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

[Txurce]

That said, I found the more significant penalty for having unhappy cities is that unit production costs more (roughly double?) in unhappy cities. Not sure what your experience with that is?

I feel like I should be asking how play is intended at this point though. Are we expected to be managing specialists manually if we want more great people? Particularly, is it intended to manually manage specialists more for Artistry to be worth investing in relative to Fealty or Statecraft? I'm willing to do that, but it's not something I've needed to do in previous versions. So I'm not quite sure how gameplay is intended to feel (how much micro is necessary, how significant are the payoffs).

Something odd occurs in the city panel sometimes where it reads x turns to build a unit, then when I click on it, the number changes to 2x. This is a lot more than 10%, obviously, and my response has been to not build units there. TBH, I haven't spent time figuring out what's going on.

This leads to your larger point about how we're supposed to be playing with the new system. Broad strokes, I think it's too early to say definitively. My sense, though, is that it's a terrific improvement partly because there's no simple go-to answer. To optimize, you have to make a decision about trade-offs that is not so cut and dried.

That said, I think tu_79's comments are on point. It's essentially what I've been doing. In my own case, I've always manually assigned all my GP production, so there's no adjustment necessary in terms of process.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

So far, playing tall is absolutly no problem happiness wise. I focus growth and have relative big cities, but not really much unhappiness. Even with like +220% modifiers at the beginning of industrialismn, I have only 2 unhappiness in total from yields in my capital. Iam running at 100% happiness since over 150 turns. (Small/Standard/Emperor)

 

[JamesNinelives]

Use Great People focus on any city you want to work specialists. It's smart enough to work first the specialists that would produce a great person first.

That's not a bad idea. I'm not sure how much it will offset the other things I care about, but I can give it a try. I'm likely to end up managing some it manually anyway because I value a great artist, diplomat, or engineer more than a great scientist or merchant.

This leads to your larger point about how we're supposed to be playing with the new system. Broad strokes, I think it's too early to say definitively.

Sure - I have no intention of making a definitive judgement. This is just my experience, as you have yours. Keep in mind there's a lot of things I like about this beta, the changes I'm looking are just what seems different relative the previous version of it.

What I can say is that without specific attention writers and artists don't aren't turning until later in the game. That's not as fun for me because I like having great works from different eras. On the other hand, I'm still producing lots of great people in late game, particularly when faith purchases come online but also because a number late-game wonders which grants great people (particularly scientists). It kind of feels like a different game during different eras, which I suppose can be taken as a positive.

My sense, though, is that it's a terrific improvement partly because there's no simple go-to answer. To optimize, you have to make a decision about trade-offs that is not so cut and dried.

That's where I'm not sure I agree with you. Of course you have to make trade-offs, but the game isn't fun if you have to do too much work to get to be bits you enjoy. The process itself should be something that is challenging enough to be meaningful, but so much work as to be tedious.

While this beta was being developed I learned to manage happiness on a local level and that was manageable and still fun. Having to manage what each city's governor is doing if I want to get the results I'm looking for is another question, and I'm not sure how I feel about it yet. Playing on a large map means you often have a lot of cities, so I want to know if it's worth making that effort. Also, it feels kind of bizarre to see a big city with 8+ slots and none of them being worked on the default governance. Why then are so many available?

In any case, I will play my next games differently, and see how things go.

 

[tu_79]

Also, it feels kind of bizarre to see a big city with 8+ slots and none of them being worked on the default governance. Why then are so many available?

My guess is that default manager tries to maximize yields. It will not work on a specialist for 4 hammers if it can work on a mine for 5 hammers.
There's a caveat for using Great People focus: growth is much slowed. So, you should use WLTKD for switching focus to default or even food, and turn it back to GP afterwards.

 

[Gazebo]

My guess is that default manager tries to maximize yields. It will not work on a specialist for 4 hammers if it can work on a mine for 5 hammers.
There's a caveat for using Great People focus: growth is much slowed. So, you should use WLTKD for switching focus to default or even food, and turn it back to GP afterwards.

It does weight the value of great person points, but the default governor will strive to be happiness and growth neutral at minimum. The many yield specializations will encourage the AI to work specialists of the same type at the expense of happiness and growth.

G

 

[Bhawb]

It does weight the value of great person points, but the default governor will strive to be happiness and growth neutral at minimum. The many yield specializations will encourage the AI to work specialists of the same type at the expense of happiness and growth.

