New Beta Version - March 31 (3/31)

[civplayer33]

Sanction Resolution - now prevents target from creating any new deals (except those related to peace treaties)

Nice, thank you. Sanctions against runaway civs feel like punishment again.

 

[Gazebo]

I forgot where I read it (recently, like, in the last week) but looked like Iteroi was working on Venice AI, and there was something about hard-coded limit of CS bought (3?) by Medieval... has it been addressed in this beta?

Imperialism (Colonialism) is a bit too strong, I feel it could work better and also easier to word if it simply doubled up the monopoly bonus: I mean, +10% GA length is weak, while +4 science/culture/faith (from +2, total 6) looks unfair compared to +4 food (from +3, total 7).

Improved Leadership could be made to apply to units with the Heroism promotion (Kris Swordmen with general-like aura).

We both worked on Venice some.

I’m not seeing any balance issues with imperialism.

I don’t know that it is needed.

Wowee! Nice new patch! Good thing I'm playing Zulu now, before the patch.

I'm glad to see Brazil nerfed. They were runaways every game I saw them. Such insane early culture.

Also does the 25 Warscore thing mean a peace deal where the AI can't offer you anything at like 80 warscore counts as a win?

Also is the spy-based War Weariness indicator included?

Looking forward to the patch!

Yes.

It should be there. If you don’t see it let me know.

G

 

[Enginseer]

Forts and Citadels (any improvement with 50% or more defense mod)

What about below 50% defense mod.

 

[CppMaster]

What about below 50% defense mod.

So all hills, forests and jungles?

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

I didn’t touch distance. If the change is behaving badly we can reduce it.- I wasnt seeing such high numbers on my test builds.

It's much faster than before, but it is interesting. I've had to expend Inquisitors to make my cheese Japan God-King + Inspiration + Diligence + Holy Law + Dojo combo work because while Enrico Dandolo did almost nothing to spread his religion besides a few CSs and Poland, I've had 2-3 pop converted to his buddhism everywhere.

I’m not seeing any balance issues with imperialism.

I don't know if I see any either, but Colonialism has too much put on it while the +10% CS policy (miilitary tradition? naval tradition? regiment something?) seems silly and small in comparison. I'd probably put either monopoly bonuses or +5S +2C from XP buildings + forts + citadels there to make Colonialism not the policy I take first every time, with the Martial Law second and Exploitation third.

 

[randomnub]

I’m not seeing any balance issues with imperialism.
G

You went a great way toward balancing tiles/resources/monopolies and then a policy throws the balance off with flat values, +4science/culture per tile is particularly meaningful happiness-wise and +10% GA length feels wrong (too weak, and no other similar bonus in the game with every other modifier being +25/50%). It might not be gamebreaking at that point of the game, but feels rushed.

Edit: Agree on Imperialism being quite frontloaded.

Edit2: Way of Transcendence typo (says 30, it's 25 yields blah blah). Not worth a Github!

 

[BiteInTheMark]

You went a great way toward balancing tiles/resources/monopolies and then a policy throws the balance off with flat values, +4science/culture per tile is particularly meaningful happiness-wise and +10% GA length feels wrong (too weak, and no other similar bonus in the game with every other modifier being +25/50%).

Look at which point of the game you unlock this policy. In most games you maybe have 6 monopoly luxuries in your working range. That would be +24 more yields for some cities. But +10% more food/hammer/... is a huge thing and outperform the flat yields easily. Especially if you have coastal cities and a science monopoly, you easily outperform rationalismn in science by exploitation and colonialismn alone.
How would be +5% percentage multiplier and tripling monopoly yields? And +20% GAL. In most cases I reroll map, if I have GAL luxuries in my capital cause it feels so useless. We are talking about 2-3 more turns GA. While percentage multiplier work all day long.

 

[Enginseer]

So all hills, forests and jungles?

Custom civ mods with improvements below 50% defense.

 

[Gazebo]

What about below 50% defense mod.

Nope. Needs to be a legit defensive position to warrant a route, otherwise the AI spams.

So all hills, forests and jungles?

Improvements. Not just tiles.

G

 

[randomnub]

stuff.

No. Read it again. I compared base flat monopolies (2 culture, 3 food) getting the same flat +4. And then you complain about my same GAL feeling, even if I go on and play whatever I roll without savescumming (GAL luxuries at least make for good tiles early on) so I speak from experience. Your numbers are also a bit off, if I had +24 to base yields I'd be happier with that than with a +10% modifier (it'd take about 300 base yields to average that, considering other middle-late game modifiers). In smaller towns the culture/science bonus on tiles has a bigger impact to happiness as well, right on the policy that also buffs the barrack line so you have a big buffer to illiteracy/boredom in a single policy.

Overall I think that simply doubling the monopoly boni ( i.e. +2C becomes +4C, +3F to +6F, 10%S to 20% and 25%GAL to 50%) would come out both nicely worded and balanced.

