katika
Warlord
In my games gems seem to be much more rare than incense or reagents. In my last game on a large (one above standard) map I had four incense and a reagent in my six cities. And I wasn't the only one with incense.
Incense and Reagents
- Thread starter Sarisin
- Start date
R0GERSHRUBBER
Shrubber
I rarely have problems with Reagents because I can still build Mages and Conjurers without them. Even if I get Archmages and Summoners late in the game, they still have a respectable amount of XP.
On the other hand, Incense and Gems are necessary to even build Priests, so they end up with significantly less XP if I can't get Gems/Incense.
My recommendation is to move the Gems/Incense/Reagents requirement to the new religion-specific High Priest/Inquisitors.
On the other hand, Incense and Gems are necessary to even build Priests, so they end up with significantly less XP if I can't get Gems/Incense.
My recommendation is to move the Gems/Incense/Reagents requirement to the new religion-specific High Priest/Inquisitors.
Great suggestion!
I think every civ should be able to build the basic Priest unit. Then, have the gems/incense requirement for the next level of Priest whether it be High Priest, Inquisitor or whatever.
BTW in my game, with only 20 turns left Tasunke with two Incense changed from Annoyed to Pleased with me in one turn - heavens knows why. I proposed a trade of Yggrasil for Incense and he went for it. So, now, with the game almost over, I finally got my Incense. Too bad it wasn't a bit sooner as my city with the 6 Altars is putting out some great XP for Disciple units.
onedreamer
Dragon
If I'm not wrong Incense and Reagents are more common than Gems, so I don't understand certain arguments. It's true however that gems have more ways to get discovered, but they give less advantages than reagents and incense (reagents = archmages, incense = more happyness). Overall, it's actually more likely for me to be without gems than incense.
In any case, if anything is to be changed, is reduce chances of appearance of Gems in mines, increasing appearance of incense and reagents would imbalance other things.
2 things:
1- Reagents are also need to build priests (of the Veil).
2- High Priests and Inquisitors are not religion specific...
In any case, if anything is to be changed, is reduce chances of appearance of Gems in mines, increasing appearance of incense and reagents would imbalance other things.
2 things:
1- Reagents are also need to build priests (of the Veil).
2- High Priests and Inquisitors are not religion specific...
kurioate only(to support super cities because of sprawling borders)
sixs_monkey
Warlord
Yeah, I see where Kuriotates would appreciate having those. My point was that perhaps it would be alright for some late game techs to unlock race-open versions of them.
R0GERSHRUBBER
Shrubber
That is my experience as well. I generally begin a game with an idea I want to see through (Civ+Religion combo), and nearly every time I play RoK I have to hunt for Gems.
1-Ah, I noted that on the second line but not the first. In any case, I meant to mention them all.
2-There will be religion-specific High Priests in 0.21. I wouldn't be surprised to see religion-specific Inquisitors at some point in the future as well.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=207471
onedreamer
Dragon
Same here. And if you look at the xmls, you will notice that it's not just our impression, but it's mathematical. So I don't really think that incense and reagents need a boost. Eventually, like I said, riduce spawn chances of Gems...
interesting, that could be a nice addition.
No, it wouldn't be best. Any other unit requires strategic resources, and I don't think that a HP or Inquisitor can be more important than an Archmage, yet they require the same resource... Point is, you most probably won't have all strategic resources. At least not unless you conquer most of the land mass.
hamtastic
Hamburglar
In my recent game, I was paying 93 g/turn for reagents just so I could upgrade to archmages. It would be nice if there were at least a wonder that could provide reagents to your civilization. (In this game, one civ had 4 sources of regents, one had one, and the rest of us had none - a bit of an irritating situation). Granted, it hasn't really handicapped me, but I still wish I had them on my own...
(I have ~50% of landmass at the moment, but still no reagents!)
(I have ~50% of landmass at the moment, but still no reagents!)
onedreamer
Dragon
well it really depends what kind of map you play. Most people play on continents, which I really don't like both in vanilla and especially in FFH.
But really 93g per ten turns is an ok price to be able to have 3 archmages.
But really 93g per ten turns is an ok price to be able to have 3 archmages.
Chandrasekhar
Determined
I suppose it would be nice if the tier-4 priest types required incense (or gems, or reagents) and the tier-3 ones didn't. The ability to bloom is very important for the FoL, and lacking that ability can cripple them. The Ring of Flames spell is also one of the strong points for the Order.
kenken244
Grammar Nazi
what if instead preists required the mana that relates to their religion?
onedreamer
Dragon
Well, actually I think Pillar of Flames is much better
Anyways this is a good idea that personally I support. Currently it is not possible because t3 priests (there are 3 tiers of priests) are not religion specific, but since in 0.21 they will, it's definitely something that can be done and that would compare to reagents needed for t3 arcane spellcasters.Well, that would make the system too similar to the one of arcane units IMO. It's good to have differences, isn't it ?
I'm sorry, but I think you are missing two of my main points.
