Council of elders

[ashendashin]

Does the cap need to be different on different map sizes? I think an issue currently is on big maps you can spread so much and get so much reward for it

Then maybe it should be harder to convert faithless cities via missionaries. Less cities to convert on smaller games so it shouldn't change too much there, but on bigger ones a faiths boundaries are pretty large, so the default catapults founders for quite a while.

Edit:
Fixed some wording.

 

[tu_79]

I'd prefer a map size correction factor, to be used with any mechanic that may need it.
MapSizeFactor = 1 for Standard Maps
MapSizeFactor = 0.5 for Huge Maps
MapSizeFactor = 2 for Tiny Maps.
So yields are double for tiny maps, and halved for huge. I can't remember how many map sizes there are, but considering there are only 5, each factor would be: 2^(-1), 2^(-0.5), 2^(0), 2^(0.5) and 2^(1).

 

[tu_79]

Math teacher here. "Logarithmic scale" would be a better term than exponential

I think the linear growth is too much because it means your founder is useless if you don't spread, but just way OP if you spread enough.

Have you noticed that logarithms are everywhere in physics and engineering, but it's almost impossible to find them in videogames? This is integers reign, no doubt.

 

[Moi Magnus]

Have you noticed that logarithms are everywhere in physics and engineering, but it's almost impossible to find them in videogames? This is integers reign, no doubt.

Well, a lot of things are logarithmic-like in games too. For example, level progression in rpg are frequently logarithmic (if XP need to level up is exponential). But is is true that the logarithm will only appear as a reverse exponential, and not as an integral or any direct way.
(Except if you take in account that data compression methods rely heavily on logarithm properties and logarithmic-like transformation, so logarithm are used a lot in video games, but never is the code written by developers itself)

 

[ElliotS]

So Council of Elders has been nerfed so hard I dont' even know why it's a belief. I thought it must be a typo that it gave 4 science and production PER CITY when every you fully convert a CITY for the first time, but it turns out it's literally worthless.

What the heck is the point of this belief? It doesn't do ANYTHING worthwhile whatsoever. I think many beliefs have hit a really good balance level, but this is an appauling overnerf.

My suggestion is toeit her buff the yields (potentially the same problem as before) or rework it into a per turn effect or something.

Because once again it's honestly beyond garbage right now.

 

[phantomaxl1207]

If it started at around x0 and gave another y per City, it could have a somewhat less likelihood of scaling out of control and give some Yields initially.

Cause 4 per new City sounds useless. 216 Science and Production accumulated for converting 10 Cities. You would need to convert a 25th City in the Industrial to get 400 Science.

 

[ElliotS]

If it started at around x0 and gave another y per City, it could have a somewhat less likelihood of scaling out of control and give some Yields initially.

Cause 4 per new City sounds useless. 216 Science and Production accumulated for converting 10 Cities. You would need to convert a 25th City in the Industrial to get 400 Science.

It doesn't scale with era either. A 25th city in industrial is 200 science and production. For a whole freaking city.

 

[Owlbebach]

I think all founders should scale with followers, not with number of cities. This way they will have the most impact around medeival/renaissance (because number of cities with you religion grows, and population in cities grows too) but remain usefull in later eras (number of cities does not grow, but number of followers does).

Yes CoE is awful

 

[tu_79]

I think all founders should scale with followers, not with number of cities. This way they will have the most impact around medeival/renaissance (because number of cities with you religion grows, and population in cities grows too) but remain usefull in later eras (number of cities does not grow, but number of followers does).

Yes CoE is awful

Number of cities fits some play styles. I have played with Coe and the only complain I have is that many times the conversion happens without control and the yields come when I wasn't expecting them, but the amount of yields is fine.

 

[ElliotS]

Number of cities fits some play styles. I have played with Coe and the only complain I have is that many times the conversion happens without control and the yields come when I wasn't expecting them, but the amount of yields is fine.

Are you kidding me? You get 8 production and science for converting your second city. 12 production and science for your third and so on. You're getting less than 1/10th of the yields of any other founder beliefs, in many cases less than 1/50th. This is the single worst belief in the game by a huge margin, not even close. Play with it and notice how ineffective it is compared to literally everything else.

The thing to note is that A) you'll need many missionaries to convert AI cities past the first few, as opposed to other founder beliefs that only require you to spread. B) That means once you run out of easy cities to convert you're done, whereas the others can just keep spamming.

Not only are the yields pathetic, but the method of getting them is far too difficult.

 

[Gazebo]

I'll look at it. I don't remember exactly why we beat it into the ground in the first place.

G

 

[ashendashin]

It was extremely easy to spam wonders with it. Still helps with wonders a ton on huge, but I can understand the sentiment of it being weak with less or tighter civs.

 

[CrazyG]

The only thing its sort of good for is timing two missionaries to convert a city on the same turn and grab a wonder that way. Its still pretty bad overall though, and late game it does nothing.

Lately the only two beliefs I've been taking were Apostolic tradition and Divine Inheritance. Basically I take Apostolic if I want to spread, Divine Inheritance if I don't. The city conquest one is pretty good too

 

[Owlbebach]

The only thing its sort of good for is timing two missionaries to convert a city on the same turn and grab a wonder that way. Its still pretty bad overall though, and late game it does nothing.

Lately the only two beliefs I've been taking were Apostolic tradition and Divine Inheritance. Basically I take Apostolic if I want to spread, Divine Inheritance if I don't. The city conquest one is pretty good too

Touristic one is pretty good too if you go faith-heavy tourism, but overall i was saying this for months, Founders are in a bad shape since they were changed to scale with cities/followers

 

[ElliotS]

The only thing its sort of good for is timing two missionaries to convert a city on the same turn and grab a wonder that way. Its still pretty bad overall though, and late game it does nothing.

Lately the only two beliefs I've been taking were Apostolic tradition and Divine Inheritance. Basically I take Apostolic if I want to spread, Divine Inheritance if I don't. The city conquest one is pretty good too

I mean even if you're converting a 15th and 16th city, that's 124 production under optimal circumstances. 2-4 turns of production under unrealistically optimal circumstances during medieval/renaissance.

I've found a lot of the founders useful, but that's a discussion for another thread.

 

[tu_79]

Are you kidding me?

No kidding. Most other founder beliefs requires spreading to foreign cities. This one works on your own cities too. When I've gone all aggressive, it seemed the safest belief, just converting cities as they were conquered. I might be wrong, though.
Perhaps it was the play style what was so rewarding that I didn't miss yields.

 

[Gazebo]

I'm going to raise it to 10 (from 4). I'm also going to raise Ceremonial Burial to 10 (from 5), Holy Law to 5 (from 3), and Transcendence to 30 (was 25). Trying to bring the scalers all in line with the potency of Apostolic.

G

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Holy Law seems OP to me and I go there every time it's available as that's a lot of yields it provides. Maybe 4 instead of 5? As it is I can't see much reason to go anything else, especially with how good the Science is, doubly so in comparison to nerfed Scientists.

 

[matlajs]

Offtopic question. That was an intentional nerf for Scientist/Writter yield action? Or is that a bug?

 

[Txurce]

Offtopic question. That was an intentional nerf for Scientist/Writter yield action? Or is that a bug?

Intentional, to reduce the value of bulbing vs. planting.