If you were to replace Rationalism...

[Arachnofiend]

Many high level players agree that Rationalism takes away more from the game than it gives. It's a near automatic selection; many social policies that would be very useful in certain situations are ignored because they are less useful than going to at least Secularism in all situations. You can nerf it all you like, but no matter what you do science is still king in Civilization V and as long as that remains the case there will never be a policy tree better than Rationalism.

Since changing the fundamentals of the entire game system would be a bit too dramatic, it would likely be easier to simply remove Rationalism from the game. But the social policy screen fits so nicely as it is now... Let's assume that, if you're getting rid of Rationalism you have to replace it with something else. What would be the focus of this new tree? A popular choice I've seen is a tree focused on mid-game settling (call it Colonization or Imperialism) but surely the collective mind of the CivFanatics could conjure up some other ideas.

 

[GoStu]

Frankly, I'd just replace most of the policies in Rationalism with different bonuses. Make the opener +1% per 3 or 4 happiness to a max of 10%, take the university boost off free thought and replace it with production speed bonuses to science buildings, half the effect of Secularism, and make Scientific Revolution give some happiness somehow.

That way the tree can exist, give empires bonuses to having science, and less about huge extra bonuses to science that are easy to get and maintain.

Further, improving some of the other trees like Honor to allow simply killing players that sit and try to turtle would balance things out a bit.

The proposed midgame settling would be nice bonuses to Exploration.

 

[Galgus]

Frankly, I'd just replace most of the policies in Rationalism with different bonuses. Make the opener +1% per 3 or 4 happiness to a max of 10%, take the university boost off free thought and replace it with production speed bonuses to science buildings, half the effect of Secularism, and make Scientific Revolution give some happiness somehow.

That way the tree can exist, give empires bonuses to having science, and less about huge extra bonuses to science that are easy to get and maintain.

Further, improving some of the other trees like Honor to allow simply killing players that sit and try to turtle would balance things out a bit.

The proposed midgame settling would be nice bonuses to Exploration.

Not sure what I would replace it with, and I agree that it would be fine if nerfed a bit.

Rationalism should be about giving a edge, not about becoming a complete run-away.
_________________________________________________________________________

Personally, I'd like to see Honor get some things that are useful in peace-time.

I want it to be the policy branch of war, but I'd like it to not be as useless in times of peace.

Perhaps some yields on military infrastructure such as Barracks and Walls, and it should really be helping with unit maintenance costs.

For a cherry on top, a yield for Citadels in the finisher would be nice.

 

[Redaxe]

If I could call the shots I would move Rationalism to the Industrial age, that way it competes directly with ideologies. I'd then decrease the scientific benefits to the tree & introduce a cost to the boost in science output.

Example is to remove the +25% GS yield & reduce the +17% science from universities but let the tree unlock an additional scientist specialist slot in your universities which requires an additional population to work.
Things like that so its not free science but quite costly.

But yes I would really like to see a Colonialism Policy Tree for the renaissance that unlocks colonies & imperialism, with red coats, ship-of-the-lines etc. Very much a French or British inspired
Then I think we could also have an industrialism policy tree that focuses on manufacturies, strategic resources, extra factorys, assembly lines etc... Very 19/20th century Germany/USA...

 

[jlim201]

I would change it so the bonuses give you other bonuses for having _ science like "in all cities with +50 science have +3 prodcution" or something to that degree.

 

[VicRatlhead5199]

I'm with those that think it'd be best to remove some of the free extra beakers from the tree and replace it with bonuses to the production of science buildings, happiness from science buildings, discounts on RAs, etc. Then it'd be more similar to piety and aestheticism by giving a slight edge on producing its respective yield but most of the work would still need to be done by your cities. Not just beakers coming from out of the ether. Changing the opener, secularism and free thought to a different science related bonus other than just straight beakers would be best imo.

