Discussion in 'Communitas Expansion Pack' started by Thalassicus, Jul 31, 2013.
I know that's how it works for writers, artists, and musicians...not sure about the others.
Merchants, scientists, and engineers appeared to all be on the same count. Prophets are their own thing. Artists/Musicians/Writers are all treated separately.
This is why the game needs a "great person" display at the top of the screen to show us how this works. The game's interface really does not present information well. I just assumed all the specialists work the same. This is very interesting information... how did you figure it out? Was it in a review? I skipped the reviews (spoilers!), and I don't think I saw any info about that ingame... even back when I had advisors on for a while. Is there some reference info I could read?
If Washington has 2 artist points and 2 writer points, and New York also has 2 of each type, will we get 4 great people at the same time? Or will we get 1 writer and 1 artist simultaneously? Or just one great person? How shared is it, and how separate? Where did you find your information? It's often hard to figure these things out by looking at game files.
I mainly want every building to have value. It doesn't have to be for border expansion. They could work in different ways. How about... the monument and theater are useful for borders, museum for tourism, and opera house for... something else... hmm...
You said the important part - games don't last 1000 turns.
I think visually:
This is how it worked in Gem. Costs "run away" from buildings. Each building contributes when its income is above the purple cost line, then falls behind.
In this example the monument gives 8-10 tiles before starting to fall back. We then build a theater, which gives another 8-10 tiles, and so on. The monument alone could not fill up 3 full rings of a city before the game ends. An opera house could do that easily.
However! This is not important for me. I like the other suggestions people have presented in this thread.
But this isn't true. Each building always contributes. The "falling behind" is only falling behind acquiring tiles *at a particular speed* (eg number of turns per tile acquired). So yes, you had to keep adding buildings to stop the speed of tile acquisition from slowing, but you did not have to keep adding buildings in order to keep acquiring any tiles at all.
I don't know why we would care about just when the game ends - which is of course also a moving target. It feels like games last longer in BNW than they did in G&K, but that may just be because I find the late game more interesting and so I'm more likely to play until I win rather than getting bored and quitting.
I don't think this works. They all provide culture, and all but the monument can provide tourism, with a great work. So they're all useful for borders and social policies, and all but the monument are useful for tourism with a great work.
I don't see why we need to have radically different roles for these buildings, just as we don't need to have radically different roles for colosseum/zoo/stadium or market/bank/stock exchange. The culture buildings are already more different than the other lines because of the different great work slots, and I think that probably justifies removing the building dependency.
Hard to know, because by design you can't easily get artist points in both Washington and New York, because mostly they only come from whichever city has the artist's guild.
I tend to lean with Ahriman's opinion here. But perhaps we could remove the prereqs from the buildings, and give them different scenarios in which they are useful:
- Monument: Flat culture for early border expansion.
- Theater: Culture per population, for tall cities.
- Opera House: Culture per trade route to / from city for trading center cities.
- Museum: I don't have a good idea for this one, but I think it would be neat if the theming bonus for these was randomized upon being built, to encourage more Great Works swapping.
I'm not sure if this fixes anything, but it would certainly make the buildings more interesting. Just a thought.
Right! This is different from the unmodded game, where expansion keeps going at the same pace without effort. This is mainly because of the tradition effect. It makes the cost curve almost flat, like building income.
BNW already gave the culture buildings radically different roles. I'm not proposing we change that. I didn't word things well, I guess.
It doesn't matter if the later culture buildings eventually contribute to border expansion in 1000 turns. The game doesn't last that long. Only the monument and theater help borders in a meaningful way with their current stats.
It does show up when you hover over the specialists and they were different numbers for each one as far as I could tell. They seemed to be generating at a consistent pace for each one even if I didn't focus on them (I had two artists and writers slots going, but not two musicians for a while as I needed the city to grow first) so I investigated to see why this was.
