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

[Gidoza]

4) A note on Growth. I know we are working on specialists right now, but I think one thing that should be looked at is late game growth. I think it should be increased. The problem right now is if I choose to forego specialists to grow my city...it still takes a whole lot of food to get those late game populations to budge. Its just not worth the loss of specialist yields right now. I would love to see those exponentials on food brought down a bit. Another option is to beef up the Grocery and Medical Lab (or just the Medical Lab) more on the food carryover to assist big cities keep growing.

I don't know if this is too much, but sometimes I wonder whether Farms shouldn't give a +2 food bonus instead of just +1.

 

[DarkZero]

What about this proposal.... Forests loose 2 food after Industrial era and gain +1 production ? Today no civilisation goes to hunt in the woods to survive as all animals would be in few months extinct... But even today lumber is a valuable resources for almost EVERYTHING. Until the Industrial era improved forests yield 2 food improved and +1 with an building like herbalist or replaced with an new budiling(Hunter lodge - 1 food on forest tiles,maintance scales foe every 2 improved forest tile additional 1 gold). In the industrial era drop 1 food food and give +1 additional production. And in Atomic era drop one more food as then people even less go in the woods to catch food for surviving. The 1 food stays as people still go in the woods to catch fish,deer,wikd pigs,hare so that is the one food yields etc that are sold on markets or in restaurants as delicatess. But forests today 99% used for lumber so that is the production yield

The current discussion is that forests are to strong early game, and your suggestion does nothing to address that.

 

[MorphBer]

Farms could defenitly use +1 food from tech or a building early to midgame. Maybe aqueduct? When I was playing india I actually build a reasonable number of farms.

 

[ElliotS]

Farms could defenitly use +1 food from tech or a building early to midgame. Maybe aqueduct? When I was playing india I actually build a reasonable number of farms.

Yeah ever since cathedrals were nerfed into the ground I don't know if I've built a since farm cluster. Farms are so lackluster compared to villages it's just not worth it even when you could make a huge farm cluster.

I think the adjacency bonus needs to be something more valuable than food. Maybe +1 for 2 adjacent farms, +1 for 3 adjacent farms, +1 for 4 adjacent farms, +1 for 5 adjacent farms and +1 for 6 adjacent farms.

Comparing that to a village which has much less required setup but comes later makes it seem fair.

 

[crdvis16]

Couple notes from my last 2 games:

1) In both games I was the only civ that went Progress. All others went Tradition except the typical 2 or so warmongers who went Authority, which seemed weird to me. I play Standard/Standard.

2) I like the discouragement from purchasing units in cities now. I pretty much only hard build them unless I suddenly realize that I need a unit NOW (city is in danger or something). It makes the decision between making buildings vs units more meaningful, whereas previously I might just buy all my units in order to not disrupt infrastructure.

3) As Portugal I am basically investing in rushing almost every building I make in any of my cities (probably ~90% of my buildings have been invested in) and still have enough money to pretty reliably upgrade units when their next advancement is available. I went Progress/Statecraft/Industry, currently in Industrial era. I have 9 cities, 4 initially, 2 more a bit later, and another 3 made with Pioneers. I imagine Portugal with Industry is particularly rich (I may have gone a bit overboard with Naus...) but it still seems weird that there's essentially no decision on which buildings or which cities to invest in faster building production- I just do them all, all the time.

4) It's been a while since I have done much naval warfare, but I am finding that the AI seems better at it than I remember. Not sure when it happened, but I would venture to say that naval warfare is harder than land warfare. On land I feel like I can take advantage of terrain to outsmart the AI, but no such luck in the sea. Not sure if there were recent changes or not, but glad to find it's a challenge.

