New BNW FAQ!

[Aussie_Lurker]

Both likely to happen.

I think exploration at Medieval also means that one of Commerce or Patronage is going to move to the Renaissance (probably Commerce). It looks more sensible to have 2 trees open at Medieval and 2 at Renaissance then 3 at Medieval and 1 at Renaissance.

My guess is this-Ancient: Liberty, Tradition, Honour.
Classical: Piety, Aesthetics.
Medieval: Commrce, Exploration.
Renaissance: Patronage, Rationalism.
Industrial: Ideology.

 

[stealth_nsk]

My guess is this-Ancient: Liberty, Tradition, Honour.
Classical: Piety, Aesthetics.
Medieval: Commrce, Exploration.
Renaissance: Patronage, Rationalism.
Industrial: Ideology.

I'd swap commerce and patronage here. The initial Patronage policies are designed to build relations with city-states. If you're targeting city-state relations you should be doing this before Renaissance. On the other hand, Commerce isn't tied to any specific playstyle and is universally helpful.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I'd swap commerce and patronage here. The initial Patronage policies are designed to build relations with city-states. If you're targeting city-state relations you should be doing this before Renaissance. On the other hand, Commerce isn't tied to any specific playstyle and is universally helpful.

Edcept that I believe that exploration is often going to be the key to finding more City States, which then leads neatly into patronage. Commerce being medieval also fits neatly with where currency falls in the tech tree.

Aussie.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Pity Portugal would not be able to take both as soon as they become available.

 

[Zigzagzigal]

I wonder if Exploration is taking the naval aspects of Commerce? If so, it'd let Commerce focus more on International Trade Routes and other such mechanics.

As for civs, I still believe Italy's more likely than Venice. For one, it ties in well with the whole notion of ideologies. For another, there's been a tendency in Civ 5 to use modern nation names where possible. Unfortunately, this may mean no Indonesia due to the alphabetical list (shame, really, it's one I definitely want to be in.)

Here's my guesses for the four taking into account everything else:

1. Italy
2. Morocco
3. Sioux
4. Vietnam

There has to be an East Asian civ. The lack of any in Gods & Kings further drives that point. After Indonesia, Vietnam's the second most likely it seems. Sioux seems a bit of a popular option so I suspect they're in. Morocco has been hinted at.

The strength 34 unit might be Redshirts, an Italian UU replacing Riflemen. Riflemen are strength 34, and Redshirts were prominent in 19th century Italy.

 

[mitsho]

I could also see Exploration taking over some of the policies so to not concentrate them all in one tree. Commerce is kind of a "must pick" tree while Patronage is "all-or-nothing". Which is fine btw., don't get me wrong. Aethetics would also fit with some Great Works bonuses, right? Do we know how these function in the early age?

Btw. do we know that Patronage has been moved into Renaissance?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I could see Exploration getting Commerce's naval movement and free Great Admiral policy, but not any of the gold policies or the coastal city production policy. They just wouldn't make sense for exploration.

The rest of the Exploration tree will probably deal in small bonuses for discovering Wonders, civs, and city-states, circling the globe, and archaeology.

 

[Seek]

I wonder if Exploration is taking the naval aspects of Commerce? If so, it'd let Commerce focus more on International Trade Routes and other such mechanics.

I definitely expect this.

I also want to say I agree with stealth_nsk that Commerce is more likely to be moved to Renaissance than Patronage. Gameplay-wise, getting a CS-focused game up earlier let's it be more viable while getting bonuses to TRs could be OP that early. Realism-wise, economic theory didn't really begin until the late 1700s with Adam Smith, and Medieval Europe was rife with small independent countries analogous to city-states. Thematically it makes far more sense this way.

 

[Louis XXIV]

I understand what it's a joke. I'm just not sure if that's joke about the wording only or a hint.

Even if it were a hint, you're doublecounting the hint. She said one more civ is European, while joking that it could be European in spirit. That doesn't mean European Civ + European ancestry Civ. That means one civ is either/or.

 

[mitsho]

I could see Exploration getting Commerce's naval movement and free Great Admiral policy, but not any of the gold policies or the coastal city production policy. They just wouldn't make sense for exploration.

Why? I'm just curious, since you don't give a reason.

The rest of the Exploration tree will probably deal in small bonuses for discovering Wonders, civs, and city-states, circling the globe, and archaeology.

The problem here is that these are all minor bonus (you say so yourself). I guess we need to know how much a social policy is worth with the revamped culture victory (and thus less of a need to fill a tree btw.). Since I can't see them getting much more cheaper (otherwise, the early game would need to be heavily revamped), these Exploration policies must a) be stronger than the corresponding Liberty and Tradition ones and b) they should have a worth if you take them later on. Otherwise, the archaeology bonuses wouldn't make sense in the finisher if you'd need to take a useless policy on top.

