New Hotfix Version (12-15)

[Gazebo]

A list of targeted suggestions to reduce yields creep mid-late game:

Spoiler :

Barracks: +2 science down to +1 science

Aqueduct: 15% food carried over down to 10% food
Baths: +10% culture in city during GA down to +7%; 1 gold maintenance up to 2

Armory: +2 science down to +1
Chancery: 2 gold maintenance up to 3 gold maintenance
Stable: +3 production down to +2 production
University: 2 gold maintenance to 3 gold maintenance

Constabulary: 3 gold maintenance up to 4 gold maintenance
Grocer: +3 food down to +2 food
Opera House: +10% culture down to +7% culture; 3 gold maintenance up to 4
Windmill: +2 food to Grocers and Granaries down to +1 food

Factory: +2 gold to engineeer specialists and +2 production to merchant specialists down to +1 each; +3 production down to +2 production
Hotel: 4 gold maintenance up to 5
Military Academy: 4 gold maintenance up to 5
Museum: 4 gold maintenance up to 5
Public School: 4 gold maintenance up to 5; +3 science per turn down to +2
Train Station: +25% production down to +20% production
Zoo: 4 gold maintenance up to 5 gold maintenance

Broadcast Tower: +1 culture and +1 tourism per 5 citizens down to per 4 citizens each; 6 gold maintenance up to 7 gold maintenance
Coal Plant: 3 coal produced down to 2 coal produced
Hospital: 5 gold maintenance up to 6 gold maintenance
Research Lab: +4 science from Hospitals, Factories and Medical labs down to +3; +33% increased Great Scientists rate down to +25%; 6 gold maintenance up to 7 gold maintenance
Stock Exchange: +3 gold per turn down to +1 (or add 2 maintenance)

I don't really know enough about the later eras to comment (and G has commented that later eras buildings need to be a bit OP to generate a return on investment quickly).

I lowered the main yields of the plainly overpowered buildings (notably all the science and culture buildings except for the first two eras when yields are more sensitive), and for the rest I either increased the gold maintenance or lowered the yields slightly if it didn't make the building bland. I didn't touch the defense buildings (castles, arsenals, etc.) because these buildings are too important to be crippled with more maintenance in case you are doing badly.

I increased the maintenance for buildings that weren't too strong but niche, so that you had an incentive not to build them everywhere - zoos and hotels, for example.

In the end this is very premilinary, just a sketch; perhaps we want more general changes (+1 maintenance to every building of every era; -1 science to everything that gives science, etc.) too. This is more to spark discussion.

(I used this wiki page: http://civ-5-cbp.wikia.com/wiki/Buildings though be wary that not everything it states is up-to-date.

Hmm, some interesting ideas here. Wish you'd told me you were working on this, I've already started addressing GPT issues mid-late in different ways. We'll see. I like maintenance amounts to be flat across eras for readability - having to micro that can be irritating.

I'm also reluctant to nerf most later-game buildings - they really do need to have an immediate impact otherwise they're a waste of hammers.

G

 

[IcyAngel]

I agree that barracks and armories should go down to +1 science. Baths don't need to be nerfed however. They are rarely a priority.
Maintenance cost increases might help with late game gold inflation but I think it would be better to lower gold income in general as it would be easier to balance

I nerfed baths because +10% culture during golden ages translates to a ton of yields late game.

How do you nerf gold income aside from buildings? Policies? Not everyone gets Industry.

I guess increasing unit maintenance could work - something like +1g maintenance every other era (starting in medieval?)

I wouldn't lower the growth/food of buildings, I think growth is fine right now. I also think the Opera House is Fine.

I wouldn't change the Constabulary, I already "hate" to build that building with its current maintenance, don't penalize me anymore please.

I think the stable change is fine, the barracks/armory change is good (and even that alone makes a dent in the science production).

I nerfed food because somebody pointed out that later on you can basically work every single specialist in every city and still grow well, which is definitely true; maybe we only want to nerf later growth buildings tho.

Constabulary lowers unhappiness a huge amount, tho. :3

Agree to disagree on Opera House, I think it's very strong; and again, nerfing % increases is the easiest way to reduce yields.

edit: To illustrate this, in my India playthrough I was generating around 3000 culture per turn in the early Modern era, under a permanent Golden Age; so Baths were generating... what, around 150-200 culture probably (150 or 200/3000 =/= 10%, but I had other percentage increases to culture and flat yields, so it's hard to tell). That's a whole damn lot for a Classical era building.

Plus, having 1g maintenance it already pays for itself with only one amphitheatre (which is a "must have" building).

