New Beta Version - March 28th (3-28)

[tu_79]

This is what's bothering me. I want to stop growth to stop unhappiness but the methods for slowing down growth can give unhappiness and, at times, more so.

For tall play, I have less problem as National Wonders and Empire Happiness can have a larger impact. Even Authority doesn't seem so bad as the instant yields of Food comes from border expansion and those don't happen as regularly as buildings being built for Progress. For whatever reason, Progress is giving me the most problems and I can't seem to figure out why.

Maybe you are building too many buildings? Try producing units and workers and settlers first. Then go for some wonders. Your biggest early problem is distress and the best way to deal with it is to increase your production: mines, pastures, quarries, are the best. Plantations give more gold than hammers, but it's fine. However, going the upper side techs doesn't work well for wide unless you are naval.
Then, don't delay walls too much, they now give unhappiness reductions. Can't remember if the barracks are still good against distress, but might be.

You'll need some culture from your pantheon, though. As progress, your main sources of culture are, gaining techs and building buildings. If you go too wide, then research is slowed down, and if you also take it easy with buildings, to avoid unwanted growth, you may lack too much culture, so you'll need another culture source.

 

[amateurgamer88]

As progress I pretty much avoid food tiles entirely. Its common for my cities to have an expected growth time of 100+ turns. In reality they grow again after 2 or 3 buildings are finished.

Also I usually avoid fealty or religious beliefs that give food, as progress.

The growth from 2 or 3 buildings is indeed what's causing me issues. My city could have stagnant growth but it will have another pop regardless. I can understand the need to avoid religious beliefs that give food but isn't Fealty supposed to be work with wide or should it be looked at to address the amount of food? I will admit that I had Fealty and my cities were growing far too quickly than I'd like. For my followers, I did go for two faith buildings so I felt Fealty was a good choice. Maybe it's really an awful idea now but I'm sad to see this not working too well. For your games, when do you go for Fealty then?

Maybe you are building too many buildings? Try producing units and workers and settlers first. Then go for some wonders. Your biggest early problem is distress and the best way to deal with it is to increase your production: mines, pastures, quarries, are the best. Plantations give more gold than hammers, but it's fine. However, going the upper side techs doesn't work well for wide unless you are naval.
Then, don't delay walls too much, they now give unhappiness reductions. Can't remember if the barracks are still good against distress, but might be.

You'll need some culture from your pantheon, though. As progress, your main sources of culture are, gaining techs and building buildings. If you go too wide, then research is slowed down, and if you also take it easy with buildings, to avoid unwanted growth, you may lack too much culture, so you'll need another culture source.

Let's just say that I went quite wide and, since I had no threats, I can focus on infrastructure. It does seem that Fealty and Progress might have caused me a lot of problems. I'll have to see if I have similar issues with any other Medieval Era policy trees. As for tech and policy, I was among the top 3 so that wasn't a problem. Regarding culture, I didn't have any pantheon available that helped me with Culture. The ones that give decent culture are also harder to find a religion.

Walls give some reduction and Barracks to help with Distress. Since I went Fealty and got Neuschwanstein, Castles help quite a bit more. My happiness only really stabilized after I finished Industry as that double happiness from luxury was massive for me. I'm starting to wonder if some policy trees need a look at after the latest patch. There might be some unintentional imbalances where some are stronger than others.

 

[Bhawb]

I have to say I love the new system, although I personally feel like I do more micromanaging than I used to. I'm pretty much manually controlling growth, specialists, and in some cases also tile working (at least early on), at least when I play wide. Tall is still as easy as ever as far as happiness goes, although specialists feel more finicky now.

How is everyone dealing with specialists now?

Maybe it's really an awful idea now but I'm sad to see this not working too well. For your games, when do you go for Fealty then?

Fealty is for empires that need extra production/growth/religious boosts. While it is true that Fealty has a lot of per-city yields, it doesn't necessarily mean it is the best tree just because you have a lot of cities. I think Artistry and Statecraft are both decent trees for Progress. Artistry will give you 9 happiness and wide gives you a lot of land area for digging sites, and wide has more production/gold to leverage for CS allies.

I've still been going Fealty for Authority starts as a warmonger, since I'll have a lot of cities with very few specialists. Everything it gives is usually pretty relevant, and you have less risk of over-population when you're capturing cities with significantly reduced population, and Authority doesn't give much pop growth.

