New Version - 2.7.3 (October 7, 2022)

[Rekk]

I also agree that the new Great Person expenditure calculation will cause incentives that will make things very 'gamey'.

Because the last 10 turns of 4 cities are used, then it would be in my interest to:

*Keep top 4 cities on the science/culture/gold process for 10 full turns before a great person was expected. this seems unnatural and gamey

*Do city bonuses count? Such as clearing a barbarian camp or a +X resource in a city event? If so, then timing those before expending a great person is incentivized. This could also lead to weird exploits like saving a bunch of writers and expending them all at once.

*Not settle new cities


So every aspect of the game would be affected by this one change

Edit: Also, this would mean civs that are way in the lead already would get the most benefit from expending great people. In my opinion, great people should be a way for civs that are behind to dig themselves out of a hole. If a civ is barely making any money then a great merchant will have no benefit? But if you're making tons of money then the merchant will give you lots more? That sounds backward

All of this is how Great Artists, Great Writers, and Great Scientists have worked for years, but they are based on empire yields.

The 4 city average was meant to balance between tall and wide playstyles. I didn't want it based solely on the capital. I could add phantom cities that contribute 0 production if you have fewer than 4 cities!

 

[Delvemor]

With the VP Congress now open, if you don't agree with the changes you are welcome to propose that they be changed, how they should be changed, and explain your rationale. Glad to hear you like some of the changes though!

It's not so much that I disagree, there is just a higher opportunity cost for getting those buildings now, which is not necessarily a bad thing. My only problem would be this City-State asking me to build a given number of lodges or herbalists when I have a desert start. More buildings are becoming situational now and I like that, but I would have a proposal for making sure City-States quests don't involve those buildings that you would otherwise skip for some if not most of your cities.

 

[smorgasborgas]

The tooltip says it's based on the number of academies and works of art etc

 

[Tekamthi]

Lodge
- New building unlocked at Trapping
- Costs 65 Production, no Maintenance cost
- +1 Production
- +1 Production to Camps
- +5 Food instant yield on border growth (scaling with era)
- +1 Food to Deer and Bison

What does this represent, historically?

 

[Rekk]

What does this represent, historically?

<Text>A lodge is a small dwelling set apart from a main dwelling, used for recreation. The term has become associated with recreational hunting, especially in relation to nobility and the recreational sportsmen in modern times. In many cultures, wild preserves were set aside for kings and their entourages to engage in hunting for pleausre.</Text>

oo, a typo.

 

[usadefcon1]

Fixed a bug in the WorldBuilder tool which caused it to assign major civ player numbers to City-States (return of Putmalk!)

I was wondering why Rome kept appearing in frozen tundra.

 

[usadefcon1]

So far the new version is great. One of these days we need to address this issue though...

Spoiler No thank you :

 

[Tekamthi]

<Text>A lodge is a small dwelling set apart from a main dwelling, used for recreation. The term has become associated with recreational hunting, especially in relation to nobility and the recreational sportsmen in modern times. In many cultures, wild preserves were set aside for kings and their entourages to engage in hunting for pleausre.</Text>

oo, a typo.

thanks for reply -- strikes me as somewhat ambiguous. I think the description quoted here is vaguely referencing medieval and reconnaissance developments, not ancient era. Also not really public infrastructure.

Consider "smokehouse" instead

 

[Delvemor]

So far the new version is great. One of these days we need to address this issue though...

Spoiler No thank you :

View attachment 640765View attachment 640766View attachment 640767View attachment 640768View attachment 640769View attachment 640770View attachment 640771View attachment 640772View attachment 640773View attachment 640774

I no longer get these anymore. Now they usually offer at least a solid 3 gpt for 1 strategic. Perhaps clearing your cache for every new version if you don't already do it can help for this.

 

[Rekk]

All of this is how Great Artists, Great Writers, and Great Scientists have worked for years, but they are based on empire yields.

The 4 city average was meant to balance between tall and wide playstyles. I didn't want it based solely on the capital. I could add phantom cities that contribute 0 production if you have fewer than 4 cities!

Alternatively, I could make it based on 2 turns worth of the total production of your 5 best cities (averaged over ten turns as normal). Then, having a second city will always be better then having one.

