New Beta Version - June 9th (6/9)

[Aldebaran1997]

All ranged ships were reduced in range, thus the battleship is 2.

DOW on damage is an automatic thing (as you can't damage a unit you aren't at war with). Thus the DOW.

I'm also curious for feedback on the new culture-from-trade-routes element. As an aside, I'm considering a buff to Progress tying into this mechanic (i.e. Progress Trade Routes to civs with more policies will generate 100% more culture). This will help Progress stay relevant early on and 'leech' culture from tradition and authority civs.

G

I think culture-from-trade-routes is nice and balanced. But with some special circumstances, like being next to Poland or Japan, it feels too strong to me, as I said before. I can get more than 100 cpt in that situations. Also, I think culture has to be added on trade routes towards culturally influenced civs like gold or science.

Btw, if naval ranged needs to have 1 range and layers of battlefield make combat more interesting, why don't you just make Range promotion as tier 3 promotion rather than tier 4? Iirc, experience needed to reach on tier 3 is almost half of tier 4, so it will be doable to get Range promotion on many units more easily but not every single one of them, which can make layers on naval battlefield.

 

[Beniito]

Another beta. Prolly last one before release.

• bugfixes for the AI
• smaller adjustments to tech/culture rates based on expansion (dropped by 1% at all sizes)
• adjustments to naval units (blockading a city causes it to produce -25% gold, RCS/CS of ranged naval units increased, ranged naval units can move and shoot)
• all civs start with a pathfinder instead of a warrior

Link: https://mega.nz/#!vZlQnJQb!Noi-DdJdr1rOblEfBpWMYjxVq9_1g2Xi77pYsxqE-nQ

G

When's the planned release ? I cant wait :3

 

[Edaka]

Has anyone ever noticed how the amount of production that barbarians steal from a city is utterly disproportionate to other yields? It seems like in the early game they can steal about 1 turn worth of culture/science/gold, but it's several turns for production.Setting that back alone would significantly reduce the barbarian induced frustration, at least for me.

Edit: I think food is also way up high, much more than 1 turn worth of it, but I'm not so sure about that.

 

[PapaRockett]

Has anyone ever noticed how the amount of production that barbarians steal from a city is utterly disproportionate to other yields? It seems like in the early game they can steal about 1 turn worth of culture/science/gold, but it's several turns for production.Setting that back alone would significantly reduce the barbarian induced frustration, at least for me.

Edit: I think food is also way up high, much more than 1 turn worth of it, but I'm not so sure about that.

I agree. I can understand if it's taking 1 turn off production, but when I'm swarmed by barbs and they're all taking 4-5 turns off building my shrine/monument it's a real disaster.

 

[Starrynite120]

Of course if its an OCD or roleplaying thing, by all means plant where you want. It certainly does seem silly to think about having 4 scientific academies all built on the land cows graze. But if trying to succeed on a higher difficulty, things like this can be important

Fun fact, Cambridge University keeps cows on multiple locations of university grounds

 

[Owlbebach]

I'm also curious for feedback on the new culture-from-trade-routes element. As an aside, I'm considering a buff to Progress tying into this mechanic (i.e. Progress Trade Routes to civs with more policies will generate 100% more culture). This will help Progress stay relevant early on and 'leech' culture from tradition and authority civs.

I like this change, helps a bit early on, also i think the idea with progress is nice, but it definetly should be upon adopting progress.

One more idea - how about instant culture from building improvements in lliberty policy? Fits progress ideologically, different mechanics compared with other policies, will force players to build more workers early on. And what is more important - it will be way stronger in the beginning rather than in the end of the game, wich is really something that progress needs right now.

 

[ElliotS]

Fun fact, Cambridge University keeps cows on multiple locations of university grounds

IDK about England, but in the US there's a tax loophole for having farm animals on your land IIRC.

One more idea - how about instant culture from building improvements in lliberty policy? Fits progress ideologically, different mechanics compared with other policies, will force players to build more workers early on. And what is more important - it will be way stronger in the beginning rather than in the end of the game, wich is really something that progress needs right now.

That seems fun if possible.

 

[Owlbebach]

Anyone feels like its something wrong going on with policy costs? Me and my friend just finished a game, where i got an ideology by researching atomic theory, and i had 3 policies in piety and 4 policies in rationalism (i.e. i have adopted only 3 piety policies before industrial era, switched to rationalism, cause its better, and haven't finished it too). And i was ranked 4/15 on the map in terms of culture, and that was deity. Policies seem to be too expensive....

Also i have some concerns about tourism victory, but i'll post it elsewhere, cause uts not reletade to beta

 

[CrazyG]

A social policy increasing the culture on trade routes seems too situational to me.

