New Beta Version - April 5th (4/5)

[Funak]

well in E&D Babylon could get an observatory in capital in ancient era

And the Hotel isn't exactly amazingly useful in the ancient era.

 

[BenchBreaker]

And the Hotel isn't exactly amazingly useful in the ancient era.

I think the problem is more of a thematic one, ancient observatories exits so they fit, but hotels are more of a new thing and feels out of place

 

[Gazebo]

Thanks for reports. If you can include the title (in the window) of your odd or messed up events I'll take a look. Managing 51 events was bound to have some clerical bugs, which is why I seeded the beta!

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

I think the problem is more of a thematic one, ancient observatories exits so they fit, but hotels are more of a new thing and feels out of place

Couldn't a tavern be said to be pretty much an ancient equivalent of a hotel? They sort of existed in this regard.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

By the way I had lots of events of building sort, is it intended? Almost every city got me a Monument choice, Lighthouse and Market wherever they were built and it's not even medieval yet. I play on Epic tho.

The lose improvement event seems to not always give an indication it happened? Had a Mine disappear from my Salt, didn't get a notification of any sort besides having the Salt 3d model and mine model (and, of course, yields) disappear. Same with my farm on Wheat once, graphic disappeared, farm disappeared.

In one case I built an improvement only to have it disappear a turn later, haha. Pretty annoying but funny, I think it could stay

Got Hotel to spawn in two cities as they both had King Solomon in their range, one in third, another in second ring. Intended?

The -2G/-2P per city is brutal (unless you took progress in which case you just take -2G and don't care) but okay

So far I'm pretty lucky with the events, RNGesus seems to like me this game.

 

[Funak]

Thanks for reports. If you can include the title (in the window) of your odd or messed up events I'll take a look. Managing 51 events was bound to have some clerical bugs, which is why I seeded the beta!

All the events are generic, right? There aren't any specific events for specific civs yet?

 

[Gazebo]

By the way I had lots of events of building sort, is it intended? Almost every city got me a Monument choice, Lighthouse and Market wherever they were built and it's not even medieval yet. I play on Epic tho.

The lose improvement event seems to not always give an indication it happened? Had a Mine disappear from my Salt, didn't get a notification of any sort besides having the Salt 3d model and mine model (and, of course, yields) disappear. Same with my farm on Wheat once, graphic disappeared, farm disappeared.

In one case I built an improvement only to have it disappear a turn later, haha. Pretty annoying but funny, I think it could stay

Got Hotel to spawn in two cities as they both had King Solomon in their range, one in third, another in second ring. Intended?

The -2G/-2P per city is brutal (unless you took progress in which case you just take -2G and don't care) but okay

So far I'm pretty lucky with the events, RNGesus seems to like me this game.

I'll look at improvements code. Of the 51 events in now, about 10 or so are building related, so not surprising that you are seeing them. Natural Wonder -> hotel is correct – city range is the key. Needs an era filter, though.

I'm moving through my list theme by theme. Haven't really hit modern era events yet, nor military ones.

All the events are generic, right? There aren't any specific events for specific civs yet?

Correct. Probably won't be adding civ-specific events any time soon, as an appreciable amount would take quite a lot of time to make.

G

 

[Gazebo]

This feels like way too much.
Progress may or may not have been under-performing, but not enough to warrant this.
This translates into +1 hammer food and science in all cities along with extra science in the capital, right?

Yep, but I don't think it is too much. I ran a few test games with the values in place and the AI running progress consistently came in the middle of the pack, whereas they were previously lingering near the end of the pack. Tradition starts still reign supreme.

Most of these bonuses come from the final two policies of Progress, so the values come online just as Tradition is finishing its branch (it is usually first) – gaining one of every yield in the Capital – and Authority is about to get its free military unit policy. The extra +5 science from Capital growth was a small steroid to its culture generation, which should help it get to the end of the branch almost as quickly as Tradition.

