New Beta Version - January 3rd (1/3)

[Infixo]

Re: Food discussion
To get from N pop to N+1 one need at given pop (formula from VP):
- 20 - 839 food
- 30 - 1854 food
- 40 - 3318 food
Assuming that 2/3 of city pop are specialists and they consume 8 food each, and city at the moment produces +50 food surplus, it takes X turns to increase by 1 pop:
- 20 to 21 @13 spec: 17 turns
- 30 to 31 @20 spec: 37 turns
- 40 to 41 @26 spec: 66 turns
If specialists use 4 food only (50% less) then the surplus food is bigger and the turns required go down:
- 20 to 21: 8 turns
- 30 to 31: 13 turns
- 40 to 41: 20 turns

 

[Gazebo]

Re: Food discussion
To get from N pop to N+1 one need at given pop (formula from VP):
- 20 - 596 food
- 30 - 1491 food
- 40 - 2835 food
Assuming that 2/3 of city pop are specialists and they consume 8 food each, and city at the moment produces +50 food surplus, it takes X turns to increase by 1 pop:
- 20 to 21 @13 spec: 17 turns
- 30 to 31 @20 spec: 37 turns
- 40 to 41 @26 spec: 66 turns
If specialists use 4 food only (50% less) then the surplus food is bigger and the turns required go down:
- 20 to 21: 8 turns
- 30 to 31: 13 turns
- 40 to 41: 20 turns

Thanks, this is what I was asking for. So, the question is, is the difference in growth here too much? I'm on the fence. On one hand it is a big change, on the other hand, too-rapid growth in the modern+ period can really cripple your happiness.

G

 

[Gidoza]

Thanks, this is what I was asking for. So, the question is, is the difference in growth here too much? I'm on the fence. On one hand it is a big change, on the other hand, too-rapid growth in the modern+ period can really cripple your happiness.

G

Well, at 30 and 40 population you have triple the growth rate; this goes without saying that Freedom is having way more productivity from the specialists (on equal population, and even more if they grow) and can actually handle the huge population; and finally, I've rarely if ever had happiness problems in the late game unless I'm a crazy warmonger - and this isn't necessarily the kind of strategy that gels with this Freedom tenet.

 

[Infixo]

Thanks, this is what I was asking for. So, the question is, is the difference in growth here too much? I'm on the fence. On one hand it is a big change, on the other hand, too-rapid growth in the modern+ period can really cripple your happiness.
G

For small and medium cities happiness can cripple them. But going from 30 to 31 doesn’t change average yields per pop that much, so happiness is less of an issue the bigger city gets, right?

 

[Gazebo]

For small and medium cities happiness can cripple them. But going from 30 to 31 doesn’t change average yields per pop that much, so happiness is less of an issue the bigger city gets, right?

Depends - sometimes a city has no more tiles to work and is compelled to work a specialist, which can negatively impact happiness.

G

 

[Infixo]

and finally, I've rarely if ever had happiness problems in the late game unless I'm a crazy warmonger - and this isn't necessarily the kind of strategy that gels with this Freedom tenet.

That’s exactly what I wrote a moment ago.
Maybe those happiness tresholds should scale somehow with city size. So those little differences you get when city gets big would actually matter more. A matter of a little different formula than yield / population when calculating happiness.

 

[Workerspam]

Re: Food discussion
To get from N pop to N+1 one need at given pop (formula from VP):
- 20 - 596 food
- 30 - 1491 food
- 40 - 2835 food
Assuming that 2/3 of city pop are specialists and they consume 8 food each, and city at the moment produces +50 food surplus, it takes X turns to increase by 1 pop:
- 20 to 21 @13 spec: 17 turns
- 30 to 31 @20 spec: 37 turns
- 40 to 41 @26 spec: 66 turns
If specialists use 4 food only (50% less) then the surplus food is bigger and the turns required go down:
- 20 to 21: 8 turns
- 30 to 31: 13 turns
- 40 to 41: 20 turns

Thank you for doing the leg work. One question: if it takes 596 food to go from 20 to 21 and you have a 50 food surplus, why isn't it 12 turns to increase by one pop? It seems like the equation is 596 food/50 food=11.92 turns. Am I missing something in the mechanic or terminology?

 

[Infixo]

Depends - sometimes a city has no more tiles to work and is compelled to work a specialist, which can negatively impact happiness.
G

There are 36 tiles in 3 rings. You’d need like 55+ pop at least to get that „problem”.
Also, if somebody wants to really use this tenet, it will be taken as one of few first ones, so around late Industrial / Modern probably. Still plenty room and time to grow.

