Early Techs Balance

[Mitch.sp]

If a player capture an enemy settler it turns into a worker, if an AI catches a enemy settler it stays a settler.

I think that if he was a settler previously owned by you can be recovered, if he was property of another civ changes to a worker.

 

[ExpiredReign]

I'm with @Funak on this one.
I like to play the early game as an isolationist, ie. stay away from my lands while I figure out the best places for my future cities.
This means I will often start wars at the first signs of enemy incursion into my realm and attack settlers, whether protected or not. Now, if I could attack a settler and get to found a city with that settler, that would be fantastic. Like stealing workings but sooo much better.

 

[Funak]

I think that if he was a settler previously owned by you can be recovered, if he was property of another civ changes to a worker.

No, they can capture all settlers, including mine.

Here's the deal, I'm not one hundred percent sure that AI civs can capture settlers from each-other (they could in vanilla and I'm not sure if you removed it) but I know for sure that they can capture other civs settlers that have already been captured by barbs, and get a settler instead of a worker. I've actually tried this out with a settler of mine getting captured by barbs and then taken by another civ.

I'm with @Funak on this one.
I like to play the early game as an isolationist, ie. stay away from my lands while I figure out the best places for my future cities.
This means I will often start wars at the first signs of enemy incursion into my realm and attack settlers, whether protected or not. Now, if I could attack a settler and get to found a city with that settler, that would be fantastic. Like stealing workings but sooo much better.

I actually meant remove the AI's ability to do this, not give it to players. Stealing settlers is WAY too easy.

 

[Atlas627]

If a player capture an enemy settler it turns into a worker, if an AI catches a enemy settler it stays a settler.

No it doesn't. Only if the barbs capture a settler and then a civ recaptures THEIR settler does it stay a settler. This is true for AI and players.

 

[Funak]

No it doesn't. Only if the barbs capture a settler and then a civ recaptures THEIR settler does it stay a settler. This is true for AI and players.

Try it out, I know for a fact that if a barb captures my settler and an AI captures that barb settler they get to keep it as a settler.

Unless those 20+ times this has happened over the years have all been bugs.

 

[Zanteogo]

Try it out, I know for a fact that if a barb captures my settler and an AI captures that barb settler they get to keep it as a settler.

Unless those 20+ times this has happened over the years have all been bugs.

Weird, I never knew this either. I always assumed non-barb capture of settler became a worker. Unless it was your own from the start.

 

[Funak]

Weird, I never knew this either. I always assumed non-barb capture of settler became a worker. Unless it was your own from the start.

How often do you watch AI civs capture barb-controlled settlers? As I said I've seen it just over 20 times in over 6k hours played. I can think of a few other ways it could have happened, but this seems like the most logical case.
I'm also sure I've captured an AI settler getting the message 'this unit belongs to civ X, do you want to return it to them'.

 

[Atlas627]

Try it out, I know for a fact that if a barb captures my settler and an AI captures that barb settler they get to keep it as a settler.

Unless those 20+ times this has happened over the years have all been bugs.

How often do you watch AI civs capture barb-controlled settlers? As I said I've seen it just over 20 times in over 6k hours played. I can think of a few other ways it could have happened, but this seems like the most logical case.
I'm also sure I've captured an AI settler getting the message 'this unit belongs to civ X, do you want to return it to them'.

When the AI captures my settler it becomes a worker. This should be easy enough to test; just build a settler and declare war on the AI, then move it into their territory with an adjacent unit to witness the capture.

To be fair, when I say they "recapture their settler" from the barbs, I only witness them getting it back so I'm not 100% they lost it, though the number of settled cities and the capture location tends to imply it was theirs to start.

 

[Funak]

When the AI captures my settler it becomes a worker. This should be easy enough to test; just build a settler and declare war on the AI, then move it into their territory with an adjacent unit to witness the capture.

To be fair, when I say they "recapture their settler" from the barbs, I only witness them getting it back so I'm not 100% they lost it, though the number of settled cities and the capture location tends to imply it was theirs to start.

Yeah taking settlers directly from you might result in a worker, someone would probably have commented on it if it didn't but the barb-thing I'm still pretty convinced of.

 

[Gazebo]

Yeah taking settlers directly from you might result in a worker, someone would probably have commented on it if it didn't but the barb-thing I'm still pretty convinced of.

Looking at code, there aren't any AI exclusions or special behaviors that I can see thus far.