The culture on trade routes has resulted in my trading much more often with city states, which are always worth much more culture than my neighbors

 

[tu_79]

Actually, I don't mind to have increased cost for first policy. Many times I haven't explored enough to know which tree will be best. In this beta I can make an informed first pick. Maybe late game is too costly (I'm still in Renaissance), but just the opening seems right.

Also, small question, a blockade is just blocking all adjacent sea tiles, or completely surrounding the city with units. Because I'm not getting blockades in the first case.

 

[Moi Magnus]

Has anyone ever noticed how the amount of production that barbarians steal from a city is utterly disproportionate to other yields? It seems like in the early game they can steal about 1 turn worth of culture/science/gold, but it's several turns for production.Setting that back alone would significantly reduce the barbarian induced frustration, at least for me.

Edit: I think food is also way up high, much more than 1 turn worth of it, but I'm not so sure about that.

When you say 1 turn of culture/science/gold, is it 1 city turn, or 1 empire turn ?
Because if it is 1 empire turn, then it correspond to multiple city turns, so it should be normal that prod and food are about 3 turns.

 

[Gazebo]

I think culture-from-trade-routes is nice and balanced. But with some special circumstances, like being next to Poland or Japan, it feels too strong to me, as I said before. I can get more than 100 cpt in that situations. Also, I think culture has to be added on trade routes towards culturally influenced civs like gold or science.

Btw, if naval ranged needs to have 1 range and layers of battlefield make combat more interesting, why don't you just make Range promotion as tier 3 promotion rather than tier 4? Iirc, experience needed to reach on tier 3 is almost half of tier 4, so it will be doable to get Range promotion on many units more easily but not every single one of them, which can make layers on naval battlefield.

I really, really want to keep most ships at 1-2 range. 3+ range on ships trivializes combat, especially with the FOW changes.

Re: influence and culture, I decided against it as influential civs are already culture leaders, thus additional culture would a.) probably never happen for them or b.) snowball their culture lead even more.

Has anyone ever noticed how the amount of production that barbarians steal from a city is utterly disproportionate to other yields? It seems like in the early game they can steal about 1 turn worth of culture/science/gold, but it's several turns for production.Setting that back alone would significantly reduce the barbarian induced frustration, at least for me.

Edit: I think food is also way up high, much more than 1 turn worth of it, but I'm not so sure about that.

It is based on local production, but I'll check it to make sure there's not a math error.

I like this change, helps a bit early on, also i think the idea with progress is nice, but it definetly should be upon adopting progress.

One more idea - how about instant culture from building improvements in lliberty policy? Fits progress ideologically, different mechanics compared with other policies, will force players to build more workers early on. And what is more important - it will be way stronger in the beginning rather than in the end of the game, wich is really something that progress needs right now.

A social policy increasing the culture on trade routes seems too situational to me.

The culture on trade routes has resulted in my trading much more often with city states, which are always worth much more culture than my neighbors

The Progress trade route thing would be an addition to one of the top 2 policies. I'm also going to remove the culture from 'friending' a CS, so that you only get it for allied CS routes.

G

 

[Beniito]

I really, really want to keep most ships at 1-2 range. 3+ range on ships trivializes combat, especially with the FOW changes.

Re: influence and culture, I decided against it as influential civs are already culture leaders, thus additional culture would a.) probably never happen for them or b.) snowball their culture lead even more.



It is based on local production, but I'll check it to make sure there's not a math error.





The Progress trade route thing would be an addition to one of the top 2 policies. I'm also going to remove the culture from 'friending' a CS, so that you only get it for allied CS routes.

G

notice me senpai (◕‿◕✿)

 

[Gazebo]

notice me senpai (◕‿◕✿)

What's the issue?

 

[grmagne]

So being friends/allies with a cultural CS won't give us culture but creating a trade route will? What alternate bonus would the cultural city states provide?

 

[Gazebo]

So being friends/allies with a cultural CS won't give us culture but creating a trade route will? What alternate bonus would the cultural city states provide?

Allies will, Friends will not.

