of any other great person slot once all embassies are placed.

Cheers,
R.

 

[tu_79]

There are some mechanics against those thousands of influence.

For instance, just in the last release, influence decays stronger for higher influence levels.

Then, you can force decolonization to one player. You may need some aid in the world Congress, but if you succeed, that civ immediately lowers all city state influence to 50. Another enactment prevents a city state to be allied to anyone, that's easier to enact. You won't ally to that CS, but if AI invested dozens of diplomats in that state, that to its lose.

Worst case is that you didn't play diplomacy at all. In this case you may be strong enough to capture any state that may be bothering you. No city states, no votes. Follow the path of Mongolia.

Other way to have votes in the world Congress is to build your religion great building (by spreading or by conquering), and also building diplomatic wonders, completing Statecraft and picking diplomatic ideological tenets.

So, as you can see, there are several options to get rid of those astronomical influence levels or just ignore them.

 

[Blue Ghost]

I agree that quests should be looked at. Right now they're seldom worth considering in your plan, especially later in the game.

 

[tu_79]

I agree that quests should be looked at. Right now they're seldom worth considering in your plan, especially later in the game.

I don't see any issue. Early game you get good quests bonuses. Mid game you have some votes and just ok quests. Late game you have many votes and not that good quests.

It's the city state life cycle.

 

[RichardB]

I don't see any issue. Early game you get good quests bonuses. Mid game you have some votes and just ok quests. Late game you have many votes and not that good quests.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here. Votes? You mean Congress votes? How do those have anything remotely to do with city state quests who - in VP - have nothing to do with CS influence gain compared to diplomatic units. And how is that an argument "pro" CS quests being garbage? Quote: "It's the city state life cycle"(???) I mean.. you don't have to give contra just for the sake of it..

Also, in relation to your first post here:
I am completely aware of all the options you mentioned. You can - realistically in limited circumstances - use the decolonization (against one Civ!), which is imo no valid argument here, as are the other world congress options you mentioned. They have nothing to do with the broken diplomatic units spam and merely constitute a poor way to MAYBE fix it under some circumstances and often ensuing diplomatic penalties with several Civs. Please note that Civs allied with a considerable number of CSs also have considerably more votes in the world congress.
Also, the ability to conquer a CS is not a valid argument against the broken diplomatic units system - it is a way to deal with the broken system. I hope you can see the difference I am talking about.
Also, getting a religion or completing CS diplomacy unit relevant wonders are both not even remotely reliable options on immortal difficulty. Please consider that as well..
Also, ignore the issue.. I guess thats valid for some ppl..

Don't get me wrong Tu_79, but I don't see how any of the points you mentioned have anything to do with the issues I raised.

Cheers,
R.

 

[Galbias]

I don't pay too much attention to quests mid-late game but from what I remember the rewards are sometimes still worthwhile, I feel like I remember seeing a couple hundred hammers for a construction project. It's also kind of hard to get an idea of what would be balanced because afaik most quests last a long time after being issued and the rewards don't change.

The "capture a city" quests I usually just ignore, capturing a city is a huge deal. Some quests just aren't going to be practical, which is fine.

• Instead of raising influence with city states through quests (and or gold like in vanilla), VP introduces diplomatic units to do exactly that. The problem I have with that is the fact that later into the game AIs just go all-out on diplomatic units and have literally 1000s (thousands!) of influence with each and every city state in the game. This might be related to playing on immortal(?), but there should really be some mechanism to enable the player to stay in the race, e.g. less influence for subsquent diplomatic units or a cooldown or making quests relevant again in this regard. Even going full Statecraft does not really enable the player to compete with the AI for more than one or two city states without seriously damaging ones economy and risk losing the game for it. Together with the diplomatic penalty for raising city state influence this, again, makes city state interaction quite unappealing. Also since the bonuses you get are not super worth it. Hence, more often than not, I end up watching diplomatic units pile up everywhere on the map and just don't care.

Is this still happening consistently in the latest version? I think Gazebo said that he didn't see CS with thousands of influence anymore when testing the decay change and I didn't either in the one game I played since then.

