New Beta Version - March 2nd (3-2)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I believe there is a hard cap of 15%.
Assuming that really is the case, Military Industrial Complex's cost reduction is blunted from 33% cost reduction on units to 15% if you've already gotten the Forbidden Palace (15%) wonder, Industry (35%) and a stock exchange (20%). That's effectively 18% cost reduction that is unused out of the overall potency of the tenet.

I've argued that MIC is already one of the strongest ideology tenets in the game (not just for buying military units, it's incredibly powerful for buying diplomat units for a DiploV). I think this is another good reason to reduce its power. If the unit cost reduction is reduced to 25%, then that's only 10% over the cost reduction limit. The tenet feels less wasted, and the overall design of cost reductions feels less clashing.
 
Oof Portugal insta peace vassal when other AI got into medieval, T190 (epic speed), yeah this needs some tweaking :D
 
andersw - I hadn't planned on taking her capital
She has no way of knowing what your intentions were and even if she did, I don't think it would matter. I think it was a perfectly fine decision. In fact, she could have made it worse. If I were in her position, I would wait until you were embroiled in another war so I could really put you in a bad spot.
 
She has no way of knowing what your intentions were and even if she did, I don't think it would matter. I think it was a perfectly fine decision. In fact, she could have made it worse. If I were in her position, I would wait until you were embroiled in another war so I could really put you in a bad spot.

If take it you mean taking away the iron so Swordsman/Longswordsman have no longer the resource. Unfortunately, that wouldn't work, as playing the Huns I never rely on them anyway. Usually sell it off.
 
I don't like the current "(gold) cost reduction" mechanic as a whole. Most other similar mechanics increase the effectiveness of the yield instead, e.g. +25% GP points, +20% production to units. These are fine to stack additively. Meanwhile, cost reduction become better the more you stack them. If you already have Forbidden Palace, full Industry and Stock Exchange (40% cost), picking Military-Industrial Complex actually makes everything 67.5% cheaper (15% cost) even with the cap. In other words, the former 3 cost reductions give a +150% gold effectiveness towards units/buildings, and the MIC provides an additional +467% effectiveness towards buying units and +50% towards upgrading them.

I know the wordings would be confusing if we use "gold effectiveness buff", but can we make the cost reduction multiplicative instead? Numbers can be adjusted.
 
Returning to Vassalage, playing as Morocco I was babying my neighbor Egypt in hopes of picking up a peaceful vassal. They LOVED me, and had fully adopted my religion. I had been checking for vassalage periodically, and then suddenly one turn they vassaled to Macedon. Macedon was being a very aggressive warmonger against the Huns, and had founded his own competing religion to mine, but hadn't established it in any of Egypt's cities. Macedon definitely has a much stronger military than me, so that alone might have been enough to sway Egypt, but it doesn't really feel right. I'm inevitably going to be at war with Macedon even though we're friends currently, and if Egypt is still their vassal then, my best friend in the world will be at war with me, simply because he wanted the protection of a strong ally I guess.
 
I don't like the current "(gold) cost reduction" mechanic as a whole. Most other similar mechanics increase the effectiveness of the yield instead, e.g. +25% GP points, +20% production to units. These are fine to stack additively. Meanwhile, cost reduction become better the more you stack them. If you already have Forbidden Palace, full Industry and Stock Exchange (40% cost), picking Military-Industrial Complex actually makes everything 67.5% cheaper (15% cost) even with the cap. In other words, the former 3 cost reductions give a +150% gold effectiveness towards units/buildings, and the MIC provides an additional +467% effectiveness towards buying units and +50% towards upgrading them.

I know the wordings would be confusing if we use "gold effectiveness buff", but can we make the cost reduction multiplicative instead? Numbers can be adjusted.

In design, multiplicative positive modifiers and additive negative modifiers are always something to look out for, because they are pushing boundaries of the game when stacked.

Unfortunately, the way the discount from Industry is increasing incrementally will make it difficult to just state it as 'multiplied by x0.7'. Reducing the availability of discounts is probably the easiest option, possibly raising the hard cap to 25% (this is +300% purchase efficiency anyway, huge!).
 
The Industry multiplier can go down from 95% (opener only) to 70% (full tree) in 5% steps. It's not a smooth curve in terms of efficiency, but it's easy to understand.
 