G

 

[supracseduch]

Yeah taking settlers directly from you might result in a worker, someone would probably have commented on it if it didn't but the barb-thing I'm still pretty convinced of.

I can confirm this, as it happened to me at least once in the past. My Settler was taken by a barbarian, then it was subsequently taken by a foreign civ who defeated the barbarian. It remained a Settler throughout.

Now anyway, we've gotten a bit off topic. I'm trying to come up with a suggestion that fixes the early techs dilemma, but it's much harder than it sounds.

I can't come up with an elegant distribution of the luxury resources among the early game techs. They always clutter the techs with icons and it's not pleasant to look at. I'm thinking maybe we can let some luxuries be visible from the start (like Citrus, Salt, Sugar, Copper, etc), while other luxuries are discovered through the ancient and classical techs (like tobacco, whales, . But then I start worrying about unfair starting locations because of the invisible luxuries so I thought maybe we can offset this starting disadvantage by increasing the base yields of resources discovered later. I feel we might have to add a tech (Weaving, Brewing, Carving, or something) that's meant to unlock luxuries en masse. Or Pottery could serve as that tech. In any case, one has to ensure that the tech tree doesn't end up looking cluttered, minimizing the number of hidden icons; that the resources' base-yields, tile improvement-improved yields, and building-improved yields are in accordance with how late they are discovered; that the end result is a tech tree wherein techs belonging to the same column are equally desirable. This task requires utmost meticulousness. Anyone up for it?

 

[Gazebo]

I can confirm this, as it happened to me at least once in the past. My Settler was taken by a barbarian, then it was subsequently taken by a foreign civ who defeated the barbarian. It remained a Settler throughout.

Now anyway, we've gotten a bit off topic. I'm trying to come up with a suggestion that fixes the early techs dilemma, but it's much harder than it sounds.

I can't come up with an elegant distribution of the luxury resources among the early game techs. They always clutter the techs with icons and it's not pleasant to look at. I'm thinking maybe we can let some luxuries be visible from the start (like Citrus, Salt, Sugar, Copper, etc), while other luxuries are discovered through the ancient and classical techs (like tobacco, whales, . But then I start worrying about unfair starting locations because of the invisible luxuries so I thought maybe we can offset this starting disadvantage by increasing the base yields of resources discovered later. I feel we might have to add a tech (Weaving, Brewing, Carving, or something) that's meant to unlock luxuries en masse. Or Pottery could serve as that tech. In any case, one has to ensure that the tech tree doesn't end up looking cluttered, minimizing the number of hidden icons; that the resources' base-yields, tile improvement-improved yields, and building-improved yields are in accordance with how late they are discovered; that the end result is a tech tree wherein techs belonging to the same column are equally desirable. This task requires utmost meticulousness. Anyone up for it?

I think it is prudent to leave the luxuries revealed, and have bonuses appear via tech. Simple, already largely works, and allows discerning users to change the setting if they desire. Otherwise it becomes very complex, and isn't mod-friendly for mods that add other luxuries.

G

 

[Kolaris]

That's fine, but then ignoring balance feedback from those people because it's not the default setting seems a bit callous.

 

[Gazebo]

That's fine, but then ignoring balance feedback from those people because it's not the default setting seems a bit callous.

Why? It's not the default setting, and I only added the luxury-tech element due to a request for its integration. I can't balance stuff against non-default options, that's a nightmare.

G

 

[TheUnholyPotato]

For whatever my opinion is worth, I agree with Gazebo, here. Focusing on a known quantity is a totally reasonable approach.

 

[Atlas627]

However, he is correct for several other points that are unaffected:

1) Settler is crucially important

2) Roads are useless without Settlers

3) Chariot Archers are useless without horses

4) Stonehenge is impossible to build without hammer bonus resources or food bonus resources + hammer tiles

5) Scouts are good

6) Warriors fall in an awkward spot. Expensive enough they aren't usually worth building early, but you'll get either Archery or Bronze Working soon enough and then they're pretty much obsolete

7) Tile improvements are useless without a very expensive worker


There's enough variation in teching that I'm satisfied, but it could certainly be better. Perhaps move the Caravan and trade route unlock to the Wheel from Pottery? And make the Warrior the same price as a Scout?

I mentioned before that these parts of the initial post, despite being non-default settings, still applied to default settings. Can we talk about these points at least?

 

[Funak]

I mentioned before that these parts of the initial post, despite being non-default settings, still applied to default settings. Can we talk about these points at least?

Fine, let's talk.