I do like that Colonialism idea though. Moving resettlement from order to the colonialism opener would be a nice improvement. Resettlement comes a tad late imo, it'd be nice to be able to get that in the Renaissance when settling on new landmasses is most likely to happen. It'd ensure that those "colonies" weren't such a drag. Maybe it could give bonuses to cities founded on landmasses other than the one the capital is on (Spain and Indonesia would love that). Another idea would be a unique, cheaper settler that could found puppets unlocked with a policy similar to the LKs in commerce. Call them colonists or pilgrims maybe. I'm not a huge fan of long term puppets but I know some people use them. You could annex them later but it would require a courthouse like any other puppet being annexed. I might start liking Venice more if I could get a way to choose where to plop some of my puppets.

 

[kaspergm]

I have myself argued for this change on several occasions. Currently, I play with a mod I made which does cut down Rationalism somewhat (for instance lowers the bonus from Secularism to 1 science per specialist) and changes the position of some policies so that you need to pick all policies to get the bonus from research agreements instead of having the option to push off Sovereignty. I do feel that makes the tree much more balanced, I still pay it visits fairly frequently in late game, but usually only after I've done at least some picking in ideology, and normally I can also manage without it on Emperor level.

If one were to remove Rationalism, I think there's little doubt that the Commerce/Exploration/new tree trio should be reworked in tandem. Commerce needs a boost of several policies - for instance the policies that increase trade routes should be merged into one in Commerce (both land and sea trade routes gain +4 gold). Commerce finisher needs a boost, namely adding +3 Culture and +3 Science to Customs Houses. Entrepreneurship also should grant a free Great Merchant imo.

Exploration needs a major overhaul (maybe rename it expansion). I've myself changed the +4 Gold from sea trade routes (now in commerce) to +25 % food/production from internal trade routes. The gold and happiness from naval buildings are merged into one policy. Navigation School also adds +1 science from lighthouse/harbor/seaport. A new policy is added that give all Settlers +2 movement and have new cities start with 2 extra citizens. This tree is intended to promote mid/late-game expansion. If a new tree is made instead of Rationalism, the finisher should be changed.

A potential new tree should focus on Archeology. It should inherit the current Exploration finisher which is the only thing in that tree that has anything to do with exploration and as such seems misplaced. Other benefits should be bonus to archeologist production, ability to buy archeologists with faith (finisher), perhaps a chance to find multiple artifacts from a dig site, ability to see what items will be in a dig site before digging it up (or after a couple of turns), etc.

 

[Bulldog Bats]

I think the goal should be to make each policy in the same era equally effective, but dependent on style of game.

Early game tradition is too powerful and honor too weak.

My style of game does not lend itself to commerce, so I am not sure of it v. patronage

I like the concept of rationalism v. piety, but rationalism is far too strong. It should be nerfed down to the same level as piety, and the player should be able to pick either depending on whether he is going science-heavy or religion/culture.

Late game order/autocracy/freedom seem closer in terms of level.

 

[Crafty Bison]

Assuming just nerfing Rationalism is off the cards, I think it'd be a great opportunity to expand on the pretty weak espionage system. Bonuses could include the basic 'more spies', or could give more promotion levels or specialist promotions, like army units. They could enable new abilities (the backwards looking part of me says things like sabotage, or they could thieve things like gold, culture, faith, production, great works, GA points. They could give bonuses to the diplomat feature, or make all cities' city screens visible instead of just 1 city for locating a spy. They could make counter espionage more effective, or nullify the opponents benefit of police stations etc. The list goes on.
Anyway, it's currently a pretty rubbish part of the game, so adding some espionage benefits would be more fun, and if it's more balanced than rationalism then the other trees will get more used as well.

 

[kaspergm]

Assuming just nerfing Rationalism is off the cards, I think it'd be a great opportunity to expand on the pretty weak espionage system. Bonuses could include the basic 'more spies', or could give more promotion levels or specialist promotions, like army units. They could enable new abilities (the backwards looking part of me says things like sabotage, or they could thieve things like gold, culture, faith, production, great works, GA points. They could give bonuses to the diplomat feature, or make all cities' city screens visible instead of just 1 city for locating a spy. They could make counter espionage more effective, or nullify the opponents benefit of police stations etc. The list goes on.
Anyway, it's currently a pretty rubbish part of the game, so adding some espionage benefits would be more fun, and if it's more balanced than rationalism then the other trees will get more used as well.