 

[Gazebo]

That’s exactly what I wrote a moment ago.
Maybe those happiness tresholds should scale somehow with city size. So those little differences you get when city gets big would actually matter more. A matter of a little different formula than yield / population when calculating happiness.

I considered it back in the day but the formula is already difficult enough to comprehend for new users. Best to leave it be. Besides, big cities do affect the global median.

Edit: if you want to tinker with it for fun, there's a pop scaler in CvCity:

//Increase threshold based on # of citizens. Is slight, but makes larger cities more and more difficult to maintain.
    int iPopMod = getPopulation() * GC.getBALANCE_HAPPINESS_BASE_CITY_COUNT_MULTIPLIER();
    iPopMod /= 100;

Could make that exponential instead of just linear.

G

 

[BiteInTheMark]

GROWTH, GROWTH, GROWTH.
Why the heck your only talking about grow??? Why is growth your only concern????
The problem in first instance is, you free a lot of citizen and need a lot less population to reach the same amount of yields.
All other civilizations have to work plenty of food tiles, to get more food for population, and send those extra population to earn even more food, to have enough for the specialists. And the lack of extra food for farms by freedom tenet doesnt makes it better.
Happines is absolutly no problem for freedom nations. Capitalismn is negating the unhappines from 12 specialists from every city, and other tenets can give up to 2 happines per city. While all other civilizations need more population to get the same amount in yields, effectivly increasing the difficulty to match the unhappines by gold/culture/science.

I overflow it, and it looks like, the maximum amount of specialists per normal city is 19 now. If we count guilds and CSD Buildings in, with a normal sized empire, we can accept the average of 20 specialists per city.

 

[Infixo]

Thank you for doing the leg work. One question: if it takes 596 food to go from 20 to 21 and you have a 50 food surplus, why isn't it 12 turns to increase by one pop? It seems like the equation is 596 food/50 food=11.92 turns. Am I missing something in the mechanic or terminology?

Oops, my bad. I've copied numbers from wrong column. The numbers are ofc bigger (839, 1854 and 3318). Fixed it in the post. Thanks!

 

[Gazebo]

GROWTH, GROWTH, GROWTH.
Why the heck your only talking about grow??? Why is growth your only concern????
The problem in first instance is, you free a lot of citizen and need a lot less population to reach the same amount of yields.
All other civilizations have to work plenty of food tiles, to get more food for population, and send those extra population to earn even more food, to have enough for the specialists. And the lack of extra food for farms by freedom tenet doesnt makes it better.
Happines is absolutly no problem for freedom nations. Capitalismn is negating the unhappines from 12 specialists from every city, and other tenets can give up to 2 happines per city. While all other civilizations need more population to get the same amount in yields, effectivly increasing the difficulty to match the unhappines by gold/culture/science.

I overflow it, and it looks like, the maximum amount of specialists per normal city is 19 now. If we count guilds and CSD Buildings in, with a normal sized empire, we can accept the average of 20 specialists per city.

I'm interested in growth because that's a big part of the equation to see what the impact actually is. I can't control for tile yields (as every city is different), but I can control for specialist food consumption v. growth.

You seem to think you have all the answers. You don't. Your tone is extremely irritating, by the way. Bring it down a bit.

G

 

[BiteInTheMark]

I'm interested in growth because that's a big part of the equation to see what the impact actually is. I can't control for tile yields (as every city is different), but I can control for specialist food consumption v. growth.

You seem to think you have all the answers. You don't. Your tone is extremely irritating, by the way. Bring it down a bit.

G

I am sry, i doesnt want to sound toxic. I like you and your work, cause you gave me back civlization 5, after it went boring. All I want, is honoring your work and make it even better. So I want to participate you with my observations and thoughts.
But you look uninterested in the values and calculations Ive shown you. Is it, cause you can only look over the balance of growth?

Oops, my bad. I've copied numbers from wrong column. The numbers are ofc bigger (839, 1854 and 3318). Fixed it in the post. Thanks!

Ok, this values are close to my calculations. Leading to the result, you need more than 10 population, only working food tiles, to get enough for the specialists. Effectivly need 30k food to reach this point.

 

[Gidoza]

I considered it back in the day but the formula is already difficult enough to comprehend for new users. Best to leave it be. Besides, big cities do affect the global median.

