Libraries

[tu_79]

If you dislike the new importance of military buildings, then say so. Gazebo went for a simplified military infrastructure that seems to have made the change jarring for some peaceful players. Consider that maybe you just don't like how barracks is the only way to have the units you need to survive, if that's the problem.

That's not the problem, right now. I've got enough supply even without barracks. It's money that I'm missing more. But somehow, libraries got delayed once and again. If I need science, I go first for barracks, since I cannot make use of the scientist slot in most cities (small cities, unhappiness), and I'm building barracks in cities where I normally wouldn't have. I thought that going Tradition I may have built more libraries, but then I'm being attacked often, and barracks give me as much science, with extra functionality, at a lesser cost.

I had games where I've built forges before granaries, as a mean to contain unhappiness, and it worked (not for the specialist, but for the extra hammer on mines). I've built guilds in cities without walls, and lighthouses in cities without markets. But I can't see me building libraries in cities without barracks.

 

[Dawnpromise]

That's not the problem, right now. I've got enough supply even without barracks. It's money that I'm missing more. But somehow, libraries got delayed once and again. If I need science, I go first for barracks, since I cannot make use of the scientist slot in most cities (small cities, unhappiness), and I'm building barracks in cities where I normally wouldn't have. I thought that going Tradition I may have built more libraries, but then I'm being attacked often, and barracks give me as much science, with extra functionality, at a lesser cost.

I had games where I've built forges before granaries, as a mean to contain unhappiness, and it worked (not for the specialist, but for the extra hammer on mines). I've built guilds in cities without walls, and lighthouses in cities without markets. But I can't see me building libraries in cities without barracks.

I'll agree that the lack of money in the ancient/classic eras makes the game crawl early on. Frankly I find my military capped more by a lack of funds then by the supply cap.

 

[ashendashin]

That's not the problem, right now. I've got enough supply even without barracks. It's money that I'm missing more. But somehow, libraries got delayed once and again. If I need science, I go first for barracks, since I cannot make use of the scientist slot in most cities (small cities, unhappiness), and I'm building barracks in cities where I normally wouldn't have. I thought that going Tradition I may have built more libraries, but then I'm being attacked often, and barracks give me as much science, with extra functionality, at a lesser cost.

I had games where I've built forges before granaries, as a mean to contain unhappiness, and it worked (not for the specialist, but for the extra hammer on mines). I've built guilds in cities without walls, and lighthouses in cities without markets. But I can't see me building libraries in cities without barracks.

See, you say that you have enough supply and then go on to say that the extra functionality makes the barracks automatically better. How does that work? Anyways, the immediate gain from a scientist is far better than some food. Go to war if your cities aren't up to par afterwards.

None of these problems justify a nerf to science. You don't want to work a library because of the lack of gold? I don't see how that is in any way whatsoever a problem for barracks.

 

[Starrynite120]

That's not the problem, right now. I've got enough supply even without barracks. It's money that I'm missing more. But somehow, libraries got delayed once and again. If I need science, I go first for barracks, since I cannot make use of the scientist slot in most cities (small cities, unhappiness), and I'm building barracks in cities where I normally wouldn't have. I thought that going Tradition I may have built more libraries, but then I'm being attacked often, and barracks give me as much science, with extra functionality, at a lesser cost.

I had games where I've built forges before granaries, as a mean to contain unhappiness, and it worked (not for the specialist, but for the extra hammer on mines). I've built guilds in cities without walls, and lighthouses in cities without markets. But I can't see me building libraries in cities without barracks.

What exactly is the problem with barracks bein a better choice than a library sometimes? That sounds like good balance to me, not a problem.

 

[tu_79]

What exactly is the problem with barracks bein a better choice than a library sometimes? That sounds like good balance to me, not a problem.

Well, if most of you don't see a problem, I guess it doesn't need to be addessed. Right now, I'm trying to build some libraries before barracks in second tier cities, but I can't afford the specialist there, so it's like, well, I would have done better with barracks. Theorically yes, I can place a worker in the slot, but the city is already growing slowly and my happiness is hurting a little. The good thing is that now I'm past the point where roads are more expensive than city connections, so gold for an extra building is an issue no more (but barracks are already built). Maybe I should dedicate a second city to unit spam, instead my capital, so I can work scientists and writers.

 

[Starrynite120]

Why would you force libraries when barracks make more sense? You should build which building is going to be the best at the moment, not build something because you think it should be the better option.

Your problem seems to be the presupposition that libraries are super important and barracks are not. That comes from vanilla. I think you just need to change your perspective and look at buildings objectively, aside from preconceived notions about them.

I say this because your argument in this thread was, if I understood correctly, barracks can sometimes be better for science than libraries, and that is wrong. People's responses were that's true but it's not wrong.

 

[Txurce]

Why would you force libraries when barracks make more sense? You should build which building is going to be the best at the moment, not build something because you think it should be the better option.

Your problem seems to be the presupposition that libraries are super important and barracks are not. That comes from vanilla. I think you just need to change your perspective and look at buildings objectively, aside from preconceived notions about them.

