'National College first' build - incredibly cheesy

[elthrasher]

Oh please nerf the game more! Please!!!

Does anyone else think build times are too fast in this game? I mean, you can plunk down a new city and have a coliseum built in only 75 turns. 75 turns! That might only take an hour if you are fast and have a Cray XT5. I think it should take more like 3000 turns. What do the rest of you think?

 

[Kyroshill]

:sigh:

 

[snarzberry]

The National College exists to try to provide a meaningful choice for you to make in the first 50 turns. Sacrifice horizontal growth for vertical growth. What's better for your current situation? Gobbling up as much land and as many resources as possible, or investing your growth developing the quality of your cities, not their quantity.

The problem as I see it is exactly the opposite to what you suggest. The problem is that the small empire that has focused on quality cities just can't compete with the large empire of smaller, much more alike, cities. So I think the entire strategy line of staying small and optimizing a lesser number of cities should be buffed, and heavily.

Hopefully expansion packs will add more diversity and flavor to strategy options than the current (lopsided) dichotomy possesses.

 

[snarzberry]

but at least they should allow players with an actual 'nation' to construct the wonders at a more moderate cost. It might make sense to ease up on the 'X in EVERY city' requirement

I understand your frustration, it's a nice building after all, and you'd like it for yourself in your empire. But the whole point of this set up is to provide things that small nations can do that large nations cannot. What could the possible advantage be in remaining small if large empires can do everything you can do plus have all the other extra benefits of being large?

 

[Kyroshill]

I understand your frustration, it's a nice building after all, and you'd like it for yourself in your empire. But the whole point of this set up is to provide things that small nations can do that large nations cannot. What could the possible advantage be in remaining small if large empires can do everything you can do plus have all the other extra benefits of being large?

alright, alright.... you have a point.... I may have to sit corrected on this one

 

[trueblue]

absence of fixed 'build >x buildings' targets a la cIV follows the same decision.

pah, so thats the way it was in Civ4?

i might have known.


just another thread by an OP who cant move on.
Moderator Action: Please don't troll other people.

 

[Arsenic Steel]

pah, so thats the way it was in Civ4?

i might have known.


just another thread by an OP who cant move on.

Wow that is simplistic. Just suggesting a mechanic that existed in the previous game means that person can't move on to the "new and improved whatchamajigger".
How about instead of shrugging off ideas purely because they were in the previous game we discuss the ideas on their own merit.

 

[Civsassin]

I understand your frustration, it's a nice building after all, and you'd like it for yourself in your empire. But the whole point of this set up is to provide things that small nations can do that large nations cannot. What could the possible advantage be in remaining small if large empires can do everything you can do plus have all the other extra benefits of being large?

I disagree with this statement entirely. Large nations can get the national wonders as much as small ones can. I often get the National College after dropping three or four cities and building libraries. Afterwards, I will expand to my hearts content. Over time, I will prioritize other builds that have an associated national wonder, and I will build them city-by-city until I am able to build the national wonder. It takes longer, but it gets done.

I think the new system is fine the way it is. You have to plan your builds to capture the national wonders that you prioritize. It's another strategic planning aspect to the game. CiV has many more strategic planning aspects to it than CiIV did.

The developers purposely made it a more strategic game than earlier versions.

 

[snarzberry]

I disagree with this statement entirely. Large nations can get the national wonders as much as small ones can. I often get the National College after dropping three or four cities and building libraries. Afterwards, I will expand to my hearts content. Over time, I will prioritize other builds that have an associated national wonder, and I will build them city-by-city until I am able to build the national wonder. It takes longer, but it gets done.

I think the new system is fine the way it is. You have to plan your builds to capture the national wonders that you prioritize. It's another strategic planning aspect to the game. CiV has many more strategic planning aspects to it than CiIV did.

The developers purposely made it a more strategic game than earlier versions.

