Improvement adjustments

[[to_xp]Gekko]

my 2 cents is that cottages and subsequent improvements should give +1food due to the 3food consumptions per population point and the need to be competitive with farms. the 3food stuff comes from RoM , and I remember back in the days when I played it before trying FFH, the AI would never ever build a cottage and the +1food was just needed. dunno how it is now in RoM, things might have changed wildly but that's what I remember and it seems fair to me

 

[ricolikesrice]

thinking about it, i think the following could be a good try at balance:

cottages/villages/towns

+1
+1 (only towns, ahwaric already posted this for upcomming patch H )

(maybe my before suggested change that cottages/villages/towns cant be build next to each other similar to fishing villages as well )

civics:

Agrarianism: remove the +1 for farms from this civic and replace it with something like +10-20% production.

Scholarship: remove the +1 and instead maybe increase the percentage to bonus

Guilds: remove the +1 +1 bonus and replace it by something else

City States: cottages/villages +1 , towns +2

Wonders:

Great Library: +1 for your sages (nerfed from +2 )


The "Why?"´s :

i think the best way of bringing farms from an overpowered to competive level is reducing the effectiveness of great specialists while slightly buffing towns by making them at least self-sufficient (on grassland).
before you could have a sage producing 3 (base) + 1 (scholarship) + 2 (great library) + 1 (guilds) = 7 !!! no way a town can compete with a farm feeding such a super sage which in addition also speeds up getting the next greatperson.

 

[Ahwaric]

The change in number of required per population point is to limit city growth. This is an ancient/medieval world so food is important. It is very important. Just as plagues but I have yet to implement it correctly.

So, 3 food stays. But I wanted to allow people to grow bigger cities. Maybe it is too much atm. I may remove base +1 food form farms and bring them back to max at 2 at sanitation. I want food to be scarce, not to add it everywhere because population needs so much.
If I did that, the whole change would be meaningless.
But I hate cottages everywhere. Cottage economy is fine, as is specialist economy. But I want these competetive and in base FfH you can just build cottages everywhere and be fine. There is no turning back to this.
So, I think of nerfing farms atm. It is easier than empovering all other improvements, and may limit population explosion in late game. Farms will still be usefull, but it will be hard to survive on plain only areas
Farms on plains will not be enough to support population point before sanitation. Need to check it in game so will probably wait till next patch.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

cottages everywhere fine in base ffh? nah. you still need farms, but that's not the real problem. the real problem is that aristograrian economy stomps cottage economy and grinds it under its chunky toes turning it into a fine powder. I do admit I miss the awesome -1F+2C aristocracy gives in Orbis. it's still way better than base FFH where aristograrian is a no-brainer except for VERY specific situations though.

 

[Opera]

Ah, well, I like this. I was thinking of giving the Ngomele +1 for Cottages, Hamlets and Villages, since they can't build farms and many other improvements and can't upgrade Villages to Towns, so if you did it for everybody, it would have lessened the interest

 

[ExMachina]

I may remove base +1 food form farms and bring them back to max at 2 at sanitation. I want food to be scarce, not to add it everywhere because population needs so much.

If you did that, it would be extremely difficult/nigh impossible to maintain a population in the early game. I think the problems lie in the numerous late-game bonuses to improvements, but I don't have time to really delve into it too deeply right now. The first one that pops into mind is the +1 to farms at Taxation, I think it should be removed.

 

[copx]

The change in number of required per population point is to limit city growth. This is an ancient/medieval world so food is important. It is very important. Just as plagues but I have yet to implement it correctly.

So, 3 food stays. But I wanted to allow people to grow bigger cities. Maybe it is too much atm. I may remove base +1 food form farms and bring them back to max at 2 at sanitation. I want food to be scarce, not to add it everywhere because population needs so much.

I would remove the late game +1 bonus instead. Cannot say the food did not feel scarce enough for me in the early and mid game.
Also the change makes picking the Agrarianism civic even more of a no-brainer than it already is. The moment I research the required tech I switch to it .. and never switch to a different civic in that category until the end of the game. Kinda boring.

If I did that, the whole change would be meaningless.
But I hate cottages everywhere. Cottage economy is fine, as is specialist economy. But I want these competetive and in base FfH you can just build cottages everywhere and be fine. There is no turning back to this.
So, I think of nerfing farms atm. It is easier than empovering all other improvements, and may limit population explosion in late game. Farms will still be usefull, but it will be hard to survive on plain only areas
Farms on plains will not be enough to support population point before sanitation.