 

[Txurce]

As Portugal I am basically investing in rushing almost every building I make in any of my cities (probably ~90% of my buildings have been invested in) and still have enough money to pretty reliably upgrade units when their next advancement is available. I went Progress/Statecraft/Industry, currently in Industrial era. I have 9 cities, 4 initially, 2 more a bit later, and another 3 made with Pioneers. I imagine Portugal with Industry is particularly rich (I may have gone a bit overboard with Naus...) but it still seems weird that there's essentially no decision on which buildings or which cities to invest in faster building production- I just do them all, all the time.

This is true for me as well, and I find it uninteresting.

 

[Gidoza]

3) As Portugal I am basically investing in rushing almost every building I make in any of my cities (probably ~90% of my buildings have been invested in) and still have enough money to pretty reliably upgrade units when their next advancement is available. I went Progress/Statecraft/Industry, currently in Industrial era. I have 9 cities, 4 initially, 2 more a bit later, and another 3 made with Pioneers. I imagine Portugal with Industry is particularly rich (I may have gone a bit overboard with Naus...) but it still seems weird that there's essentially no decision on which buildings or which cities to invest in faster building production- I just do them all, all the time.

This is interesting that you're experiencing this, and I'm experiencing much the same thing. I like it better than previously, but it still feels wrong. I think I'd rather have buildings be cheaper in production costs and gain less gold throughout the game, so that infrastructure can be constructed in a city through production, and then you use gold to make the most important investments in either buildings or rushed units. My point is that production should be holding the ground at all times to make cities or armies what they are - gold should be a buffer to help the process where needed; gold shouldn't be the main focus of the process.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

Yeah ever since cathedrals were nerfed into the ground I don't know if I've built a since farm cluster. Farms are so lackluster compared to villages it's just not worth it even when you could make a huge farm cluster.

I think the adjacency bonus needs to be something more valuable than food. Maybe +1 for 2 adjacent farms, +1 for 3 adjacent farms, +1 for 4 adjacent farms, +1 for 5 adjacent farms and +1 for 6 adjacent farms.

Comparing that to a village which has much less required setup but comes later makes it seem fair.

Since you can get 40+ food only by buildings and lot of +food modifiers, the need for farms is pretty low.
Maybe we should stop trying to make any improvement equivalent and start seeing farms as a necessity. Simply because we make them a necessity.
One simple step is removing the food for forests from herbalist, and you really have to decide, do I want growth (go farm), do I want hammer (go mine), do I want something between (go forest).
Remove some (half?) flat food yields from buildings and decrease food multipliers, and you will see, farms will be more important cause you F******* need them.
And less food and growth will leed to slower lategame (less population, less specialists, more difficult decisions, instead of "work all specialists, rest is split over tiles").

3) As Portugal I am basically investing in rushing almost every building I make in any of my cities (probably ~90% of my buildings have been invested in) and still have enough money to pretty reliably upgrade units when their next advancement is available. I went Progress/Statecraft/Industry, currently in Industrial era. I have 9 cities, 4 initially, 2 more a bit later, and another 3 made with Pioneers. I imagine Portugal with Industry is particularly rich (I may have gone a bit overboard with Naus...) but it still seems weird that there's essentially no decision on which buildings or which cities to invest in faster building production- I just do them all, all the time.

The easiest solution to deal with too much gold in late would be, reduce the gold generation in lategame (he already started with it, but its too obviosly, its only scratching the surface). Nerfing the unit purchase and make purchasing buildings incredible cheap looks for me like a really weird solution. Went Tradition in my current game, and Iam able to purchase 90% of buildings. Silly.

 

[tu_79]

This is interesting that you're experiencing this, and I'm experiencing much the same thing. I like it better than previously, but it still feels wrong. I think I'd rather have buildings be cheaper in production costs and gain less gold throughout the game, so that infrastructure can be constructed in a city through production, and then you use gold to make the most important investments in either buildings or rushed units. My point is that production should be holding the ground at all times to make cities or armies what they are - gold should be a buffer to help the process where needed; gold shouldn't be the main focus of the process.

