1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Internal vs. External Trade Route Yield Mix

Discussion in 'General Balance' started by pineappledan, Jan 15, 2019.

Tags:
  1. pineappledan

    pineappledan Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2017
    Messages:
    4,868
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alberta, Canada
    I posted this earlier in the 01-15 patch notes:
    Then G said:
    So let's discuss. How might Culture be dealt with in External and Internal Trade Routes, so that they might make ITRs a viable counterplay option against a civ going for a CV?
     
  2. phantomaxl1207

    phantomaxl1207 King

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2010
    Messages:
    744
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Indiana
    ITR's getting Culture would help them fuel new Cities faster. How soon will the Culture kick in? Would ETR's gain another Yield in exchange of losing :c5culture:?

    Is there any need or desire to change the Ottomans' UA, as their UA triggers on TR completion with these new mechanics? Other TR UA's are per Turn.

    I am surprised that no later game Buildings provide :tourism: on finishing a ETR.

    What if, having higher levels of Influence reduced opposing Player Influence? Say both Players having Popular with one-another will give them less Influence than a Popular to an Exotic Influence.
     
  3. pineappledan

    pineappledan Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2017
    Messages:
    4,868
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alberta, Canada
    I don’t necessarily think that :c5culture: should be eliminated from ETRs, but maybe the amount from policy leaders could be harshly reduced, maybe only 1:c5culture: per policy lead. The :c5culture: from CS ETRs could be cut by half IMO

    To compensate, ITRs could gain a either a flat 2:c5culture: to destination city, or more buildings could be added to YieldsOnITR. Maybe 25:c5culture: on ITR for Customs House and 50:c5culture: on Stock Exchange?

    Mendicancy could be changed to 2:c5food:2:c5culture: on ITRs, scaling with Era, and swap the flat 2:c5culture: on cities to a different yield
     
  4. Minh Le

    Minh Le King

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2018
    Messages:
    793
    Gender:
    Male
    I think you guys are undervaluing ITRs. In my recent games I used them a lot and they are the thing that carried me, not ETRs, only use 2 or 3 to the culture leader. I tried using ITRs with Medicancy/Fealty; Statecraft/Industry; Industry/Order. All of these combinations give really good yield on ITRs and each ITR worths more than 10 of my citizens working food tiles. That's huge.
    Give culture to ITRs then I dont see any reason to use ETR anymore :).
     
  5. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,064
    My main concern with weakening ETRs is that high level players rely on them as a rubberband mechanic, allowing players to keep up somewhat with AI bonuses through the extra bonuses they receive. This also allows lesser civs to catchup to the big boys a bit.

    If we weaken ETRs we weaken that mechanic. Now if the diety players want the game to be even harder that is one way to do it, or this could be done in conjunction with a slight reduction to the AI handicap.

    Overall, I don't feel ITRs need to be equivalent to ETRs all the time...as long as they have a niche. Right now they are decent early on (especially for starting cities), but tend to fall in usefulness pretty quickly once infrastructure is established. So if we can stretch that niche a bit, that would be enough for me.

    The fact that CV play relies a lot on ETRs is not a critical concern for me.

    G also mentioned going back to some static bonuses for tourism instead of just a big lump sum. I'm all for that, I like the steadier pace myself, its easier to see how your doing than when everything comes in giant bombs.
     
    Gokudo01 likes this.
  6. Minh Le

    Minh Le King

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2018
    Messages:
    793
    Gender:
    Male
    Even going for CV, 2 or 3 TRs to the culture leader are enough (or you wont be able to win CV). ITRs are more valuable to feed cities to work culture specialists.
     
  7. chicorbeef

    chicorbeef Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2017
    Messages:
    1,356
    Gender:
    Male
    Internal Routes are buffed with Mendicancy and Fealty. I think it's enough.

    External routes are supposed to be valuable. It makes much more sense that trading with your neighbours is profitable. It creates good interactions and catchup mechanics in the game. It makes sense that using exclusively internal routes would be weaker than a mix. If we give Culture to Internals I think we'll swing too far in the wrong direction.

