Info on Next Patch

[The Tollan]

The SP change appears to be positive.

Still, several of the policies are significantly lacking in utility and do not provide adequate benefits compared to other ones. It might be too early to expect changes right now but in the future such changes will need to come.

 

[Celevin]

You argue that the change forces micro-managing, but I thought almost every example you gave was some sort of micro-managing. Sonereal offered a couple of solutions to your concerns, so I'll reply more generally.

I hated the saving-SPs exploit partly because it was used as a slingshotting exploit, and that is probably why the designers fixed it. But my biggest beef with it is that it is so blatantly phony. This is not an abstract game, but one loosely based on social, cultural and military history. Saving SPs goes against the game's verisimilitude. Now if you're the sort of player who sells a bunch of cities at once to jack your score or finish date, then I can see why you would not like having an exploit taken away from you. I don't play that way, so I'm very happy to have the exploit removed.

I'm really not that type of player. I think I'm one of the first to write up about that kind of play on these forums, but that's because I hate it so much and want to see it fixed. This change does not fix it, it only mitigates it while greatly hurting any player that doesn't closely watch their time till next policy. I can still buy my last 4 policies at greatly reduced cost after this change. I can still slingshot to Order. Yet I'm now being punished because my policy rate was one turn behind my tech rate. While this change addresses the most extreme ways of playing, it's going to cause headache inducing micromanagement that must be done at the same level of trying to manage the no beaker overflow, with devastating results if you mess up.

There's nothing wrong with saving up policies. By saving, the player is giving up an advantage right now in order to gain a (hopefully bigger) advantage later on. The reason it's being abused is because some policy trees are just plain old better. Remove slingshotting, even the trees out, and remove selling abuse. These are the real problems. Not letting players save policies for even a single turn just covers these issues up.


Don't mention history. This is a game, you make mechanics, then pretend it resembles anything real afterwards. If the mechanics don't work then it isn't fun no matter how closely it resembles whatever it's trying to be. A game is always an abstraction.

 

[PawelS]

I wonder what will happen when you have adopted all policies available in the current era and gain enough culture to get another one...

 

[MinutiaRules]

Yes: I like being required to use SPs and promos at the time earned. Seems more in line with how things happen in "reality". And that was probably the original design intent.

No: Okay horse units are powerful in the right hands. But then again horse units ARE powerful in the right hands! And its nice to have variety in the choice of military and in military decision making. Are people taking too many AI cities too quickly with horse units? Then patch the AI to use horse units too!!!! You take my city I'll take yours so you better think twice. In none of my games has the AI bothered to build that many (if any) horse units. Even when they are the initiator of the aggression they don't bother to balance out their attack with them. If the AI was patched to appreciate horse units then that aspect of the game would balance out very nicely and variety wouldn't be reduced. Then there would be a possibility of considerations along the lines of "do I need more (or any) spearmen in case of a large number of horse units appearing?"

 

[smellymummy]

I'll miss the ability to stockpile SP's (especially the free one from the Oracle ) but I think this change makes sense...seems kind of silly that you can enter a new era and immediately gain 3-5 policies relevant to that new age in a single turn.

i'm pretty sure it was the original idea to block new turns on policy change. the AI does it, and the way the code treats new policies is along the same lines of how new production/new research is treated. the only difference is that the devs didn't trap the click the new policy notification away thing

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I've always played as if the SP rule were already in effect, and always get into the second half of the tree (3-7 policies) while going for a science victory. What do you consider a "small" civ? Mine range as high as 12 cities, with no puppets.

Same here-on the rare occasions I've played the game (am seriously hoping this patch will change my aversion to the game) I've always treated it as if the SP rule were in effect-purchasing a new policy as soon as my culture breached the threshold!

Aussie.

 

[Pouakai]

* Policies must be selected the turn they are earned. (Added 11/18)

What?

Sometimes I've been saving my social policies until I hit medievil, then complete patronage straight away... bad move Firaxis!

 

[Txurce]

I'm really not that type of player. I think I'm one of the first to write up about that kind of play on these forums, but that's because I hate it so much and want to see it fixed. This change does not fix it, it only mitigates it while greatly hurting any player that doesn't closely watch their time till next policy... While this change addresses the most extreme ways of playing, it's going to cause headache inducing micromanagement that must be done at the same level of trying to manage the no beaker overflow, with devastating results if you mess up.

I see a lot of your points, but given that I already play this way, don't find them problematic. I don't see how it greatly hurts or devastates anything. If you don't nail a transition just the way you wanted it... you probably won't be breaking any records that game. I kepe track of my best games, but to me that's not a big deal.