There's a cost reduction when buildings are from older eras. If the discount can be made only in hammers, but not in gold, then investing in current age buildings is more efficient.

 

[MorphBer]

In my last game with germany, I had absolutly no problem with food or growth. I picked ascetismn and Mandir, ok, but in my whole empire, you will not see any farm. Atomic age, my capitol was past 40 pop, 7 of 8 cities above 30. And i hadnt picked freedom with the "half food for specialist" tenet. Some of my cities only need working 4 tiles and still are not in negative food. In my opinion, food gain is too high. Especially from buildings and the +food bonuses.

So you spend half your religion to get additional food and had no problem with food? Wow what a suprising revelation... (I guess you had the freedom policy as well)

And I think everybody got your opinion now, every page here has like 2 posts from you mentioning too much food.

I'm in atomic with Germany, all citys are below 30 exept my Capital with 35, but it also has all of my trade routes so it gets 120% tourism modifier. Cities still growing but not too fast (~10 turns or so per pop) even I allready have freedom policy

I think mastery should also +1 yield to all great person tiles to help compete with specialists (its also an underwhelming belief currently)

Sounds like a good Idea, I did not get to play with it when it was still +2 but if you nerf something by 50% there should be some compensation.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

So you spend half your religion to get additional food and had no problem with food? Wow what a suprising revelation... (I guess you had the freedom policy as well)

Nice you noticed my posts, but if you reply to them, you should atleast read them. No freedom, no half food for specialists, no +2 to farms, not even one farm.
The food from religion counts only 14 (Description says, maximum is 10, is 14 the final (modified) value shown by UI or is this a bug?). I dont think, this is the solution, how working 4 tiles can feed 32 pop with specialists.

 

[lunker]

Reporting that I am also investing in all buildings and buying units on rare occasion (7 city 4 puppets America)/ I think the disparity needs to be adjusted just a smidgen and it will be *perfect*

AI seems to go for an even spread of tradition, progress, and authority for me.

Also, still not getting why forests are considered strong at all, I usually have them unworked all game long in favour of farm clusters.

 

[Stalker0]

Nice you noticed my posts, but if you reply to them, you should atleast read them. No freedom, no half food for specialists, no +2 to farms, not even one farm.
The food from religion counts only 14 (Description says, maximum is 10, is 14 the final (modified) value shown by UI or is this a bug?). I dont think, this is the solution, how working 4 tiles can feed 32 pop with specialists.

It’s +10 to food (aka the hanging gardens in every city), and then the mandirs is +3 food (I may misremember the exact number)...but most importantly, +10% food.

I’m not saying this is op by any stretch, but it’s not a great example of typical growth in the game

 

[Gidoza]

It’s +10 to food (aka the hanging gardens in every city), and then the mandirs is +3 food (I may misremember the exact number)...but most importantly, +10% food.

I’m not saying this is op by any stretch, but it’s not a great example of typical growth in the game

I could be wrong, but I thought it was +10% growth, not +10% food - those aren't the same thing. Growth only affects food after munching has already been calculated.

 

[lunker]

I could be wrong, but I thought it was +10% growth, not +10% food - those aren't the same thing. Growth only affects food after munching has already been calculated.

It's 10% food iirc

 

[Gidoza]

It's 10% food iirc

Yep just checked - you're right. Whoa, I've been underestimating this thing!!!

 

[Workerspam]

Nice you noticed my posts, but if you reply to them, you should atleast read them. No freedom, no half food for specialists, no +2 to farms, not even one farm.
The food from religion counts only 14 (Description says, maximum is 10, is 14 the final (modified) value shown by UI or is this a bug?). I dont think, this is the solution, how working 4 tiles can feed 32 pop with specialists.

You don't mention what policies you took (aside from no Freedom), your pantheon, what your growth looks like when you do work those specialists while working only 4 tiles... you leave a lot of important, relevant details out. What you did mention was the two followers you took, which are the two most helpful for growth. I should hope you had less food problems in your game with those two follower beliefs, that's the whole point of taking them.

