New Beta Version - August 16th (8/16)

[pineappledan]

What was wrong about the WC proposals?

In the previous hotfix, only 1-2 civs would contribute at all to any project. I was usually able to complete >70% of the production of any given WC project by myself.

I suspect it had to do with some sort of priorities overflow, like what was happening with settlers, where AI were prioritizing the WC proposal so highly that it rolled over to 0

 

[Recursive]

Small changes for next version:

Blocked ability to offer/accept third party war bribes against City-States you pledged to protect (also goes for the AI of course)
- Added tooltip to note this

Improved Declare War / Negotiate Peace button
- Declare War / Negotiate Peace button is now always visible, even if disabled, and mousing over it gives an explanation of why you're unable to declare war / make peace
- If you're locked into a coop/third party war and cannot make peace, the tooltip will now display this, and how many turns are left
- If the OTHER player is locked into a coop/third party war against you, the tooltip will now display this, and how many turns are left
(wasn't a secret to people paying attention, so this is just QoL)

Improved Demand / Request Help button
- Fixed issue where "Request Help" would be visible when at war
- Button now has tooltips when moused over

 

[Deljade]

The main difference comes from how humans compete against the AI militarily: humans are much better at using their Units while the AI will simply cheat to get more Units that they don't use as effectively.
This means a very large difference in attrition: the AI player will lose and replace much more Units than the human player who will more often be able to pull back wounded Units to heal them back up.
If you play with epic speed the production cost of Units is increased by 50% which hits the AI player much more severely than the human player: the rate at which Units are replaced is 33% slower.
Meanwhile the healing of Units is not affected at all.

Also consider that the Instant Yields you get from killing Units or conquering Cities are scaled up with game speed as well: at epic speed you are getting 50% more Instant Yields than at standard speed.
However, because the Eras are longer you will also be able to kill more Units per Era compared to standard speed.
Therefore you will effectively get 50% more Instant Yields from killing Units/conquering Cities if you switch from standard speed to epic speed.

It's been getting consistently harder to war without losing units in VP, it's in no way like vanilla civ where you can have the same units fighting for the entire game. Moreover, the AI won't hesitate to build units to defend itself and it still has it's production bonuses. If you tell me that it's easier to break a stalemate by winning the attrition war... that seems fair? I don't know what else to say other than you may want to try epic and see if it's really that much easier, it's different, I won't dispute that, but I wouldn't say it's "2 levels easier". You might even like it if you're that keen on warmongering. And I feel it's a more balanced experience asnd it's not as if warring is the only viable strategy on Epic.

 

[CrazyG]

The amount of Culture per turn that you get from Authority is not as high as it may seem; the only reliable source is Discipline.
On most maps there are not that many Barbarians to kill.
City States can only be bullied once every 30 turns.
Imperium is just not very good at all because you either get it too late or because you have to delay Discipline.
Also consider that a lead in Culture automatically decays as the game goes on; once you're in the Medieval Era the lack of good scaling sources of Culture becomes very noticeable.

Disclaimer: the above considerations were made for militaristic Civs that do not peak in the Ancient Era (Denmark, Rome).
If you are playing as a Civ that gets a good Unique Unit in the Ancient Era (Persia, Songhai, the Aztecs) then going Tribute -> Imperium is more viable.

Are you referring to the 2 culture for a garrison? That policy is a trap, you don't have enough army in ancient era to occupy all cities all the time. Progress can accidentally nerfed this patch, if your approach to authority can't keep up with progress then it's the wrong approach.

Honestly authority is a straight line, you always take tribute -> imperium. You can weave the science on kills in sometimes with a really fast start, but delaying imperium is very high risk without much benefit. After hundreds of authority games across many patches I'm certain it's the overall better approach.

 

[DaniSciB]

Game pace has always been a difficulty factor for Warmongering. This was true in Vanilla and it is for VP.

Playing Domination on Quick Speed is crazy. AI replaces their troops like they are Persian Inmortals IRL. Also, by the time your army gets to enemy lands they are already obsolete. The timing is even more tight, there is no much advantage for beelining a new Tier of troops since the AI will unlock them sooner anyways. Not only that, the AI can actually destroy you, since they have a massive Science advantage and they can create an overwhelming army faster and constantly.

So, we can say that Deity on Quick is the hardest challenge for any Warmonger.

The opposite happens on Epic and Marathon... Being Marathon just ridiculous in comparison.

The AI replaces their units considerably slower giving you a massive advantage as a decent strategist, you have more time to siege without complications or too much hurries and your beelines are actually a great advantage that can give you the chance to caught your enemy with their pants down ans they can't do much for a while and that "while" is usually "They lost their capital".