If anything, I think the scaler influence boost from Statecraft might need a slight nerf, 50% is a big advantage for a Statecraft civ to have over one without, but that's an aside.

Somewhat related to the point above, Great Diplomats are supposed to have two functions, the embassy (strong thing, worth going for, all good) and raising influence with a CS while simultaneously lowering that of all other civs in the game. The issue is that a ~100 influence Great Diplomat creates an effective delta of 200 influence for its owner while a diplomatic unit at the same stage of the game generates what.. 50+ influence a pop? Meaning that 4 AI diplomatic units (effective build time = ?) just nullify the use of a great person. What this means is that it is imo not worth working great diplomat slots in favor of any other great person slot once all embassies are placed.

I made a topic in this subforum specifically about this about a week ago. I still think it's an issue, if not a terribly high priority one.

 

[tu_79]

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here. Votes? You mean Congress votes? How do those have anything remotely to do with city state quests who - in VP - have nothing to do with CS influence gain compared to diplomatic units. And how is that an argument "pro" CS quests being garbage? Quote: "It's the city state life cycle"(???) I mean.. you don't have to give contra just for the sake of it..

Also, in relation to your first post here:
I am completely aware of all the options you mentioned. You can - realistically in limited circumstances - use the decolonization (against one Civ!), which is imo no valid argument here, as are the other world congress options you mentioned. They have nothing to do with the broken diplomatic units spam and merely constitute a poor way to MAYBE fix it under some circumstances and often ensuing diplomatic penalties with several Civs. Please note that Civs allied with a considerable number of CSs also have considerably more votes in the world congress.
Also, the ability to conquer a CS is not a valid argument against the broken diplomatic units system - it is a way to deal with the broken system. I hope you can see the difference I am talking about.
Also, getting a religion or completing CS diplomacy unit relevant wonders are both not even remotely reliable options on immortal difficulty. Please consider that as well..
Also, ignore the issue.. I guess thats valid for some ppl..

Don't get me wrong Tu_79, but I don't see how any of the points you mentioned have anything to do with the issues I raised.

Cheers,
R.

Well, I didn't argue against what you said about Great Diplomats, though Gazebo said that Great Diplomats strength scales. Theorically you could make friends with any CS using one GD and perhaps a little help from some extra diplomats. I can't say, I never use my GD for alliances. If you are a tradition player, you will be working all specialists slots anyways.

Your issues: quests irrelevant late game, AI have crazy influence with some CS, Great Diplomats useless once you've placed all embassies.
My answer: it doesn't mind if quest are irrelevant late game because we're focusing in keeping allies late game for the votes (they matter early game, they are still there as flavour late game) and there are some mechanics to deal with crazy influence (may you like them or not).
Added: Great Diplomats might be useful if they scale properly (don't know myself).

 

[ashendashin]

Also, the ability to conquer a CS is not a valid argument against the broken diplomatic units system - it is a way to deal with the broken system. I hope you can see the difference I am talking about.
Also, getting a religion or completing CS diplomacy unit relevant wonders are both not even remotely reliable options on immortal difficulty. Please consider that as well..

Both of these are absolutely valid.
Don't like the leverage a civ has over you due to some minors? Get rid of them. That's the permanent option to remove influence.
There's several civs that easily get religions and you can still get lucky on Deity with faithless ones. If you can't properly prepare for wonder construction (which is always viable, provided the right position), go take it. Conquest is the most reliable option to make up for losses.

The system isn't broken. It favors production and gold, which is important for all civs. It's up to you to figure out how to keep up with the AI on high difficulties. I assure you that there have been no invalid arguments made so far. Ideologies make CSs extremely malleable and diplo units can easily be killed and blocked by borders.
I wouldn't be against messing with diplo unit influence to make actual alliances a bit more open to all civs, but there's plenty of valid options if you focus on a useful set of CSs, even on Deity.

 

[RichardB]

I love how you end your comment with "I wouldn't be against messing with the diplo unit influence [...]". Great stuff, thnx.
Like how you don't want to see my point - being that yes there are congress options and yes you can conquer a CS and yada yada, but you cannot play the diplomatic units game - and just keep repeating what I know and heard you say the first time.
This was meant as a comment for devs anyway, who may read it or not.. w/e..

