New Beta Version - June 14th (6/14)

[Enrico Swagolo]

Cheating?

He's getting like -25 unhappiness in his capital alone with all the buildings and Tradition, I think it's not really cheating to persuade the game to be more... lenient.

 

[ryanmusante]

Cheating?

You can go to jail for cheating in the game. Gazebo told me so.

 

[inzlinger]

I believe it is a problem of big cities about 40. In my latest game as Boudicca my capital has grown to 43 also and I have gotten -17 crime, which wasn't manageable, since I build literally everything. Maybe there is an exponentiell factor or anything else, which let grow the crime or poverty to fast, if your city grow about 40 or so?

 

[ElliotS]

Yeah I'm not in favor of punishing growth so heavily. That's one of Tall's strengths and making it a weakness seems wrong on many angles.

 

[ashendashin]

Yeah I'm not in favor of punishing growth so heavily. That's one of Tall's strengths and making it a weakness seems wrong on many angles.

I think G's view makes sense. If you're reaping the benefits of being tall then use it to focus on other things. Railroading the game down one line with endless benefits is boring, and I see a lot of people here that want their chosen strategy to remain a railroad.

 

[Txurce]

I think G's view makes sense. If you're reaping the benefits of being tall then use it to focus on other things. Railroading the game down one line with endless benefits is boring, and I see a lot of people here that want their chosen strategy to remain a railroad.

I completely agree that if you're playing on autopilot, pretending it's SimCiv, then you ought to have problems. Whether it's balanced well enough right now is something Gazbo can gauge pretty well in his tests.

 

[pineappledan]

Not necessarily. You can put your citizens on non food workplaces, gaining more yields than just food.

I have every specialist worked, and there are 2 other cities which overlap on tilespace. Look again at my picture I posted, everything that isn't a farm is being worked already, the only things not being worked are farms.

By the way, @pineappledan, can't you produce some great admiral (discovery voyage) or great musicians (concert tours)? Are you able to trade for more luxuries? Conquer them in the worst case? Can you ally city states with unique luxuries? Any city state quest grants happiness out there? Maybe too late but, have you chosen a religion that helps with happiness (Pacifism seems mandatory)? Maximizing happiness from the policies you've chosen?

I actually just produced a great admiral 5 turns earlier, and I am paying 30g each for 3 luxuries: brazilwood, pearls and salt. That is why my GPT is so low for Industrial. Doesn't matter though, because each luxury only gives 1 happiness.
Everyone is trying to figure out what my problem is when I have already, very clearly stated what my problem is: I am averaging 1.4 per luxury on 327. If I was playing vanilla civ I would have 60. I have 6 bonus from an ultra-high population, which is not how the system was described. This current bonus happiness scaling on population is a damned joke. luxuries don't do anything in this version, so you may as well go in and set the happiness per lux to 2-3 just so it's playable.

Yeah I'm not in favor of punishing growth so heavily. That's one of Tall's strengths and making it a weakness seems wrong on many angles.

My biggest issue is that there are a few civs explicitly rewarded for going tall (india, China), and the mechanics are punishing that playstyle. This renders certain civs unplayable in their main strategy, so all you can do is use their unique abilities as an excuse to not focus on those aspects of the game at all.

To be honest Fealty wasn't such a bad idea now that I think about it. With Statecraft he'd be getting pretty much the same food in the capital at this point (though also other yields to lower other stuff, but then he'd have WAY higher Crime as well) so he'd have the same population anyway, also around 10, and if he's using his 4UC mod he's also getting free Culture because of CS.

Well, I think I've pretty much maxed out crime anyways, so it wouldn't matter. I have the Red Fort in my capital, and even that couldn't save me. I am playing with 4UC, so the extra production towards castles and conversion of city defense into culture was my main concern, yeah. I think it's actually having a large effect on boredom, more than crime.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

I have every specialist worked, and there are 2 other cities which overlap on tilespace. Look again at my picture I posted, everything that isn't a farm is being worked already, the only things not being worked are farms.
I actually just produced a great admiral 5 turns earlier, and I am paying 30g each for 3 luxuries: brazilwood, pearls and salt. That is why my GPT is so low for Industrial. Doesn't matter though, because each luxury only gives 1 happiness.
Everyone is trying to figure out what my problem is when I have already, very clearly stated what my problem is: I am averaging 1.4 on 327. If I was playing vanilla civ I would have 60. I have 6 bonus from an ultra-high population, which is not how the system was described. This current bonus happiness scaling on population is a damned joke. luxuries don't do anything in this version, so you may as well go in and set the happiness per lux to 2-3 just so it's playable.