I don't know exactly how much easier/hard is of course. But it is for sure noticeable.

If anyone here is a Epic/Marathon Warmonger they might have a heavier time if playing the same difficulty but in Standard.

 

[Zanteogo]

Game pace has always been a difficulty factor for Warmongering. This was true in Vanilla and it is for VP.

Playing Domination on Quick Speed is crazy. AI replaces their troops like they are Persian Inmortals IRL. Also, by the time your army gets to enemy lands they are already obsolete. The timing is even more tight, there is no much advantage for beelining a new Tier of troops since the AI will unlock them sooner anyways. Not only that, the AI can actually destroy you, since they have a massive Science advantage and they can create an overwhelming army faster and constantly.

So, we can say that Deity on Quick is the hardest challenge for any Warmonger.

The opposite happens on Epic and Marathon... Being Marathon just ridiculous in comparison.

The AI replaces their units considerably slower giving you a massive advantage as a decent strategist, you have more time to siege without complications or too much hurries and your beelines are actually a great advantage that can give you the chance to caught your enemy with their pants down ans they can't do much for a while and that "while" is usually "They lost their capital".

I don't know exactly how much easier/hard is of course. But it is for sure noticeable.

If anyone here is a Epic/Marathon Warmonger they might have a heavier time if playing the same difficulty but in Standard.

Playing slower speed levels actually gives similar feelings to fighting a human. Wars have more impact. You can't just replace everything in a few turns and rinse and repeat.

It changed slightly when they adjusted the AI bonuses for game speed, but it's still there.

I enjoy the slow speeds, but the enjoyment certainly diminishes once you reach mid game. More so than on the faster speeds. Usually by modern if I know I lost, or I know I am going to win and just start a new game.

 

[Deljade]

I think we're missing the point here. Whether someone -should- be rewarded more for the -effort- they put in warring, that's a different thing. Voremonger's post was about happiness constraints which are fairly constant. Despite the mechanical differences between combat in slower speeds. And frankly, these will always exist and will be a matter of preference. I've played Standard speed in the same difficulties and simply found Epic to be a more enjoyable and more balanced experience.

 

[Stalker0]

Honestly authority is a straight line, you always take tribute -> imperium. You can weave the science on kills in sometimes with a really fast start, but delaying imperium is very high risk without much benefit. After hundreds of authority games across many patches I'm certain it's the overall better approach.

Got to agree here, Imperium is big boost to culture early. Its also got a "hidden" bonus....the culture causes your border to instantly expand 1 turn after the city's founding, which gives it an instant shot of Tribute bonuses. This means Authority cities have a very nice kickoff on their infrastructure when they are first founded.

 

[pineappledan]

Got to agree here, Imperium is big boost to culture early. Its also got a "hidden" bonus....the culture causes your border to instantly expand 1 turn after the city's founding, which gives it an instant shot of Tribute bonuses. This means Authority cities have a very nice kickoff on their infrastructure when they are first founded.

Fun extra thing with Imperium + Russia: If you take God of the Expanse, Imperium gives enough culture to expand new city borders twice.
so, with Russia's UA, God of the Expanse, and Tribute, that's 40, 60, 40, 40 in 2 turns
Obviously, this only works until you have founded, since pantheons no longer are established on settle after that, but you might still be able to do it if you escort your settler with a missionary and convert immediately.

 

[DaniSciB]

Playing slower speed levels actually gives similar feelings to fighting a human. Wars have more impact. You can't just replace everything in a few turns and rinse and repeat.

It changed slightly when they adjusted the AI bonuses for game speed, but it's still there.

I enjoy the slow speeds, but the enjoyment certainly diminishes once you reach mid game. More so than on the faster speeds. Usually by modern if I know I lost, or I know I am going to win and just start a new game.

Aye, I do agree that Epic seems the best game pace thanks to the meaningful eras and wars (It just feels... Good.) at the same time I have to say that the AI is no human and they get crippled thanks to it, Wars being the most evident way to see it, but actually, if there are more turns, there are more ways for humans to play better and capitalize the "errors" the AI make.

I remember bois like FilthyRobot saying that Quick was the hardest speed: since there is not much margin of error, there is less ways to overcome the AI, and the AI Advantages are just more extreme. (Quick has always been a terribly unbalanced setting to be honest.)

 

[Tugboatspotter]

This is why I proposed Pioneers and Colonists come with some kind of tangible inherent happiness that represents the ambition and willingness of the adventurous citizens who take on the challenge of claiming new lands.

So they settle new land for your empire and, instead of being naturally rebellious, they are artificially happy and loyal.

That sounds really gamey.

 

[Voremonger]

@CrazyG @DaniSciB @Stalker0 So at what point do you start to actually found more Cities with Authority? Do you wait until you have Imperium? If yes, what do you build in your Capital until then?

