Full Patch Notes for December Patch

[lockstep]

Research overflow! Finally!

 

[Celevin]

First off, from the old thread....



The missing piece was the "Razing Cities does not increase cost" part.

I speculated this at some point, but dropped it because it was just speculation at the time. It doesn't solve the problem to me. I still can't drop in empire size without being severely punished. All it does is stop a single exploit, and causes a variety of other problems in doing so.

EDIT: I don't mean to direct this anger at you whether or not you agree with the exploit fix, I just think there was probably a better way to do it. It could be the suggestions offered by this forum just weren't something the devs were looking for, or maybe they didn't notice, or maybe they'd just rather go with what they came up with.

 

[firecat318]

I speculated this at some point, but dropped it because it was just speculation at the time. It doesn't solve the problem to me. I still can't drop in empire size without being severely punished. All it does is stop a single exploit, and causes a variety of other problems in doing so.

Why would you want to drop in empire size? The main goal of the game (if you're playing domination) is to capture as many cities as you can and eliminate the other civs... if you're losing cities you're not in good shape.

 

[Valkrionn]

I speculated this at some point, but dropped it because it was just speculation at the time. It doesn't solve the problem to me. I still can't drop in empire size without being severely punished. All it does is stop a single exploit, and causes a variety of other problems in doing so.

EDIT: I don't mean to direct this anger at you whether or not you agree with the exploit fix, I just think there was probably a better way to do it. It could be the suggestions offered by this forum just weren't something the devs were looking for, or maybe they didn't notice, or maybe they'd just rather go with what they came up with.

Don't worry about it, I'm far from upset.

Honestly though, I don't really see a problem. Why would you want to drop in empire size?

Keep in mind, I typically go with the "mushroom" build; Small-mid size empire that balloons in late game.

Actually, if you dont' mind, just pm your reasons to me to keep the thread from derailing. I will more than likely pass concerns on to the devs. I do so often.

 

[RadioLemon]

Yay updates! This is going to be the best one yet!

 

[bryanw1995]

Actually I have them at +1 in all cities and +2 in the capital and they're still pretty much the best way to spend your money, certainly better than buying things (settlers being the exception in my mod)

Interesting that they went all the way to nerf scientists. Siam is now officially the strongest civ in my opinion, unless they just forgot to add that universities also get 2 scientist slots

Good news about research overflow

oops, sorry forgot that you nerfed them too!

yes, that would be crazy if wat is 2 scientists and unis only one, surely they are both 2 now. somebody(s) really hate ics obviously...

 

[No_such_reality]

[CITY/BUILDINGS]

• 
  ...
• Library now has no specialist slots.
  ...
• Circus now has +2 happiness and no maintenance.
  ...
• Reduced effects of Forbidden Palace and Meritocracy (Happiness per city).
• Buildings can now no longer provide more Happiness than there is population in a city (wonders are excluded from this).
  ...

[CITY STATES]

• Reduced bonuses from Maritime city-states - Friends: +2 food in capital, +0 food in other cities - Allies: +3 food in capital, +1 food in other cities
• Only the first 3 units gifted to a city-state will earn Influence now.
• Killing a barb inside a city-state's territory now gives a 5-turn buffer where there is no Influence intrusion penalty.

[HAPPINESS]

• If an empire reaches -20 Happiness, it goes into revolt, and rebels start appearing throughout the empire, based on the number of cities.
• Amount of Happiness needed to trigger a Golden Age reduced.
• Amount of Happiness needed to trigger a Golden Age now increases as the number of cities in the empire goes up.

[TECH TREE]

• ...
• Research overflow now works correctly (extra beakers after completing a tech will rollover to the next tech).

[SERIALIZATION/SAVES]

• Fixed save format which causes saves to increase the memory footprint of the game drastically when loading frequently over the course of the game. This heightened the risk of late-game our of memory crashes significantly.

Isn't this really going to make ICS more powerful?

Happiness limited to buildings, but will it counter act unhappiness due to number of cities? i.e. if I have a pop 2 city and a coliseum, will it neutral out or will the coliseum only generate 2 happiness? What if I'm a pop 4 city and I build a circus (free maintenance) and a coliseum, am I neutral or only getting a total of 4 happiness again ignoring city unhappiness?

Nerfing libraries that's good but really buffing public schools. If they don't crank the research counts way up, techs will go even faster. On a recent Prince level huge game, Augustus hit the modern era mid-1800s. Give him public schools and he should go even faster. That's on Prince vanilla.

Regarding the save fix, hurray!

 

[bryanw1995]

For what it's worth, I made a Dark Ages mod for the testers to use, and can and will make it available as a mod for general use once the patch is out. It most certainly is a graduating effect, as the more unhappiness you have, the faster you will hit that Dark Age.

I'm of the opinion that it is a better implementation, though both could work together quite well. I'd like to add revolts in as well...

I'm assuming that the "dark age" is hit upon -500 happiness etc, correct? aren't we already getting a lot of that at -10 anyway? I suppose it would be good if nothing else to keep track of the anti-happiness, keeping you out of GA's as often in the mid/late game though...

wow, that won't be nearly as bad for rex at least, you just have to dealy it a bit more to ensure than happiness is under control. I still think that the library nerf + limited fp benefit is very damaging to the ics strategy however. plus, the public schools buff is more effective for larger cities, making smaller empires with larger cities much more useful. certainly ics has become more situational at least now, probably with a bias against it.

 

[Celevin]

Don't worry about it, I'm far from upset.

Honestly though, I don't really see a problem. Why would you want to drop in empire size?

Keep in mind, I typically go with the "mushroom" build; Small-mid size empire that balloons in late game.

Actually, if you dont' mind, just pm your reasons to me to keep the thread from derailing. I will more than likely pass concerns on to the devs. I do so often.