However, he is correct for several other points that are unaffected:

1) Settler is crucially important

Unless you're Venice .
Honestly I've done Pottery as my 5th tech quite a few times. Having it right at the start isn't anywhere near as important as you make it sound.

2) Roads are useless without Settlers

Fair enough, big question is, where would you put the roads?
On the same tech as Settlers? Doesn't that sound really powerful for just one tech?
Available from the start? Why? As you mentioned they are useless without settlers.
On a later tech (pref one with the settler tech as a prereq)? Feels like an unnecessary delay to me.

3) Chariot Archers are useless without horses

Unless you're Egypt.

4) Stonehenge is impossible to build without hammer bonus resources or food bonus resources + hammer tiles

Yes? Most wonders are hard to build in a crappy city without production...

5) Scouts are good

Yes?

6) Warriors fall in an awkward spot. Expensive enough they aren't usually worth building early, but you'll get either Archery or Bronze Working soon enough and then they're pretty much obsolete

Early game unit balancing is a topic for another thread, but there I agree that they are slightly off, sure.
I would not say they are too bad to be used however, I usually build 2 or 3 warriors if I'm in a location where I'm likely to get bashed by barbs.

7) Tile improvements are useless without a very expensive worker

First of all, a worker is really not that expensive, it takes a few turns to build but considering how powerful tileimprovements are I really don't see a problem with that.
Also, the AI start with several workers, meaning tile-improvements are not useless to them.

There's enough variation in teching that I'm satisfied, but it could certainly be better. Perhaps move the Caravan and trade route unlock to the Wheel from Pottery? And make the Warrior the same price as a Scout?

The Wheel unlocks a wonder, that's pretty damn powerful.

About the warrior scout situation, I guess that could work, they aren't exactly competing for hammers considering they both fill different roles but the warrior is kinda pricey I guess.

 

[Atlas627]

Fine, let's talk.


Unless you're Venice .
Honestly I've done Pottery as my 5th tech quite a few times. Having it right at the start isn't anywhere near as important as you make it sound.

Oh yes, sometimes I delay it. I didn't say it was a guaranteed no-brainer. But Pottery provides 3 excellent things (Settler, Granary, Caravans) as well as decent tech opportunities (Calendar and Construction are both very good). I'd say I go Pottery 1st 80% of the time, 2nd 10% of the time, and 10% of the time I purposely delay it while I do other things.

Fair enough, big question is, where would you put the roads?
On the same tech as Settlers? Doesn't that sound really powerful for just one tech?
Available from the start? Why? As you mentioned they are useless without settlers.
On a later tech (pref one with the settler tech as a prereq)? Feels like an unnecessary delay to me.

On a later tech with settler as a prereq would be fine, or making the settler available from the start.

But that isn't what I'm suggesting at all. What I'm saying is that roads are useless without settlers. That's fine, keep them separated. But there needs to be some OTHER reason to research the Wheel, since the roads are useless otherwise. Essentially, Pottery ALREADY is a requirement for the Wheel, since the Wheel doesn't give you anything without settlers!

Unless you're Egypt.

One civ does not provide enough variation in decision-making alone.

Yes? Most wonders are hard to build in a crappy city without production...

Most wonders let you develop production first. Stonehenge is the only wonder on a level 1 tech. You will not have developed any territory whatsoever if you want to get that wonder.

Yes?

Yes, scouts are good. I agree this has nothing to do with the current topic, but he made a claim and I thought it was silly to outright dismiss it simply because he is playing on different settings. Scouts are good on all settings.

Early game unit balancing is a topic for another thread, but there I agree that they are slightly off, sure.
I would not say they are too bad to be used however, I usually build 2 or 3 warriors if I'm in a location where I'm likely to get bashed by barbs.

I didn't say they were too bad to be used, I said usually. I never find that I need warriors to protect me from barbs. The only time I build warriors is when I have a unique warrior, which is...the Aztecs? One civ is not enough variation.

First of all, a worker is really not that expensive, it takes a few turns to build but considering how powerful tileimprovements are I really don't see a problem with that.
Also, the AI start with several workers, meaning tile-improvements are not useless to them.

The AI has nothing to do with this conversation. This is about interesting choice for the human, not a game balance concern. And the worker is by far the most expensive thing to build in the very early game that we are talking about.

The Wheel unlocks a wonder, that's pretty damn powerful.

A wonder you cannot build because you have no time to improve your territory before you have to rush to build it. Its not a choice to build Stonehenge. If the stars align (you have a silly high production start) then you build it because you can't go wrong if you win the faith race, and otherwise you don't. Funny that Stonehenge is about the stars aligning!

