I want to leave the
on Quarries because I think its beneficial to have some terrain that isn't necessarily worth improving until your cities have developed enough health infrastructure. If Quarries had no
then hills (and deserts) would just be spammed with Quarries instead of Mines. In the early eras I'd rather see just the occasional Quarry or Mine built; it feels more realistic and I think it's important to retain some form of 'ramping up' of tile use, especially now that we're making many other tiles improveable early on when they formerly were not.
I take your point. We
should aim for a "ramping up" of tile use as the game progresses. I just worry that if Quarries produce
, then Hills will be spammed with Windmills, which come with no health penalties and also produce
. Polluting Quarries greatly limit the improvement options for hilly cities, which are common on all maps with ridges, including Highlands, Tectonics, and Terra. I would prefer to weaken the Quarry further, to maintain balance with Mines:
Quarry
Requires Masonry
+1
+1
at Geology
+1
with Railroad
+1
with Slavery
No health penalty
Can be built on Desert, Hills
Chance to produce Salt, Stone, Marble, Jade
No base commerce and no health penalty but +1
with Slavery and Railroads.
'Professionalism' isn't the best name but I haven't been able to come up with anything better. 'Apprenticeship' isn't right, much too narrow in meaning.
EDIT: Perhaps 'Merchantry'?
'Apprenticeship' might be too narrow but 'Merchantry' is surely too broad. How about 'Craftsmanship'?
Speaking of civic names, I'm not too happy with 'Organized Religion' and 'Free Religion.' 'Organized Religion' is, again, too broad. The best name for a civic that emerges from Priesthood, one that presents a clear contrast with Paganism, demands not only proper ritual but inner faith, enables missionaries and brings communities together to construct great works, is
Orthodoxy. 'Free Religion,' meanwhile, is simply a contraction of 'freedom of religion.' It works fine alongside 'Free Market' and 'Free Speech' in BtS, but I've always found it a bit passive. A society that does not merely tolerate diversity but celebrates it: that would be 'Pluralism' or 'Multiculturalism.'
I was intending for Lumbermills to discover Prime Timber, must have been misplaced at some point. To be honest I'm fine with dropping the river bonus altogether. I'd prefer the Bureaucracy bonus to remain commerce, so perhaps I'll just switch the Paper bonus to production instead.
What if you kept the commerce bonus from Paper and reintroduced the hammer bonus from Railroads?
Lumbermill
Requires Machinery
+1
+1
with Paper
+1
with Bureaucracy
+1 with Railroad
No bonus next to River
Can be built on Forest, Jungle
Chance to produce Prime Timber
Lumbermills don't have to be quite as strong as secondary improvements but they should be stronger than other primary improvements. After all, they can only discover one resource; and once you have a single copy, Lumbermills are only as strong as their yields. (Unless you adopt the Da Vinci corporation, of course.)
That's my hesitation too. I deliberately want Cottages/etc to be weaker than they are in BTS. I don't see 1
Cottages as weak as they don't take very long to upgrade to Hamlets. If they start at 2
then they start becoming a no-brain choice again.
I disagree. Cottages are already significantly weaker when compared to BtS: they produce +1
, equivalent to -1
; they appear later in the game and thus mature later in the game; the Financial trait does not increase their yield; there are other improvements that produce up to 3
, including Camps, Plantations, Watermills, and Windmills, some of which can be built directly atop terrain features; and they produce one less commerce at full strength, 6 compared to 7. If you do not bump Cottages to 2
, I suggest you add a technology bonus, perhaps at Printing Press. (Even 1.17 offers more Cottage bonuses: +1
each from Democracy, Social Welfare, and Highways.) The health penalty alone prevents Cottages from being a no-brain choice.
Hmm. Maybe you could replace +1
with +0.5
, +0.5
? That way, two Cottages would have the same effect as once city population point. (The citizens must be entertained!) Forest Preserves increase happiness so surely you can code an improvement that decreases happiness?
I need some feedback on how common to set resource discovery. Currently there are 2 rates in 1.17: Mines are set to the same rate of discovery as in BTS, and Farms are set to discover more often. You all play many more actual games than I get to, let me know which of these feels more appropriate to you for what we're proposing. Somewhere in between possibly, or even more common?
It all depends on what you consider most important about the new improvement system. If you mainly see it as a way to add variety to the landscape, with resource discovery as mere flavour, then the current Farm rate, 1 in 5000, seems appropriate: resource discovery comes as a welcome surprise but is not reliable. If, however, you want resource discovery to be a strategic consideration, such that players can tailor the resource mix in their empire, discovery chances should be set higher. 1 in 2000 does not seem to me to be unreasonable; but you'd have to reduce the number of resources created by the map generator first. Of course, I play at Normal speed and discover about two resources per game. The experience of players who prefer slower speeds will be different.