Have you considered that all Illian terrain quickly turns into the equivalent of plains (your version of Illian ice)?! They were already crippled with the old farms, if you reduce the base yield of farms I don't see how Illians are supposed to be played as anything but a special challenge game. Also many map scripts (including some of the most popular ones) generate vast plain only areas..

 

[Ahwaric]

It is done...

Due to complains for overpowered farms I have nerfed them. So, only +1 food per farm till you research sanitation.. Or, you can run agrarianism, I am fine with it being great in early game.

I WANT food in early game to be limiting factor. The key is survival, expansion will come later.

Also, with +3 from city center you can reach size 4 on grass or 2 on plains with no farms and no food source. With any, the size increases a lot.

Illian version of ice will stay as it is. Plains are not a bad terrain. No one complains about plains. Well, maybe a bit.
So find some food resources, a bit of fresh water or crystal plains. And build farms.
Illians are not supposed to be that numerous. Challenging - maybe. Crippling - do not think so.

Of course, I know you people have different opinion. I am going to test current rules and work on it. All feedback is welcomed.
But I still have some principles in mind.

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

so now a grassland with a farm in the early game will give 3food, which is totally useless since it just sustains itself without giving any additional yield. I think copx hit the nail right on the head in his post, something seems wrong here. it's the lategame yields that are overpowered, not the early game. I agree with what he says about agrarianism too.

edit: this post sounds overly critical. the point still stands though

 

[Ahwaric]

So, the main problem with too big yields was +1 that taxation gives to farms, right? And that you actually have to build farms (not only on grain resources) to support towns, even on grassland.
Because if early game yields are fine, there is nothing I have changed here. Bonus food from sanitation is from base FfH and with increase food consumption it is fine
The starting bonus and extra base farm yield did cancel out...

So where is the problem then?

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

dammit, now you got me confused cuz I don't have Orbis installed right now and I can't check the actual numbers

anyway. having to build farms to support other improvements is perfectly logical to me. I actually really like the way improvements and civics work in Orbis compared to FFH, and even if I'm not a fan of the 3food per pop I don't have anything specific against it either ( if it aint broken to start with, then generally trying to fix it is a bad idea. that's all ) .

the problem is that, if I'm remembering stuff correctly, now under patch H a farm on a grassland will give 3 food, until you get sanitation or adopt agrarianism. since we don't want to force players to do either of this, this thing right here is what I have a problem with. in base FFH, a farm on the most food-rich ( i.e. best, since food is the most valuable yield ) tile is 3 food. which is useful, because it sustains itself + give an extra food to work a tile with 1F only for example ( like a nice grassland hill mine ) . however, in Orbis with the 3F consumption per pop this wouldn't work, because a tile that gives just enough food to sustain itself and nothing else is de facto a useless tile. so, a farm on grassland needs to give at least 4 food, so that it is actually useful.

if I'm wrong with the numbers, or if I missed some obvious point somewhere please let me know and feel free to publicly embarass me and put me to shame

 

[Pazyryk]

My 2 cents.

I really like the fact that it is so hard to max out city size in Orbis, and the farm nerf probably makes it more so. In fact, if it was my modmod, I'd nerf it so bad that you wouldn't even think of building a city without some good food resources nearby (unless you're building a strategic outpost, which should cost you). And while I'm acting like the Grinch Who Stole Christmas (or is that Ahwaric's job?), can't we do away with the ridiculous elf megalopolises somehow? What, are they eating those ancient trees? Give them some other toys instead. I just don't feel like giant megalopolises are very elfish. Also, the ability to eat trees (in conjunction with infinite happiness from Guardian of Nature civic) really takes away from CoE for Svarts.

Regarding Ag being a no-brainer, why not just boost the other civics. (They don't need to be "perfectly" balanced, just as long as there is some hard choices down the road or in some circumstances.)