 

[IcyAngel]

Hmm, some interesting ideas here. Wish you'd told me you were working on this, I've already started addressing GPT issues mid-late in different ways. We'll see. I like maintenance amounts to be flat across eras for readability - having to micro that can be irritating.

I'm also reluctant to nerf most later-game buildings - they really do need to have an immediate impact otherwise they're a waste of hammers.

G

Don't worry I spent ~15-20 mins on it, going down the wiki list.

Yeah, I figured maintenance costs being consistent across eras would be simpler for you and new players, it's just that I didn't think every building deserved it (maybe they do!). I think the former objective is more important then the later anyway - we can do corrections in "post-production" if we see the gold income is still wrong.

 

[ElliotS]

Actually the nerf I have a problem with iss the stable. I really don't like that building already. Arena and/or markets are a better choice. (Markets could give 1 less gold and still be really good.)

 

[Enginseer]

A list of targeted suggestions to reduce yields creep mid-late game:

Spoiler :

Barracks: +2 science down to +1 science

Aqueduct: 15% food carried over down to 10% food
Baths: +10% culture in city during GA down to +7%; 1 gold maintenance up to 2

Armory: +2 science down to +1
Chancery: 2 gold maintenance up to 3 gold maintenance
Stable: +3 production down to +2 production
University: 2 gold maintenance to 3 gold maintenance

Constabulary: 3 gold maintenance up to 4 gold maintenance
Grocer: +3 food down to +2 food
Opera House: +10% culture down to +7% culture; 3 gold maintenance up to 4
Windmill: +2 food to Grocers and Granaries down to +1 food

Factory: +2 gold to engineeer specialists and +2 production to merchant specialists down to +1 each; +3 production down to +2 production
Hotel: 4 gold maintenance up to 5
Military Academy: 4 gold maintenance up to 5
Museum: 4 gold maintenance up to 5
Public School: 4 gold maintenance up to 5; +3 science per turn down to +2
Train Station: +25% production down to +20% production
Zoo: 4 gold maintenance up to 5 gold maintenance

Broadcast Tower: +1 culture and +1 tourism per 5 citizens down to per 4 citizens each; 6 gold maintenance up to 7 gold maintenance
Coal Plant: 3 coal produced down to 2 coal produced
Hospital: 5 gold maintenance up to 6 gold maintenance
Research Lab: +4 science from Hospitals, Factories and Medical labs down to +3; +33% increased Great Scientists rate down to +25%; 6 gold maintenance up to 7 gold maintenance
Stock Exchange: +3 gold per turn down to +1 (or add 2 maintenance)

I don't really know enough about the later eras to comment (and G has commented that later eras buildings need to be a bit OP to generate a return on investment quickly).

I lowered the main yields of the plainly overpowered buildings (notably all the science and culture buildings except for the first two eras when yields are more sensitive), and for the rest I either increased the gold maintenance or lowered the yields slightly if it didn't make the building bland. I didn't touch the defense buildings (castles, arsenals, etc.) because these buildings are too important to be crippled with more maintenance in case you are doing badly.

I increased the maintenance for buildings that weren't too strong but niche, so that you had an incentive not to build them everywhere - zoos and hotels, for example

I disagree with Barrack and Armory. If you reduce it to a minor science, it'll affect warmongers greatly. If we want to nerf science, we need to nerf the library as well.

 

[Deadstarre]

I disagree with Barrack and Armory. If you reduce it to a minor science, it'll affect warmongers greatly. If we want to nerf science, we need to nerf the library as well.

currently taking libraries before barracks just looks like a mistake though. thats in part because its too early for most of my cities to have a spare citizen that can move off growth and production to specialist slot, and in part because the arena is going to buff the barracks with precious, precious hammers.

 

[Deadstarre]

markets are a better choice. (Markets could give 1 less gold and still be really good.)

I keep hearing this but i dont really get it? at this point in the game 3 gold just looks equivalent to 1 hammer for me. I definitely am not working that merchant slot yet and unless i am absolutely desperate for gold and moving into the negative, or have lots of sugar I guess, this building is already somewhere down my queue.

 

[MorphBer]

Nerfing the stable does bot make any sense to me, I only build it cities with 2 or more Pastures or.in the endgame when it takes 2 turns.

In fact we identifed science and gold to be too much so I would say Hammers are actually the chokepoint which corelates with my ingame expirience. I allready build all the good Hammer Buildings asap and work a lot to all engineer slots (Might be suboptimal play) yet I still have trouble keeping up with all the stuff that is beeing unlocked. Thats whx I need to purchase units because even dedicated Military Cities need to keep up with at least all the majot Buildings.

