(LOCKED) Going for Gold: Buildings

[Legen]

Oh, I see.

 

[Gazebo]

G was talking about a new mechanic, but didn't describe it. It sounds like new code is on the table for re-integrating defense buildings.

What I am describing above is essentialy a modified version of the health mechanic from Civ IV, and resurrecting civ IV mechanics seems to be popular

I didn’t say new code. And that’s way too much.

G

 

[Bromar1]

I feel like Customs houses can be kinda weird for Statecraft civs. You wanna trade with city states as much as possible so customs house are pretty much pointless for those

 

[CrazyG]

I feel like Customs houses can be kinda weird for Statecraft civs. You wanna trade with city states as much as possible so customs house are pretty much pointless for those

After the bank its a 3 gold, 2 culture building. It isn't terrible, but its not a priority either.

 

[Stalker0]

After the bank its a 3 gold, 2 culture building. It isn't terrible, but its not a priority either.

And a -50% poverty reduction. Its commonly one of those buildings I neglect for a time and then go "oh crap I need happy" and then build them.

 

[phantomaxl1207]

I build Custom Houses for the Merchant Specialist.

 

[Bromar1]

It's not a bad building per se, it just feels very anti thematic that customs houses have little synergy with the trade focused Statecraft tree.

 

[Owlbebach]

I do not trade a lot witgh City-States playing Statecraft. Sometime it is nice, but usually trading with civs give you more.

Main power of custom houses is tourism bombs

 

[Bromar1]

I do not trade a lot witgh City-States playing Statecraft. Sometime it is nice, but usually trading with civs give you more.

Main power of custom houses is tourism bombs

Really? Trading with allied city states might have a little less gold but you are guaranteed a good amount of science and culture (which is increased by 25% if originating from your capital or holy city) without giving your rivals science and culture if they are behind. Seems like a no brainer to me until you want to get tourism bonuses with a specific civ. And even then, you get mini tourism bombs with all civs when you complete a trade route to a city state

 

[tu_79]

Really? Trading with allied city states might have a little less gold but you are guaranteed a good amount of science and culture (which is increased by 25% if originating from your capital or holy city) without giving your rivals science and culture if they are behind. Seems like a no brainer to me until you want to get tourism bonuses with a specific civ. And even then, you get mini tourism bombs with all civs when you complete a trade route to a city state

You just miss the growth bonus.

 

[Owlbebach]

Really? Trading with allied city states might have a little less gold but you are guaranteed a good amount of science and culture (which is increased by 25% if originating from your capital or holy city) without giving your rivals science and culture if they are behind. Seems like a no brainer to me until you want to get tourism bonuses with a specific civ. And even then, you get mini tourism bombs with all civs when you complete a trade route to a city state

Well thats propaply a difficulty issue, i just always have enough civ to trade to get more of everything trading with AI rather than City-States

 

[CrazyG]

Well thats propaply a difficulty issue, i just always have enough civ to trade to get more of everything trading with AI rather than City-States

How many social policies behind are you? A CS gives 20 culture per trade route late game, if its in your capital its 25 with statecraft.

 

[Owlbebach]

How many social policies behind are you? A CS gives 20 culture per trade route late game, if its in your capital its 25 with statecraft.

Don't know, with William i was ahead, but it does not feel uncommon for me to be 2 policies behind everyone and 3-4 policies behind the leader in early-mid game

 

[Bromar1]

Don't know, with William i was ahead, but it does not feel uncommon for me to be 2 policies behind everyone and 3-4 policies behind the leader in early-mid game

Unless you're significantly behind on policies or techs, trade routes to allied city states will usually give more culture and science than to major civs

 

[Omen of Peace]

Bromar, Owl plays Deity, where it's common to be very much behind the AI.

I play on Emperor, and I also often prefer trading with City-States.

 

[SpankmyMetroid]

So assuming this thread isn't locked, are seaports supposed to be strictly better than train stations (since they're mutually exclusive?). If not, I think train stations need a small nudge (or seaports a small nerf) to make them more viable to build. Right now, the only advantages they have over seaports is the +10% (which being a passive bonus is rather large I'll admit), they're 250 cheaper, and they don't need previous buildings (the lighthouse and harbor) to build. On the other hand, seaports have a number of significant advantages: Extra city health, supply cap, and the ability to buy industrial/modern naval units is the big one, they're available deceptively much earlier (not only do they unlock with the steam power, the coal revealing tech so they're immediately buildable, while train stations need that tech and railroad, but you need to build railroad connections which you can't even start until you research railroad), Extra from terrain (even just one) which I'd argue is more valuable than , and with a lot of water tiles they bring in more gold with the +1.