I'm all for expanding the espionage system (albeit not with negative effects like sabotage), but I don't think that should be only through a policy tree, but rather a general change in the game, because this area is sorely lacking.

 

[Vitruvius]

Why don't just introduce a system which makes it easier for civs to catch up with each other in science. In the current game, there are four mechanisms: 1. Trade routes, 2. RAs, 3. Spy, 4. Scholars in Residence.

I will talk about trade routes here. Right now it suffers from the following flaws:
1. It gives huge science boost early but it becomes insignificant as game wears on.
2. You can take the science from trade routes to research a tech that nobody knows, which doesn't make alot of sense..

Instead, we can make trade routes work something like scholars in residence, but only exclusive to the civs participating in the trade route. Give it say a 25% reduction in tech cost to techs already discovered by the civ you are trading with.

What does this have to do with rationalism? Well now you can still choose to go rationalism and stay ahead in the tech game. But if you dont you can still keep up with other people using trade routes.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

[Arachnofiend]

I think the goal should be to make each policy in the same era equally effective, but dependent on style of game.

Early game tradition is too powerful and honor too weak.

My style of game does not lend itself to commerce, so I am not sure of it v. patronage

I like the concept of rationalism v. piety, but rationalism is far too strong. It should be nerfed down to the same level as piety, and the player should be able to pick either depending on whether he is going science-heavy or religion/culture.

Late game order/autocracy/freedom seem closer in terms of level.

Commerce is actually really good for Pangaea domination. With the gold bonuses you can afford your army even when sending your routes to city-states after everyone starts hating you, landschneckts are just hilariously powerful and can be pumped out in droves, Mercantilism speaks for itself, and Protectionism is by far the best happiness policy in the game.

The thing is, Protectionism is competing directly with the entire Rationalism tree, because if you complete Commerce you likely won't have time to go into Rationalism until ideologies kick in. Rationalism isn't really competing with Piety, especially since the two are mutually exclusive; Tradition/Liberty/Honor/Piety compete with each other as the starter trees, Patronage/Aesthetics/Commerce/Exploration/Rationalism compete with each other as the mid-game trees, and Freedom/Order/Autocracy of course compete with each other as the late game ideologies.

@Vitruvius: That basically already exists? For every civ that knows a tech that you don't know that tech is cheaper. I don't think it really addresses any issues.

 

[Browd]

In BNW, Piety and Rationalism are no longer mutually exclusive. You can open both (but whether you want to open both is a different question).

 

[kaspergm]

Why don't just introduce a system which makes it easier for civs to catch up with each other in science.

I think the key thought here is very interesting. If Rationalism (or whatever we call it) becomes a tree that focuses more on catching up rather than being a tree that lets whoever-is-first-into-Renaissance get an even bigger advantage, it will definitely add some interesting perspectives on the game. I guess that would mean a tie-in, directly or indirectly, with Espionage as Crafty Bison suggested above. Personally I find this a thought worth pursuing, if nothing else than just to see what ideas one could come up with, even though I still vote for a general overhaul of Espionage system (even if I'm don't believe we'll get that, at least from official side).

 

[Galgus]

I have myself argued for this change on several occasions. Currently, I play with a mod I made which does cut down Rationalism somewhat (for instance lowers the bonus from Secularism to 1 science per specialist) and changes the position of some policies so that you need to pick all policies to get the bonus from research agreements instead of having the option to push off Sovereignty. I do feel that makes the tree much more balanced, I still pay it visits fairly frequently in late game, but usually only after I've done at least some picking in ideology, and normally I can also manage without it on Emperor level.