 

[Hansebenger]

Lets calculate:
Farm (Orbis 0.24G) feeding ill sages (Each needs 4F; Vassalage;Guilds;Agrarism;The Civic which gives specialists 1research): 4F2C-->4.4F,2.6C(Market,Guilds enhancing raw output)-->Can support 1.1 ill sages(6research,1money)-->2.6+(6+1)x1.1=10.3
Best cottage (Guilds): 5commerce x 1.3 (Market, Guilds enhancing raw output)= 6.5

I think cottages shouldn't be given +1F to feed themselves, I think they should be given + 1 or 2 coin at some stage. So you would have to still build lots of farms to feed the cottages.
I do not like the farm change either. Like the others mentioned a farm on a grassland (3F) can't support another 2F tile with a cottage now. So I would give it back the initial 2F. But I would remove either the +1F with either sanitation or Agrarism (I tend to remove Agrarism because you cannot really make a civic in this branch which is better than +1F per farm...). And I would remove the +1Coin with the vassalage civic. Additionnally I would remove the specialists bonus with guilds and move the current 1research bonus for specialists civic (I do not have an english version, sorry) to Sorcery.

Farm (My proposal): 3F1C--> 3.3F1.3C-->Can support 0.825 ill sages (5research)-->1.3+5x0.825= 5.425

So a best stage cottage would be better than a farm, not cause such many happyness issues like a Specialist Economy but also be more vulnerable. What do you think about this being more balanced ?

Sorry for my bad english

 

[Ahwaric]

having to build farms to support other improvements is perfectly logical to me.
the problem is that, if I'm remembering stuff correctly, now under patch H a farm on a grassland will give 3 food, until you get sanitation or adopt agrarianism.
if I'm not a fan of the 3food per pop I don't have anything specific against it either ( if it aint broken to start with, then generally trying to fix it is a bad idea. that's all )

That is the whole point. It was ok, but I want to change the whole mechanics so that you feel thet you struggle for food in early game and can't really grow big populations.
Erebus is a dark and unforgiving world fresh after Ice age. Also, during medieval times much more area was taken by farms and the food output was much lower than today. The famine was common. I want to simulate this.
So, farms before sanitation and plain see with no resources (but with a lighthouse) are now barely able to sutain themselves. But city hasa some extra food to allow it to grow or claim other resources/types of improvement. Also, in early game hunting (forester) is a viable strategy, too. Especially for elves as they get nothing from normal farms.
Also, flood plains and wetlands (with construction) are very valuable now as these give extra food you need to expand. So are food resources.
That changes with sanitation as the agriculture improves - so you get a little surplus from good farms and can expand.
Agrarianism is ment as a way to get some extra population. But I want it to have serious drawbacks so that you change from it if you are not really low on food and can afford civic better for the rest of economy

So, it is a big change - a change in philospohy what should the early farming do. I know it is not to everyone's liking and needs further balancing, but I wanted to explain myself.

@Hanseberger
I feel farms and towns are quite balanced now. But I may need to redo your calculation for patch H. In G I agree, farms were way overpowered

By the way, I reuploaded patch H with the following changes:
Agrarianism changed to -20%
Illian bonuses changed to +2 from snow, +1 from tundra and crystal plains
Updated yields chart in the editor

I really like the fact that it is so hard to max out city size in Orbis, and the farm nerf probably makes it more so. I

Great, so I am not the only one
Regarding elves, it bothers me too. That is why they get -1 from farms. But I think of changing ancient forests to +1 instead of and giving them normal farm yields.
Or maybe a special building that gives -20% food gain but a nice extras? And make it work as infernal citizens in infernal cities? Elven citizens anyone?

 

[copx]

Regarding elves, it bothers me too. That is why they get -1 from farms. But I think of changing ancient forests to +1 instead of and giving them normal farm yields.

I would suggest that you don't allow elves to build farms on ancient forests at all instead. I don't like all these farms on totally inappropriate terrain. I am thinking about trying to come up with a new scheme for the improvements myself and I wonder whether the AI will be able to adapt.. Do you need to hack the C++ to tell the AI what improvements to build or is there some generalized routine which just looks at the yields and then picks whatever serves it's current goal?