    I think the two are balanced right now, especially with the new bursts of Production/Food.
     
    civplayer33 likes this.
  8. CrazyG

    CrazyG Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    4,781
    Location:
    Beijing
    The purpose of internal trade routes is to develop cities, right? I think it should stay that way and only give food/production. Its elegant design to have internal routes give local yields, and international routes give the empire wide yields.
     
    Gokudo01 likes this.
  9. pineappledan

    pineappledan Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2017
    Messages:
    4,868
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alberta, Canada
    My objective wasn't to necessarily buff ITRs and weaken ETRs with this discussion. I wanted to discuss changing the yield "mix" on ITRs/ETRs.

    ETRs provide 4 different yields, whereas ITRs provide 2, and only ever provide them 1 at a time. Even if ITRs have very good yields for those 2 yields, it's still limiting that an ETR can be contributing all 4 types of yields at once.
    The other problem is that 2 of ETR's yields, :c5science: and :tourism: contribute directly to a victory condition, while ITR's :c5production:/:c5food:, do not. The strong infrastructure provided by ITRs can be valuable enough on its own, but if you're focused on a cultural or science victory, then it's hard to pass up a source of those yields in favor of slightly better infrastructure which can indirectly contribute to those ends.

    If Culture is reduced, removed from ETRs, it would be more than fair to increase Gold and Science, and maybe even add back some benefits to Tourism. Likewise, if we added Culture to ITRs, I think we could relax the overall yield output to make room, so to speak.
    Wouldn't adding some :c5culture: to ITRs count as developing cities? Culture IS a local yield. It can take a while to get borders growing quickly to grab the resources for that city.
     
    CppMaster likes this.
  10. Minh Le

    Minh Le King

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2018
    Messages:
    793
    Gender:
    Male
    Food TRs to a city allow it to work more culture/science specialists so they actually contribute to any kind of victory condition. ETRs Science/Culture only worth if youre behind, or to ally city states. If youre still behind in Renaissance, this game probably lost already, and you wont have that many of ally city states to trade with, and even if I have plenty of CS ally, I still find that food TR to my cities are more valuable.
     
  11. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,064
    I think this is a bit of a false premise, especially with culture specialists. I can usually work all of my guilds without issue, even without ITRs.
     
  12. pineappledan

    pineappledan Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2017
    Messages:
    4,868
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alberta, Canada
    Yes, hence why I said direct vs indirect contributions to those victory conditions. Merely explaining back to me what those indirect contributions are isn't really making an argument.
     
    CppMaster likes this.
  13. CrazyG

    CrazyG Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    4,781
    Location:
    Beijing
    I still wouldn't consider culture a local yield. If you need more tiles, buy them. If you need gold, get an external trade route.

    I agree that the link between tourism and external routes can be.....strange? I'm not sure what the word is, but I'm not a fan of ETR being too important in cultural victories.

    Trade routes provide science when you are behind in tech, which if you are going for a spaceship victory, isn't very likely. I don't think their science very much contributes much to a scientific victory.
     
  14. Bromar1

    Bromar1 King

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2015
    Messages:
    801
    I don't know if this is possible but what about +25% border growth to cities receiving ITR? This would help infrastructure without inflating yields
     
    Gokudo01, Stalker0 and tu_79 like this.
  15. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,064
    I think it does early on. Often you are behind the AI as you build up your infrastructure, and use the rubber band of trade routes (and spies) to get tech parity and then can move ahead. Late game I don't get much science from ETRs, but for a good portion of the game you do.
     
  16. CrazyG

    CrazyG Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    4,781
    Location:
    Beijing
    I do pick up science from trade routes early in the game, even as Korea, but I've never had the thought "I'm trying to win by science, therefore I should do a ETR instead of an ITR". If we are talking about the science victory itself, we are talking about late game science, and its not significant.
     
    Bromar1 likes this.

Share This Page