[NFP] How Are People Liking the New Policy Card and Government Changes?

[Stringer1313]

I'm in the pro-Oligarchy/Autocracy change camp. I have actually found myself using all three early governments which I never ever did before (one time even accidentaly switching back to an already used one ,triggering anarchy, whoops). So it's great.

I don't understand the appeal of Monarchy to so many people because building walls just seems to take forever even with Limes. Though I get that the diplo favor is nice, but I always get and spam Pagodas (which feels like cheating - they really need to nerf pagodas, at least depending ont he size of the map)

 

[Vargas1]

I like the idea of a card that gives benefits for delegations - I rarely send them unless I'm trying to befriend an otherwise aggressive civ or I'm planning on trying to do some early religious warfare. But getting some tangible benefit back for having sent them would be great.

I also wouldn't be against seeing more trading-related cards end up as diplomatic cards, particularly ones related to international trade. Or change Charismatic Leader to be +1 envoy point per trade route to city-states (maybe up to a certain maximum so it doesn't get out of hand later in the game).

 

[InsidiousMage]

I definitely think one way to make diplo slots better is to put the trade route cards in there and have there value go up by either 50% or 100% for international trade routes depending on balance issues. So Caravansaries would give 2 gold on domestic trade routes but then either 3 or 4 for international. And then same for Triangular Trade and E-Commerce.

 

[Baigan]

I think there's a reasonable game pattern now where you go Autocracy into Monarchy and build early Government Plaza and Diplo Quarter in your capital. Well, it existed before but Monarchy was prohibitively bad. There are several upsides to this line of play.

• Trade routes to your capital are +3F/+3P with only 4 population, plus whatever districts you choose to build
  
• +3 to all yields in the early game is actually relevant. 15 S/CPT seems pretty normal when you unlock Political Philosophy, which equates to a +20% boost
  
• Provision Magnus makes your trade routes +5/+3, or you can go the usual Pingala route to wring the most out of that +3 S/CPT with his early +15% boost
• The early Diplo Quarter and Monarchy work together to get you lots of envoys:
  • Don't worry about suzerainty: pump those envoys to get the +3 bonuses in all relevant CSes ASAP. This rewards going wide (you get more +3 Universities), plus you get to double up from the Consulate bonuses in your 15%-boosted Pingala capital
• Kilwa, Ruhr, Oxford, and Sankore are amazing wonders to build in your capital, and you might even get Autocracy's production bonus if you don't rush the switch to Monarchy
• Owls of Minerva seem good if you have that enabled

The emphasis on internal trade routes means this probably isn't as good if you're going for CV. Monarchy is really only good for the bonus envoy generation; once you have your CSes locked up you should be able to switch freely. The biggest drawback is the rigid district order this places on your capital, which has a lot of ripple effects. Early religion and Monumentality plays are hurt without an early Holy Site, Inspirations for Guilds and Medieval Faires are more difficult as is the Inspiration for Industrialization. The yields you normally get from adjacency are just absent until the Chancery envoy bonuses come online. Getting growth in the capital is so important (plus there's all those wonders we want to build) that the capital should probably have more space than the usual 4 tile distance, but this makes getting adjacency from the Government Plaza tricky. I suspect this works best when you're pursuing SV or DV, when there are many science/industrial/commerce CSes, and when you have strong locations for your first satellite cities that can support the early weakness in the capital before the Chancery comes online.

 

[Kaushad]

I don't understand the issue with classical diplomatic policies. Do you not want to be suzerain of multiple city-states when it's almost the only source of diplomatic favour, it gives era points, reveals more of the map and distracts opposing civs before they have walls and crossbows?

I don't understand the appeal of Monarchy to so many people because building walls just seems to take forever even with Limes. Though I get that the diplo favor is nice, but I always get and spam Pagodas (which feels like cheating - they really need to nerf pagodas, at least depending ont he size of the map)

It's nice for utopian sandbox games. Even before this patch, I often switched to monarchy just before Tier 3, to get that housing legacy card. The other Tier 2 legacy cards provide gold or faith and there are lots of ways to get gold and faith.

 

[InsidiousMage]

I don't understand the issue with classical diplomatic policies. Do you not want to be suzerain of multiple city-states when it's almost the only source of diplomatic favour, it gives era points, reveals more of the map and distracts opposing civs before they have walls and crossbows?

The problem is that there are just better cards to run that have a more immediate and stronger impact on the game. Additionally, the Diplo Quarter is available not long after unlocking your first government and just offers more than the simple policy cards.

 

[UWHabs]

The problem is that there are just better cards to run that have a more immediate and stronger impact on the game. Additionally, the Diplo Quarter is available not long after unlocking your first government and just offers more than the simple policy cards.

I rarely if ever can get the DQ going that early. But yeah, it's simply a case where that early in the game, even just getting +2 gold per turn is arguably better than +2 envoy points per turn, simply because I need that gold now. Those envoy points take a long time to pay for themselves except in some very specific cases. Now, granted, sometimes they are game-changers. But often I don't even pop in the new envoys when I get them because there's nothing useful until you can get a few of them saved up and truly figure out which CS to target.

 

[InsidiousMage]

I rarely if ever can get the DQ going that early. But yeah, it's simply a case where that early in the game, even just getting +2 gold per turn is arguably better than +2 envoy points per turn, simply because I need that gold now. Those envoy points take a long time to pay for themselves except in some very specific cases. Now, granted, sometimes they are game-changers. But often I don't even pop in the new envoys when I get them because there's nothing useful until you can get a few of them saved up and truly figure out which CS to target.