 

[DaniSciB]

@CrazyG @DaniSciB @Stalker0 So at what point do you start to actually found more Cities with Authority? Do you wait until you have Imperium? If yes, what do you build in your Capital until then?

I always wait until Imperium to settle. I usually build 1 or maybe even 2 settlers meanwhile I wait for the social policy, depending on how much troops do I need to kill barbs and/or tribute CS. So I pretty much always found 2 cities by the time I get Imperium (Free settler + one hard builded).

 

[SuperNoobCamper]

If anyone here is a Epic/Marathon Warmonger they might have a heavier time if playing the same difficulty but in Standard.

I play Epic speed almost exclusively and what i like about it is the game pace, eras and time feel more natural; units don't just obsolete as soon as you wage a war, there is more window to actually use the UUs, play the game and more time to micromanage your cities and feel the impact of the infrastructure on your empire.
Standard speed was always too fast paced for me even when i intend to play peacefully.

 

[ASCII Guy]

Standard speed, Communitu_79 standard size, and king difficulty. DV on turn 434.

My main issue with this playthrough was how the map turned out. Every major civ was put onto a tiny continent. I'm shocked Polynesia did so poorly given the circumstances.

I'm also shocked Russia didn't declare on me during the last 50 turns. They had scooped up all the military policies and wonders so their CS bonuses were staggering. Even though I had a tech lead, I didn't have that many units and they were all inexperienced. Maybe it was because of how many city-state allies I had?

Spoiler Most civs only had 3 cities for half the game because of how small the main continent was. :

Spoiler My vassal voted for me! How nice. :

 

[2506]

Standard speed, Communitu_79 standard size, and king difficulty. DV on turn 434.

My main issue with this playthrough was how the map turned out. Every major civ was put onto a tiny continent.

That's rare, but I recommend choosing "blocky" shapes. They are more natural continents, but still vary enough from game to game to make it always interesting, and generate the fantastic-looking details I expect from Communitu_79. In fact, I would make "blocky" the standard, and adjust descriptions from there.

 

[JamesNinelives]

I play almost exclusively on Epic speed and while it's true that war used to heavily favour the player once upon a time I don't really believe that is true now. The military AI is very decent. Sure, if you are an experienced player you're going to be better than the AI, but I don't think that counts as favouring the player. If you are experienced in other areas of the game you can make better decisions than the AI in those too. The area a player is going to be strongest is relative to the AI is a matter of what that player chooses to focus on IMO.

 

[tu_79]

Standard speed, Communitu_79 standard size, and king difficulty. DV on turn 434.

My main issue with this playthrough was how the map turned out. Every major civ was put onto a tiny continent. I'm shocked Polynesia did so poorly given the circumstances.

I'm also shocked Russia didn't declare on me during the last 50 turns. They had scooped up all the military policies and wonders so their CS bonuses were staggering. Even though I had a tech lead, I didn't have that many units and they were all inexperienced. Maybe it was because of how many city-state allies I had?

Spoiler Most civs only had 3 cities for half the game because of how small the main continent was. :

Spoiler My vassal voted for me! How nice. :

Looks like you played with the terra setting. Defaults are not working properly, please go to advanced options when setting up your new game.

 

[azum4roll]

Are you referring to the 2 culture for a garrison? That policy is a trap, you don't have enough army in ancient era to occupy all cities all the time. Progress can accidentally nerfed this patch, if your approach to authority can't keep up with progress then it's the wrong approach.

Honestly authority is a straight line, you always take tribute -> imperium. You can weave the science on kills in sometimes with a really fast start, but delaying imperium is very high risk without much benefit. After hundreds of authority games across many patches I'm certain it's the overall better approach.

Too bad the AIs go the right side first most of the time...

 

[Drakle]

Fun extra thing with Imperium + Russia: If you take God of the Expanse, Imperium gives enough culture to expand new city borders twice.
so, with Russia's UA, God of the Expanse, and Tribute, that's 40, 60, 40, 40 in 2 turns
Obviously, this only works until you have founded, since pantheons no longer are established on settle after that, but you might still be able to do it if you escort your settler with a missionary and convert immediately.

I really wish that pantheon issue was fixed. It isn't like settlers were just grabbing all the atheists and carting them off. It can be really punishing for some pantheons and not impact some at all.


Anyway, in regards to religion in general, it seems like the AI are regarding religious buildings with a much higher priority than before. Basically all the AI founders got at least 1 religious building, and most have gone 2. Because of this, the AI seems generally slower to spread and enhance, which I'm guessing is related to buying religious buildings. Of course, none of the AIs in-game are religious civs.