G

 

[Funak]

Yep, but I don't think it is too much. I ran a few test games with the values in place and the AI running progress consistently came in the middle of the pack, whereas they were previously lingering near the end of the pack. Tradition starts still reign supreme.

Most of these bonuses come from the final two policies of Progress, so the values come online just as Tradition is finishing its branch (it is usually first) – gaining one of every yield in the Capital – and Authority is about to get its free military unit policy. The extra +5 science from Capital growth was a small steroid to its culture generation, which should help it get to the end of the branch almost as quickly as Tradition.

The final two? Do people actually go for the left side of the tree first, ever?

 

[Tomice]

Yep, but I don't think it is too much. I ran a few test games with the values in place and the AI running progress consistently came in the middle of the pack, whereas they were previously lingering near the end of the pack. Tradition starts still reign supreme.

Most of these bonuses come from the final two policies of Progress, so the values come online just as Tradition is finishing its branch (it is usually first) – gaining one of every yield in the Capital – and Authority is about to get its free military unit policy. The extra +5 science from Capital growth was a small steroid to its culture generation, which should help it get to the end of the branch almost as quickly as Tradition.

G

I wouldn't have thought that Tradition is still strongest, but it's hard to compare capital-centric bonuses vs empire-wide ones. Of course, AI performance isn't everything. Then again, we humans judge a lot by how powerful something feels, the AI is more neutral in this regard.

I still thing the worker policy is the biggest problem. The tree as a whole may be balanced, but this policy seems in a bad position. Maybe I'm underestimating faster worker movement, but the free worker comes too late to have much impact IMHO.

For the left column, I would love to see the building production bonus on tier 1 and both movement and improvement speed for workers on tier 2.
Or just any arrangement that puts workers on tier 1 and still allows to select the building production bonus before unlocking the bonuses on building completion (which is a nice synergy)

 

[Gazebo]

I wouldn't have thought that Tradition is still strongest, but it's hard to compare capital-centric bonuses vs empire-wide ones. Of course, AI performance isn't everything. Then again, we humans judge a lot by how powerful something feels, the AI is more neutral in this regard.

I still thing the worker policy is the biggest problem. The tree as a whole may be balanced, but this policy seems in a bad position. Maybe I'm underestimating faster worker movement, but the free worker comes too late to have much impact IMHO.

For the left column, I would love to see the building production bonus on tier 1 and both movement and improvement speed for workers on tier 2.
Or just any arrangement that puts workers on tier 1 and still allows to select the building production bonus before unlocking the bonuses on building completion (which is a nice synergy)

Moving the worker off of that policy takes away a bit part of its utility. It'd be a move that caters towards taking that policy last.

The final two? Do people actually go for the left side of the tree first, ever?

I always go for it first, and so does the AI. 3 moves on civilians means faster settling, much faster improvement creation, and faster road construction. Bonuses from the other three policies in the tree really shine once you have 3 or so cities, and I'd prefer to have my worker bonuses before that point.

G

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

The final two? Do people actually go for the left side of the tree first, ever?

I know I don't, the first policy on the left is great but isn't of much use until you get +Prod from the right side (and if you get +Prod, getting +2/3F per city +2/3S for connection is too tempting not to take)

 

[Gazebo]

Playstyles differ, and that's fine, but stating that something (the worker) comes 'too late' when you are specifically delaying taking it until the last policy is an incongruous argument. That's why I'm not rearranging it.

G

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

I always go for it first, and so does the AI. 3 moves on civilians means faster settling, much faster improvement creation, and faster road construction. Bonuses from the other three policies in the tree really shine once you have 3 or so cities, and I'd prefer to have my worker bonuses before that point.

G

I'm sorry but picking left side first could be the very reason why Progress AI was underperforming and is only in the middle of the pack now, especially since AI IIRC has reduced costs of everything the base yields on cities faster would be even better for them.

