Agree that production should be > than gold especially if gold/turn is already positive.
New Beta Version - February 18th (2-18)
- Thread starter Gazebo
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 2-18 beta vox populi
- Status
Agree that production should be > than gold especially if gold/turn is already positive.
Giving this one a try, deity standard. Persia authority, with 5 immortals by T84 I conquered Moscow (only Russian city, she was busy trying to build Stonehenge) Constantinople (who actually got SH, but also 2 more cities out) and London (2 more expo razed, she's been eliminated as well)
. Low cities CS are just too easy to take early on and no AI has walls up yet, I went a lil overkill on the city attack promotions. 
Spoiler :
Diplomacy wise the AIs are doing fine, the guys I'm bullying are denouncing me and becoming friends, while the top score Inca gave me a good trade in order to spare Byz last city, then when my troops were far away he and Theo dowed. It would be scarier if Theo actually committed her troops (~6 spears and couple archers now I think), against a 10 CS (walls and no garrison) Constantinople that should be enough, but she's chilling on my borders atm.
Same, I don't get how Incas got such a lead with a peaceful 2 city progress start but if the other civs played as good as Pacho I think the difficulty would be spot on. Aztecs/England still in Ancient Era feels wrong.
Last edited:
I've also noticed something else in my game, and it isn't the first time.
France has exactly 6 points. But hovering over his pointometer, no category shows anything other than 0. He is still active in the game, but there is no evidence of any units, cities, or anything else. I do not have the "complete elimination" setting turned on.
What's interesting about this is that this has happened before - again with France. Could be coincidence, but I don't know.
I have a theory that possibly France was eliminated from the game by moving his initial settler on turn 1 and 2 only to have it grabbed by a barbarian, and somehow this doesn't eliminate a player from the game in a way it normally should.
Just to be clear - I'm able to make trade deals with a player who doesn't exist, though I'm only able to *offer* goods, of course.
France has exactly 6 points. But hovering over his pointometer, no category shows anything other than 0. He is still active in the game, but there is no evidence of any units, cities, or anything else. I do not have the "complete elimination" setting turned on.
What's interesting about this is that this has happened before - again with France. Could be coincidence, but I don't know.
I have a theory that possibly France was eliminated from the game by moving his initial settler on turn 1 and 2 only to have it grabbed by a barbarian, and somehow this doesn't eliminate a player from the game in a way it normally should.
Just to be clear - I'm able to make trade deals with a player who doesn't exist, though I'm only able to *offer* goods, of course.
JamesNinelives
Emperor
So that's why city manager decides to work a 31
lake over a 3
farm on fresh water plains.
By the way, is tile selection while building settlers fixed in these versions? Several versions ago I still have to manually pick tiles while building settlers.
Why is your lake producing gold and no hammers?
I'm finding AI prioritizes villages over other types of tile improvements too much. Myself, I only build villages on roads that connect my cities and have a high possibility to have a trade route pass over. Without these two boosts to their yields, villages have quite mediocre yields and should probably be replaced by something else.
The AI does a great job of building villages on roads, but then it goes beyond to also sacrifice farm and lumbermill triangles to build non-road villages. I think these non-road villages should be severely discouraged and only considered if no farm or lumbermill triangles are possible, or if the rationalism village boost is present.
Otherwise, the AI is doing a noticeably better at improving tiles this version, yay!
The AI does a great job of building villages on roads, but then it goes beyond to also sacrifice farm and lumbermill triangles to build non-road villages. I think these non-road villages should be severely discouraged and only considered if no farm or lumbermill triangles are possible, or if the rationalism village boost is present.
Otherwise, the AI is doing a noticeably better at improving tiles this version, yay!
Agreed - I only bother with villages on my city connections as well where a trade routes will pass.
What is a lumbermill triangle?
Same as a farm triangle tho im not 100% sure its still in the current version, probably is.
I think the villages problem is they dont get better yields from techs, but this can be an intentional design choice too. That eventually u should replace your villages if u can afford it.
Idk
It is, +1 hammer with a lumber triangle.
vyyt
Deity
And I think +1 gold on jungles.
Automated workers feels slightly wonky in the latest version, not connecting cities (sometimes leaving one tile of road unbuilt), not removing marshes.
Also reading some extremely weird happiness issues, one of my cities with every available building constructed with 2 rounds of public works done and every adjacent tile improved still having one unhappiness for every population.
Also reading some extremely weird happiness issues, one of my cities with every available building constructed with 2 rounds of public works done and every adjacent tile improved still having one unhappiness for every population.
Seems rather odd as Forests and Jungles are often interspersed in a weird way that would often prevent triangles. Strikes me that it would just end up favouring some players over others from sheer luck. Farms don't nearly have as bad of a problem.
I agree. I'd actually like look at balance of basic improvement.