 

[Paramecium]

I disagree, too. Nerf the gold and culture, but dont nerf the production. Even with the cooldown between unit purchase, in most cases you purchase one unit, build one and buy the next when the cooldown finished. Lategame the turn times can be very long and most people (including me) are not that pacient to wait for units more than like 7 turns (<- Attention, that is more a feeling, not empiric proved knowledge).

I did not play with the Imperialism tree lately, it always felt weak to me compared to the other two in my play situations, but I didnt go full warmomgering lately. So I cant say if the tree would speed up significantly my unit production. But I have the feeling, that I am not the only one who is feeling the way that Imperialism seems a bit weak.
If I have more time, I can try to crack the nut thinking about some numbers. Maybe it is just the fact, that Imperialism is focusing a lot on naval stuff when I prefer to play Pangea.

 

[CrazyG]

I would make all buildings in the same column of the tech tree have the same maintenance. Its a pretty easy and clean rule to follow
The entire second column is -1 (herbalists)
Third column is -1 (libraries)
Fourth column is -2 (temples)
Fifth could be -3 (universities)
Sixth -3
Seventh -4

And so on, doesn't have to be that exactly. Of course the gold producing buildings are exceptions, its silly to both produce and consume gold

My thoughts-

Barracks to 1 science - controversial but probably the right call. I don't think it hurts warmongers as much as people think
Aqueduct- 10% food (it could lose its direct food yields too). Even if I don't really care about growth in a city, I build these
Baths - should stay at 10% culture, but increasing the maintenance would be fine

Armory - 1 science is fine
Stable - stay at 3 production
University - this contributes to how borderline OP forests are, I personally think the issue lies in that
Opera House - yea this building is really good. I would drop to 5% culture, maybe give it a base of 1 more

Windmill - I think its fine. I would lower the % if anything

Factory - honestly just drop the specialist bonus entirely, leave the rest as is
Public School - yea these are pretty OP, if you get them before the others do you have a massive advantage. I think almost everyone including AI usually enters through this tech (unless going very heavy warmongering)

 

[Deadstarre]

Of course the gold producing buildings are exceptions, its silly to both produce and consume gold

not quite. yield modifiers will boost that raw gold into a surplus, and having any gold yield directly impacts poverty. consuming that gold via maintenance won't affect either of those.

thus a building producing 3 gold and consuming 3 gold is not the wash it looks like.

I like maintenance amounts to be flat across eras for readability - having to micro that can be irritating.

G

did you mean irritating coding-wise or for the player to be constantly forced into evaluating the variable maintenance as a factor of the building? if for players, i'm personally in favor of adjusting individual maintenance as a means to adjust the desirability of some buildings. We're already doing this in the ancient era with councils and shrines right, i think itd be fine to still matter later on as well.

 

[CrazyG]

not quite. yield modifiers will boost that raw gold into a surplus, and having any gold yield directly impacts poverty. consuming that gold via maintenance won't affect either of those.

thus a building producing 3 gold and consuming 3 gold is not the wash it looks like.

I know it fights poverty and it actually generates gold if you have positive modifiers, but its still weird, I don't think stock exchanges, markets, caravansaries or any of those should have maintenance

 

[MorphBer]

I disagree with Barrack and Armory. If you reduce it to a minor science, it'll affect warmongers greatly. If we want to nerf science, we need to nerf the library as well.

So? Nerfing Baths, Opera Houses etc, hurts peacfull playstyles. The different playstyles should be treated the same, especially since Barraks is "The best Building in the game" currently

 

[BiteInTheMark]

I disagree with Barrack and Armory. If you reduce it to a minor science, it'll affect warmongers greatly. If we want to nerf science, we need to nerf the library as well.

Barracks (+armory) give +2 science, +15 experience, +1 supply cap, reduce crime, and with arena, you get +2 production.
Library give +2 science and a specialist slot.
I think, barracks/armory down to +1 science is a justified nerf.

I wouldnt touch the production of buildings, maybe even rising some values (stonework, factory, windmill). In lategame, its kinda impossible to keep pace with the unlocking by technologies.
The early flat gold from market is sometimes really necessary. Even i dont have a big military force, iam often enough in negative values. And if you look nowadays on civlization like aztecs or japan, they have really hard problems with gold generation. But I think, the flat gold by later era buildings can be removed, like bank, stock exchange. You also may think about the necessarity of those "+1 gold for X" guild abilities.
I would give the trainstation only +5% gold and remove the +1 gold for forest and jungles by workshop. Fully improved forest and jungles are already good enough with food, production, science, tourismn.
The buff to engineer, merchant by factory could also be reduced from 2 to 1.

