Discussion in 'General Balance' started by ElliotS, Feb 19, 2018.
Just a friendly reminder that my post above was solely WIP changes related to techs.
I have a suggestion; not sure if it's doable, but I'll throw it out there. Give a building (maybe Granary?) the following trait :
For every two farms with fresh water, and for every three farms with no fresh water within 3 tiles of a city, gain +1 in city.
And have the food bonus either scale with era or improve with later techs and/or buildings. This should mitigate the balance discrepancy of getting a start with fresh water vs getting a start without, as if you start without fresh water access for your farms, you can still potentially keep up with Civs who do have fresh water starts, but you must necessarily prioritize and invest more heavily in your agricultural infrastructure, which makes complete logical sense. This also acts as an indirect buff to farms, since the bonus will apply regardless of whether or not the farms are actively worked by the city populous, and thus encourages players to plan out the ratio of farms to forests/jungles.
If you want this to go anywhere, rephrase it:
For every two worked farms with fresh water, and for every three worked farms with no fresh water, gain +1 in city.
Can you elaborate on why you think it should be worked farms instead of just any farms then? I liked the concept of farming infrastructure granting a passive food bonus just for being present near a city. The bonus food wouldn't be so substantial that your city could experience high growth without working the farms if that's your concern.
I think, from a realistic perspective, it makes little sense to gain extra food from farms not being worked. It's back-breaking work after all. From a game play perspective it's rather uninteresting and counter-intuitive to plan out several farm clusters that I don't plan to work just for a few extra bushels.
Mostly gameplay reasons. Buildings give flat yields, and they don't need to be worked, but they usually cost maintenance. Tile improvements, on the other hand, only costs the turns to build them. With your proposal, you are asking every worker to place farms everywhere, only keeping the occasional lumbermill when production is crap in a city. It's not a good game design, in my opinion. We were removing no-brainer mechanics from the game since the beginning.
That's a convoluted solution to a non-existing problem if all other improvements yields are toned down, and we also need to play more games with the new GP food consumption before dismiss farms so easily.
All good points. I'm on board with the re-phrasing to "worked."
Personally, I find farms to be in an ok spot where they are now, but if people find them lacking to the point where G is considering making radical adjustments to the fresh/no-fresh mechanic, I would say my proposal gives a very slight boost to farms without needing to do that. The basic concept isn't that convoluted; it's very straightforward: more farms = more food ; fresh water = more efficient food.
He won't dare touch fresh water, not if we take out our free-pottery-at-deity pitchforks once more.
Separate names with a comma.