Edit: if you want to tinker with it for fun, there's a pop scaler in CvCity:

//Increase threshold based on # of citizens. Is slight, but makes larger cities more and more difficult to maintain.
    int iPopMod = getPopulation() * GC.getBALANCE_HAPPINESS_BASE_CITY_COUNT_MULTIPLIER();
    iPopMod /= 100;

Could make that exponential instead of just linear.

G

I don't know - I think unhappiness from specialists in a city is more important than unhappiness from population.

What if instead there was some kind of scaler against the number of specialists within the city, either for food or for happiness or for both? That is to say, 20 specialists in 20 cities might require 20 food and generate 20 unhappiness, but 20 specialists in the same city might eat 60 food and cause 60 unhappiness. The bonuses from Capital and various buildings/wonders make for huge effects from putting your specialists all in one place, but you'd have to pay for it - if you were to spread out the specialists, the costs against you would be minimal and you could work many more tiles, but you wouldn't reap collective Great Person bonuses as much.

 

[Gazebo]

I don't know - I think unhappiness from specialists in a city is more important than unhappiness from population.

What if instead there was some kind of scaler against the number of specialists within the city, either for food or for happiness or for both? That is to say, 20 specialists in 20 cities might require 20 food and generate 20 unhappiness, but 20 specialists in the same city might eat 60 food and cause 60 unhappiness. The bonuses from Capital and various buildings/wonders make for huge effects from putting your specialists all in one place, but you'd have to pay for it - if you were to spread out the specialists, the costs against you would be minimal and you could work many more tiles, but you wouldn't reap collective Great Person bonuses as much.

It becomes really difficult to predict things with scalers like that. Not really needed.

G

 

[Workerspam]

Oops, my bad. I've copied numbers from wrong column. The numbers are ofc bigger (839, 1854 and 3318). Fixed it in the post. Thanks!

Thanks, makes sense now and I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something. One thing to note is the difference in turn time to next pop is very dependent on the assumed Food Surplus.

Assume the 40 pop example from your table, 26 of whom are specialists.

1. 50 food surplus: 67 turns for new pop (before Civil Service) to 22 turns (after Civil Service)
2. 100 food surplus: 34 turns to 17 turns
3. 150 food surplus: 23 turns to 14 turns
4. 200 food surplus : 17 turns to 11 turns
5. 250 food surplus: 12 turns to 9 turns

This may be why I think Civil Service is nice but not game changing as others do. 12 turns down to 9 is very nice and it's why I take the policy but I'm only cutting it down by 3 turns. If somebody else is cutting off 44 turns then it may seem overpowered.

Note: My numbers are slightly different than those in Infixo's post (he has 66 turns to 20 in the 50 food surplus case); I'm guessing it's a rounding/order of operations thing.

 

[MorphBer]

I agree that its a strong tennet, but doesn't need a nerf. It's really strong in a Tradition Tall empire, where it's normally the first lvl 2 tennet, but tbh there are so many crazy strong tennets this does not seem op.

 

[tu_79]

How about just letting the player select what the puppet should focus on? I mean yeah that's less puppeting and more direct control, but it makes sense that you could give overall instructions to a puppet.
Feels like it would solve a few of these puppet-problems.

Please, do. This is my main issue with conquering and going wide.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

This may be why I think Civil Service is nice but not game changing as others do. 12 turns down to 9 is very nice and it's why I take the policy but I'm only cutting it down by 3 turns. If somebody else is cutting off 44 turns then it may seem overpowered.

Isnt simply picking the worst ratio in your calculation to argue a bit subjective? If my city is working automaticly, they all reach a point, having 30 food surplus. If i had picked civil service, I would safe 57 food, effectivly tripling the growth of the city.
In such a city, if I work all specialists (23, 2 guilds), I have a lack of 14 food. 69 safed food from civil service would give me a growth of 55. Instead of a starvation. Did you reconsider such things?

 

[Stalker0]

i'm not sold on the freedom food thing.

My thing is, how much does growth actually help you at that point in the game? So I got 4 more pop in my capital over a large amount of turns compared to someone who didn't take the tenant. That growth doesn't translate into THAT many yields...especially compared to a tenant that can get you an immediately boost to yields and continues generating through all of those turns I'm having to grow.

Honestly I think the much stronger freedom tenant is the one that turns the unhappiness of 6 specialists per city into happiness. That is a big boost in happiness in many of my games.

But even so, I don't think freedom is necessary OP. Every ideology has some really strong tenants. Orders 2 free techs is a HUGE amount of science!