The finisher from imperialismn is strong, but the opener and scaler from imperialismn is absolutly crap. If your not a warmonger, its kinda unattractive.
Rationalismn feels like a must have for science victory, theres a lot for science and also nice grow, but nothing to compensate the fast speed of unlocking buildings. Leeding to the result, you unlock plenty of stuff but are unable to build it in the same speed. Only the +1 gold to specialists help, but i dont know, if this is enough.
In my opinion, industry is the strongest of the late game trees, cause its flexible enough for every playstile. The starter could be nerfed a bit down to +10 (instead of +15) for every finished building. And the buff +5% hammer/+5% gold for every windmill, workshop and factories could be changed to +7%/+2%.
Change "free trade" from +5 gold for international traderoutes to -50% influence of distance to trade routes and +33% yields from internal traderoutes from "protectionismn" to +15% yields to every trade route.

Also, the flat food from some buildings should be reduced, like aqueduct, grocer, the ability from windmill, agriculture, hospital (both from +5 down to +2, you want mainly their abilities, not the pure food).

I wouldnt touch that much culture from early buildings, else their influence to total culture may be too low in comparision to specialist or pantheon. Later culture by specialists and buildings could be tuned down a bit.

 

[Deadstarre]

Rationalismn... Leeding to the result, you unlock plenty of stuff but are unable to build it in the same speed.

I know people see this as a downside to Rationalism but I just dont, having lots of options available means you can always be guaranteed to be building the best ones first. and if you win the game before you finished all of the lower priority things that didn't aid you as much... whoops?

 

[BiteInTheMark]

I know people see this as a downside to Rationalism but I just dont, having lots of options available means you can always be guaranteed to be building the best ones first. and if you win the game before you finished all of the lower priority things that didn't aid you as much... whoops?

Iam a typical Builder , liking to max the effectiveness of my cities to a maximum. For that reason, Germany is in my opinion one of the strongest nation, their science surplus by their UA goes hand in hand with their increased production from Hanse building, making it a perfect civilization to build the stuff you unlock.

 

[Deadstarre]

Iam a typical Builder

you're not alone. its why I feel a problem with rationalism focusing too strongly around science in general; no matter how much science it gives, even if that amount is objectively OP, many players still dont like taking it for the reasons you describe.

 

[Gokudo01]

I disagree with Barrack and Armory. If you reduce it to a minor science, it'll affect warmongers greatly. If we want to nerf science, we need to nerf the library as well.

Feel the same here i would be forced to go writing in order to keep up early on

Barracks (+armory) give +2 science, +15 experience, +1 supply cap, reduce crime, and with arena, you get +2 production.
Library give +2 science and a specialist slot.
I think, barracks/armory down to +1 science is a justified nerf.

A good example of feeling bias when you want to be right.

He didn't mention literacy reduction although he mentioned that barrack reduces crimes. And no great scientific can come from barrack.
furthermore library unlocks a borderline op NW with school of philosophy while barrack unlocks a not great national wonder.

The specialist slot gets stronger and stronger as game grows(already extremly good once your reach +1 culture ). yes library is not the ultimate building to rush so what ? let's buff market in order to make it a prime build because the specialist is almost useless until renaissance ( unless you crave for gold ) and the + 3 gold is not that useful if you don't need to maintain a big army.

Moreover 2 grand scientists changed as academies will greatly improve your science output.

Barrack and armoury are fine unless you decide to nerf science specialist and academies which will throw the balance off.

 

[Psikus]

If you had to choose between the following nerfs to gold purchasing units, which would you prefer?

1. Greatly increasing unit gold cost (my personal least favorite)
2. A 'conscripted' promotion that expires after x turns (i.e. 30) that reduces combat CS/RCS by x% and/or reduces XP gain
3. Units purchased with gold gain half of the XP of units created with production (so Barracks units would gain 7xp if purchased).
4. Some amalgam of these?
G

I'd go for 3.

Outside of these options, I'd really like to experiment with changing gold purchasing of units to gold investment, just like buildings. But that's a huge balance change that likely involves quite a bit of new code, so it's probably not worth it.

 

[Grabbl]

Feel the same here i would be forced to go writing in order to keep up early on

How would this nerf the player more than the AI? (not criticizing I just don't see an obvious reason).

I think it is a very reasonable nerf, especially for barracks. Barracks are very strong, and on the same tech as horsemen. So, the tech path variety would increase for me. Right now, Military Science is always the first or second tech in the second tier, and second only if I have a specific reason, e.g. want to build Pyramids or Petra, or need fishing boats for my pantheon.