I would like to bring up something I have noticed in my current game, involving Maria of Portugal, & playing as the Huns on Marathon speed. Basically, Maria throughout the game, though is only near medieval, has been hoarding settlers & dithering for ages before settling a city. I first noticed this early on when exploring with my pathfinder & had come back to finish an area I hadn't done before. As I got Pyramids I was only one with two cities, but then noticed Maria coming my way with escort, obviously going to settle. No doubt where she eventually put Braga. Something spooked her, & she scuttled back & I waited ages for her 2nd city until dozens of goes later she formed Porto, towards me. At this time I was building up my empire & destroying barb camps when Maria floated by with escort obviously going to the original location. Guessing where she was going, she landed on my tile, so I oportunitivesly declared war & gained Porto in the process & an amazing quest from Belgrade for doing so. Lisbon had walls so soon decided to get peace, even though she had no troops, except for workers & another Settler. Peace treaty went (30 turns) & Maria still hadn't settled, until finally she settled Braga in the same spot of first two attempts.

The location is shockingly placed by the coast with flat ground around with Shaka to the east, who had recently denounced Maria. Great choice & what could go wrong. Anyone another 50 goes went by then Shaka declared & the city went within a few turns. I can see into Lisbon due to a caravan, & what is amazing that before the war Maria has been sitting on 2 more settlers idlying by, whilst in the meanwhile has 2 spearman (1 destroyed in city) & pathfinder. No range units since I destroyed her archers when I had just reached classical era.

Three points. Firstly, the appalling choice of city location taking account of neighbours. Secondly, the complete disregard for defence. Thirdly, constantly building settlers before anything else then sitting on them. After my initial war with her I felt a bit guilty & protective, which is where we are now. Was going to block Shaka getting access on both fronts to the well protected but slimly defended city of Lisbon. Instead I will await for him to launch a bloody attack, then declare on him, & take him from behind.
 
Last edited:
I would like to bring up something I have noticed in my current game, involving Maria of Portugal, & playing as the Huns on Marathon speed. Basically, Maria throughout the game, though is only near medieval, has been hoarding settlers & dithering for ages before settling a city. I first noticed this early on when exploring with my pathfinder & had come back to finish an area I hadn't done before. As I got Pyramids I was only one with two cities, but then noticed Maria coming my way with escort, obviously going to settle. No doubt where she eventually put Braga. Something spooked her, & she scuttled back & I waited ages for her 2nd city until dozens of goes later she formed Porto, towards me. At this time I was building up my empire & destroying barb camps when Maria floated by with escort obviously going to the original location. Guessing where she was going, she landed on my tile, so I oportunitivesly declared war & gained Porto in the process & an amazing quest from Belgrade for doing so. Lisbon had walls so soon decided to get peace, even though she had no troops, except for workers & another Settler. Peace treaty went (30 turns) & Maria still hadn't settled, until finally she settled Braga in the same spot of first two attempts.

The location is shockingly placed by the coast with flat ground around with Shaka to the east, who had recently denounced Maria. Great choice & what could go wrong. Anyone another 50 goes went by then Shaka declared & the city went within a few turns. I can see into Lisbon due to a caravan, & what is amazing that before the war Maria has been sitting on 2 more settlers idlying by, whilst in the meanwhile has 2 spearman (1 destroyed in city) & pathfinder. No range units since I destroyed her archers when I had just reached classical era.

Three points. Firstly, the appalling choice of city location taking account of neighbours. Secondly, the complete disregard for defence. Thirdly, constantly building settlers before anything else then sitting on them. After my initial war with her I felt a bit guilty & protective, which is where we are now. Was going to block Shaka getting access on both fronts to the well protected but slimly defended city of Lisbon. Instead I will await for him to launch a bloody attack, then declare on him, & take him from behind.
Never have I seen AI sit on multiple settlers since running vanilla, other than when the AI was completely hamstrung and trying to keep hold of the settler, even though was only one and they had barbarians at their door plus another civ pounding on them.
 
Never have I seen AI sit on multiple settlers since running vanilla, other than when the AI was completely hamstrung and trying to keep hold of the settler, even though was only one and they had barbarians at their door plus another civ pounding on them.

Well Portugal has in this game. I must admit I cannot remember seeing it happen for a long time either. There were certainly no barbs around & the wars were after she had them sitting around. Wonder if playing on marathon makes any difference, as usually play on standard.
 
Standard Immortal Spain on Communitas_79a. DV on Turn 391.