G

 

[Tekamthi]

Overall love the beta. Naval change is a great step. Some of the smaller stuff like CS moving through allied territory, though I havent seen these working extensively, do seem to make things a little more interesting so far (I'm playing 43 civs/20 CS, not many opportunities). Culture from trade routes and the proposed policy benefit connected to this sit well with me. I haven't necessarily experienced/noticed the extreme cases with certain civs mentioned in this thread

Re: naval changes: again, really enjoy these for the change it brings to naval combat. That said, it feels like a half-measure, and an incomplete update to me so far. I'm not sure if maybe there's already more planned, but the naval beta has sparked this vision as I've played:

• add attack and move for naval melee too... just doesn't make sense that boats that are supposedly faster (more movement points) & get around using the same technology, would be so profoundly different in their ability to move and attack, considering the time scale of the turns we experience in civ. Right now naval melee is mostly just a demolition derby once it starts, and has always felt very blunt and simplistic. Attack and move as the standard for both types of core naval units might allow for more cohesive naval formations, maneuvering, and overall better tactical play.
• attack and move for both has the potential to make naval even more deadly in their ability to focus firepower on coastal targets, which i realize is counter to the aim of the naval range reduction that led to the attack and move compromise in the first place... But I find the attack and move change is just as important as the original range change itself... So resurrect civ 3's coastal fortress! Assign it to engineering. If stone were a strategic resource, I'd say tie it to that, but since its not, no resource req. Base benefit is similar to current mine field, except all water tiles w/in one give the movement penalty, whether worked or not. W/ discovery of physics, coastal fortress removes/counters the rcs penalty of any unit stationed in city. W/ discovery of metallurgy, some kind of small auto-bombard, say -5 to any naval that moves w/in 2 tiles. Maybe some def bonus to city against naval-based attacks too. Possibly scale these further w/ later techs. Cost of construction & maintenance should be proportionate to the advantage these benefits work out to be, sooo... expensive?
• Add the same effects from proposed coastal fortress city improvement to fortress and citadel tile improvements.
• Range 1 makes sense in ancient and medieval, but I feel it should go to 2 at frigate, cruiser should have 2 + indirect, and battleship 3 + indirect. Battleship w/ 2 just feels wrong. To counter the long range, and considering the proposed coastal fortress above, change minefield to add extra movement to all tiles w/in 3 rather than just worked tiles, and add -5 dmg to naval unit entering worked tiles.

Anyway I'll be the first to say my thoughts are a little half-baked, and may be much harder to reflect in code than I imagine.. but I really like the naval changes I see shaping up, and hope for more!

Thanks as always to the devs and community here.

 

[Beniito]

What's the issue?

Nothing I just wanted you to notice me <3

And to say thank you!

 

[Grabbl]

The naval changes are great in my opinion. Finally, naval combat gets a tactical element and is not just about "who has more ranged ships" and "who fires first" (so AI also tends to be better at it). Also, I find it rather accurate that as a "land" civ, I don't have to maintain an ancient/classical navy unless I plan on a naval invasion, though it certainly has its advantages to have one (in my games, navy was not irrelevant at all, just not a must-have anymore.

add attack and move for naval melee too

From a balance point of view, this would shift too much towards melee ships, I think. Also, lore-wise, it makes sense that a "bombarding" unit can move after combat, but a unit, that really has to engage in combat cannot.

Range 1 makes sense in ancient and medieval, but I feel it should go to 2 at frigate, cruiser should have 2 + indirect, and battleship 3 + indirect. Battleship w/ 2 just feels wrong. To counter the long range, and considering the proposed coastal fortress above, change minefield to add extra movement to all tiles w/in 3 rather than just worked tiles, and add -5 dmg to naval unit entering worked tiles.

I also think that this would feel good an make sense, however we would recreate the Vanilla Civ Issue "First with frigates wins" (in my experience, almost every PBEM game on vanilla needed an additional rule to prevent this) that I was really glad the Patch managed to eliminate.

 

[Tekamthi]

From a balance point of view, this would shift too much towards melee ships, I think. Also, lore-wise, it makes sense that a "bombarding" unit can move after combat, but a unit, that really has to engage in combat cannot.

Couldn't the balance here be tweaked with CS/RCS adjustments fairly simply, or is there something else i'm not thinking of? I don't really understand what you mean lore-wise... historically there was little difference in the way dromons and triremes engaged that would imply that one should be stuck next to its adversary for ~20 years at a time while the other should be able to sail off. We don't make horseman get stuck after they attack, right? Both them and horsearchers can move and attack last i checked. Isn't that the same distinction? I acknowledge though that it would a drastic change from what we're used to.. and maybe game-breaking in its ability to focus attacks. That was my thinking in buffing the ability to actively counter them from cities & shore, but maybe some other mitigating change would be needed.

I also think that this would feel good an make sense, however we would recreate the Vanilla Civ Issue "First with frigates wins" (in my experience, almost every PBEM game on vanilla needed an additional rule to prevent this) that I was really glad the Patch managed to eliminate.

I only vaguely remember this, to be honest. Am I missing something, or would the same effect now be applied as "First to cruisers wins"?