If one were to remove Rationalism, I think there's little doubt that the Commerce/Exploration/new tree trio should be reworked in tandem. Commerce needs a boost of several policies - for instance the policies that increase trade routes should be merged into one in Commerce (both land and sea trade routes gain +4 gold). Commerce finisher needs a boost, namely adding +3 Culture and +3 Science to Customs Houses. Entrepreneurship also should grant a free Great Merchant imo.

Exploration needs a major overhaul (maybe rename it expansion). I've myself changed the +4 Gold from sea trade routes (now in commerce) to +25 % food/production from internal trade routes. The gold and happiness from naval buildings are merged into one policy. Navigation School also adds +1 science from lighthouse/harbor/seaport. A new policy is added that give all Settlers +2 movement and have new cities start with 2 extra citizens. This tree is intended to promote mid/late-game expansion. If a new tree is made instead of Rationalism, the finisher should be changed.

A potential new tree should focus on Archeology. It should inherit the current Exploration finisher which is the only thing in that tree that has anything to do with exploration and as such seems misplaced. Other benefits should be bonus to archeologist production, ability to buy archeologists with faith (finisher), perhaps a chance to find multiple artifacts from a dig site, ability to see what items will be in a dig site before digging it up (or after a couple of turns), etc.

Archeology could probably be worked into Aesthetics.

To be honest, I've never liked Aesthetics since it mostly feels like trading actually useful policies for a shot at a victory condition.

The changes to tourism benefits helped this a bit, but a tree that gives you culture if you put culture into it, and doesn't refund itself, doesn't make much sense to me.

__

Anyway, I go Commerce all the time, and I'd love to see it get the sea trade route gold bonus.

 

[kaspergm]

Archeology could probably be worked into Aesthetics.

To be honest, I've never liked Aesthetics since it mostly feels like trading actually useful policies for a shot at a victory condition.

The changes to tourism benefits helped this a bit, but a tree that gives you culture if you put culture into it, and doesn't refund itself, doesn't make much sense to me.

I get what you're saying about the "pay culture to get culture". The argument is not 100 % valid, however, because culture pays a double purpose: Not only is it the currency with which you pay for policies, it's also affecting your border spread and preventing foreign tourism influence. With regards to the latter cummulative effects, there is in fact an idea in paying culture to get more culture, but when that's said, I do feel that Aestetics could be spiced up a bit.

I'm not sure linking it to archeology is my prefered choice, however. Aesthetics opens in classical era, and archeology starts in industrial - that's a pretty long time gap. As such, I think linking Aesthetics to Great Works - in a more general sense - works better, because these start already in, well, classical era (with the guilds and Parthenon). However, many of the policies in Aesthetics are rather underwhelming: Artistic Genious (1 free Great Artist) is lacklustre at best, Fine Arts (50 % extra happiness added to culture suffers exactly of the "culture for culture" symptom and on top of that is mediocre at best (and bad in most situations), and Flourishing of the Arts (extra culture in cities with world wonders + free golden age), which not being bad, also suffers from a distinct lack of lasting impression.

It's a bit symptomatic that the overwhelmingly best way to get tourism impact in early game is not through Aesthetics, but through Piety - namely courtesy of the Sacred Sites belief. This is definitely something that Aesthetics should address. I do realize that tourism is supposed to be mostly a late-game feature, but it does feel a bit dissatisfactory that in most game up to at least Emperor, you can all but completely neglect tourism until Industrial era and then rather easily make up for it with a final rush of WC votings and those information era "free" boosts. So more focus on tourism - rather than culture - would probably be a good focus in order to boost Aesthetics.

 

[Galgus]

I get what you're saying about the "pay culture to get culture". The argument is not 100 % valid, however, because culture pays a double purpose: Not only is it the currency with which you pay for policies, it's also affecting your border spread and preventing foreign tourism influence. With regards to the latter cummulative effects, there is in fact an idea in paying culture to get more culture, but when that's said, I do feel that Aestetics could be spiced up a bit.