 

[Gazebo]

No. Read it again. I compared base flat monopolies (2 culture, 3 food) getting the same flat +4. And then you complain about my same GAL feeling, even if I go on and play whatever I roll without savescumming (GAL luxuries at least make for good tiles early on) so I speak from experience. Your numbers are also a bit off, if I had +24 to base yields I'd be happier with that than with a +10% modifier (it'd take about 300 base yields to average that, considering other middle-late game modifiers). In smaller towns the culture/science bonus on tiles has a bigger impact to happiness as well, right on the policy that also buffs the barrack line so you have a big buffer to illiteracy/boredom in a single policy.

Overall I think that simply doubling the monopoly boni ( i.e. +2C becomes +4C, +3F to +6F, 10%S to 20% and 25%GAL to 50%) would come out both nicely worded and balanced.

Over-increasing GAL is very dangerous in AI hands, especially at higher difficulties - there's a reason I've reduced GAL modifiers elsewhere in the game over the past few major iterations.

G

 

[Randomsheep]

How is the AI road building working out?

Has anyone seen AI civs building roads to their borders? and has anyone connected a road to a rival civ yet?

 

[BiteInTheMark]

No. Read it again. I compared base flat monopolies (2 culture, 3 food) getting the same flat +4. And then you complain about my same GAL feeling, even if I go on and play whatever I roll without savescumming (GAL luxuries at least make for good tiles early on) so I speak from experience. Your numbers are also a bit off, if I had +24 to base yields I'd be happier with that than with a +10% modifier (it'd take about 300 base yields to average that, considering other middle-late game modifiers). In smaller towns the culture/science bonus on tiles has a bigger impact to happiness as well, right on the policy that also buffs the barrack line so you have a big buffer to illiteracy/boredom in a single policy.

Overall I think that simply doubling the monopoly boni ( i.e. +2C becomes +4C, +3F to +6F, 10%S to 20% and 25%GAL to 50%) would come out both nicely worded and balanced.

The monopoly you will get is centered around your capital. Normally 3 of them are in the working range of your capital. So, only 3 or maybe 4 are left to work for other cities and I dont see, how those 3-4 other luxuries will help that much with your needs of "smaller" cities. A percentual modifier increase yields of every city, no matter if there are those ressources or not, this makes such monopolies extremely worty for wider empires.
You already have reached the mid of the game (more or less), if you unlock this policy. If you only produce 300 culture/science/food/hammer/gold at this point, you are doing something wrong. If you get the monopoly early, 3 times 4 more food in your capital is pretty nice, but not in industrial, while your capital produce easily 100-150 food.

 

[Stalker0]

I don't know if I see any either, but Colonialism has too much put on it while the +10% CS policy (miilitary tradition? naval tradition? regiment something?) seems silly and small in comparison. I'd probably put either monopoly bonuses or +5S +2C from XP buildings + forts + citadels there to make Colonialism not the policy I take first every time, with the Martial Law second and Exploitation third.

I actually like the dynamic right now. In general I do want colonialism first, but it also pushes me farther from exploitation which is another really good policy. So having desires on both sides of the tree is a good balance point to me.

In terms of frontloadedness, the tree is more frontloaded than it was before...but that is the point. The tree before wasn't front loaded enough, even for the bonuses that were good, it often took too long to get them. Industry and Rationalism both also get very nice bonuses early in their tree.

 

[black213]

New sanctioning sounds like a big game changer. I'm not sure what to think of it. I just hope AI understands the effects of it.

 

[bigcat88]

@Gazebo will be in future possible to add third option when AI says about your increasing influence over CS, something like "bro I agree to decrease my influence(-% of influence) and don't get -30 penalty for CS competing.

 

[Deadstarre]

@Gazebo will be in future possible to add third option when AI says about your increasing influence over CS, something like "bro I agree to decrease my influence(-% of influence) and don't get -30 penalty for CS competing.

this can be really unavoidable, unless thats the intention behind it in which case its working as intended. i mean you could just be building barracks because you need them, then you inadvertently complete a quest with a CS who wanted you to build barracks, and presto, youre now competing for that city state and Alexander does not appreciate it.

 

[wobuffet]

I support the idea, but imagine it'll be tough to get the AI to recognize this. Also, would we humans have the option to do this too (like with "your troops are close to my borders")?

 

[Gazebo]

@Gazebo will be in future possible to add third option when AI says about your increasing influence over CS, something like "bro I agree to decrease my influence(-% of influence) and don't get -30 penalty for CS competing.

The diplo stuff is a locked down in terms of changes.

G

 

[tripleducky]

I encountered a game stopping bug in my latest play through.

https://imgur.com/yEDBMkl

I'm not sure what flibby 4 means but I can't click through it.