 

[[to_xp]Gekko]

yep, I agree. the -1food from farms for elves is unfair, way better to just don't let them build those in forests if you want to limit their food yields ( careful with that though, it will make guardian of nature less useful to them if they can never get the full use out of their huge healthy/happy caps ) , and farms in forests never made sense anyway. giving them worse yields from farms though doesn't strike me as a good thing, since I feel it takes away from their possible range of choices for improvements.

aside from this, I like your interpretation of how Erebus should feel. but please always remember that flavour and historical realism ( which is a moot point in a world in which you can shoot fireballs anyway ) are supposed to come after gameplay. and imho the fact that grassland+farm give 3F in the early game is not good for gameplay. it's not like making those yield 4 food will let you build huge cities in the earlygame anyway, but at the very least those tiles will actually have some degree of usefulness. if you want to avoid farms giving lots of food, changing agrarianism so that it gives a percentage increase to it instead of extra farm yield seems better, and you could also move the +1F from sanitation to a later tech if you want

 

[Schwarzbart]

There is a other Problem with Elfes build Farms in the Forest because if theyr City got Captured the one who Captured the City still get the Full Bonus. So I als think it would be bether to dont allow to build Farms at all in the Woods.

 

[Opera]

Also, remember that coast tiles are now viable, with increased food and kelp. Plus, with one or two food resources, even with 3F grasslands in the beginning, you can easily grow

 

[Ahwaric]

I would suggest that you don't allow elves to build farms on ancient forests at all instead. I don't like all these farms on totally inappropriate terrain.

You mean illians? Well, they grow special snow algae
And elves have orchards. Actually, I think I will import freya's look of elven farms next - they look like fruiting shrubs.
I think elves know a way to grow plants in the ancient forests and I actually like the change. I just do not like the amount of food they get and the size of cities they can easily grow.
Schwarzbart has a point though. But the same can be told of all other improvements and Kurio Enclaves. MAybe we need mechanics that encourages cutting forests in areas captured from elves?

I am thinking about trying to come up with a new scheme for the improvements myself and I wonder whether the AI will be able to adapt.. Do you need to hack the C++ to tell the AI what improvements to build or is there some generalized routine which just looks at the yields and then picks whatever serves it's current goal?

I think AI is programmed to take yields into acount, if the imrovement requires/carries irrigation etc. So name does not matter. Only the effects do.

careful with that though, it will make guardian of nature less useful to them if they can never get the full use out of their huge healthy/happy caps

The problem is that it is too usefull for them. Elves are suppoesd to be nerly extinct during the age of ice. Have long lifespan so probably low birthrate. So why they have the biggest cities?
I seen no problem if guardian is not that usefull. No better choices anyway and FoL and Guardian are overpowered for elves right now.

historical realism is a moot point in a world in which you can shoot fireballs anyway

I like an opinion of one of polish fantasy writers - you accept there is magic in the world and that gods intervene and there are magical beasts and demons. But you still expect the things to fall down not up most of the time, that plants need sun to grow and that people need to eat. And that developing technology makes some things previously impossible possible. And developing technology is an important factor in Civ IV, both standard and FfH/Orbis

but please always remember that flavour and historical realism are supposed to come after gameplay and imho the fact that grassland+farm give 3F in the early game is not good for gameplay

I do. And gameplay I think is fine, just one needs to be more carefull planning where to settle and what improvements to build. FfH is generally easy compared to Civ IV, so I want to make that harder.
Also, let's check the gameplay in 24 H first. I tried a bit and it does seem ok. Illians were less so, so were changed.

it's not like making those yield 4 food will let you build huge cities in the earlygame anyway, but at the very least those tiles will actually have some degree of usefulness.

Maybe not, but the food carries over to late game. In early game you will probably use mostly resource or other good tiles anyway. Base improvement yields are more important when the game advances and you have to use also standard tiles.
Also, farm tile is still usefull - it lets you to grow a bit bigger city and we agree that bigger population is a good thing. Als, there is a chance thay you will discover new resources.
If you really need food, you can take agrarianism. But I repeat, I will nerf it as long as it is not longer considered unbalanced. But yield bonuses from farms and plantations will stay as they are - % bonus uses also food from sea, foresters etc. and that is not the flavour of agrarianism.

 

[Opera]

Schwarzbart has a point though. But the same can be told of all other improvements and Kurio Enclaves. MAybe we need mechanics that encourages cutting forests in areas captured from elves?

I changed that a bit in LENA. I don't remember if it works for improvements with a PrereqCivilization but improvements with BlockCivilization (new tags) will either go down their previous upgrade or will be removed if they are in the border of a civilization they're blocked for. I view as if the civilization wasn't able/willing to adapt to this unknown kind of thing and just changed it to its usual ways. Makes more sense (and more balance).