I'd want to drop in size if I couldn't afford the happiness or culture infrastructure right away. Secondly, what if I take it and annex it, then it's taken back from me, and I can't re-take it? I'm suffering because of an exploit I had no intentions of doing exists in the game as a way to win by culture victories quickly?


http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=401461
This thread details it nicely. I could try and sum up the concern, but the other posters added so much more that anything I say wouldn't be as good as just the discussion itself. I wish me or someone else brought it up sooner.

TLDR for the thread: "Policy overflow" is as big of a problem as "Research Overflow" is, and stopping the problem fixes the city selling exploit along with other stuff all at once. Basically, the "selling cities exploit" is only the positive way to abuse policy overflow. It's also negatively affecting people constantly.

 

[Valkrionn]

I'm assuming that the "dark age" is hit upon -500 happiness etc, correct? aren't we already getting a lot of that at -10 anyway? I suppose it would be good if nothing else to keep track of the anti-happiness, keeping you out of GA's as often in the mid/late game though...

Well, it's counter-based just as Golden Ages are. Meaning the longer you are in unhappiness, the closer you get; It's just that 15 unhappiness gets closer much faster than one unhappiness.

Currently the first DA is at 500, then the threshold progressively decreases (opposite the Golden Age, so DA's become progressively easier to reach), and the effect is 10 turns of Anarchy. Nice and simple, and something that should be avoided.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=401461
This thread details it nicely. I could try and sum up the concern, but the other posters added so much more that anything I say wouldn't be as good as just the discussion itself. I wish me or someone else brought it up sooner.

TLDR for the thread: "Policy overflow" is as big of a problem as "Research Overflow" is, and stopping the problem fixes the city selling exploit along with other stuff all at once.

I'll take a look through that, thanks.

 

[MouseyPounds]

Let's say you have a pop 2 city. You build a coliseum. You will receive two happiness from the building. Once the city is at 5 population, you will receive 5 happiness, which will then be flat for higher population levels.

In short: Happiness buildings only provide happiness equal to whichever is lowest: City population, or happiness cap on the building.

So the cap is on each individual building rather than the buildings in that city as a group? I.e, if that same pop 2 city has both a coliseum and a circus, do each of those give +2 happy (for a total of +4 happy from buildings in that city) or is it essentially +2 from the coliseum and nothing from the circus?

 

[cman2010]

Most of this stuff looks good and looks like it will totaly change the game. However I think the library should have at least one specialist slot, and the maritime civs should not be nerfed so badly.

 

[No_such_reality]

Why would you want to drop in empire size? The main goal of the game (if you're playing domination) is to capture as many cities as you can and eliminate the other civs... if you're losing cities you're not in good shape.

Rome and Byzantine...

Europe shedding it's colonies...

 

[Celevin]

Why would you want to drop in empire size? The main goal of the game (if you're playing domination) is to capture as many cities as you can and eliminate the other civs... if you're losing cities you're not in good shape.

In addition to other reasons like culture victories, or not enough gold to afford new culture/happiness buildings, that this game is already anti-comeback enough. I'm fearing an RPG feel where you always gain gain and gain again, without any feeling of one step back, two steps forward.

 

[Louis XXIV]

It didn't quite work out so great for either of them.

But I do agree that, if you lose a lot of cities, having higher SP costs hurt you. I still argue if you want to roleplay as liberator, just puppet the cities instead of annex them before gifting them away (although they should really allow you to liberate any city from a rival civ that's been taken in exchange for a relations boost rather than force you to take it and then give it away).

EDIT: You can sell buildings, you know.

 

[Marshall Thomas]

They certainly are.

Hell, the AI will rushbuy city defense buildings now if it thinks it's in danger. I've had attacks stalled because the AI rushed a castle on me.

I was hoping that steamrolling, blobing AIs get rebels when they conquer too many other AI cities; but they'd have to have -20 unhappiness. Does this ever happen?

Thanks in advance

 

[Valkrionn]

It didn't quite work out so great for either of them.

But I do agree that, if you lose a lot of cities, having higher SP costs hurt you. I still argue if you want to roleplay as liberator, just puppet the cities instead of annex them before gifting them away (although they should really allow you to liberate any city from a rival civ that's been taken in exchange for a relations boost rather than force you to take it and then give it away).

EDIT: You can sell buildings, you know.

I like the liberate action...

 

[Orion66]

"Update to tactical AI pillaging code - now prioritize enemy land resources and trade routes (never regular mines or farms). Always uses the check to make sure AI is not trying to pillage in an enemy dominance zone. Barbarians will still target everything."

Can you explain this to me? It means that AI will NOT pillage my farms or mines? Why? Destroying enemy infrastructure is the best thing t do. Pillaging farms makes my cities starve. Pillaging mines criples economy/production ability.
So I ask. WTF ????

 

[bryanw1995]

Well, it's counter-based just as Golden Ages are. Meaning the longer you are in unhappiness, the closer you get; It's just that 15 unhappiness gets closer much faster than one unhappiness.

Currently the first DA is at 500, then the threshold progressively decreases (opposite the Golden Age, so DA's become progressively easier to reach), and the effect is 10 turns of Anarchy. Nice and simple, and something that should be avoided.




I'll take a look through that, thanks.

wow, that's awesome!! 10 turns dark age...you could do that just to make things harder on yourself if the late game was going too well...

 

[Louis XXIV]

I'll suggest the liberate action... I don't believe that would be too hard to add for the next patch. We'll see if they like it.

Cool. It does seem simple, but maybe deceptively so (obviously make sure they don't copy the code that gives you their UN vote, of course ). I think that's a good compromise so they don't hurt the roleplayers because the best strategy players break their toys