[NFP] New City-States Envoy Bonuses (Ethiopia DLC)

[DanQuayle]

Most interesting change in the upcoming DLC in my opinion.

Change to city-states envoys
1 envoy: +1 to T1 building and +1 to Capital
3 envoy: +2 to T2 building and +2 to Consulate building
6 envoy: +3 to T3 building and +3 to Chancery building


My opinion:
It is interesting to note that it actually seems to be a buff to a wide playstyle as you can now get +6 yields to all your cities in your empire from having 6 envoys to a single city-state (instead of +4 yields as it is currently the case). It does however come a little bit later (+3 yields vs +4 yields when only at T2 buildings). Whether you play tall or wide, only one of your city will benefit from the Diplomatic Quarter.

Now consider the following example:
4 scientific city-states on the map (which is the maximum number for a standard sized map with a standard number of 12 city-states)
Let's say you have 10 cities with a Campus/Library/University in them

You slot in the Diplomatic League policy card when you send your first envoy to each of these 4 scientific city-states
You complete 1 quest for each of these 4 scientific city-states.
So with only 4 envoys (maybe 3 unlock from the culture tree + 1 from the accumulation of influence points), you can get an additional +3 science in all 10 of your cities for each city-state for a total of +120 science. You can get these 4 envoys in the Classical era with Mysticism, Theology and Military Training.

Compare this to the current rules (without Ethiopia DLC):
You slot in the Diplomatic League policy card when you send your first envoy to each of these 4 scientific city-states
You complete 2 quests for each of these 4 scientific city-states (over at least 2 eras)
You still need to send 2 more envoys per city-state to reach 6 envoys and get +4 science to each city.
So you need to send at least 3 envoys to each city-state for a total of 12 envoys.
You will only reach that amount of envoys late Renaissance/start of Industrial without any envoy bonus (like Apadana).
You however get +4 science in all 10 of your cities for each city-state for a total of +160 science, but it comes much later!

For the same number of envoys sent with the Ethiopia DLC and Research Labs in all cities, you will now get +6 science in all 10 of your cities for each city-state for a total of +240 science which is more than the current maximum of +160 science.

Now, the university comes a bit 'late' for this since it is a Medieval era building, but you could do the same with Temples which is the earliest T2 building and you need Theology anyway to get the fastest +4 envoys (without building the Apadana).

TLDR; the +3 yield is less than the current +4 yield for T1+T2 buildings, but it can come sooner!

In-depth analysis: in post #41

 

[acluewithout]

I can’t work out if these changes improve the envoy game or not. I hope they do.

I think one envoy giving you bonuses for your Capital and T1 buildings is a bad idea. One envoy, and all your Libraries are +1 Science. Hmm.

I would have thought a better balance would be:

• 1 envoy = +yield Capital,
• 3 envoy = +yield T2 Building (and Consulate), and
• 6 envoy = +yield T3 Building (and Chancery).

ie no bonus for T1 buildings at all.

I also think the changes to envoy isn’t going to have much impact overall without also re-working / rebalancing Buildings and Rationalism-type cards. The flat bonuses to buildings are problematic, and the Rationalism-type cards create perverse incentives.

Overall, the game still seems to use envoys and buildings to push you too hard to go wide and spam Campuses. But happy to find out I’m wrong, and that these changes actually improve the balance more.

Still. One envoy = +1 all my Libraries feels wrong.

 

[Hawke9]

I'm a bit disappointed by this change. I was hoping the envoy bonuses would only be affecting buildings in the diplomatic quarter. The current change only further expands the "Win by having the most cities" mentality. I really hoped tall gameplay would get a boost here, but wide has only been improved even further

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Instead of reducing envoy bonuses, they enhanced them.

Sure Victories will be faster. Envoys are too useful now.

My thinking is that achieving 1,3,6 are somehow too easy. Shall add another level and let it be
1 envoy: +1 at capital (2 for gold)
3 envoys: +1 for district T1 buildings and Diplo Zone (gold +2)
6 envoys: +2 for district T2 buildings and Diplo T1 building (gold +4)
10 envoys: +3 for district T3 buildings and Diplo T2 building (gold +6)

Suzerain requires at least 5 envoys, and liberating a CS grants 5/10 envoys based on pre or after Industrial era.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

The current change only further expands the "Win by having the most cities" mentality.

It's Civilization - expanding your Empire is kind of the point ....

