New Hotfix Version (12-15)

[BiteInTheMark]

I think you would get a hell of a lot further if you listed specific offenders which are giving too much gold. The last major patch implemented a massive nerf to trade route gold.
Is the caravansary 25% on city connections a culprit? Would that be better at 15%?
Are there particularly bad policies for gold inflation?

Look at your late game cities. If you let the city decide, which tile it works and which GP slot it works, what will it do?
You have 30 citizen cities, working 6 tiles while the rest is working in markets, libraries, factories, guilds and so on. At the moment, AI tall civilizations doing much better than wide empires, cause we have massiv extra yields for AI events by great people. Created by the fact, AI is working mainly specialists in mid- and lategame like your cities.

I cant tell exactly, where all this money/science/food comes from, but its simply silly, my 30 citizen city works only 6 or 7 tiles, the rest is working as specialist and still has +50-100 extra food. Even tiles with +10 to yields Polder improvement isnt sometimes worked and specialists are prefered. The strenght of a city should come from its tiles/placement, and not a doomstack of specialist slots. In my opinion, specialits are too powerful, the options to improve their value are too plenty.

And if you want to know a specific point, the first thing that comes me to mind is that useless bank ability +1 gold to trade buildings. With 10 cities, you can can earn 200 gold only by that ability.
And btw, iam playing King/Emperor, with standard speed. Iam now out of the discussion cause iam not the deity player ?

 

[Deadstarre]

can pretty much guarantee hes taking industry if knowing nothing else. ive adjusted industry and played at%15 reduction totals when the current discounts were really feeling too steep, tree still made sense and was viable

I agree with him that banks with wide get out of hand in gold rather quickly

 

[Gazebo]

And btw, iam playing King/Emperor, with standard speed. Iam now out of the discussion cause iam not the deity player ?

Considering that I’ve always defended non-deity inclusion in balance discussions, I find this statement both ignorant and asinine. All have a right to discussion. Doesn’t mean you are right, though.

G

 

[CrazyG]

also, even if they were equally effective anyone who takes progress is still gonna spend the cash for units and keep the cities working on buildings otherwise theyre throwing away %20 hammers. and i think a whole lot of people are taking progress now

Exactly.

Also on the note of gold, the way banks scale is really OP, when you start getting caravansaries worth 18 gold per turn things get out of hand. However, I want to point out that these problems showing up more clearly is largely because the recent AI bonus changes are working, the game remains undecided longer!

 

[Gazebo]

Exactly.

Also on the note of gold, the way banks scale is really OP, when you start getting caravansaries worth 18 gold per turn things get out of hand. However, I want to point out that these problems showing up more clearly is largely because the recent AI bonus changes are working, the game remains undecided longer!

Indeed, and specific examples like this are much more useful to me as feedback than genericized, blanket statements.

G

 

[Randomsheep]

Gazebo, what do you mean by genericized, blanket statement?

I reallly don't think anyone is doing that.

Sure, most of us don't have expertise but what do you want?

Should 95% of this community just shut up.

 

[IcyAngel]

Gazebo, what do you mean by genericized, blanket statement?

I reallly don't think anyone is doing that.

Sure, most of us don't have expertise but what do you want?

Should 95% of this community just shut up.

There is too much gold generation late game, do something about it Gazebo! = genericized, blanket statement

The Bank grants too much gold, what about we nerf it in the following way =/= genericized, blanket statement

 

[Gazebo]

Gazebo, what do you mean by genericized, blanket statement?

I reallly don't think anyone is doing that.

Sure, most of us don't have expertise but what do you want?

Should 95% of this community just shut up.

Is that rhetorical?

What I'm saying is exactly what @IcyAngel noted: find specific imbalances, from buildings, policies, or whatever, and offer feedback on that. Generic 'yield too big for all time' statements aren't helpful, as you're not putting forth any empirical evidence for help.

G

 

[Gazebo]

There is too much gold generation late game, do something about it Gazebo! = genericized, blanket statement

The Bank grants too much gold, what about we nerf it in the following way =/= genericized, blanket statement

The != in the first line is confusing, as that means false in C/C++

 

[Randomsheep]

That is fair enough IcyAngel, so what is wrong with a genericized, blanket statement of that sort?

Have you never posted something similar?

We are all here in this community with a wish to see the game improved.

 

[Gazebo]

That is fair enough IcyAngel, so what is wrong with a genericized, blanket statement of that sort?

Have you never posted something similar?

We are all here in this community with a wish to see the game improved.

Right. But the goal of feedback (real, useful feedback) is to provide something in exchange for the work we do on the mod team. Generic statements pass the buck back to us, telling us to both find the problem and the solution (because a generic statement is commenting on symptoms, not problems or solutions!).

G

 

[Randomsheep]

Get over yourself.

I gave you feedback and I'm happy to give you more but you are starting to come over as pretty arrogant at times.

 

[CrabHelmet]

Calm down, @Randomsheep. At the end of the day, there's a billion of us giving suggestions but only a few who actually do the work and one of them is @Gazebo. I'd be quite concise in my responses if I got pestered with ideas half as much as he does too.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

The Bank grants too much gold, what about we nerf it in the following way

=/= genericized, blanket statement

Serious? Two different people already said, the special ability of the bank produce too much money, espially in wide empires (cause its exponential). What is generic at this statement?

There is too much gold generation late game, do something about it Gazebo! = genericized, blanket statement

Why do you think we are discussing nerfing the unit purchase? Cause everyone is only purchasing units in the lategame. We are already agreeing, there is too much money in the lategame.
And I already posted my opinion, the specialists are the problem. Which are sometimes more focused by citizen than tiles with strong UI. Specialist slots shouldnt be stronger than tiles with even GP improvements.
If we nerf the gold generation lategame, we dont need any nerf to unit purchase. And if we decrease the science generation, cities have more time to produce units and buildings naturally, and the need for purchasing goes also down.

 

[SLGray]

Saying the banks produce too much money is a blanket statement because you do not give a counter solution.

 

[SLGray]

A blanket statement is a generalization - something that covers everything, like a metaphorical blanket. There is an implication when using "blanket statement" that it may be an over-generalization. For example, "Snow is cold" is a fact; "Nobody who lives here can drive safely in the snow" is a blanket statement, and most likely not completely accurate.

 

[XplosiveLun]

Regarding on Bank rebalance. What about having the caravansary and custom house bonus capped at, like 5 to 10. In this way, it encourages you to build banks at key cities which you'll probably want to invest. It won't scale too radically for wide empires. You will still want to build banks in satellite cities for the science bonus however.

 

[Randomsheep]

First of all I apologise to Gazebo for suggesting arrogance (|I was pissed up)

Second, I thank everyone who has posted and made me see the error of my ways.

Thirdly, happy new year.

 

[CrazyG]

Regarding on Bank rebalance. What about having the caravansary and custom house bonus capped at, like 5 to 10. In this way, it encourages you to build banks at key cities which you'll probably want to invest. It won't scale too radically for wide empires. You will still want to build banks in satellite cities for the science bonus however.

Great solution. The problem is just that if you get 20 cities with banks, you earn too much gold, enough for basically infinite army and it destroys all poverty, eliminating one of the biggest problems of building such a massive empire

 

[Gazebo]

Get over yourself.

I gave you feedback and I'm happy to give you more but you are starting to come over as pretty arrogant at times.

First of all I apologise to Gazebo for suggesting arrogance (|I was pissed up)

Second, I thank everyone who has posted and made me see the error of my ways.

Thirdly, happy new year.

G