 

[amateurgamer88]

I have to say I love the new system, although I personally feel like I do more micromanaging than I used to. I'm pretty much manually controlling growth, specialists, and in some cases also tile working (at least early on), at least when I play wide. Tall is still as easy as ever as far as happiness goes, although specialists feel more finicky now.

How is everyone dealing with specialists now?

Fealty is for empires that need extra production/growth/religious boosts. While it is true that Fealty has a lot of per-city yields, it doesn't necessarily mean it is the best tree just because you have a lot of cities. I think Artistry and Statecraft are both decent trees for Progress. Artistry will give you 9 happiness and wide gives you a lot of land area for digging sites, and wide has more production/gold to leverage for CS allies.

I've still been going Fealty for Authority starts as a warmonger, since I'll have a lot of cities with very few specialists. Everything it gives is usually pretty relevant, and you have less risk of over-population when you're capturing cities with significantly reduced population, and Authority doesn't give much pop growth.

I've also noticed the more micromanaging than before. I used to just do it for Tall and accept it. Now, it matters regardless of what you go for. While I can understand how specialists should be finicky for tall playstyles, it seems to hurt wide more as you have less happiness to go around so each specialist hits that happiness harder than before. Not sure what can be done now though.

For Artistry, I can see the argument for more digging sites. However, those 9 happiness are limited to what cities built them and specialists tax you hard with unhappiness. I feel like you actually have less happiness to work with overall. Is there really a point getting those Guilds and not working them? As for Statecraft, I can see it work and TR can be dedicated to cities that really need the happiness. For my game, I didn't have many CS close by so it's much harder to work with.

I'm currently in a game with Authority and Fealty which seems to work better than Progress and Fealty. Only reason I didn't go for Statecraft is the Austria in my game.

 

[Bhawb]

Is there really a point getting those Guilds and not working them?

I pretty much always work the specialists in each guild no matter what. Even without Artistry they allow you to make use of the +3 gold per guild, give you a source of more culture, and GWAMs are useful for any empire. In Artistry you will absolutely build and work them, they unlock a lot of the tree.

 

[tu_79]

I've also noticed the more micromanaging than before. I used to just do it for Tall and accept it. Now, it matters regardless of what you go for. While I can understand how specialists should be finicky for tall playstyles, it seems to hurt wide more as you have less happiness to go around so each specialist hits that happiness harder than before. Not sure what can be done now though.

For Artistry, I can see the argument for more digging sites. However, those 9 happiness are limited to what cities built them and specialists tax you hard with unhappiness. I feel like you actually have less happiness to work with overall. Is there really a point getting those Guilds and not working them? As for Statecraft, I can see it work and TR can be dedicated to cities that really need the happiness. For my game, I didn't have many CS close by so it's much harder to work with.

I'm currently in a game with Authority and Fealty which seems to work better than Progress and Fealty. Only reason I didn't go for Statecraft is the Austria in my game.

Artistry used to be good for the extra Golden Ages to wide (money money). Since the great artist was nerfed, I don't know if it's still true. Statecraft was not directly good for wide, but wide is good for diplomacy, so if you wanted to go that route, you'd pick it anyways.

They were useful to any playstyle if their conditions were met. The only tree that does not work well is wide Tradition (a puppet empire is a tall empire).

 

[Kim Dong Un]

They were useful to any playstyle if their conditions were met. The only tree that does not work well is wide Tradition (a puppet empire is a tall empire).

My snowballing Japanese empire is going to have to differ, because this naughty Nobunaga is definitely more on the 'thicc' side ...

Tradition / Fealty / Imperialism at 8 cities - 2 annexed capitals so far - with 5 other puppets for a 13 city total. I also have 4 CS allies, and happiness has barely ever dipped under 85%.

Balance note for @Gazebo , I'm going to have to fully agree that Hero Worship is indeed 'lit' now. The synergy with Japan's UA is bonkers; Crusader Spirit reformation puts it on another level, let alone if you've also got Authority/Imperialism/Order/Autocracy bonuses for city capture...

 

[Bromar1]

How is everyone dealing with specialists now?

It used to be that you could stall growth by working specialists, so even wide empires had 2-3 specialists per city. Now they are huge happiness drain.

Would it be possible to change urbanization to take in the ratio of specialists to non specialists? It just feels bad to have 18+ pop cities unable to work a single specialist without tipping into unhappiness

 

[Gazebo]

It used to be that you could stall growth by working specialists, so even wide empires had 2-3 specialists per city. Now they are huge happiness drain.

