Cheap jails I understand, but I don't see how cheap Custom Houses are any more appropriate to Imperialistic than Stables would be.
Imperialistic: no 1/2 production buildings?
- Thread starter Fraulzar
- Start date
bonafide11
Worker
I think the Custom Houses would refer to the economic aspects of Imperialism. As others have mentioned, Imperialism doesn't have to be only a military trait. The Custom Houses provide Imperialist with a slight bonus to their trading abilities, and Imperialist nations tend to have asymmetrical trading relations. It will not provide Imperialist with a major trading bonus, but a bonus to construct the Custom Houses faster. It's just a thought...
winddbourne
Prince
In my opinion Imperialistic shouldn't be even MOSTLY a war trait. Imperial cities are wealthy, often they govern trade empires, or empires like rome that were gotten only partially through conquest, and partially via culture or diplomacy. What is important is that imperial civilizations have the wealth and arms to support such an empire. A glorious prosperous and well guarded one. Not just another dictatorship.
The trick is making the bonus apropriate without it being overpowered. Maybe less cost for soldiers, a bonus to science and espionage? Maybe a lessoned cost for vassals, though the only imperial civilization I can think of that really went in heavilly for vassals is England, and that partially backfired.
Imperial implies large and wealthy, but not necessarilly conquest. Large stable empires like china are as imperial as rome or england, and many people call america imperial these days even though we conquer nothing. Though I admit we interfere way too much for my taste (I'm an isolationist) but that would be espionage and diplomacy not conquest.
The trick is making the bonus apropriate without it being overpowered. Maybe less cost for soldiers, a bonus to science and espionage? Maybe a lessoned cost for vassals, though the only imperial civilization I can think of that really went in heavilly for vassals is England, and that partially backfired.
Imperial implies large and wealthy, but not necessarilly conquest. Large stable empires like china are as imperial as rome or england, and many people call america imperial these days even though we conquer nothing. Though I admit we interfere way too much for my taste (I'm an isolationist) but that would be espionage and diplomacy not conquest.
bonafide11
Worker
The thing is Firaxis is not going to dramatically change the trait. We need to come up with ideas that will slightly help Imperialist without changing the trait. The GG bonus and Settler bonus are not going to be removed, so we need to find small bonuses that accompany them. Thus, making Imperialist a mostly financial trait isn't going to happen.
I've never understood why there is a trait that reduces civic upkeep costs but not number-of-cities costs, which to me is what Imperialistic is.
Civ oddity: Imperialists are often self-defeating because they can expand faster than their economy can keep up.
Civ oddity: Imperialists are often self-defeating because they can expand faster than their economy can keep up.
Pikkis
Prince
Where is this information from? I thought overseas maintenance costs just meant high distance costs made by the ocean between. Will overseas cities still have normal distance costs in addition to overseas maintenance? Wouldn't reduced overseas maintenance be bigger boost to Imperialistic, because it can't be reduced any other way except Ikhanda/Courthouse, if they work for overseas maintenance too. Does this mean that FP and Versailles don't give any help with Colonies?
KrikkitTwo
Immortal
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 12,418
Info from the Info Center thread on colonies
Overseas Cities will cost Overseas maintenance, as long as you own them, FP+Verssailles won't help
By giving your overseas cities to your Vassal (ie Colony) you don't have to pay ANY maintenance on them anymore (although they increase the # cities Maintenance in your cities)
The idea is that
Distance Maintenance has all type of solutions (FP, Versailles, State Property)
Overseas Maintenance was put in so there would be a reason to use Colonies (the only solution)
Number cities maintenance is almost Impossible to "solve". because even your Vassal (including Colony, Capitulated, and Voluntary Vassals) cities add in to what it costs in your cities.
So Imperialistic would be ideal for reducing that, because it helps you maintain a large empire of yourself OR Vassals.
Jails+ Custom Houses would be good, to represent 'Meddling in others affairs' through espionage+trade
Besides those two though, I'd just stick with Fixing the previous bonuses.
Food+Hammer Bonuses for the Settler are absolutely necessary (because It basically is a bug like early versions of overflow were a bug)
Improving the use of GG would also be good (partially as an overall game fix)
Pikkis
Prince
But how about Courthouses? Will they work with Overseas maintenance too, since they have this far worked with both Distance and NoC maintenance.
And there it was: "In addition to the regular maintenance costs, you will now also incur a significant additional cost for cities that aren't on the same continent as your capital." I guess I just didn't read that section after it was updated.
KrikkitTwo
Immortal
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 12,418
I'd imagine so, but courthouses are a Generic Solution
bonafide11
Worker
Organized already has the bonus to courthouses...