 

[newbie2]

For me, it still doesnt fix a big issue: Discovering a CS as first is a massive bonus, and everyone else gets nothing. Offcours, it encourages exploration, which is important, but there is a big rng factor to it, especially with the tendency of how CS get clustered. they become now more powerfull, so its gonna create an even bigger gap. Discovering a city state early can cut early research or civic time significantly

I would prefer it so that the first person got two envoys, and the rest got 1. that way there is still an incentive to look for CS (as you are closer to suzerain bonus). maybe move the tresholds to 4 and 7 envoys to keep it balanced as before

 

[acluewithout]

Honestly. I’m glad they tweaked Envoys, and there are some good ideas here. But the bonuses for one envoy is really silly, and I suspect it will just further drive yield creep.

I think I’ll just mod out the +1 for Libraries entirely, and then just have Capital, T2 and T3. That should be pretty easy to do.

 

[Equilin]

they should change that first level to +1 to T1 building and +1 to diplo district tbh

 

[GrumboMumbo]

It's Civilization - expanding your Empire is kind of the point ....

True, but having only one strategy being the optimal path every game is just not fun, it confuses me that people don't understand this.

They even mentioned in the livestream that the purpose for this change is to address 'Wide vs Tall balance', one of the devs said this, but it shows they don't understand the fundamentals because it does not do this at all...

 

[IvoryPavane]

I’m undecided, I will need to play with it to see what I think.

One thing I do enjoy though is that while Tamar was crying with envy at all the creamy Ethiopian faith bonuses that she thought should have been hers, she can take heart that her ability to amass huge amounts of envoys is going to become even more valuable

 

[Uberfrog]

The false Tall vs Wide dichotomy will never die, it seems.

Tall does not mean Small. A strong empire is both Wide (many cities) and Tall (large population). There is no buff you can make to enhance tall empires that doesn’t also benefit wide empires, because you will always have more cities that can benefit. Without penalising expansion (not particularly fun), having more cities will always be better. Choosing to have fewer cities is always going to be a self-imposed handicap.

The DQ still benefits small empires because it allows envoys to provide yields with fewer districts. But obviously it was always going to benefit larger empires as well.

I have a feeling that the 1 envoy bonuses are too strong, but I like the changes overall.

 

[GrumboMumbo]

The false Tall vs Wide dichotomy will never die, it seems.

Tall does not mean Small. A strong empire is both Wide (many cities) and Tall (large population). There is no buff you can make to enhance tall empires that doesn’t also benefit wide empires, because you will always have more cities that can benefit. Without penalising expansion (not particularly fun), having more cities will always be better. Choosing to have fewer cities is always going to be a self-imposed handicap.

It can be improved though, by having yields tied to population and extra % bonuses for 'number of districts in city' and 'number of governor promotions in a city'. A cross pollination of mechanics and strategies is completely lacking in civ6. Something which could be hugely improved by changing some policy cards and building effects.

A 4 pop city that you have chopped a campus+buildings in the late game should not have similar Science output to a capital city with 20 population and 7 districts. I am not saying this for thematic reasons, but for the health of game balance and a variety of decision making.

Tall does not mean small. It means I have focused on growing a few cities with large population at the expense of expanding to more small cities. Think 4 x 20 pop cities vs 8 x 10 pop cities, they both have a combined population of 80, yet the latter setup is far more profitable than the former in civ 6.

How you utilise population is one of the most fundamental mechanics in Civ games, and in civ6 there isn't even a choice to make....the game plays itself.

I don't want civ to have the strategic depth of noughts and crosses (tic tac toe if your American)

 

[darkace77450]

For me, it still doesnt fix a big issue: Discovering a CS as first is a massive bonus, and everyone else gets nothing. Offcours, it encourages exploration, which is important, but there is a big rng factor to it, especially with the tendency of how CS get clustered. they become now more powerfull, so its gonna create an even bigger gap. Discovering a city state early can cut early research or civic time significantly

I would prefer it so that the first person got two envoys, and the rest got 1. that way there is still an incentive to look for CS (as you are closer to suzerain bonus). maybe move the tresholds to 4 and 7 envoys to keep it balanced as before

I get where you're coming from and don't necessarily disagree, I do want to point out that randomness impacting early exploration isn't limited to city-state discovery. Finding a relic or being awarded a free builder from a tribal village is far better than triggering the eureka for Bronze Working or the inspiration for Military Tradition if those are things that happen during the natural course of play. I guess that's my way of saying big swings stemming from good fortune in exploration is just the nature of the beast in Civ 6.