G

Completely anecdotal, but my governors absolutely aren't keeping happiness neutral. Last night I was going around hitting manual specialist control because even my cities with balanced 4 happy/unhappy would work 3 specialists, throwing my happiness off a bit. I can post pictures later if I'm the only one experiencing this. Do they maybe consider empire happiness, or some other weighted factors? Because I was still technically above the highest threshold even with specialists being worked, I just wanted more of a buffer w/ incoming conquests.

 

[Teholb]

I play on Prince/Standard/Standard/Communitas/Sparse with one less AI (MP stability with one other player) and I've got to say . . . this feels like the best version yet. When the new happiness system was first implemented, I didn't like how simple it felt to keep happiness soaring regardless of what I was doing. In the current iteration, I do feel that I have to balance priorities in order to achieve reasonable happiness levels. Warmongering now feels like a true commitment, not something I can pick up and drop as needed- I now carry through with wars until I've gained something worthy, because otherwise the massive investment tradeoff that unit production now represents would leave me impoverished and underdeveloped.

I don't see many lower-ranked players contributing their experiences, so I wanted to add my two cents. VP is headed in a great direction, and I cannot wait to see what other refinements are in store!

 

[Gazebo]

Completely anecdotal, but my governors absolutely aren't keeping happiness neutral. Last night I was going around hitting manual specialist control because even my cities with balanced 4 happy/unhappy would work 3 specialists, throwing my happiness off a bit. I can post pictures later if I'm the only one experiencing this. Do they maybe consider empire happiness, or some other weighted factors? Because I was still technically above the highest threshold even with specialists being worked, I just wanted more of a buffer w/ incoming conquests.

‘Strive.’

G

 

[Bhawb]

‘Strive.’

G

How hard are they "striving" if not working the specialists would put the city at neutral? That's like when I tell people I'm striving to lose weight and then order a family sized deep dish pizza for myself.

 

[pineappledan]

God I hate 'strive'... Almost as much as undergrads love 'strive'.

I wonder if the thresholds for GP birth need to be lowered by 5-10%, since specialists are so much harder to work? Might be worth looking into making GPP points more valuable. It's hard to tell by what people are saying if the specialist unhappiness is too harsh, or if the reward just isn't enough right now.

 

[Gidoza]

Something odd occurs in the city panel sometimes where it reads x turns to build a unit, then when I click on it, the number changes to 2x. This is a lot more than 10%, obviously, and my response has been to not build units there. TBH, I haven't spent time figuring out what's going on.

This leads to your larger point about how we're supposed to be playing with the new system. Broad strokes, I think it's too early to say definitively. My sense, though, is that it's a terrific improvement partly because there's no simple go-to answer. To optimize, you have to make a decision about trade-offs that is not so cut and dried.

That said, I think tu_79's comments are on point. It's essentially what I've been doing. In my own case, I've always manually assigned all my GP production, so there's no adjustment necessary in terms of process.

Been noticing this too. In the city view the unit might take 4 turns, but then on the map view it takes 6 turns, and the 6-turm version is the true one.

Is it possible that carry-over production isn't carrying over?

 

[Gazebo]

How hard are they "striving" if not working the specialists would put the city at neutral? That's like when I tell people I'm striving to lose weight and then order a family sized deep dish pizza for myself.

Because the governor decided that the yields granted by the specialists were worth the city's 'bottom line' valuation of happiness. You're mincing words. Strive = primary motivation. But it is not the only motivation.

Monitor your cities. Make changes where you want. If you want the game to play itself for you, play Civ6.

G

 

[BiteInTheMark]

Because the governor decided that the yields granted by the specialists were worth the city's 'bottom line' valuation of happiness. You're mincing words. Strive = primary motivation. But it is not the only motivation.

Monitor your cities. Make changes where you want. If you want the game to play itself for you, play Civ6.

G

In the former versions my governor was working plenty of specialists, some times to a degree, close to stopping growth of the city. I had to activate manual specialist control, choose some specialits and balance my food generation to get an acceptable growth for the city.
Now, even with a great buffer of happiness, it seems the only city which is working more than the guild specialists is the capital with the tradition food cost reduction. Now I have to activate manual control to get more specialists in my cities. What a weird world.

 

[Bhawb]

Because the governor decided that the yields granted by the specialists were worth the city's 'bottom line' valuation of happiness. You're mincing words. Strive = primary motivation. But it is not the only motivation.

Monitor your cities. Make changes where you want. If you want the game to play itself for you, play Civ6.