1. I miss farms on fresh water hills. It could be locked behind a tech if really necessary, but is it?
2. Lumbermills are really weak early on.
Currently a forest is base 2
1, or 1,2You get +1
for lumbermill+1
+1 for workshop+2
to lumbermills on metallurgy in the renaissanceWhat I would do is change the lumbermill to +2
, but the tech boost in renaissance to only 1. That puts lumbermills more in line with farms and mines of their time. As is lumbermills hit 4 yields, competing with mines + forge that already has 5 yields, and a 6th upon researching steel. Farms have 4 yields + a 5th if they have a triangle.Eventually forests do become amazing because the zoo keeps getting strange buffs that no one asked for. I don't think lumbermills should get 1 culture as something all civs have access to.
3. Maybe this doesn't match the above, but I really think the forge should just give 1
to mines. Right now, sheep are generally worse than empty hills.4. Agribusiness farms/pastures totally dominate the late game. Industry's buffs aren't very important because they still don't beat agribusiness farms. I think imperialism could use a few adjustments here. 3 yields to farms is too many, I really think 2
on ocean is obscene, for many empires its more than science that rationalism gets, while still getting all the other imperialism perksf.I appreciate your post, CrazyG.
1. Why were freshwater hillfarms removed in the first place? I miss them as well.
These days, the freshwater hills end up being my Villages most often.
2. Agreed with swapping the 1 production for the later 2 production bonus.
3. I agree with decreasing Forge bonus to Mines, but I would add that I think there's too many bonuses to things generally, until finally the overview screen simply looks like a mess. I actually want to do some backtracking to Vanilla a little and make all the tiles and buildings and techs more simple. This one is an excellent start.
HOWEVER, this comment may also say more about Sheep than it does about Forges. Sheep suck. GP on sheep also suck since you don't even get to keep the Gold yield for Golden Ages. AND you don't get the culture yields from God of Pastures because the Sheep are always on Hills. Basically I think this yield needs a re-think.
4. When it comes to balancing out the later policy trees, I think what we're taking for granted is the earlier policy trees that are all different and react with later trees in a variety of ways. By the time the late game arrives, it's hard to pin down what the actual yield numbers for these later trees really are. It would be interesting to field test some of the later trees with a "blanked" earlier social policy tree (that is, run a test game where you ONLY have Rationalism/Imperialism/Industry and nothing else besides) and see how the numbers pan out.
1. Why were freshwater hillfarms removed in the first place? I miss them as well.
These days, the freshwater hills end up being my Villages most often.
2. Agreed with swapping the 1 production for the later 2 production bonus.
3. I agree with decreasing Forge bonus to Mines, but I would add that I think there's too many bonuses to things generally, until finally the overview screen simply looks like a mess. I actually want to do some backtracking to Vanilla a little and make all the tiles and buildings and techs more simple. This one is an excellent start.
HOWEVER, this comment may also say more about Sheep than it does about Forges. Sheep suck. GP on sheep also suck since you don't even get to keep the Gold yield for Golden Ages. AND you don't get the culture yields from God of Pastures because the Sheep are always on Hills. Basically I think this yield needs a re-think.
4. When it comes to balancing out the later policy trees, I think what we're taking for granted is the earlier policy trees that are all different and react with later trees in a variety of ways. By the time the late game arrives, it's hard to pin down what the actual yield numbers for these later trees really are. It would be interesting to field test some of the later trees with a "blanked" earlier social policy tree (that is, run a test game where you ONLY have Rationalism/Imperialism/Industry and nothing else besides) and see how the numbers pan out.
2. Lumbermills are really weak early on.
Currently a forest is base 2
You get +1
+1
+2
What I would do is change the lumbermill to +2
--Just to be thorough, forests also get .5F through the herbalist. I'm not opposed to your idea, I generally only work lumbermills when I get a triangle.
3. Maybe this doesn't match the above, but I really think the forge should just give 1
--Mines are fine, fix the sheep if that's the problem.
4. Agribusiness farms/pastures totally dominate the late game. Industry's buffs aren't very important because they still don't beat agribusiness farms. I think imperialism could use a few adjustments here. 3 yields to farms is too many, I really think 2
--I believe Imperalism received that ocean nerf on the last patch.
tu_79
Deity
I can tweak the map script so forest clusters happen more frequently, but that would only work for my map.I agree. I'd actually like look at balance of basic improvement.
1. I miss farms on fresh water hills. It could be locked behind a tech if really necessary, but is it?
2. Lumbermills are really weak early on.
Currently a forest is base 2
You get +1
+1
+2
What I would do is change the lumbermill to +2
Eventually forests do become amazing because the zoo keeps getting strange buffs that no one asked for. I don't think lumbermills should get 1 culture as something all civs have access to.
3. Maybe this doesn't match the above, but I really think the forge should just give 1
4. Agribusiness farms/pastures totally dominate the late game. Industry's buffs aren't very important because they still don't beat agribusiness farms. I think imperialism could use a few adjustments here. 3 yields to farms is too many, I really think 2
What do you mean for your map?
This raises the question for me as to whether VP should make basic edits to all the standard map scripts for general balance.
vyyt
Deity
I agree, I miss the hill farms (adjacent to fresh water) too.
- Status