Would it be possible to change urbanization to take in the ratio of specialists to non specialists? It just feels bad to have 18+ pop cities unable to work a single specialist without tipping into unhappiness

Specialists are a luxury afforded those who endeavor to earn them. They shouldn’t be a default for all cities. That’s a lesson taken from civ 4.

 

[DeAnno]

They were useful to any playstyle if their conditions were met. The only tree that does not work well is wide Tradition (a puppet empire is a tall empire).

In general Sovereignty + God of the Expanse is pretty cool with lots of cities too, at least for a few eras. After it's sort of expired by scaling you should be snowballing anyways.

 

[pineappledan]

Hero worship, Crusader Spirit, Imperium, Civilizing Mission, Futurism, Spain/Assyria.

Even if balanced, It’s... a lot stacked on a single event trigger.

 

[Gazebo]

Hero worship, Crusader Spirit, Imperium, Civilizing Mission, Futurism, Spain/Assyria.

Even if balanced, It’s... a lot stacked on a single event trigger.

You’re a lot stacked on a single event trigger.

 

[Stalker0]

You’re a lot stacked on a single event trigger.

Sniff, I wish G would praise me like that

 

[Kim Dong Un]

Specialists are a luxury afforded those who endeavor to earn them. They shouldn’t be a default for all cities. That’s a lesson taken from civ 4.

Before this change, practically every city would be working specialists, regardless of policies, pop, etc., but now they actually are special and it feels right. Although I don't know if this puts any styles that rely on specialists, such as Tradition or Artistry, at a disadvantage.

I've personally found no problem happy wise with being able to still work some specialists, and my deterrent for using them usually revolves more around my affinity for growth.

 

[Stalker0]

Finally got a chance to continue my Spain game. I'm in Turn 210 in the Renaissance. Happiness is a bit of a struggle at the moment, I'm hovering around 62% and its been hard to push it back up. The main issue is poverty as there are not a lot of buildings that reduce it at this point in the game. But my "troubles" aren't terrible, I feel stable and think I can pull it back up in a bit.

I did give the Public Works building a go. My capital has massive unhappiness, so I actually built 2 of them. And...my unhappiness didn't go down one bit So...maybe they will pay off later, but right now I don't find PW to be OP

 

[Bromar1]

Before this change, practically every city would be working specialists, regardless of policies, pop, etc., but now they actually are special and it feels right. Although I don't know if this puts any styles that rely on specialists, such as Tradition or Artistry, at a disadvantage.

I've personally found no problem happy wise with being able to still work some specialists, and my deterrent for using them usually revolves more around my affinity for growth.

I'm playing a wide progress -> artistry ->imperialism Poland right now. I have lots of relatively high pop cities but very few specialists. It feels weird to have 2-3 illiteracy but none can work any scientist...

I think artistry may deserve more wide happiness since specialists are so expensive. Maybe instead of +1 happiness per guild, it could be a mini version of the Capitalism tenet: up to 1 specialist per city creates happiness instead of unhappiness

 

[Kim Dong Un]

Can somebody please, for the love of One & Only Best Superior Korea, tell me where (or if) I can find the counter for turns remaining in a defensive pact between AI's. It's not anywhere to be found in any menu or UI. It shows turns remaining for the player's DP in the diplo & relations menu, but why not for the AI? Is this intended?

I don't understand how nobody has an answer for this (I've asked nicely multiple times in various threads through the past), and it's an extremely frustrating aspect of VP that's been bugging me for ages for obvious reasons.

 

[JamesNinelives]

Specialists are a luxury afforded those who endeavor to earn them. They shouldn’t be a default for all cities. That’s a lesson taken from civ 4.

That's fine, but that means I'm not going to enjoy that luxury unless I micromanage. You said that simplifying was intended to put that aspect of the game was becomes too much trouble, so it's been moved into the background so that we could focus on the more fun aspects of the game. What I'm seeing is that one of those fun elements has ben reduced and now I have to do more work for it.

I don't mean that as a criticism of the beta (I'll talk about that in a moment), but I'm not sure I'm on board with the way you are talking about it. I love looking at works of art and trading for my favourite pieces of writing so that I can put them in a themed display. I can't do that until later in the game now be because my guild slots feels like I'm being punished for using them rather than rewarded for investing in them.