Personally, I'm only really aggressive about getting city-state suzerainty if I'm going for a diplo victory so the Diplo Quarter is a must in that case.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

The governments are much better now imo.
Before, Oligarchy was such a strong pick because you got the most balanced card setup (1 of each type), while giving you a flat +4 combat strength for your units.
A military government type like that shouldn't be a cookie cutter in terms of card setup, it makes it too tempting for non-military uses while giving that safety cushion that +4 CS brigns on higher dificulties.
Giving +2 military cards now makes much more sense for a domination-oriented playstyle, as it should.
Autocracy on the other hand was similarly plagued by the +2 military card slots, while otherwise being a peaceful government, making it a terrible choice for most games.
In my most recent game now I went Autocracy, as the wonder bonus coupled with a balanced card setup was as ideal to me as it could get - well done firaxis.
Monarchy being more balanced is equally appreciated.
Before it was a trash tier government that I only took as a stepping stone to reach the other T2 governments, and that was largely due to the +3 military policy cards (quite redundant), while offering nothing else in terms of other cards over T1, and also having a pretty crap inherent government bonus.

I also like that they moved some cards from yellow to red now, like the +100% industrial zone adjacency.
Makes it more worthwhile to get red cards to begin with, which for me were often filled with garbage policies due to no other useful cards being available.

 

[Dantesedge]

I'm not disappointed by the change to Autocracy (moving one of the Military slots over to Oligarchy and adding a Diplomatic slot) because it makes total sense, but I am sad it throws off my early Polish game (one of my favorite Civs). I always chose Autocracy for them because I found the bonuses more appropriate than Oligarchy for them, so the loss of that extra Military slot hurts. In order to gain the extra Wildcard (for early Great Prophet points) and keep at least one Military slot, I'm pretty much forced to choose Oligarchy now for Jadwiga.

That said, the extra Military slot for Oligarchy has been beneficial for all my Domination games. No complaints there.

Of course Monarchy has been a boon for another of my favorite Civs, Georgia. That government now has complete synergy with Tamar's abilities: Extra housing for walls (Tamar focuses on walls); +50% Influence Points (Tamar focuses on maximizing Envoys); and Renaissance Walls gain extra Diplomatic Favor (there should be a Tsikhe in every city). It completes her package for excellent Diplomatic Victory campaigns as she'll be absolutely swimming in DF.

Even though nothing changed, Merchant Republic kind of took a hit only because Monarchy is now so popular. Oh well.

 

[aieeegrunt]

The governments are much better now imo.
Before, Oligarchy was such a strong pick because you got the most balanced card setup (1 of each type), while giving you a flat +4 combat strength for your units.
A military government type like that shouldn't be a cookie cutter in terms of card setup, it makes it too tempting for non-military uses while giving that safety cushion that +4 CS brigns on higher dificulties.
Giving +2 military cards now makes much more sense for a domination-oriented playstyle, as it should.
Autocracy on the other hand was similarly plagued by the +2 military card slots, while otherwise being a peaceful government, making it a terrible choice for most games.
In my most recent game now I went Autocracy, as the wonder bonus coupled with a balanced card setup was as ideal to me as it could get - well done firaxis.
Monarchy being more balanced is equally appreciated.
Before it was a trash tier government that I only took as a stepping stone to reach the other T2 governments, and that was largely due to the +3 military policy cards (quite redundant), while offering nothing else in terms of other cards over T1, and also having a pretty crap inherent government bonus.

I also like that they moved some cards from yellow to red now, like the +100% industrial zone adjacency.
Makes it more worthwhile to get red cards to begin with, which for me were often filled with garbage policies due to no other useful cards being available.

I mostly agree with the partial exception that Oligarchy’s +4 CS is still head and shoulders above the other two legacies; I literally time a government swap with my government district to secure it even if it would otherwise make no sense.

The way combat works in Civ6 a +4 boost is very significant boost.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

I mostly agree with the partial exception that Oligarchy’s +4 CS is still head and shoulders above the other two legacies; I literally time a government swap with my government district to secure it even if it would otherwise make no sense.

The way combat works in Civ6 a +4 boost is very significant boost.

Absolutely, which is why I usually went for Oligarchy as it gives that safety cushion in most games, even if you don't plan on using it offensively.
In my current game however, I had the most secure start I've ever gotten (an entire "continent" to myself, with the only entrance to my neighbours blocked off by mountains), so I could freely use Classical Republic or Autocracy.
And since Autocracy was no longer trash tier with the +2 military cards, I opted for it.
Was a nice experience getting to use a government type I haven't used since... forever, basically.

 

[jozef57]

i general i love them, for me it is improvement. on the end of turn bug freeze lately anoyes the excrement out of me

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

Still enjoying them after one month.

 

[hhhhhh]

Monarchy is certainly a lot better. I plan to use Monarchy more often.

I think I'm OK with the changes of the types of certain policy. (like economic -> militaristic)

I find the change to GPP policies like invention most interesting (was +2 points, now it can get you +4 to +20 or even +30 points, crazy).

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

I find the change to GPP policies like invention most interesting (was +2 points, now it can get you +4 to +20 or even +30 points, crazy).

While I agree that the change was nice (+2 to a Great Person type hardly mattered outside the very early game if you desperately needed the GPP fast), I think the current iteration is overtuned.
Granted, I haven't used the cards much yet (haven't gone for a SV yet for instance), but when I used the ones for Great Artists in my recent game, the effect was a tad much.
And that card is probably the weakest ones of the lot, with the Great Engineer (Invention) card looking completely bonkers for something like a SV.

Personally I like that they now scale with the amount of districts you have, but I wouldn't mind if they toned down the GPP from Invention (GE points) to +1 per workshop.