I've noticed the same about luxuries, it's 1 for each and then there's a weird bonus that exists independently of the luxuries. Doesn't matter how many you have, only the population counts when this strange bonus is considered. At this point why is this said to be related to luxuries when it has little to no relation to them in any way, shape or form? This is just happiness you get from your population number that also somehow counts in the amount of cities you own, it has absolutely nothing to do with luxury resources. I don't know if you even need to have 1 luxury for the bonus to start existing because I think I once got a popup saying I got +1 happiness from luxuries when I had none.

 

[pineappledan]

The way I had understood it, I thought the population bonus was supposed to take populationBonusFromPop * No.UniqueLuxuries. Apparently I am mistaken.

This puts us back to where we were 2 patches ago, where luxuries may as well be sold off, because the AI values them at 7-10 GPT each, which is far more valuable than 1-2 happiness. The only value luxiries have is for monopolies and tile bonuses. The luxury happiness system is inoperable

 

[Moi Magnus]

I've noticed the same about luxuries, it's 1 for each and then there's a weird bonus that exists independently of the luxuries. Doesn't matter how many you have, only the population counts when this strange bonus is considered. At this point why is this said to be related to luxuries when it has little to no relation to them in any way, shape or form? This is just happiness you get from your population number that also somehow counts in the amount of cities you own, it has absolutely nothing to do with luxury resources. I don't know if you even need to have 1 luxury for the bonus to start existing because I think I once got a popup saying I got +1 happiness from luxuries when I had none.

@Gazebo, is it normal that the happiness bonus from luxury is not multiplied by the number of luxuries? Or should we open a Github issue?

 

[Gazebo]

@Gazebo, is it normal that the happiness bonus from luxury is not multiplied by the number of luxuries? Or should we open a Github issue?

Maybe it’s a bug?

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Maybe it’s a bug?

I posted on github then.

 

[tu_79]

I am averaging 1.4 per luxury on 327

This sounds like a bug, yep.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

I am averaging 1.4 per luxury on 327

This sounds like a bug, yep.

I dont think so.... You have 14 cities, as I remember correctly, every additional city decrease the value of a luxury lineary.
If you had have only 7 cities, your luxuries would be worth 2.8 happiness.
(Luxury Rank * Number of luxuries ) / (Number of cities * 0.25)

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Just checking to see if it's a bug or a feature (since I don't usually demand tribute) -> has anyone been able to demand (heavy) tribute each turn from a city state, without a cooldown period? In my current game, I've been successfully demanding heavy tribute once per turn from Kuala Lumpur as Rome.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

There is definitly a bug with "tithes" belief. You only get 20 + 1 gold for every city.... instead of 10 gold for every city for the first religioius conversion.

 

[Gazebo]

I dont think so.... You have 14 cities, as I remember correctly, every additional city decrease the value of a luxury lineary.
If you had have only 7 cities, your luxuries would be worth 2.8 happiness.
(Luxury Rank * Number of luxuries ) / (Number of cities * 0.25)

Wrong. It is not linear.

There is definitly a bug with "tithes" belief. You only get 20 + 1 gold for every city.... instead of 10 gold for every city for the first religioius conversion.

Not a bug- it scales exponentially, but starts slow.

G

 

[chicorbeef]

Pineappledan has a point. India's main schtick has always been growing more tall cities than anyone else because it gets +2% growth per follower and food from Farms (you need to have a large enough pop to work all those farms) which synergizes best with a handful of massive cities rather than a bunch of small ones.

My last India game with a previous version was alright (nowhere near that much poverty/crime) and I don't think India was OP then at all, especially after Growth was made harder in the winter versions, so they should probably be compensated somehow or have something in their UA to manage the happiness (maybe a reduction in the population modifier unhappiness? The reduction itself could be exponential if we want to get creative). It feels wrong that you have to limit growth as India, the one civ designed explicity for massive growth, and I have the feeling that they've been indirectly overnerfed lately.

If India can't grow to the capacity that the UA/UB comfortably allows then I feel they won't remain competitive with other civs such as Korea, Arabia, Egypt, Brazil, etc.and that's a problem.

I suppose that we ought to test the viability of India through AI games.

 

[CppMaster]

Maybe just needs reduction as Indian UA would fix it.

 

[Stalker0]

Pineappledan has a point. India's main schtick has always been growing more tall cities than anyone else

I have to agree. We can't give the UA a big bonus to growing cities and then complain when people grow big cities. If the happiness system isn't allowing India to exploit its UA than an adjustment should be made. But I think we can adjust India's happiness specifically instead of necessarily changing the base system.