This forum seems to be quite the toxic environment... enjoy your time here people. Glad I dropped by.

 

[ashendashin]

I love how you end your comment with "I wouldn't be against messing with the diplo unit influence [...]". Great stuff, thnx.
Like how you don't want to see my point - being that yes there are congress options and yes you can conquer a CS and yada yada, but you cannot play the diplomatic units game - and just keep repeating what I know and heard you say the first time.
This was meant as a comment for devs anyway, who may read it or not.. w/e..

This forum seems to be quite the toxic environment... enjoy your time here people. Glad I dropped by.

Diplo units are still needed in conjunction with everything above. They're are all that keeps alliances for any decent length of time before and after you deal with everything else.
But yeah sure we're totally the toxic ones here. I hope we gave you the worst possible impression in terms of free discussion, seeing as how you're so much more open to it.

 

[tu_79]

I love how you end your comment with "I wouldn't be against messing with the diplo unit influence [...]". Great stuff, thnx.
Like how you don't want to see my point - being that yes there are congress options and yes you can conquer a CS and yada yada, but you cannot play the diplomatic units game - and just keep repeating what I know and heard you say the first time.
This was meant as a comment for devs anyway, who may read it or not.. w/e..

This forum seems to be quite the toxic environment... enjoy your time here people. Glad I dropped by.

With all due respect, how long have you played Vox Populi? It's not perfect, we know, but you are pointing at something nobody else sees a problem.
You can play the diplomatic game. AI is so stubborn with some City States that it neglects some others completely. You can secure a couple or three CS for yourself just using diplomats. If you are not unlucky, another couple of CS might be easy to achieve if you focus on diplomacy. Get the hang in world congress and you'll be able to weaken your oponents, set one or two city states in your sphere of influence, so for every enactment you pass, your control increases. Forbidding alliances to some CS is quite powerful, and that teaches a lesson to those who focus on just 2 city states.

What you cannot do is playing tall and expect to rule the world congress just by sending diplomats (you lack raw production). Sending one diplomat every 15 turns doesn't work, either. You need to commit to diplomacy, and that means dropping some infrastructure and relying on the bonuses your CS are giving. That means building diplomatic buildings first, even if you think you'd do better building guilds. That means working all your civil specialists and keep producing diplomats while you have the paper. 1000 influence? That's too much, but at 500 influence I can turn the tides just before the next session with diplomats only (70-80 influence each one, that's just 7 diplomats, have two cities producing them and you get it in less than 5 turns, plus the journey). Unless, of course, you are playing at the highest difficulties, where players are expected to solve things by brute force.

Achieving the diplo victory is more tricky since you also need an ideology and the tech for the UN, but if you are successful with your alliances, chances are that they are provinding you with the necessary.

 

[ashendashin]

Unless, of course, you are playing at the highest difficulties, where players are expected to solve things by brute force.

Still possible to do everything peacefully (til everyone hates you), you just need some serious civ roids ( ) to pull off CS world dominance. Planning around quick late game policies can be extremely powerful in keeping everything in order.

 

[Gazebo]

Don't forget spies. A good coup can can really change things.

 

[Txurce]

Don't forget spies. A good coup can can really change things.

I tend to use spies for techs, to prevent tech stealing, or, occasionally to beef up one of my own CS. But every now and then a coup leaves me flabbergasted. Good reminder.

 

[tu_79]

flabbergasted

Congratulations! I've recently added this word to my dictionary, but couldn't find the occasion to use it.

 

[Chandler]

Didn't want to create a new thread for this. As a usual marathon player, I'm starting to feel guilty (after a few months ^^u) about how much advantage I can take of the issues with the rewards from CS in this game speed. Not really a top priority, I know. But I just wanted to address some problems.

Many rewards, such as flat , , , , , , , or experience, may need to be tripled, as they already seem to be, due to the increased costs of everything. However, we also have rewards of Great General and Great Admiral points tripled. And I think we shouldn't. The issue, of course, being that GG and GA requirements remain unchanged at any game speed.