I also love Artistry as a tree - it has a lot of flavour to it, and it's fun to use. I can't help but wonder if I've putting myself at a disadvantage going down that path now, unless I happen to be in a particular set of circumstances. I don't care as much about +1 culture on specialists if I'm only working a few. Similarly, +25% great people feels a lot less helpful when I'm not generating many to being with.

To be clear, I'm not saying this just to complain. I'm playing this beta right now and I'm enjoying it. I ended up getting a fair number of great people, just not as many as I used to and it took a bit longer to get there. The free great person in Artistry is relatively more valuable now, and so are those rare Event Choices that grant you a great person - and the great people you can purchase with faith for completing a tree.

The start of the game was faster and smoother for me - I didn't have issues with unhappiness until later in the game. That said, I didn't get works of writing or art until later on as well. Happiness became much more important for me late-game. Previously I thought that the penalty for unhappiness was pretty trivial, because the cities I build troops with are those who tend to have good infrastructure (like barracks) anyway. When I was caught was on the defensive though, not being able to get troops out as fast as I liked turned out to be quite significant. I don't know if that's good or bad, but I found it to be a surprisingly effective penalty.

Middle game was a bit longer than I expected, and to be honest I found managing happiness was actually a bit of a challeng until I figured out what balance to strike. This is surprising because in previous game empire happiness was the important factor, and I'm used to managing that well. Now every city has it's own conditions for being happy though. I like the city happiness approach, it's cool and it makes sense. In terms of making things simpler though, most of the management now happens on a city level rather than an empire level. That was something that took a little while to learn.

For context, the current approval rating system I mostly ignored. I don't believe I ever went below 95%. To be frank, I dislike the notion of 'approval rating' because it feels like a political poll - and it's not as if the people can vote me out. I'm here forever lol. Back to happiness though, I was managing cities on an individual level a fair bit, but the empire happiness level was only relevent for me if if my war weariness starting racking up.

On the plus side, war weariness does feel significant now that I'm feeling it on a city level rather than an empire level. On the minus sign, the empire unhappiness is a really poor measure of how your people are doing. I had about half my cities unhappy at one point and was still doing 95-100% approval. To be honest it's a little confusing - I found the happy/pop much clearer.

General game balance has been pretty decent though. As others have said, challenging without being too difficult. Cities are happy/unhappy when it feels like they should be in most cases.

There was one case where my cities were unhappy even though I was investing a lot in improving the land and building infrastructure, I think because I was progressing in science faster than I could keep up with infrasture. Felt a bit frustrating - sometimes you want lots of science so you can build that wonder before someone else grabs it. And to keep your army up to date or even ahead of the game. But if you go to fast in science people seem to ask for more than you can give them.

Still, overall the game has been pretty fun. Not perfect, but of course not terrible either. Hope my experience has been useful in some way. Thanks for reading, and best of luck to you all.

where (or if) I can find the counter for turns remaining in a defensive pact between AI's. It's not anywhere to be found in any menu or UI. It shows turns remaining for the players DP in the diplo & relations menu, but why not for the AI? Is this intended?

Honestly, I've never looked for it. I'm not sure it exists. You know how long your diplomatic deals last because you made them. How would you learn about other people's diplomatic deals if you weren't a part of the deal? You don't know how long they are trading luxuries for, or how long until their denouncement of one another, or their declarations of friendship last. I'm not saying that you are wrong for asking, and I can't understand why you would want to. But not knowing that information is at least consistent with all the other stuff you don't know about the AI diplomacy relative to one another.

 

[Stalker0]

That's fine, but that means I'm not going to enjoy that luxury unless I micromanage. You said that simplifying was intended to put that aspect of the game was becomes too much trouble, so it's been moved into the background so that we could focus on the more fun aspects of the game. What I'm seeing is that one of those fun elements has ben reduced and now I have to do more work for it.

I'm still on the fence about the new specialist unhappiness. I do think its a bit too much of a penalty in the earl game at the moment. There is a middle ground between "I fill every slot" and "I fill no slots". I find that it balances out better in the later game though.

 

[Txurce]

I'm still on the fence about the new specialist unhappiness. I do think its a bit too much of a penalty in the earl game at the moment. There is a middle ground between "I fill every slot" and "I fill no slots". I find that it balances out better in the later game though.

On this topic, are you convinced that happiness in the 50s for a long stretch isn't worth filling every slot you normally do on a wide empire? This is how I've been playing: trading 10% efficiency for a GP boost. I figure that I'm not concerned about lower growth, the production ding is acceptable, and I have the option of switching out during wartime if the war's tough enough where 10% means something.