Don't mention history. This is a game, you make mechanics, then pretend it resembles anything real afterwards. If the mechanics don't work then it isn't fun no matter how closely it resembles whatever it's trying to be. A game is always an abstraction.

Here is where we will probably always disagree. This is a game painstakingly designed to let us pretend afterward, as you said. Not saving SPs lets me pretend a little more.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

What?

Sometimes I've been saving my social policies until I hit medievil, then complete patronage straight away... bad move Firaxis!

and with that, you've effectively demonstrated why Firaxis made the right decision in changing it. Heck, City-States are already way-overpowered without this kind of gamey behaviour!

Aussie.

 

[Txurce]

...am seriously hoping this patch will change my aversion to the game...

Let us know, Aussie. Given your dedication and contribution to Civ 5, I really hope that's the case.

 

[Pouakai]

and with that, you've effectively demonstrated why Firaxis made the right decision in changing it. Heck, City-States are already way-overpowered without this kind of gamey behaviour!

Aussie.

I was aiming for Diplomatic victory, not bonuses.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Let us know, Aussie. Given your dedication and contribution to Civ 5, I really hope that's the case.

I've been dedicated to the Civ franchise-that's true-but Civ5 still remains a dissapointment. An AI that won't leave its units in the open to be bombarded by my city-amongst other things-will be a great joy!

Aussie.

 

[smellymummy]

I wonder what will happen when you have adopted all policies available in the current era and gain enough culture to get another one...

worst case: firaxis forget to check if you cant get a new policy and your turn is blocked forever! more than likely: play as normal until you change era where a notification triggers to say 'hey time to buy a policy!'

What?

Sometimes I've been saving my social policies until I hit medievil, then complete patronage straight away... bad move Firaxis!

i would do the same with the sea/commerce thing. but thing is the AI doesn't do this, it buys a policy right away so might as well make it level with the AI in that department of decision making

 

[Buccaneer]

What?

Sometimes I've been saving my social policies until I hit medievil, then complete patronage straight away... bad move Firaxis!

Congratulations. You now have jumped so far ahead of the AI and won the game.

 

[Wulf38]

I like most of the changes, but the social policy change is just going to make it even harder to unlock Order and Autocracy in time to actually influence the outcome of the game. I feel like those trees should be bumped down to renaissance to make them more influential.

 

[ohioastronomy]

All stick so far, no carrot. Pretty much what I expected, sadly.

I'm waiting for "building times less ridiculously long" or the like, as opposed to nerf nerf nerf.

And the folks defending the penalty for defending on open ground...hmm, we don't see other games taking this approach. Why, I wonder? Perhaps because it makes for poor gameplay?

In a normal game it's easier to defend yourself than attack someone, and the entire logic in this game reverses this. (No, it doesn't favor the "strategic defender." The defender in this game just has their units sit there while the attacker whacks them.) It's also an AI handicap, since the AI has a harder time using terrain - and the poor movement algorithm frequently forces units, or excess units, into the open to be slaughtered.

 

[boehj]

All the right keywords have been mentioned. The big ones = Maritime; horse; archers. I can't wait to have a play of CiV RC3. It looks very promising. No doubt there'll be a new set of issues that'll crop up but we're headed in the right direction I feel.

Oh, and to all you gamers out there that are blatantly gaming this game with 'game-y' strats & tactics, just stop it would you.

Game on!

 

[smellymummy]

It's also an AI handicap, since the AI has a harder time using terrain - and the poor movement algorithm frequently forces units, or excess units, into the open to be slaughtered.

no, actually the default pathfinding will put a unit on a defensible tile all the time over open terrain. it avoids open terrain when possible at all times

however it will not for example calculate a "detour" where it reaches x,y using the best defensible path, it searches for shortest path with defensible tiles. its not the best, but it's the quickest, which is really important in the early turns for the AI to found a city: every turn counts

 

[Illuminated]

All the right keywords have been mentioned. The big ones = Maritime; horse; archers. I can't wait to have a play of CiV RC3.

I was thinking more along the lines of Beta 3.

 

[ohioastronomy]

no, actually the default pathfinding will put a unit on a defensible tile all the time over open terrain. it avoids open terrain when possible at all times

however it will not for example calculate a "detour" where it reaches x,y using the best defensible path, it searches for shortest path with defensible tiles. its not the best, but it's the quickest, which is really important in the early turns for the AI to found a city: every turn counts

Not when there are too many units, and not when terrain is constricting. There is also balancing the fog of war - e.g. not knowing when it is safe or not because of enemy units just outside of range. The too many units bit is important because that is the main equalizer that the AI gets in this series (more units), and the architecture neuters that.