Notice that I never stated that large nations cannot get the NC. Of course it's possible to build the NC after 3 or 4 cities and then expand, as you say, to your hearts content. It's just that the longer you wait before you build it, and the more cities you have, the worse of an option it becomes for you and the less of an effect it will have.

The point I was making is that you had to sacrifice something in order to play your line. No matter which way you slice it, or after how many cities you build it, investing all those hammers in the first 100 turns of the game comes at a very large opportunity cost. What I'm suggesting is that this concept is taken even further.

I think it's fair to say that what the developers are trying to achieve is a meaningful decision from which branch two broad strategy lines that are competitive with each other. When I say that there should be things that small # of cities nations can do that large # of cities nations cannot I don't want to point to the NC as a perfect example of this as in my opinion it doesn't do it's job well enough. That's why I think that this entire strategy line - a small number of quality cities - should be buffed.

 

[Tabarnak]

The problem is large empires out-produce small empires for hammers and gold output. If some buildings can be build only with a minimum of in, small empires can get an advantage somewhere over large ones.

Another example, a pop 12 city is enable to build a building who boost hammers by 40%. It's not easy to get fast 12 pop cities with large empires. But it is with small ones.

 

[biohazard72]

NC start is the strongest IMO, ESPECIALLY on Deity where your tech rate needs to be maximized the most ruthlessly. Putting NC to Philosophy does nothing, I get Philosophy fairly early to control my RAs a bit better.

I think it's just a little out of balance right now. Going vertical early should be better for tech, but not by the huge margin (usually double or better) that it currently is.

 

[Strategist83]

Sigh.

So, reading through these two pages of responses it appears that almost nobody really read my initial post. Reading comprehension trouble much?

I am NOT asking for a NC first nerf because I think the build it overpowered. Geddit? Reread the very first sentence. NC first, regardless of its superior research rate, is a very weak build in my eyes.

What I AM saying is that I regard it as an incredibly cheesy and stupid build that can actually only ever work because the AI is as horrendously bad as is the case. Moreover, as a logical conclusion to this, that national wonders are way, way too hard to get built in games where you are facing any real sort of competition - games where you'd actually have to expand to stay competitive, to expand before all the best lands are claimed. Which means we have several buildings sitting around which could be interesting but in reality are [almost] never built due to how insanely fast the national wonder costs increase.

Oh, and:

Also, your contention that ancient people had no concept of "nation" is just flat out wrong. Ancient nations were much smaller than they are now, but people definitely had a sense of themselves (those "of the tribe") and others (those "outside the tribe").

Tribe =/= nation.

 

[snarzberry]

What I AM saying is that I regard it as an incredibly cheesy and stupid build that can actually only ever work because the AI is as horrendously bad as is the case. Moreover, as a logical conclusion to this, that national wonders are way, way too hard to get built in games where you are facing any real sort of competition - games where you'd actually have to expand to stay competitive

I'm not sure I follow you. When you say that it's an incredibly cheesy and stupid build do you mean that because in your opinion it would never be the best option to take when playing a multi-player game? Is that, exclusively, what you meant by 'any real sort of competition'? Or do you mean the higher difficulty levels?

I'm seeking to understand you because I can assure you that it is a viable way to win on the hardest single player levels in certain situations. If you are saying it's incredibly cheesy to use as an option in SP because it's not optimal in MP then I'm not sure what the point is. MP has always been a different beast, as I understand, although I don't have much experience playing it.

The other objections you raise about if one city deserves to be a nation and have a national wonder seem more like semantic arguments to me. You could probably come up with a different name for it that would satisfy you. The point is the effect it has.

 

[Deussu]

The problem is large empires out-produce small empires for hammers and gold output. If some buildings can be build only with a minimum of in, small empires can get an advantage somewhere over large ones.

Another example, a pop 12 city is enable to build a building who boost hammers by 40%. It's not easy to get fast 12 pop cities with large empires. But it is with small ones.

Now that you mention it I recall Aqueduct being required to achieve more than 6 population in Civ4. Imposing similar limits in Civ5 (National Wonders requiring 10 pop etc) would rather well eliminate part of the problem... maybe.