A 4 pop city that you have chopped a campus+buildings in the late game should not have similar Science output to a capital city with 20 population and 7 districts.

This isn't technically true. Since each citizen generates .5 science on its own, a 4-pop city will inherently produce 8 fewer science than a 20-pop one. Then there's also Rationalism and a powered Research Lab to consider.

 

[Pfeffersack]

There is no buff you can make to enhance tall empires that doesn’t also benefit wide empires, because you will always have more cities that can benefit..

I disagree. Such a mechanic might not be found easily, especially if it should be "fun", too - but Civ5 showed that it is technically possible.

And just as a small example - not that it will solve the entire issue, but I don't see how it would encourage wide more than the current rule - imagine that the free amenity is dropped each city gets for the first two pops. I played games with that change in place - suddenly spamming new cities will cost you happiness, while growing existing ones tall and building entertainment/waterpark districts in them helps you fighting the unhappiness. Of course, founding certain new cities still makes sense (e.g. connecting new luxuries), but gone are the days where each new city "pays for itself".

 

[Minou]

Overall I think the biggest change is that this makes crazy lucky starts where your Warrior meets like two cultural city states in the first 5 turns a little less OP. I like that the developers continue to push for the later buildings to be more relevant and this is also another step in that direction.

 

[Melkus]

I disagree.

Yes, to reward population growth is not exactly a hard problem - a library in your capital could easily give more science than a library for two fishermen on an island, since it educates more people (in game terms: it could give +0.2 science per citizen, envoys could then improve this number). If the two fishermen can then feed a fulltime scientist (let's say: a flat +3 science) in the library - fine. At least there's a tradeoff and some player strategy involved.

Wouldn't take any fun away from wide players, just slow them down relative to city developers.

These are conscious design decisions in a game that already rewards taking a lot of territory (via district sprawl).

 

[GrumboMumbo]

This isn't technically true. Since each citizen generates .5 science on its own, a 4-pop city will inherently produce 8 fewer science than a 20-pop one. Then there's also Rationalism and a powered Research Lab to consider.

I didn't say it had exactly the same, I said it has similar output.

However, it was a bad hyperbolic example to make the point of flat yields not being a good way to represent science output.

Back on topic though, I don't think the changes they made with Envoys/Diplomatic Quarter do what the developers intended them to do

 

[kryat]

To me, the envoy bonuses to the consulate and chancery are a hidden gem in all of this. They get the bonus from all city states concentrated in a single district, so it acts like a combo:
Museum/Radio/University/Lab/Bank/Stocks/Factory/Plant/Temple/Worship

When you consider that it’s also likely to be in a large city that benefits from other %-Based city-wide bonuses AND acts as another +1 adjacency to any district WITH the Govt plaza as well, you could have a seriously powerful single large city.

 

[Amrunril]

The false Tall vs Wide dichotomy will never die, it seems.

Tall does not mean Small. A strong empire is both Wide (many cities) and Tall (large population). There is no buff you can make to enhance tall empires that doesn’t also benefit wide empires, because you will always have more cities that can benefit. Without penalising expansion (not particularly fun), having more cities will always be better. Choosing to have fewer cities is always going to be a self-imposed handicap.

The DQ still benefits small empires because it allows envoys to provide yields with fewer districts. But obviously it was always going to benefit larger empires as well.

I have a feeling that the 1 envoy bonuses are too strong, but I like the changes overall.

Tall vs. wide (or development vs. expansion) can be a real trade off without being a dichotomy. Expanding your civilization should virtually always make you stronger. Developing the cities you already have should also virtually always make you stronger. Which to focus on at a given point in time should be an interesting, context dependent decision.

Because most building yields are flat bonuses, adding a city with a campus, even in a terrible location, will almost always add more science than investing in a city that already has one. If building yields were instead tied primarily to terrain, population, or specialist slots, adding a random tundra city with a campus would be less appealing compared to, say building a dam or neighborhood to improve an existing city.

 

[Uberfrog]

I agree that specialists are underpowered, but terrain and population absolutely do matter. Rationalism (+50% for 3+ adjacency bonus and +50% for 10+ population) is an absolutely key policy card.

I can see how it seems like diminishing returns for populations above 10 (aside from the science from population). A boost to specialists and projects would help this, I think. But a rubbish pop 4 city with a chopped Campus is absolutely not producing as much science as your 20 pop capital with rationalism/Pingala/etc.