I'm not a huge fan of the idea, though. There are already costs to keeping to one city for any period of time. I'm sure your neighbours will love that they spawned next to a self-inflicted Venice.

 

[Colt45]

Noob here, will this now work with YNAEM now?

 

[CrazyG]

Alternatively, I could make it based on 2 turns worth of the total production of your 5 best cities (averaged over ten turns as normal). Then, having a second city will always be better then having one.

I'm not a huge fan of the idea, though. There are already costs to keeping to one city for any period of time. I'm sure your neighbours will love that they spawned next to a self-inflicted Venice.

Average of top X cities is fine (where X is 3, 4 or 5). Average is pretty fair to tall/wide, tall gets to enjoy a fat capital, but still gets punished if other cities are crap.

This change is overall very good by the way, its much more transparent and in line with other great people. There is just one particular edge case that's frustrating, which is the very first one for tradition.

All we want is a newly settled city to not unfarily weigh down this average, so a condition that checks for only cities that existed for at least X turns, or have at least X population, or at least X production, or even just a rule that the very first engineer uses just your best city are all that's needed to fix. Anything along these lines would be sufficient (balance-wise they are all close enough, IDK what would be easy/possible). The first engineer should consistently build or be very close to building a Hanging-Gardens level wonder IMO.

 

[DImensiondog]

My first game in:

[Spoilers]
View attachment 640735
[/Spoilers]

So I did get a granary in my capital, I wanted to send a food TR to some of my starting cities. Likewise I did get one for barcelona, as I have 4 food resources there I get a bonus on, so that kind of a no-brainer. How much did the +25 food loss hurt? Well my capital was delayed 2 turns without the growth bonus, and Braga was founded 1 turn before my settler reached its spot.... so yeah it made a HUGE difference, I was forced to settle elsewhere.

Lodge wise, I did build one in my capital, with 2 plantations it pays for itself in 32 turns (and the extra food is still something), which this early in the game is still a reasonable investment. Herbalists though, even though I'm running renewal I haven't found the time to slip it in, its feels too pricey for the food it gives me.

Have fun when you get conquistadors. They seem overpowered to me. Stronger than trebuchets at taking cities and hardly take damage when doing so. Also destroy armies with flanking.

 

[CppMaster]

Alternatively, I could make it based on 2 turns worth of the total production of your 5 best cities (averaged over ten turns as normal). Then, having a second city will always be better then having one.

I'm not a huge fan of the idea, though. There are already costs to keeping to one city for any period of time. I'm sure your neighbours will love that they spawned next to a self-inflicted Venice.

What if it would just scale with era instead of city yields? It'd be much less gamey and easier to balance.

 

[nekokon]

How to know if AI really really wants something.
Good thing they don't have anything that's not impossible to trade.

 

[youngsteve]

Has anyone done a domination victory on this version, & if so how was the happiness issues.
Stalker0 did a culture win where he took 16 full cities, & says his happiness tanked under 40 & he built 50 public works to help with this. I am just worried that if you went full domination with loads of cities, would your empire implode. Though could it be that the game has reverted back to when puppeting cities made more sense, than it has in recent years playing.

Just interested as haven't started main game yet, just trying things out, & with marathon takes an age to get anywhere.

 

[JNZS13]

How to know if AI really really wants something.
Good thing they don't have anything that's not impossible to trade.

maybe you should open a ticket on github

 

[vetox20]

I played on Warlord, 8 civs, epic speed, with Zulu and went for Domination victory. I averaged about 6 main cities, razing the rest with Authority, Fealty and Imperialism. Most of the game with luxury buys/policies/buildings I hovered at 52%. I would be stopped by war weariness causing my happiness to dip to mid 30s (which makes sense) and it would climb to the mid 60s after weariness left. I quit when there were 3 civs left and I had huge swaths of iron clads and impi into fusilier paving waves of destruction with little to no resistance left. Fun game though.

 

[CppMaster]

Only 6 cities and 52% happiness? So I guess wide empires are not feasible anymore?

 

[Rekk]

What if it would just scale with era instead of city yields? It'd be much less gamey and easier to balance.

To be clear, the way it currently scales works much better in later eras. You are suggesting a return to the previous method, where GE scaling is a serious problem.

Please explain why it's gamey, more so than what you can do with Great Scientists (who, by the way, used to be able to be maximized with only 3 turns of science focus).