I say this because your argument in this thread was, if I understood correctly, barracks can sometimes be better for science than libraries, and that is wrong. People's responses were that's true but it's not wrong.

Not "sometimes," but "almost always." That's why the question came up. But the consensus is that barracks science is fine as is. If there's an issue with libraries, it could be addressed separately.

I won't speak for tu79, but my own views about the relative importance of barracks vs libraries don't come from vanilla, but from pre-beta VP. As of that point, barracks were not an essential early game building in every city for me.

 

[Starrynite120]

Not "sometimes," but "almost always." That's why the question came up. But the consensus is that barracks science is fine as is. If there's an issue with libraries, it could be addressed separately.

I won't speak for tu79, but my own views about the relative importance of barracks vs libraries don't come from vanilla, but from pre-beta VP. As of that point, barracks were not an essential early game building in every city for me.

Its not almost always though. Just in cities where you won't run the specialist (so mostly early game), and even then science is equal, and the only reasons barracks is better is production cost. Its undeniable that in the long run libraries produce way more science, and in the short run can triple what a barracks produces in a larger city.

 

[Txurce]

Its not almost always though. Just in cities where you won't run the specialist (so mostly early game), and even then science is equal, and the only reasons barracks is better is production cost. Its undeniable that in the long run libraries produce way more science, and in the short run can triple what a barracks produces in a larger city.

I'm saying "almost always" in that you almost always build them first. I agree with all the differences you cited.

 

[Workerspam]

I'm fine with barracks and libraries as is. Agree with the sentiment that removing the science from the barrack would tend to homogenize the tech path while reducing the barracks to a specialist building for non warmongering playstyles.

Barracks are a fine building but I'm surprised at how much importance many players appear to place on it. In my games it has plenty of competition. Unless I'm hard up against the cap I'm likely prioritizing shrines, monuments, and councils first (quick, cheap, effective), with barracks competing with walls, granaries, markets, stoneworks and most classical era buidlings, including libraries, for build priority.

 

[Moi Magnus]

Why would you force libraries when barracks make more sense? You should build which building is going to be the best at the moment, not build something because you think it should be the better option.

Your problem seems to be the presupposition that libraries are super important and barracks are not. That comes from vanilla. I think you just need to change your perspective and look at buildings objectively, aside from preconceived notions about them.

I say this because your argument in this thread was, if I understood correctly, barracks can sometimes be better for science than libraries, and that is wrong. People's responses were that's true but it's not wrong.

Lets take this situation :
+ There is no barabarian
+ You're alone on your island
=> You have almost no army, and have no need to have some (except maybe garnison for happiness)

If in this situation, building barraks before libraries is still the best choice, then I think there is a problem.
Writing is supposed to be THE tech for science, possibly ex-equo with another tech, but not weaker.
The problem of writing before was that it was the only way of having science.
Having barracks giving science is a good idea, and being able to make a correct science devellopement without library is good.
But barracks should not be "the best choice" for making a science devellopement, because they already have a role as a militaristic building.

(Note : It's been a while since my last game with VP, so I don't really know what is the situation. I've just tried to guess by reading the other messages)

 

[NigelC]

Writing is supposed to be THE tech for science, possibly ex-equo with another tech, but not weaker.
The problem of writing before was that it was the only way of having science.
Having barracks giving science is a good idea, and being able to make a correct science development without library is good.
But barracks should not be "the best choice" for making a science development, because they already have a role as a militaristic building.

So maybe building a library should also give an immediate boost to science, like the circus does for culture?

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Lets take this situation :
+ There is no barabarian
+ You're alone on your island
=> You have almost no army, and have no need to have some (except maybe garnison for happiness)

If in this situation, building barraks before libraries is still the best choice, then I think there is a problem.
Writing is supposed to be THE tech for science, possibly ex-equo with another tech, but not weaker.
The problem of writing before was that it was the only way of having science.
Having barracks giving science is a good idea, and being able to make a correct science devellopement without library is good.
But barracks should not be "the best choice" for making a science devellopement, because they already have a role as a militaristic building.

(Note : It's been a while since my last game with VP, so I don't really know what is the situation. I've just tried to guess by reading the other messages)

Barracks are built before Libraries because Councils exist as a prerequisite. Barracks are much better than the cheaper Councils, but Libraries defeat Barracks Science wise as you must work the Scientist almost every time in every city anyway. Libraries are far superior in this regard. Because the prerequisite exists, you're actually comparing how likely people are to build Councils and follow them with Libraries rather than go Barracks first or go Council into Barracks. It's also less micro-intensive, you can make a build queue with Water Mill Shrine Monument Council Barracks in any order you want them up, but you can't add Library until AFTER Council is built - at 10 cities, I will build Barracks after Council for nearly every new one to spare myself some time manually going into the city to choose the Library after Council is built even if I have tons of pop to work the GS with because it'd take too much time to go into every city that often for Library and every other building with prerequisites.

Libraries are superior in Science and Culture and generate Great Scientists. They're fine. Barracks are also fine.