I'm not sure linking it to archeology is my prefered choice, however. Aesthetics opens in classical era, and archeology starts in industrial - that's a pretty long time gap. As such, I think linking Aesthetics to Great Works - in a more general sense - works better, because these start already in, well, classical era (with the guilds and Parthenon). However, many of the policies in Aesthetics are rather underwhelming: Artistic Genious (1 free Great Artist) is lacklustre at best, Fine Arts (50 % extra happiness added to culture suffers exactly of the "culture for culture" symptom and on top of that is mediocre at best (and bad in most situations), and Flourishing of the Arts (extra culture in cities with world wonders + free golden age), which not being bad, also suffers from a distinct lack of lasting impression.

It's a bit symptomatic that the overwhelmingly best way to get tourism impact in early game is not through Aesthetics, but through Piety - namely courtesy of the Sacred Sites belief. This is definitely something that Aesthetics should address. I do realize that tourism is supposed to be mostly a late-game feature, but it does feel a bit dissatisfactory that in most game up to at least Emperor, you can all but completely neglect tourism until Industrial era and then rather easily make up for it with a final rush of WC votings and those information era "free" boosts. So more focus on tourism - rather than culture - would probably be a good focus in order to boost Aesthetics.

I know there are some other advantages to the increased , but it seems far less beneficial to the empire on the way to its victory condition than, say, having a edge because you picked Rationalism.

For me to be happy with Aesthetics, I'd want more benefits from Tourism as well as earlier benefits.

There just isn't much gameplay in Tourism right now, as it is basically about filling specialists, nabbing the right World Wonders, and adopting Aesthetics.

I find the religion game far more interactive and interesting: with choices to be made on how far to spread the religion and how much one is willing to invest to maintain it.

Edit: Perhaps there could be a delegate bonus for the highest tourism civ.

 

[kaspergm]

I know there are some other advantages to the increased , but it seems far less beneficial to the empire on the way to its victory condition than, say, having a edge because you picked Rationalism.

Arguably true, although that is probably more symptomatic of a problem with Rationalism (being too good) than with Aesthetics (being too bad).

There just isn't much gameplay in Tourism right now, as it is basically about filling specialists, nabbing the right World Wonders, and adopting Aesthetics.

I find the religion game far more interactive and interesting: with choices to be made on how far to spread the religion and how much one is willing to invest to maintain it.

Edit: Perhaps there could be a delegate bonus for the highest tourism civ.

I definitely agree that a brainstorm on how to spread the importance of tourism to other parts of the game could be fruitful. I really liked how they in the fall patch added the benefits from conquering cities from a civ with whom you are culturally influential - that was both noticeable and providing a nice synergy between war and culture, so no doubt this is an example that could be followed.

A synergy between WC and tourism could work, although I don't think flat mandates is the way to go simply because that would also influence your diplomatic victory chances, and I think these two VC should be kept separate for balance reasons. However, as the set-up times for diplomats doesn't seem to follow your tourism level (unlike it does for spies after the fall patch) this is an obvious place to start. Having the ability to know what another civ will vote if you are dominating them (similar to how you know if you share ideology or have a diplomat) would also work, and possibly even have them more likely to vote in favor of your suggestion on higher influence levels.

An overall broadening of the concept of great works and how they work is probably something we'll see in future iterations of the game. I myself think it would be obvious to have works connected with other aspects than culture - for instance, you could have scientific writings also (tourism/science) and religious art (tourism/faith). I also feel the way we earn great works (build one guild for each, then just wait) is something that could be expanded.

 

[layelaye]

the reason rationalism is too good isnt because it gives science; its because it gives too much science.

if it had given +1% science when the empire is happy and +0.2 science for specialist it wouldent be so good now would it?

all it needs is a simple numbers nerf. change the opener to 3-5% and secularism to only effect science specialists and maybe give 1-1.5 science each, etc, and it will be balanced.

 

[kaspergm]

One thing I think would be kind of interesting would be if adopting rationalism would start to "convert" your citizens to atheism, which would mean your religious follower count would start to drop. Each citizen following atheism would increase science output of city by 1 % up to a maximum of 15 %. If majority of citizens are atheists you lose religion bonuses in that city.