The count increases per specific one from what I could gather, so you could in theory get a couple different "artists" in one turn, but likely not the same type (artist/writer/musician) on the same turn (unless you use a faith buy too). I think the game does the GP generation per city in order (founding date I assume), so it would just mean one city would roll over and have a head start toward the next GP and another would complete if you had two cities generating writers somehow. Right now that isn't possible so I'm not very worried about it. (I don't think it should be possible either.) Generating a writer, an artist, and musician at the same time could be possible. I think. (I'm not 100% sure, but it definitely seemed to work that way). They are 100% definitely separated from the other GP generation however. This is probably the value of those WC resolutions on generating GPs. I don't think it is a city by city effect, but rather a per GP type effect (three independent cultural versus 3 combined economic).
I don't think separating the roles for the buildings is a good idea. All of them provide culture, some of them can provide tourism too, and museums and towers provide (potentially) more of it. The key point is their independent value at providing culture or tourism and then how this interacts with the costs of policies, tourism wins, and borders (in that order in my opinion).
Museums are fine, because of theme bonuses. Theaters are fine, with the GW slot and some extra flavor culture available. Monuments are fine. Towers are fine. The only one that would concern me is opera houses. They could get some extra culture somehow, through a small per pop or just raw, or we could have musicians generating extra culture and/or tourism on the GW slot. Which I think would work fine. At that point going over the tradition policy (moving it back would help) or the culture border costs to adjust their function to the roughly linear increases in culture for most cities is much easier.
Note: There's also a bug on artists culture (not writers/musicians), and they should probably all remain at 3 as they are rare.
I might have this wrong, but I thought all Great People were generated at a city by city basis. The place to look is in the city UI, on the right hand side, under "Great People." Each city has a different counter, I thought, both for the cultural great people, but scientists and engineers too. The only great people who are generated empire wide are prophets (from faith) and generals and admirals (from combat). All the rest come from particular cities--not empire wide.
Like I said, this is definitely how artists/writers/musicians work, but don't engineers and scientists work this way as well?
I think I always understood
My issue is that you were saying a particular building gives X tiles, and that to get more than X you needed the next building. But this isn't true. You can say it gives X tiles in Y turns. But these are not the same thing. You will always keep getting new tiles at any positive rate of culture income. I think it is ok that tile acquisition rate doesn't slow down much in the late game without extra buildings, I don't think that tiles should still be hard to get by the ~industrial/modern era. Most tiles should be occupied, and so where the borders are between civs will depend on city placement and the historic speed of tile acquisition.
In general I agree with mystikx's points here.
Great question, I always thought that they were on an empire basis, that was how they worked in vanilla Civ5 and G&K IIRC.
If they now work per city, then that would be an explanation. I had an early game with all three guild buildings in different cities. My thought was that it was different based on the type, cultural versus economic. And then it seemed distinguished on the cultural types, but not on the economic.
I'm not sure why that would be desirable however. It would seem better to have focused GP generation as a specialist city (especially good on coastal cities now since much coast is essentially useless population but fish and atolls add population) rather than have to swap around which city would be generating GPs because X city is at 900 and another is still at 300. The cost should be 900 for either.
Before BNW, earning a great person from specialists rose the cost of the next specialist GP of every type in every city. If we earned one GP at 100 cost, the next one might cost 200, then 300, and so on. It did not matter what type it is or where it came from. All specialists and cities shared this common cost.
It sounds like "scientific" and "cultural" great people might now have different cost pools. This would mean if one city's producing 2 towards scientists, while another's giving 2 for artists, both cities could simultaneously produce a great person at 100 cost, then both produce another at 200 cost.
It basically would double our rate of great people?
If this is how it works, the 1-per-nation limit on guild buildings isn't necessary. I'd be interested to see if they treat each cost pool individually per city for the new specialists... if so, that inconsistency would be very weird and confusing. Why treat them differently if you can only build the structure in one city? Conversely, why only build in one city if we don't treat them differently? Both situations don't make sense. This is very odd...
I don't understand why we should distinguish between "never helps" and "never helps before the game ends." If a building helps in 1000+ turns, but games last 400 turns, it's the same thing.