I'm pretty sure what's supposed to be intended (but I may be wrong) is that seaports are meant to be built on coast heavy cities, and train stations on landlocked cities. But if a city has just one coast tile my inclination is to build a seaport. Just spitballing balance ideas here: Give train stations the same city defense and unit cap so they see more equal. Or if you want to get fancy maybe give train stations +1 gold on railroad tiles in the city’s radius (since the train stations 'help' maintain their railways). Now there’s an extra incentive to build stations on landheavy cities that have a lot of railways. This also helps differentiate the two buildings more than just city terrain; build seaports for extra defense, production, and military, but build ports if you just want more gold.

 

[Owlbebach]

So assuming this thread isn't locked, are seaports supposed to be strictly better than train stations (since they're mutually exclusive?). If not, I think train stations need a small nudge (or seaports a small nerf) to make them more viable to build. Right now, the only advantages they have over seaports is the +10% (which being a passive bonus is rather large I'll admit), they're 250 cheaper, and they don't need previous buildings (the lighthouse and harbor) to build. On the other hand, seaports have a number of significant advantages: Extra city health, supply cap, and the ability to buy industrial/modern naval units is the big one, they're available deceptively much earlier (not only do they unlock with the steam power, the coal revealing tech so they're immediately buildable, while train stations need that tech and railroad, but you need to build railroad connections which you can't even start until you research railroad), Extra from terrain (even just one) which I'd argue is more valuable than , and with a lot of water tiles they bring in more gold with the +1.

I'm pretty sure what's supposed to be intended (but I may be wrong) is that seaports are meant to be built on coast heavy cities, and train stations on landlocked cities. But if a city has just one coast tile my inclination is to build a seaport. Just spitballing balance ideas here: Give train stations the same city defense and unit cap so they see more equal. Or if you want to get fancy maybe give train stations +1 gold on railroad tiles (since the train stations 'help' maintain their railways).

it is the opposite - Sea Port SHOULD be weaker than Train Station. There is one very important part that you forgot - Sea Port allows you to purchase modern navy for money. If you do not have a Sea Port in a city - this city is extremely vulnerable to enemy's ships unless you don't have sizable navy yourself.
Another part - Sea Port becomes superior to Train Station if you play Imperialism. With imperialism's buff to sea tiles and Sea Port it becomes worth working every single of them!

 

[Gokudo01]

I don't understand why people always want to reopen discussion when they aren't right the first time.

 

[SpankmyMetroid]

it is the opposite - Sea Port SHOULD be weaker than Train Station. There is one very important part that you forgot - Sea Port allows you to purchase modern navy for money. If you do not have a Sea Port in a city - this city is extremely vulnerable to enemy's ships unless you don't have sizable navy yourself.
Another part - Sea Port becomes superior to Train Station if you play Imperialism. With imperialism's buff to sea tiles and Sea Port it becomes worth working every single of them!

I mentioned the ability to buy modern units in my post, which I agree is a huge advantage the seaport has over the station, which grants no equivilant military bonus. I don’t see how pointing this out makes the seaport weaker, though, can you explain your argument?

I don’t mean to open up a huge number of issues but this is the appropriate thread, so here goes. Can hydro plants/wind farms not be locked out by whether or not you’ve settled by a river? Certain maps (I’m looking at you Communitas) have a lot of short, 1 or 2 tile rivers that I feel punished for settling because I can only build extremely lackluster hydro plants later when wind farms would have been more optional. Can they just be mutually exclusive like the seaport and train station regardless of terrain? It would also work for consistancy’s sake.

 

[Stalker0]

The seaport is better than the station and it’s fine. Coastal cities are more vulnerable than internal ones and you gain a benefit for that. And the less coast you are on the less benefit, so it’s a risk reward thing.

Regardless of the size of the river, you gain base gold, as well as benefits of the water mill and baths for a very long time before hydro plants come around. You’ve gotten way more benefit than if you had settled off river and gotten a wind plant. I don’t see a need to change this.