I also have some more polemical ideas. About not tripling the influence reward. Or maybe even about not tripling anything at all. The thing is... At Standard speed, a reward of a mission in the Ancient Era is usually not enough to become an ally of a CS. Maybe not even to become friends. When you play in Marathon speed, however, it certainly is, unless you are surrounded by irrational CSs giving ridiculously low rewards. And then the snowball begins, much earlier, and much stronger. We already have a slowed pace of influence loss, and that should be enough for the increased time needed to accomplish some missions and producing diplomatic units.

About the flat rewards not being tripled... I'm less sure. Nevertheless, with three times more turns, CSs usually have time to ask for many more missions than in Standard speed, and you have more time to accomplish them. I think "three times more" Standard speed flat rewards should make up for the virtually less flat yields you'd be getting for each mission. The flat gifts for meeting them, though, should remain tripled, as you won't be able to do that more than once per game, as in Standard and actually any game speed.

Again, not a top priority, I know.

 

[lunker]

1. Most city state quests I find are fine... +15 exp for all units can level up a LOT of units, especially when not at war. +hammers is great for building wonders. I find +food to be helpful too. I also love the +Great General points one. The only problem I have with city state quests is that I play with 30 city states and it can get a little messy.

2. I have never encountered this situation on Emperor.

3. I only ever use Great Diplomats for votes. I do not find the -200 influence difference to be oppressive at all. Actually, I am glad that the AI doesn't make too many embassies.

Don't mean to be a nay-sayer but I don't feel any of these issues at all.

 

[Chandler]

1. Most city state quests I find are fine... +15 exp for all units can level up a LOT of units, especially when not at war. +hammers is great for building wonders. I find +food to be helpful too. I also love the +Great General points one. The only problem I have with city state quests is that I play with 30 city states and it can get a little messy.

2. I have never encountered this situation on Emperor.

3. I only ever use Great Diplomats for votes. I do not find the -200 influence difference to be oppressive at all. Actually, I am glad that the AI doesn't make too many embassies.

Don't mean to be a nay-sayer but I don't feel any of these issues at all.

Hum... So maybe I should have created a new thread after all? ^^u

 

[lunker]

Hum... So maybe I should have created a new thread after all? ^^u

Woah woops. Didn't look at any of the timestamps.

Still, I don't have too much issue with the CS rewards. It might be because I play with 30 city states and 15 civs, so there are usually more quests than I can bother to look at. Sometimes I will get great rewards when I randomly fulfill a quest. I suppose I don't notice the bad ones because the effect is so minor that I didn't notice that I completed a quest.

Overall I don't particularly feel strongly about city state quests and influence other than that it does not need a major overhaul like OP suggested months ago.

 

[Gidoza]

Regarding Great Diplomats and thousands of influence - it would be interesting to have a slightly different mechanic for the Great Diplomat that had some of the following possibilities.

1. First off, the Influence increase/decrease would stay no matter what.

2. We could add "your influence matches the points of the highest civ" to the effect - which means you ALWAYS become an ally when using a Great Diplomat - your lead would only be as much as the GD influence bonus after that, which isn't THAT much and can be overcome.

3. Other civs can lose a % of their influence in addition to the hard drop (so if 40%, then someone with 30 influence loses 12 + the hard drop, while someone with 1000 influence loses 400 + the hard drop). This might not insta-convert city-states, but it would manage the control of them much more significantly.

4. Maybe you could use the GD near a city of a particular Civilization instead - and the influence of that particular Civilization would be lowered with all city-states, or something. This would make the GD an effective means of dealing with Diplo leaders if everyone teams up on them.

5. The GD effect could simply drop everyone else to 50 influence, sort of like an "Open Doors" effect - thus, if you and someone else both use GD on the same city-state, then only the recently player would be at 50 influence + the GD's natural bonus.


Basically, I'm thinking that only a small tweak would be sufficient to make the GD influence bonus relevant at all stages of the game, but it needs to be one that has a percentile effect or a "readjustment" effect on the city-state.



As for quests...I just wish they were a bit more stable. Sometimes they are just so random that they're not worth pursuing. The randomization needs to be cut down some and it'll be good.