Pangur Bán
Deconstructed
Always thought the Imperialistic trait ought to bring benefits to a capital. Essentially, the larger Empire you have, the larger the core cities can become relying on food from conquered provinces. It was the grain of Africa, Egypt and Sicily that brought Rome's population to one million people in the imperial age, nothing else. Esp. in classical and medieval eras, huge cities can only become huge cities by being able to maintain a parasitical relationship on other areas. So, Imperialistic could mean, maybe, +50 % food for capital (or +100% if that wouldn't be overpowered).
bonafide11
Worker
It makes sense for Imperialist to get a bonus to the capital, especially since the majority of the new Imperialist leaders had such centralized administrations in their capital. For example, the Roman Empire needed Rome to be considered the Roman Empire. Likewise, without Rome, the Byzantine Empire centralized its power in Constantinople and this city became the Eastern version of Rome. Suleiman of the Ottomans is another example of an Imperialist leader with the extensive powerful capital. But I do not know if the food bonus is the right idea either. Also, it will be difficult for any bonus given to the capital to remain balanced throughout different map sizes and different game speeds, so it will be hard to implement, and as a result, I think it's unlikely that we'll see it...
Pangur Bán
Deconstructed
Interesting point about map sizes. Perhaps then a food bonus to the capital dependent on how many other cities are ruled from there. +1 or +2 (or something) food from each dependent city goes to capital. In large maps, there'd be a gigantic capital (surely appropriate) and on small ones a smaller capital. It may also encourage greater expansion, surely appropriate for an imperialistic civ. 
IbnKhaldun
Chieftain
I think that is a very good idea for a few reasons.
First because it provides a much needed bonus to the Imperialistic trait. While the half off jails or customs houses would be a good addition as well, I think they are a little limited in applicability. Genghis, Ögedei and Kublai Khan lacked customs houses (much less access to water) but the the golden Khanate DID have quite a few vassals.
Second because it is appropriate given the behavior of non-modern empires. Every empire from Rome to Britain profited from their vassal states whether through geographic access, resources or taxation. This would reflect that key relationship.
Lastly I think this gives Imperialistic leaders a powerful incentive to leverage their trait early and often. I can't tell you how excited I would be if the AI for Victoria started wars against underdeveloped overseas civilizations because, once conquered, they were very inexpensive to hold.
I wonder if there will ever be a "soft" or "market" imperialistic quality given to the game's leaders? I suppose that corporations will represent that to some degree. The modern day hegemonic influence the U.S., U.K. and (more generally) the West hold over the World's developing nations is definately non trivial element in global affairs. I would love to see that implemented formally in this game.
bonafide11
Worker
I don't like any improvement that will affect the game differently in single player than multi player, and I can't imagine (though I don't multi player) that many vassalages are formed between two human players.
kristopherb
Protective/Charismatic
Charismatic don't have cut price building's so what?
IbnKhaldun
Chieftain
A very good point! But I thought that human players at least CAN become vassals in multiplayer.
Or, you can just turn off Vassal States in the options menu when setting up the game, and there goes that bonus.
Right now, all the traits have utility no matter what you do in that options menu (with the exception of Always Peace, and even then, Charismatic still gives you happiness and Imperialistic quicker settlers). I would like to limit that, if at all possible, so I'd vote against improving Vassal States for Imperialistic. Giving a weak trait an improvement that can be turned off with a switch before the game begins doesn't strike me as a great fix.
Also, Charismatic doesn't have double production buildings because it already gives extra happiness (which, due to the longer lifespan of monuments in BtS, will be boosted) and improves your troops; in essence, it has two very strong abilities. Financial has only one ability (the commerce boost), but it is friggin' awesome, so it isn't too weak (I would still give them a double production building, though).
Right now, all the traits have utility no matter what you do in that options menu (with the exception of Always Peace, and even then, Charismatic still gives you happiness and Imperialistic quicker settlers). I would like to limit that, if at all possible, so I'd vote against improving Vassal States for Imperialistic. Giving a weak trait an improvement that can be turned off with a switch before the game begins doesn't strike me as a great fix.
Also, Charismatic doesn't have double production buildings because it already gives extra happiness (which, due to the longer lifespan of monuments in BtS, will be boosted) and improves your troops; in essence, it has two very strong abilities. Financial has only one ability (the commerce boost), but it is friggin' awesome, so it isn't too weak (I would still give them a double production building, though).
Pikkis
Prince
I would give them Bank bonus back too, though it would make Elizabeth ultimately powerful with double-speed Universities and Stock Exchanges and other benefits of Philosophical and Financial.
It could instead of Bank bonus have Customs House bonus too, if it doesn't go to Imperialistic. Customs House would be maybe better because it doesn't help civ which has CH-based UB (Portugal).
I just thought that if Courthouses give reduce to overseas maintenance too, The HRE with its Rathaus unique buildings can become a huge overseas colony power, while it wasn't that in the real history (it had a few colonies, but not huge colonial empire like the British Empire).
Similar threads
- Sticky
