New Beta Version - January 14th (1-14)

[CrazyG]

I think the biggest remaining problems with VP are AI combat and runaways. The first makes the game less challenging than it could be, and the second flat-out ruins games, often after an investment of hours. But can anything be done about them that hasn’t been tried before?

Honestly, the change to archery units so that they only earn 2 XP for shooting a city instead of 3 was one of the single most difficulty increasing change added to VP recently. It takes a long, sustained effort to get units with logistics or ranged now. If you want to make combat more difficult, lower the XP earned by melee units too. High level promotions make the game a lot easier. Heck, you could even cap all units at like 5 or 6 promotions if you wanted to nerf war. If the goal is the to make the game harder, this is how you do it

Of course the counter-argument is that high level promotions are really fun, which they are

Now here's the tricky part: You'll need to delete the offending units, save your game, and THEN install the new version. Otherwise the game won't know to reduce your supply!
G

I have to wait 45 turns to delete those trade caravans....................................I suppose my strategy of praying Greece leaves me alone continues

 

[Txurce]

Gazebo, I wouldn't think you'd describe making the AI more city-focused an overhaul outside reasonable computational limits -- and it sounds like you did something along these lines with the current version (which I have yet to play).

Honestly, the change to archery units so that they only earn 2 XP for shooting a city instead of 3 was one of the single most difficulty increasing change added to VP recently. It takes a long, sustained effort to get units with logistics or ranged now. If you want to make combat more difficult, lower the XP earned by melee units too. High level promotions make the game a lot easier. Heck, you could even cap all units at like 5 or 6 promotions if you wanted to nerf war. If the goal is the to make the game harder, this is how you do it

Of course the counter-argument is that high level promotions are really fun, which they are.

Yeah, that's a similar problem to the one I'd have reducing movement to one and two tiles -- not that it's hard to do, but that it's not fun.

 

[Gazebo]

Gazebo, I wouldn't think you'd describe making the AI more city-focused an overhaul outside reasonable computational limits -- and it sounds like you did something along these lines with the current version (which I have yet to play).



Yeah, that's a similar problem to the one I'd have reducing movement to one and two tiles -- not that it's hard to do, but that it's not fun.

For the record, commenting on the latest version and offering complaints/criticisms based on prior versions is really confusing.

G

 

[Stalker0]

High level promotions make the game a lot easier. Heck, you could even cap all units at like 5 or 6 promotions if you wanted to nerf war.
Of course the counter-argument is that high level promotions are really fun, which they are

Would a "cap promotion" option make sense for the mod. For those ultimate war players that still just can't get challenged enough.

 

[ElliotS]

Would a "cap promotion" option make sense for the mod. For those ultimate war players that still just can't get challenged enough.

Honestly I would rather give the AI bonus to unit production and higher caps than take out high level units. It would really hurt the fun.

A dice roll is perfectly balanced but doesn't make for a balanced game.

 

[Stalker0]

This is much more than a minor buff. Not as strong as with the +2 to specialists, but can give a lot of GAP, even more than the scaler of the artistry tree. Didnt you think this is maybe a bit too strong, especially for brazil?

2 notes here.

Remember that since specialists cost .5 happy, they also cost .5 GAP. So you only get a net .5 GAP from this.

The second note, is that tall players (who this is designed for), often get into eternal Golden Ages later in the game. This belief helps you get there earlier in the game, but doesn't really affect the later game much.

 

[Questdog]

@Gazebo Could you please post new builds in a new post? Edits are very easy to miss and if not for CrazyG quoting your edit, I would have never seen it. Thanks!

 

[ryanmusante]

l
I have to wait 45 turns to delete those trade caravans....................................I suppose my strategy of praying Greece leaves me alone continues

With the "Units - Visible Trade Units" mod, you can select caravans during the turn. I don't know if moving them automatically cancels the trade route. I haven't tried yet.

 

[Gazebo]

@Gazebo Could you please post new builds in a new post? Edits are very easy to miss and if not for CrazyG quoting your edit, I would have never seen it. Thanks!

Considering the odd steps that it takes to fix the issue, I don't consider it a proper fix - it was really just intended for his game.

G

 

[black213]

I'm unable to assign my spies as thieves. Anyone else as well?

 

[Gazebo]

I'm unable to assign my spies as thieves. Anyone else as well?

You can only assign thieves in non-capitals.

G

 

[black213]

You can only assign thieves in non-capitals.

G

Right, but the option is not presented when assigning spies in non-capital cities.

 

[Gazebo]

Right, but the option is not presented when assigning spies in non-capital cities.

Then you done got yourself a mod conflict.

G

 

[Kim Dong Un]

After playing a game, I will say I do like all the changes, however the AI tactics and supply caps are still frustrating for me, just not in the same sense that you're all arguing about. Now maybe I'm just not very good, but I honestly hate how I will forever be out settled and out produced unit wise by the AI every single game I play, no matter the circumstances.

I play King normally, but just tried a game on Prince where I took Carthage/progress and had marble with a nice jungle coastline for what I had hoped to be rapid expansion and a walk in the park. Instead I had Russia with authority somehow jam six cities down my throat from above along with a DoW and lines of enemies by turn 90 (don't remember the exact turn, but it was before turn 100 which is absurd for Prince)! Of course 90% of my units were Quinqueremes and rendered useless against landlocked Russia. Then as I'm holding her off, Egypt swoops in and settles right up my dong from the East. Other than a few early wonders via the marble, I end up around turn 150 with only a few cities along with lack of infrastructure in my capitol because I have to basically pick my poison and sacrifice expansion for survival, which I completely agree with and makes the game fun, but an authoritative Russia should not be able to expand that quickly along with pumping units like that (as well as somehow being the tech leader I might add probably from her UA). Deity sure, but not Prince...