+2 Prod+2G per city means I can produce a worker way more easily, it means my cities can faster get to the point I can afford to have them produce settlers. Building culture is usually as important as tech culture bonus for me and so by going left side you'll get yields later, you'll also have wasted some bonus culture in your cities that you would've gotten otherwise (the buildings are already there = no culture/f from them)

 

[Gazebo]

I'm sorry but picking left side first could be the very reason why Progress AI was underperforming and is only in the middle of the pack now, especially since AI IIRC has reduced costs of everything the base yields on cities faster would be even better for them.

+2 Prod+2G per city means I can produce a worker way more easily, it means my cities can faster get to the point I can afford to have them produce settlers. Building culture is usually as important as tech culture bonus for me and so by going left side you'll get yields later, you'll also have wasted some bonus culture in your cities that you would've gotten otherwise (the buildings are already there = no culture/f from them)

I'm not sure what you're talking about re: reduced based costs. That only applies to the highest difficulties.

You've decided that you like going for the yields, and that's fine. But it isn't the only way to play, and – depending on your starting area – it isn't always the best choice.

G

 

[Funak]

I'm not sure what you're talking about re: reduced based costs. That only applies to the highest difficulties.

You've decided that you like going for the yields, and that's fine. But it isn't the only way to play, and – depending on your starting area – it isn't always the best choice.

Well, I've never even considered going for the left side first, and from what I've gathered from those two progress whine-threads that were up recently, that was pretty much the one point people agreed on

 

[Gazebo]

Well, I've never even considered going for the left side first, and from what I've gathered from those two progress whine-threads that were up recently, that was pretty much the one point people agreed on

Right, but they also complained (often in the same breath) that the worker came too late to be useful. People get googly-eyed when they see yields, but not so much for +1 movement on all civilian units. I think they're discounting the utility of that by quite a bit.

G

 

[Deadstarre]

Playstyles differ, and that's fine, but stating that something (the worker) comes 'too late' when you are specifically delaying taking it until the last policy is an incongruous argument. That's why I'm not rearranging it.
G

The entire thread i started about how progress needed help was filled with people who acknowledged the free worker policy sucks where it is, even those who disagreed with me about everything else.

G picks it first. Well then, it'll stay where it is- no surprises here. these changes are a start in the right direction anyway

 

[tu_79]

Moving the worker off of that policy takes away a bit part of its utility. It'd be a move that caters towards taking that policy last.



I always go for it first, and so does the AI. 3 moves on civilians means faster settling, much faster improvement creation, and faster road construction. Bonuses from the other three policies in the tree really shine once you have 3 or so cities, and I'd prefer to have my worker bonuses before that point.

G

Problem is that I am forced to train my first worker myself if I want to profit from the +25% improvement speed. I pick it evenso, I like the +20% building prod, but for a while I am producing some units. Training the worker drains heavily my hammers the very first turns. When I am able to pick the free worker, suddenly the bonus from building completion seems more rewarding, as I am about to settle and I already have a worker. For the next policy I am quite able to produce workers myself and maybe I have trained a second one, so it's a wasted policy, better left for last.
As I said in another threat, tier 1 policies should be more relevant to a single city than tier 2.

You may prefer to improve workers over a money and culture bonus, but most players don't, unless they have very nice resources workable in sight.

EDIT: I am talking about the Free Worker. Extra civil movement is nice even at this stage (faster settling, less risk of them being captured, faster improvements) but it gets better the more workers you have.

 

[Gazebo]

The entire thread i started about how progress needed help was filled with people who acknowledged the free worker policy sucks where it is, even those who disagreed with me about everything else.

G picks it first. Well then, it'll stay where it is- no surprises here. these changes are a start in the right direction anyway

To be clear, I'm not saying "I do it, therefore it stays." This isn't a fiat. I am saying that moving the worker policy up simply reinforces the mono-path of right side, then finish left last. I'm not against looking at it more thoroughly, but simply 'moving the worker up' isn't a solution, at all. As noted above, the yields changes were more about bringing the branch overall into line with the yield performance of Tradition and Authority, not about inter-branch pacing.

You may prefer to improve workers over a money and culture bonus, but most players don't, unless they have very nice resources workable in sight.

See above post.