First, that you can get Gems from gifts in mines. Every game I get gifts in the forms of metals and often, gems.
You cannot get incense in this manner, period. Why not add something like it?
Second, although tougher, you have the Dragon's Hoard which gives you gems. Again, there is nothing comparable for Incense.
It is true if you favor one religion over another you will likely prefer gems over incense, for example. All I am saying is make it either equally tough to get Gems and Incense, or add a few other ways of getting Incense to the game to balance it out.
I still like the idea of having a that can give incense or regents, or, better yet, as suggested, let the player build priests, etc. but have the requirement for the higher level type of gems and incense.
onedreamer
Dragon
I think it's rather the contrary. I answered each of your points but I don't see any comment from you to my answers ? I'll make a summary of my answers so you can comment on them.
My answer was: reduce this chances.
Answer was: because incense is more common than gems, and because it gives many more bonuses. You shouldn't think of incense and gems exclusively as a strategic resource to build priests, you have to consider the whole picture.
I think it's worth the prize. And at the point you can kill Acheron, I don't think it would really matter if you had stonewardens or not. I'd rather focus on making Acheron more dangerous than it now is, I believe it's currently way underpowered compared to what he's supposed to be.
The answer was that religions are balanced overall not in every single component separately.
Thank you for your discussion points.
I don't really see a problem with three suggestions made by others and myself:
1. Add a similar event to Gems popping in mines for incense or reagents.
2. Add incense or reagents to an existing Wonder or create a new one.
3. Eliminate the requirement for Gems/Incense/Reagents for priests, stonewardens, confessors, etc. and place it on the building of High Priests and Inquisitors.
I think where you and I disagree is whether or not there is a shortage of incense or reagents.
Consider one more point:
Three out of the five religions (dropping Cult) require Incense for their priests. You need Gems for ROK and Reagents for AV.
That means usually (of course not always) you will have more civs competing for incense. I know it depends on how many civs you have in your game, but I think many play Huge maps with the default no. of civs - 10. Again, the law of averages says you will have more civs competing for incense than gems. Reagents is a curve ball as you need that for your magicians too.
But, of the early religions, you need incense for two of them - OO and FOL. So, it should follow that you would have more civs competing for one resource.
How about this suggestion?
Let's give each religion its OWN resource it needs. Maybe add Dye and Wine to the mix. Or, create new resources.
Then, have an equal number of each resource on the map and an equal number of ways of getting the resource like popping it in a mine.
What do you think of that?
Thanks again for taking the time to discuss.
PS. I do realize the getting the extra happy face from a Pagan Temple with incense makes it perhaps more desirable and strategic than gems. Also, if you have more than one temple in your city that needs incense you will benefit.
It would be a great idea to not make the first level of priests require a resource, like adepts and axemen work, and have to capture resources to upgrade them.
My last online game inland sea as the elves with FoL there was no incense on the entire southern half of the map and had to take over half the map before I could reach some, meaning by the time I could use bloom, I was already ready to make druids and the druid hero, there also were no gems besides in acherons city anywhere on the map from what I saw.
My last online game inland sea as the elves with FoL there was no incense on the entire southern half of the map and had to take over half the map before I could reach some, meaning by the time I could use bloom, I was already ready to make druids and the druid hero, there also were no gems besides in acherons city anywhere on the map from what I saw.
onedreamer
Dragon
Yeah that's where. Ok, uhm... for the answer number 1 and 2 I repeat that I think it's better to lower the spawn chances of gems, because from my experience incense and reagents are common enough. Sure, there will be games where you won't have access to them, or only very late. Amen. That's how it's supposed to be with strategic resources. That's the point of them. If you were supposed to always have all strategic resources, then why have them at all ? This would bring us back to Civ2.
About number 3 I do agree, the problem was that until now it wasn't possible to do, but probably now that we will have religion-specific HP and Inquisitors it's very possible that the staff will take this in consideration.
Well, some considerations are due here. I always play on standard or large maps, I don't play huge, but if I'm not wrong with the increasing size of the map, not only civs are added, but also resources. So I don't really think it's a problem of map size. It is of course true that more religions require incense than gems, but that was balanced by 2 things:
1- incense are more common than gems.
2- religion distribution accross the tech tree.
Now, I'm talking at the past because from 0.20 the staff made changes to the point number 2 which I think need much more tuning. In 0.16 you would have FoL and RoK founded much before others (before the end of 0.16 OO needed Sailing instead of just fishing), this ensured a wide diffusion of both, therefor balancing the fact that 3 of 5 religions have incense as strategic resource. In 0.20 this is a bit fubar, personally I don't like the changes at all as I've seen Ashen Veil and Order founded way too early.
Sounds good.
not sure it sounds as good. Because certain religions are more powerful than others in certain fields, I think it's good if the strategic resource is harder to come by.
Exactly. This would also be fixed with a unique resource for each religion. Or by playing RoM
kenken244
Grammar Nazi
well a small fix could be that you can build preists of your religion in the holy city for no resource requirement