I can see the Opener be double yields for encountering a city state and a free scout+caravel, but any later, these bonuses wouldn't really be worth it, right? Archaeology as a gameplay style seems to fit more with a 'wider' strategy (more land = more sites), while culture is more tall (more specialists = more great works). But since archaeologists can go into foreign territory as well, it does seem more for tall civs. But such bonuses would be weird for a tall tree, no?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Why? I'm just curious, since you don't give a reason.



The problem here is that these are all minor bonus (you say so yourself). I guess we need to know how much a social policy is worth with the revamped culture victory (and thus less of a need to fill a tree btw.). Since I can't see them getting much more cheaper (otherwise, the early game would need to be heavily revamped), these Exploration policies must a) be stronger than the corresponding Liberty and Tradition ones and b) they should have a worth if you take them later on. Otherwise, the archaeology bonuses wouldn't make sense in the finisher if you'd need to take a useless policy on top.

I can see the Opener be double yields for encountering a city state and a free scout+caravel, but any later, these bonuses wouldn't really be worth it, right? Archaeology as a gameplay style seems to fit more with a 'wider' strategy (more land = more sites), while culture is more tall (more specialists = more great works). But since archaeologists can go into foreign territory as well, it does seem more for tall civs. But such bonuses would be weird for a tall tree, no?

The gold policies of Commerce are economic in nature. They reference trade unions and mercantilism. Reducing gold costs of harbors and roads doesn't have anything to do with throwing a musket over your shoulder and venturing into the steaming jungles of another continent. Explorers go where there are no roads.

I see the Exploration Tree giving bonuses to acts of Exploration, like boosts for discovering city-states as examples of how explorers treated with the natives they encountered. Some met with hospitality while others met with death.

Spain's UA already encourages exploration, and I think that sets an ideal for what the Exploration policies would do. But it should not be limited to just Natural Wonders.

There is already a note that crosses your screen when a civ circumnavigates the map. I think the Exploration tree should reward that feat.

The reason the bonuses should be small is because they would be cumulative. We know the finisher is revealing hidden archaeology sites. That's a pretty good incentive to collect the whole set.

 

[bagas12]

It's Venice no doubt. The phrase from the unique ability is also Venice's UA.

.... for each International Trade Route with.... generate X culture. Maybe.

 

[codepoet]

Even if it were a hint, you're doublecounting the hint. She said one more civ is European, while joking that it could be European in spirit. That doesn't mean European Civ + European ancestry Civ. That means one civ is either/or.

It could be Morocco by that logic.
Since it controlled most of Spain at one point >.<

 

[Seek]

It could be Morocco by that logic.
Since it controlled most of Spain at one point >.<

I'd be ok with that.

 

[Louis XXIV]

It could be Morocco by that logic.
Since it controlled most of Spain at one point >.<

Except she didn't include "not European, but owned European territory" in that list. Of course, I think she was just being coy and it's just a simple European Civ.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I wonder if Exploration is taking the naval aspects of Commerce? If so, it'd let Commerce focus more on International Trade Routes and other such mechanics.

Yes, that's expected. I also expect Aesthetics to take Piety's focus on culture with Piety being concentrated purely on religion.

This way developers get rid of both dual-purpose policy trees.

 

[mitsho]

@Eagle Pursuit, All of these are 'realism' reasons, none of them are convincing me gameplay wise. It's highly dependent how much new stuff you can explore from the middle ages on. And if I wait because I take some other policies first, these would not have any worth to me? That's a gameplay reason why I wouldn't like them. The tree in essence would be way too specific, even more so than Patronage which doesn't go beyond city states, but those are useful for the whole game.

I also wouldn't concentrate too much on the 'Exploration' name, I bet the tree could as well be named 'Colonization' (but the first one is cooler and less controversial), and now the reduced upkeep on harbors and other stuff fits again.

 

[stealth_nsk]

I also wouldn't concentrate too much on the 'Exploration' name, I bet the tree could as well be named 'Colonization' (but the first one is cooler and less controversial), and now the reduced upkeep on harbors and other stuff fits again.

I think it will be less about colonization and more about naval. Maybe something about naval unit production and/or experience. They could grant a great admiral. Also, if America UA was reworked, increased sight radius for land units could be put here as well.

 

[cybrxkhan]

We don't know if the EUropean civ will be the next one revealed - we just know the next one revealed will be one with an international trade UA, which leads me to actually suspect Morocco, though it could be Indonesia too.

 

[sanpavlos]

We don't know if the EUropean civ will be the next one revealed - we just know the next one revealed will be one with an international trade UA, which leads me to actually suspect Morocco, though it could be Indonesia too.

Curious: why's Morocco more likely intl trade UA than the other suspects?