Alright, I just went in and checked, and scientists, engineers and merchants are all generated per city. I have two cities with wildly different great scientist counts. Who knew? I guess that's one really good argument for city specialization...
The limit on building them in one city is to prevent tourism from getting out of hand. I think that works for them. There are other ways to generate artists/writers/musicians (policies and wonders, plus gardens), and several ways to accelerate generating them.
If it's generated per city, that's a very strange way to design it though. I don't think it makes any sense to keep it that way as it reduces GP specialist as an effective city strategy versus microing back and forth (the only thing it does do is encourage putting the guilds in different cities, it also means the garden should maybe be removed from the freshwater requirement). I'd be fine with separated cultural lines and economic ones for starters. That makes at least some sense as there are various policies and diplomatic effects that can impact these distinctly.
The reason you can't have the cultural guilds in multiple cities is because of the effect the culture-producing specialists would have on the acquisitions of policies.
Essentially, you could ICS and have each policy come sooner than the last, especially with a certain combination of religious bonuses and social tenants. If I have six culture specialists in each city, and then great works that I'm consistently pulling in from archaeologists and great people, I could easily have each city producing something along the lines of fifty culture per turn.
And let's not forget that this would be another 12 beakers per turn for every Korean city over a certain population, not counting modifiers.
Was ICS a problem in Gem? Here's a comparison of the average culture each building created:
> Higher policy costs than BNW
BNW (in most cities)
2 Monument - useful for borders
5 Museum - useful for tourism
4 Tower - useful for ideology bonuses
2 Monument - useful for borders
4 Theater - useful for borders
1 Opera - useful for specialists
5 Museum - useful for tourism
5 Tower - useful for ideology bonuses
> remove tier requirements for opera, museum, and tower.
This keeps us close to BNW while giving purpose to the theater and opera house.
I'm not sure how the ramping up of costs works, but looking at some of my games, here's a few things I've noticed.
1) I've produced one great scientist naturally, in one of my cities, earlier in the game. Looking at two of my cities, one which produced a great scientist, one that didn't, their scientists cost the same at the moment, 500 GP points.
2) Engineers and Merchants also cost 500 at the moment.
3) Writers, artists and musicians are much cheaper--200 GP points, less than half the cost. If you want guilds buildable in every city, that price is going to have to go up.
Right. The guilds might make sense on the lines of the cathedrals in civ4, as something you have to have X of to get another one (say 4-5 for every one), but they're both an ICS and a tourism issue if you can spam them in every city. It should be sufficient to just provide more opportunities to get the great cultural people or to increase the rate of generation for them if they're falling behind other GP effects later in the game when you can get several scientist or engineer or merchant slots in a city.
Both theaters and opera houses have some value in vanilla BNW for great works. Museums are just better at it. I think this is fine. We don't need to make major changes there. Just small adjustments, like the resources for flavor or maybe culture at 2 or a minor bonus per pop and slightly higher policy and border popping costs, and slightly higher tourism generation from great works. Most of these buildings work fine as is and the question is over the third and least important mechanic for culture (border control), which has its own mechanic that can be adjusted instead to make more culture building a useful thing to do for that purpose as well as for the purpose of culture wins or new policies.
I don't think we want opera houses to generate specialists on this point and theaters are probably fine at 2+resources+slot if they are removed from the requirement to build monuments first.
Let's say they just split "scientific" GP costs from "cultural" GP costs. If this is true, and we built guilds in every city, most cities would never produce a great person. This means building guilds everywhere would not affect great person creation rate.
It should be easy to test. After we create a Great Writer in one city, the cost to produce the next Great Writer should go up in all other cities. Does this happen? Do all cities share the same cost? It shouldn't be hard to find out.
If it is per city, then the other cities could produce a great person (also all the guilds have default GP generation on top of the specialist slots at present).
If it is per type, then the other cities wouldn't catch up, but the point would be the capacity to generate huge amounts of culture per city. We already have a mechanic to help this with moving great works around if it is desired.
Separate names with a comma.