I was pissed and kept the war constant despite her proposals for peace and my failure to siege two of her cities. I proceeded to cripple her lands, including capitol, with war elephants pillaging, but at the end of the day she would still pump unit after unit and eventually made a DoF with snowballing 1st place Egypt (who then proceeded to DoW me and pick my carcass with his #1 military) and the game was essentially over despite me being third in score.

Now I understand every game will be different and that you can't dominate every aspect of the game otherwise you snowball and it's no challenge or fun, but It's also not fun being over settled by the AI (peaceful or not) essentially every game while they also have the ability to back up their ridiculous early expansions with a seemingly endless supply of units. I know I have a brain and have the advantage overall, but at the end of the day 20 units is still too much for 10, especially when in certain situations those 20 units are on par or above my 10 tech wise.

The only other thing I still hate is how long it takes to capture cities, especially now that the AI can use the Defense ability. Historically even up until recently in WWII there are a myriad of cities and lands that have changed hands over the course of time, but when I play VP it seems city transitions don't happen quick/often enough. By the time I've exhausted and sieged/captured a city or two it always seems that half the game is over. Late game like Modern era onward I understand, but for most of the game I think buffing it slightly would make things more interesting even if not going for domination victory. Just because a city has a garrison and castle it shouldn't basically negate the damage my trebuchet, a unit from the same era, is doing...It takes way too long and is again counteracted by the fact the AI can then just pump unit after unit without consequence. This argument could just be a product of my skill at the game though, so just thought I'd give some input. Either way I still love 95% of VP and will always appreciate the time and effort G and all the good people have put into this project!

 

[Gokudo01]

@Gazebo, capitalism increased my happiness by +100 in my last play through ( 16 cities if i remember well . )

Between the huge reduction of unhappiness, ( 6 specialist doesn't generate unhappiness is already a huge reduction with 0.5 unhappiness per specialist) But now you generate 3 happiness. it's + 6 differential per city

 

[Infixo]

I posted this observation around version 1-3 but it is still there, so I will repeat. Around turn 150 many AI cities have already built all possible buildings. Basically AI is able to build buildings as fast as techs are discovered. Along with keeping an army of the maximum size (up to supply limit). As a result, many cities just run processes. I’ve seen many arts and science.
Beside obvious effect of snowballing potential, this adds to happiness problems. AI with complete infrastructure pulls the median up, and humans simply may not keep up.

 

[MorphBer]

@Kim Dong Un
I started a Game as Poland and got stomped by my neighbor Inca. Probably result of my poor play but I have the feeling that plaing wide is significantly harder against the AI than tall. I tried to forward settle but he had built the same number of settlers but had 5 units to my one lonely warrior

 

[CrazyG]

I play King normally, but just tried a game on Prince where I took Carthage/progress and had marble with a nice jungle coastline for what I had hoped to be rapid expansion and a walk in the park. Instead I had Russia with authority somehow jam six cities down my throat from above

When I play Carthage, I always take pottery first (or second, sometimes with progress's extra science it doesn't really matter) and build a settler the moment I can. This usually means settling my second city around turn 30, which is consistently well before the AI. If you are getting forward settled so heavily, I would try to put the settlers out earlier.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

@Gazebo, capitalism increased my happiness by +100 in my last play through ( 16 cities if i remember well . )

Between the huge reduction of unhappiness, ( 6 specialist doesn't generate unhappiness is already a huge reduction with 0.5 unhappiness per specialist) But now you generate 3 happiness. it's + 6 differential per city

The increase of food consumption and unhappiness makes freedom even more a no brainer pick.
Growing is now much more difficult and freedom helps with this (+2 food for improvements, half food for specialists, hospitals for free, maybe before you have researched it), AI builds everything and pushes you into oblivion by unhappnies, freedom cuts down your specialist unhappiness. You have never enough military cap, freedom helps with this (Why is this a freedom tenet and not Autocraty???). Tall play gets even more improved by additional trade routes, more franchise limit. Several culture sources to get more social policies.
No matter what you want to do, freedom is the universal ideology, solving the most problems you have.

By the way, after we have decreased the overall food generation and nerfed the yields from specialists greaty, I dont think the increased food consumption +1 for specialists is necessary anymore.
Playing korea at the moment makes freedom the only useful choice, even order is also declared as good pick for SV. (Maybe saving the game at ideology pick and try both ways, maybe the internal trade routes can help with this, but as lvl3 tenet, I think, this comes to late to help greatly).

The general game speed have decreased definitly, much less gold and science, which is in my opinion good. I think the main source of this is the slower growth of cities by less passiv food and the reduced specialists yields.

The costs for buildings and units feel now a bit too high, atleast in the early and mid game, havnt reached the lategam till yet.

The observation by Infixio is disconcerting. On the one side, its good, AI playing now more like a human and see more value in grow and infrastructure. But on the other side, this is kinda bad. The former necessary advantage of the AI is now reduced (due to better decisions) but is still earning the same benefits. Making it really hard to win in a fair (non-combat) science/culture/other-stuff competition.

Honestly I would rather give the AI bonus to unit production and higher caps than take out high level units. It would really hurt the fun.
A dice roll is perfectly balanced but doesn't make for a balanced game.

Sorry, but this sounds more like a buff to warmonger play. More units to kill = more yields by authority or Abilities.

 

[Gokudo01]

AI builds everything and pushes you into oblivion by unhappnies

ok so that's the reason why we are so pressured by unhappiness ???