It's like complaining about a high gold income after you take Industry; gold/production is the main point of the tree. If you still have serious gold issues after filling out industry you've either done something horribly wrong or the tree is failing.

If you play a game with a civ that lacks inherent growth potential (no China, Carthage), avoid high food pantheons/beliefs, forego Tradition, Fealty, Rationalism, and Freedom (I believe those are the highest food/growth policies, though Progress isn't too shabby), and still find growth to be too much then you may indeed have a case worth making. You may also simply be partial to less growth than the community and developers at large, in which case that's what mod-mods are for.

For reference, there's an active thread in one of the sub-forums (general balance maybe?) where the argument that growth in late game is too low has been advanced and found support.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

You don't mention what policies you took (aside from no Freedom), your pantheon, what your growth looks like when you do work those specialists while working only 4 tiles... you leave a lot of important, relevant details out. What you did mention was the two followers you took, which are the two most helpful for growth. I should hope you had less food problems in your game with those two follower beliefs, that's the whole point of taking them.

It's like complaining about a high gold income after you take Industry; gold/production is the main point of the tree. If you still have serious gold issues after filling out industry you've either done something horribly wrong or the tree is failing.

If you play a game with a civ that lacks inherent growth potential (no China, Carthage), avoid high food pantheons/beliefs, forego Tradition, Fealty, Rationalism, and Freedom (I believe those are the highest food/growth policies, though Progress isn't too shabby), and still find growth to be too much then you may indeed have a case worth making. You may also simply be partial to less growth than the community and developers at large, in which case that's what mod-mods are for.

For reference, there's an active thread in one of the sub-forums (general balance maybe?) where the argument that growth in late game is too low has been advanced and found support.

Progress, statecraft, industry. For me, standard germany pick.
After that, i picked autocraty and now, after nothing with worth is left, i started imperialismn.
Pantheon is fertility, religion goes ascetismn, mandirs and I think Tither (the one that give yields for every unlocked policy). Yeah, i know, food heavy. But while i nearly always pick Mandirs (+10% food every time beats every other religious building, and could need a nerf), the last time i can remember taking ascetismn is more than 1 year ago. Ascetismn isnt that strong, but i wanted growth. Compared to civil society, which saves you now 90+ food per city, this +10 food is a minor thing.
I cant remember, having any time growth issues. If you like short time decision, farming those specialists first and ignore growth, others will be able to overtake you in population, ok, if you like it. But it feels too easy to create monstrous cities with all slots worked, not even forced to sacrifice other yields for food/growth.

The only gold issues i have are sometimes in early stage of game, and nowadays, even this disappeared. In the named game, i reached 3k gold generation +1k by events. I buy everything, only to get faster back to science generation from production. With 11 cities on a small map. I can remember a game with nebukadnezar, reaching around 4.5k gold normal and around 2k by events, also on a normal sized, peaceful empire on a small map. This is simply mindblowing.

I play civilization since Civ1, fine working your tiles to grow the city, get hammer and stuff. But the numbers in this mod are getting more and more crazy, more and more buildings with side effects. My opinion is, tune it down. I like the complexity, but some abilities are unnessecary complex, making the tracking of your decisions extremly difficult.

 

[Txurce]

Is upgrading units supposed to be cheaper than buying them? Right now a field gun costs 1140 and upgrading a cannon costs 1140 for me.

That scenario gives you a choice: which has more XP?

 

[CrazyG]

Pantheon is fertility, religion goes ascetismn

I don't think you can pick so many growth beliefs than complain that growth is too easy. I can build every building in every city with earth mother, diligence, and thrift. I can get disgusting science with scholarship + synagogues. Gross culture with inspiration + mosques. The opportunity cost to those options is large enough to counteract how strong they are.