 

[Civsassin]

Now that you mention it I recall Aqueduct being required to achieve more than 6 population in Civ4. Imposing similar limits in Civ5 (National Wonders requiring 10 pop etc) would rather well eliminate part of the problem... maybe.

You're assuming a problem where none exists. The current system is fine; some players would just prefer it to be different. I don't think there is a single feature that every player likes. It's personal preference. I prefer taking what the developers did, and making the best of it. To me the coulda, shoulda, woulda's discussions don't make me a better player...

 

[Strategist83]

In response to snarzberry:

Good post.

Yes, I define 'real competition' as multiplayer. I do not believe the AI can be taken seriously at all.

It is 'cheesy' because National Wonders are only practical to build before the civ is even a nation while becoming nearly impossible once the civ has any sort of size worthy of having an 'epic'. But what should they rename it to, then? 'Instant one-city science boost building'? You can indeed argue we're debating semantics, but let me ask you this: Beyond the NC, in just how many of your games do you build the other national wonders? Though here, we're probably running into the problem of you not having a lot of MP experience, so you may actually be building them - because the docile AI's allow you to (it doesn't matter how badly you play in SP, you'll always win). Facing human opponents, however - which IMO equals to playing what the AI 'should have been' - giving up expansion in order to tediously construct X building in every city is just too much of a drawback. Thus, the various national wonders are never built, leaving us with that many fewer actually viable buildings in the game.

 

[Strategist83]

Now that you mention it I recall Aqueduct being required to achieve more than 6 population in Civ4. Imposing similar limits in Civ5 (National Wonders requiring 10 pop etc) would rather well eliminate part of the problem... maybe.

This I disagree with completely. We certainly don't need the national wonders nerfed further.

 

[MkLh]

Notice that I never stated that large nations cannot get the NC. Of course it's possible to build the NC after 3 or 4 cities and then expand, as you say, to your hearts content. It's just that the longer you wait before you build it, and the more cities you have, the worse of an option it becomes for you and the less of an effect it will have.

The point I was making is that you had to sacrifice something in order to play your line. No matter which way you slice it, or after how many cities you build it, investing all those hammers in the first 100 turns of the game comes at a very large opportunity cost. What I'm suggesting is that this concept is taken even further.

I think it's fair to say that what the developers are trying to achieve is a meaningful decision from which branch two broad strategy lines that are competitive with each other. When I say that there should be things that small # of cities nations can do that large # of cities nations cannot I don't want to point to the NC as a perfect example of this as in my opinion it doesn't do it's job well enough. That's why I think that this entire strategy line - a small number of quality cities - should be buffed.

Yes, it makes sense to try to make small empires more competitive by increasing costs of NWs in bigger empires. This good attempt was however watered down by making NWs so weak they don't help small empires much either. Even the NC isn't so strong per se. It's nothing compared to Civ4s Oxford, more like a Civ4 Academy, but actually weaker as it's harder to direct most of your research in one city now. It's useful mainly because it comes so early and can be built with only one city.

 

[Strategist83]

Exactly, MkLh.

The only reason the National Library is powerful is players are building it so extremely fast. Were the AI more dangerous so you'd actually have to both expand and defend yourself, you'd probably be building the NC at the earliest around the time when universities become available - and at that time the National College is probably the weaker option compared to the university, because the hammer cost becomes insanely high very quickly with the number of cities.

 

[Deussu]

You're assuming a problem where none exists. The current system is fine; some players would just prefer it to be different. I don't think there is a single feature that every player likes. It's personal preference. I prefer taking what the developers did, and making the best of it. To me the coulda, shoulda, woulda's discussions don't make me a better player...

I agree. I wouldn't mind trying the modification out though. Better to test it than outright say it's bad.

This I disagree with completely. We certainly don't need the national wonders nerfed further.

The patch didn't nerf national wonders, it boosted them. Prior to the December patch NC only gave a +50% science output, now it gives +5 in addition to that.