About the warrior scout situation, I guess that could work, they aren't exactly competing for hammers considering they both fill different roles but the warrior is kinda pricey I guess.

Yeah this wasn't really relevant other than talking about early game issues. Spearmen and Archers come so soon that Warriors become obsolete very quickly. Essentially instantly, since Scouts are SO good.

 

[Funak]

Oh yes, sometimes I delay it. I didn't say it was a guaranteed no-brainer. But Pottery provides 3 excellent things (Settler, Granary, Caravans) as well as decent tech opportunities (Calendar and Construction are both very good). I'd say I go Pottery 1st 80% of the time, 2nd 10% of the time, and 10% of the time I purposely delay it while I do other things.

Caravans being located there probably isn't exactly relevant, you're probably not going to be rushing them anyways (at least I don't)
As for tech-order I don't actually remember the last time I went Pottery as first tech, I usually try to get one of the techs that reveal resources first, Animal Husbandry usually, sometimes mining or trapping.

But that isn't what I'm suggesting at all. What I'm saying is that roads are useless without settlers. That's fine, keep them separated. But there needs to be some OTHER reason to research the Wheel, since the roads are useless otherwise. Essentially, Pottery ALREADY is a requirement for the Wheel, since the Wheel doesn't give you anything without settlers!

Okay, this I actually disagree with. I'm completely with you that the wheel is rarely a choice for the first tech, but you don't NEED pottery for it. There are plenty of strategies that doesn't rely on early settler-spam, some of them use chariots and some of them uses the Petra.

Most wonders let you develop production first. Stonehenge is the only wonder on a level 1 tech. You will not have developed any territory whatsoever if you want to get that wonder.

Actually, most wonders let the AI develop their their production first, as you've stated you can't afford workers meaning you won't have any extra developed terrain when building any of the tier 2 wonders compared to the Stonehenge.

The AI has nothing to do with this conversation. This is about interesting choice for the human, not a game balance concern. And the worker is by far the most expensive thing to build in the very early game that we are talking about.

The AI are part of the game so naturally you have to count them. There are also ways to get early workers, either by stealing them, getting a gold-ruin or playing as carthage.

A wonder you cannot build because you have no time to improve your territory before you have to rush to build it. Its not a choice to build Stonehenge. If the stars align (you have a silly high production start) then you build it because you can't go wrong if you win the faith race, and otherwise you don't. Funny that Stonehenge is about the stars aligning!

It is still a powerful wonder. It being on the tech changes the value of that tech completely, you can't just disregard it because you never build it.

 

[supracseduch]

For whatever my opinion is worth, I agree with Gazebo, here. Focusing on a known quantity is a totally reasonable approach.

That's the easier approach, I'll give you that.

Sure, we can continue using hidden bonus resources as the default setting, and we can continue balancing with that in mind, but it will always feel wrong that bonus resources are unlocked later than luxuries (it's just so un-thematic), and thus I'll always find myself adjusting the settings. I'm sure there are a few others who would do the same.

Now on to the balance discussion.

The Wheel wouldn't be too bad if it unlocked just one more thing that gives you reason to research it first. Right now, you'd only do that because you want the Stonehenge, and if you get beaten to it (which is likely at higher difficulties and bigger maps), you're off to a bad start. And thus, prudent players would want to avoid getting into that mess and thus don't even attempt to do it. As has been said, the only time it's viable is if you're Egypt or Venice. That's 2/43. It's worth researching first less than 5% of the time.

Pottery on the other hand, is an excellent choice for first tech most of the time. Being able to build Settlers can allow you to snag a natural wonder (many of which are better than the earliest world wonders) or to secure resources for a potential monopoly, etc. The Iroquois and the Songhai will research it before The Wheel because their city-connection ability cannot exist without other cities. Militaristic civilizations would tend to research it first or second because they want to become as wide as possible, fast, because they're gonna want to build a lot of units, while developing the capital's infrastructure. Civilizations with trade route-related abilities (there's like 5 of them) have good reasons to research it first too. There are plenty of reasons to research this tech first, many of which arise from it unlocking the Settler. The only time I don't research it first is when I purposely delay it out of spite for its overpoweredness.

And as for the always-build-scout-first problem, I think it can be (mostly) solved by increasing the Scout's production cost to 50 (same as Warrior) and reducing the Worker's cost to 65 (same as Shrine/Monument).