G

Which is why I just flip on manual control and never let governors touch anything. But when the governors will push you below a happiness threshold to work a couple scientists, I'd still argue they aren't "striving" hard enough. It isn't mincing words if their motivation doesn't seem to be working. I never had this issue with governors on the old system; they were still stupid, but at least they mostly didn't assassinate your happiness constantly.

 

[Aristos]

Monitor your cities. Make changes where you want. If you want the game to play itself for you, play Civ6.
G

QFT.

 

[Rekk]

Completely anecdotal, but my governors absolutely aren't keeping happiness neutral. Last night I was going around hitting manual specialist control because even my cities with balanced 4 happy/unhappy would work 3 specialists, throwing my happiness off a bit.

Now, even with a great buffer of happiness, it seems the only city which is working more than the guild specialists is the capital with the tradition food cost reduction. Now I have to activate manual control to get more specialists in my cities. What a weird world.

Does not Compute

 

[Aristos]

Does not Compute

It does. Throws Consistency Exception.

 

[Bhawb]

I mean, I'm assuming Bite and I aren't playing the exact same civs in the same games the same way. I need to remember to try swapping focus more like I used to pre happiness change.

Edit: Maybe what I was seeing was the specialists getting worked when freeze growth is checked? If you tell the city to stop growth it will work a ton more specialists (duh); in my last game I was using a lot of stop growth because of my near-issues with unhappiness, which caused the cities to just work specialists making me more unhappy and have to stop the specialists. Dunno, just throwing that out there, obviously if no one is having issues I'm doing something wrong.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

I mean, I'm assuming Bite and I aren't playing the exact same civs in the same games the same way. I need to remember to try swapping focus more like I used to pre happiness change.

Edit: Maybe what I was seeing was the specialists getting worked when freeze growth is checked? If you tell the city to stop growth it will work a ton more specialists (duh); in my last game I was using a lot of stop growth because of my near-issues with unhappiness, which caused the cities to just work specialists making me more unhappy and have to stop the specialists. Dunno, just throwing that out there, obviously if no one is having issues I'm doing something wrong.

Switching my capital to GP focus not even lead to a maximum of specialist usage. Only 1/2 - 2/3 was worked and I had still +130 food for growth. I remember using GP focus in one of my cities didnt changed anything about GP usage. But I never used stop growth button so I cant say anything about such circumstances.
Before the change to distress, stopping growth always helped with unhappiness in the cities. But with distress, I sometimes had to stop growth cause of unhappiness problems but some of my cities generated even more unhappiness cause of the urbanization unhappiness. I didnt checked whats happening now, cause I didnt had to use it till now. But if it happens too, its a bit problematic.

 

[JamesNinelives]

Monitor your cities. Make changes where you want. If you want the game to play itself for you, play Civ6.

G

G, I'm a fan of your work, but not always your rhetoric. There's a difference between 'play' and 'work', which you might call 'fun'. That difference is going to be subjective. That's why you ask for feedback, no?

Been noticing this too. In the city view the unit might take 4 turns, but then on the map view it takes 6 turns, and the 6-turm version is the true one.

Is it possible that carry-over production isn't carrying over?

This is the increased unit production. I just checked, and it's not in the notes for this beta so I guess that means it was introduced in the previous one. It's also mentioned in the tooltip when you hover over happiness up the top, and if you hover over the unhappy face on an unhappy city. TL;DR: It's working as intended for unhappy cities.

That said, it would be useful to know how much of a penalty it is applying. A number when you hover over the unhappy face so you know what the magnitude of the effect is would make me very happy .

Which is why I just flip on manual control and never let governors touch anything. But when the governors will push you below a happiness threshold to work a couple scientists, I'd still argue they aren't "striving" hard enough. It isn't mincing words if their motivation doesn't seem to be working. I never had this issue with governors on the old system; they were still stupid, but at least they mostly didn't assassinate your happiness constantly.

On the other hand, in late-game I have cities not working guild specialists after a certain point because another one won't turn up for 100 turns. I want them those slots worked anyway because the yields are great. But my governor prefers to pump out scientists even though I've completed the tech tree. Actually, I ended up producing stacks of great people late-game because my cities were super happy.

I think the current system can be improved, but it's not that bad either. I have learned that specialists are a bit more complicated than I was aware though, which gives me some respect for it. If I had to guess I would say that no matter how you progam things, it's not going to be able to make all of us happy.