Spoiler :

upload_2021-3-11_9-57-21.png



Interesting start on this one. I was on a small island surrounded by other islands, while everyone else was on full continents, so made for an interesting play. I was surrounded by a lot of CS early on, so made a lot of early alliances to compensate for my scattered terrain. Used the conquistador to expand into that far eastern continent and then warred on the Incan to the south, wiping them out and securing a ring of puppets.

The celts and I would war on occasion, and I did a big amphibious invasion to liberate Valleta for the quest. Egypt became a voluntary vassal, which actually did make sense this game, as he had only 3 cities left, was surrounded by major players, and still asked for a ton of gold...so while the other voluntaries were too easy this one felt right.

Endgame was about Poland. Poland went culture like a mad man, and was basically 6 policies ahead of the pack in the late game, but then started surging in science as well. I did one big southern amphibious push combined with Egypt but was repelled by superior tech and a lack of oil, so I was getting worried there.

However, the good news was Poland's tech unlocked the final DV resolutions, and though I only had 3 CS allies....with 5 embassies, Westminster, and 5 votes from holy land I was most of the way to Hegemony already. I purchased 6 votes from my vassal (at too cheap a price), and got to hegemony, just as Poland was unveiling some of the end game techs.

My notes:

1) On Spain: The new UA works fine, giving you some gold and giving you an "effective discount" when you buy plots. I found that the UA still helps you bag a pantheon pretty early, but doesn't have strong legs, and so you still have to work on your faith to ensure a religion....its not automatic like it was previously. And while the free inquisitors help, even Spain cannot compete with the might of Orthodoxy without inquisitor maintenance. The gold bonus long term is alright but you are not going to be racking in cash like other money civs like Portugal for example.

For the Hacienda I really wish it had its actual yields by type in the tooltips, 3 Spain games and I still couldn't tell you how much I get for putting a hacienda near a horse and a cow, or a fish and coral, etc.

Ultimately I think Spain has been toned down a lot from the old days when it was commonly seen as one of the top civs. Its still good, its still interesting, but no longer dominant like it once was. So its good changes all around.


2) Having gotten DV several times in this version, I feel very comfortable reiterating I think the hegemony vote count is just fine even with the vassal change. I also still think hegemony votes should be more expensive from your vassals.

3) I mentioned my happiness issues earlier. I managed to finally break 50 for a little bit but then went right back, and though I flirted at 36 occasionally, ultimately I was able to keep the bad happiness in check. Ultimately while I'm still a bit confused on why happiness was so much harder this game than probably the last 10 I've played....it was still manageable. I never got into the spiral.

4) I did build a number of Special Forces towards the end as I was planning a retry on that amphibious Poland assault (before I realized I could make a DV play). The cheaper cost was felt, I'll need more games to see if building SFs is now a competitive option
 
The Industry multiplier can go down from 95% (opener only) to 70% (full tree) in 5% steps. It's not a smooth curve in terms of efficiency, but it's easy to understand.
Could also make each policy a separate Less multiplier and increase the value to 6 or 7%. Six 6% multipliers is a ~31% discount, while 7% is ~35.3%, if we want to give a small compensatory buff.
 
I'm playing as Arabia on Emperor and I'm a bit ahead in techs and policies. My neighbor Austria is sending 5 trade routes to my city - the problem is, I have a limit of 3 and she has no policies nor wonders that add extra trade routes. It's impossible for her to have more than 3 from tech alone (I checked).

Can anyone confirm that their neighbors have too many trade routes?
 
Playing current patch. King difficulty.

The AI is not building many wonders. They are pretty much ignoring them. It's turn 120. I'm in late classical, and Halicarnassus still hasn't been built:
upload_2021-3-11_20-52-0.png
 
Playing current patch. King difficulty.

The AI is not building many wonders. They are pretty much ignoring them. It's turn 120. I'm in late classical, and Halicarnassus still hasn't been built:
View attachment 589591

On Immortal I am seeing something similar. Its not that a lot of them are being ignored per say, but on occasion a wonder will go MUUUUUUUCH later than I'm normally used to seeing it. In the last game I had the pyramids go on Turn 61!
 
Just stumbled into GA (Golden Age) mechanic: when you are in a GA, then in the end of it, even if acquire GAP enough for next GA by several turns before, you still get 1 turn without GA (I mean not getting production, culture and all other staff associated with GA). You get notification about end and start GA in the same turn, but you lose all the benefits (and sometime it means that you don't get WW, WC project.
Can we change the mechanic that if you have enough GAP to start another GA, that you don't lose the benefits of GA at the end of one and start of next one
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom