1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

New Version - July 17th (7-17)

Discussion in 'Community Patch Project' started by Gazebo, Jul 18, 2019.

  1. BiteInTheMark

    BiteInTheMark Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2016
    Messages:
    1,949
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    You could have achieved the same result, if you had reduced flat food from buildings. Working tiles would be more important, if you would gain less passiv food from buildings or other sources. This was done to some extend, but only for late game buildings, which make no sense, cause you need now much much more food in lategame than in early game, which is kinda double punishing.

    Besides this, increasing growth cost leads to the complete opposite we were talking about in the threads. Not the food in the early game is the problem, its the more and more losing worth of food and growth in the late game. Now you reach the point even faster, where it is no longer worthwhile to invest food in population, because all sorts of other sources contribute more than a new citizen. In my last Germany game, all the citizens, specialists, and buildings in my cities accounted for just 30% of my global science output. 40% came from instant yields. All normal citizens were only contributing 9.5% of the science I gain per turn, while the instant usage of an scientist is able to create 500% of the science I gain per turn. So, what do you think make more sense, getting a new citizen in each of my 30 citizen cities to increase the science per turn by 0,3%. Or invest the food into specialist to use more specialits?
     
  2. phantomaxl1207

    phantomaxl1207 King

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2010
    Messages:
    810
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Indiana
    On Trade Routes: ITR boosting the source City could allow a strong Capital to fuel its other Cities and itself rather well.

    Now, it is solely in favor of the target City. If we want to emulate the previous iteration, we would the boost to ITR's go both ways: have the Granary give 2 :c5food: to both Cities.

    If enough people don't like the new ITR system, we can revert it.
     
  3. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,904
    The other crazy idea, would if stone works/workshops didn't give a production option, what if they just gave production to the ITR straight up? So ITRs give Food and Prod always.
     
    Bromar1 likes this.
  4. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,904
    Oh, just wanted to say...my god do I love Lebensraum (Autocracy). Even though I don't war often, that has got to be one of the most fun passive policies in the game. I am literally cackling over here as I am doing a 3 general push, and have just cut out a whole swath of key sea territory from Spain. I have tried to control this channel the entire damn game, and now I have it. Muhahah!
     
    CrazyG, vyyt, Bromar1 and 1 other person like this.
  5. CrazyG

    CrazyG Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    5,356
    Location:
    Beijing
    In that situation, I went with food routes, 19 food is a lot better than 14 hammers. I did use a production route to my capital because it built a wonder faster, a good example of the overall weaker option being the best choice. I also start putting trade routes to CS in the mid-game.

    I think people are missing some of the less obvious things that affect trade route yields.
    The food from trade routes is affected by city level modifiers, such as 30% growth from tradition, and the growth bonus from happiness. That food ITR is worth a lot more than 19 food, a specific example this game was closer to 25. Gold, culture, and science from foreign trade routes are not affected by city modifiers, and the risk is big, especially to a city state, who could easily get that barbarian swarm quest any day now, or have another civ ally then war me. 10 gold per turn is at best 250 gold for the duration of the trade route. If the route gets pillaged, it will cost me hundreds of gold to replace by purchasing (caravan costs scale with era now), or a comparable amount of production. The change to scaling caravan/cargo ship costs combined with rewards for trading to far away cities (and less gold for nearby cities) have combined to make ETR really unappealing to me, their gold output has been really cut down.

    To me, the biggest balance problem among trade routes is between city states and foreign civs.
     
  6. balinte

    balinte Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2016
    Messages:
    68
    One advantage of ETRs would be that it gives gold which can be spent in any city so the -mobility- of gold over production
    But since you can send ITRs into any city that needs it, the mobility is not a problem

    I think in civ 6 the origin city of the TR gets the production/food not the destination city
    So if you need prodtion in a city via TR you must build a stoneworks or workshop there first

    Might be a nice little nerf for ITRs in CBP as you wouldnt be able to supply your whole empire from a single city with stoneworks or granary

    Also ETR yields get pretty good with the influence increasing
     
  7. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,904
    I do think a lot of people underestimate the Food power in the early game, and that is why I think ITRs are very good in the early and mid game. But at that point, its not the gold that switches me over, but the science and culture. As you noted above, the gold isn't that great, and especially compared to the hammers of a prod route. But...the science and culture is still very powerful, and once growth starts to taper as it inevitably does, you are now deciding between Hammers vs Gold+Science+Culture. Sometimes the hammers win out, I use them myself for a wonder city, or sometimes even for a diplo unit city when I'm trying to come back on CS. But for my general fare, ETRs take over in the mid to late game. And having just finished a game on the current version, even getting +33% internal from Industry...ETRs still win out to me.
     
    phantomaxl1207 likes this.
  8. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,904
    Finishing up my current game as Poland. Phew this one was fun. You can see my initial notes earlier on. For the longest time Spain was just a rock, and I wondered if I would ever be able to overtake her. But patience won out, and with the power of Lebensraum I leapfrogged my borders around one of their key cities, and finally was able to take this very key channel. Once that city was taken the rest fell into place. Spain became my vassal, and soon did Japan. I had a full airforce, and neither player had any (which is concerning for Spain as she was flat out better than me in tech).

    Now people have wondered about slower gameplay. I am currently on Turn 455 on Emperor and about to pick up Robotics, so it does feel like the overall game is slower. I'm basically in the driver's seat for a science victory at this point, so I'm planning to play it out to see just how long the game actually takes to finish up.

    Growth wise my two biggest cities are right around 30, and most of my other cities are low 20s. Funny enough I actually used ITRs quite a bit in this game because I got sanctioned for a long time, but even still I'm not hitting the huge pop numbers on growth. I think that is more to do with I can use specialists more again, so I just turned to specialists over growth in the late game....because, yeah...they are just better. What is 1 more pop really going to do for me at that point in the game.

    Turning off the specialist unhappy cap was a really good change for smoothness of the game. I feel like the governor handles specialists better, so I just have to intervene in critical times (which is how I like to play, a bit more hands off than you crazy diety players ;)

    I'm going to make a thread specifically about this, but I'll note that while Rifleman have been a little sturdier in this version....ultimately it really hasn't moved the needle to me. There's a more fundamental "problem" (I put in quotes depending on how much you care) with infantry units to me, so I'll go through them in another thread.

    Happiness wise, towards the late game my unhappiness was spiked, and I'm at 52% at the moment. A lot of this is due to specialists and my lack of building (many of my newly acquired cities I have just turned to processes and not focused on a lot of building). Ive been using resource trading to stay happy enough, and I'm seeing if I can that through to the end.
     
    burleigh likes this.
  9. andersw

    andersw Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,005
    Location:
    sweden
    I find that around 20 cities I need to build public works, micromanage growth and grab all happiness I can find.
    Still this version was more lenient than previous ones.
    And 99%? as long as I don't drop below 60 I'm fine.
     
  10. Enrico Swagolo

    Enrico Swagolo Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Messages:
    2,387
    99% is what was before and I'm not complaining about that obviously, if let's say the cities grew at that point it'd be a nightmare of far below 50%. Maybe 25-33% at best. Either I stop growth everywhere or it's all up in flames, pretty much.

    I don't understand it... Even after applying my old fix it was only okay up to city 28, and then suddenly I see every city, with Capital that has almost all wonders inside included has, 60 to 100 Distress deficit, so (nearly?) every pop will be Distress soon, and there's around 10-60 Poverty deficit everywhere. I will have to mess around with the values until I see Distress is not that hellish
     
  11. CrazyG

    CrazyG Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2016
    Messages:
    5,356
    Location:
    Beijing
    So for me, CS routes always have the most culture, which is why I end up using those instead of other ETR (grouping all ETR and all ITR for comparison is stupid, there are 4 trade route types). I've found the added culture slingshot on trade routes to be very ineffective at making a comeback or stopping a runaway.
    Industry does buff ETR too.

    ETR are strong, especially after corporations, and I view this as a feature. ITR are plan B, plan B can't be better than plan A all game. Even if ETR are much stronger late game, ITR will still get used. Similarly I'm okay with food ITR being stronger than production ITR, because production ITR are still useful. I thought about all 4 options for TR in this last game, and generally they all had at least one advantage to them.
     
  12. BiteInTheMark

    BiteInTheMark Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2016
    Messages:
    1,949
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    You are right with the modifiers for ITR. Thats a bit illogical. Either both should get used with modifiers, or none of them. The contribution of Food ITR is really weird, its added before the growth modifiers but after the food modifier.
    The introduction of the proximity modifier was in my eyes really a mistake. I dont think this really contributes any fun or interesting to the game, its only one more burden. It was argued, that in reality, trading with more distant nations is delivering more valuable goods than trading with closer neighbors. While this is true, the fact I can only create one trade route to a foreign city at one time, didnt directly say how much goods I trade with them. Trading 100 tons of salt with my direct neighbor can be worth more than trading 100kg spices with a far away civilization. It also had created the weird situation, that constructing trading buildings with trade route length increase, effectivly reduce your yield gain for you old trade routes. If you are able to get more yields from closer neighbors, you effectivly would increase the overall yields from ETR, didnt get unnecessary high risk by pillaging and could in return increase the value of ITR for better balance.

    I also think, that increasing the cost of trade units and increasing their pillage value that much, as it do, is a double punishment. If that trade unit gets pillaged, the value my enemy get is tremendous, but additional, I have to pay a lot to replace it.
     
    Kim Dong Un likes this.
  13. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,904
    So I "actually" finished my game on turn 500. I was 6 turns away from building the final spaceship part.

    Now this game did have the -33% great scientist policy in effect, which is a decent dent in science speed. And of course I won't say I was playing optimally. But considering I got both hubble and cern, and didn't crack 500, does suggest to me the game has gotten slower in the late game
     
  14. Enrico Swagolo

    Enrico Swagolo Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Messages:
    2,387
    I've tested my game by changing values, and while I didn't write anything down, here's what I've noticed:

    Vanilla VP happiness - 21 cities, can't grow anywhere state
    Fix so divisors at 100, tech penalty lower (same as in 12th june version on 3rd page) - 26-28 cities, empire can't grow anywhere but capital state, Distress is everywhere. Can hear tortured screams of agony, anguish, anger and apathy in a city with all the (relevant) buildings available built, so I don't think it's good at all
    Fix + distress divisor to 125 - slightly better, but nothing truly changes. Better, but doesn't help, can't really grow - with me already with Military Academies about everywhere, no real big Distress reductions are on the way that won't increase my empire's output as a whole
    Fix + distress divisor to 125, tech penalty from 75 to 50 - no greatly noticeable difference at all from the above, I'm sure it's sort of better but it's about the same from what I see.

    What did the trick was lowering the per city penalty from 5% to 3%. Situation instantly fixed, I might undo some of the other changes and turn per city penalty into 0-2% because, well, this is the clear culprit of the wide has to permanently stop growth everywhere situation. I'm sure the point of permaunhappy will be reached even with 3% so I will lower it further while undoing some of the other changes so it's not a permahappy system. New acquisitions are mostly 100% unhappy even with the fixes, but the old guard with all the buildings is doing very fine.
     
    Omen of Peace likes this.
  15. Crag Hack

    Crag Hack Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2019
    Messages:
    152
    Gender:
    Male
    Old problem...old debate...nothing new...but those TR I wished I could control them. They get destroyed so often.

    Always believed they should be controllable. Just makes no sense not to be able to do that.
     
  16. ridjack

    ridjack King

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2017
    Messages:
    684
    I assume this isn't with Tradition? I was hitting similar numbers with Tradition Venice by the renaissance.

    I really hope that's a one-off and not indicating a trend. Late-game is already frequently the least interesting part for any non-Domination game, and Domination games don't usually make it that far into the late game anyway. Extending that part of the game out even further, at least in its current state, would be... unfortunate.

    I never did see any answers to the question posed in my previous post in this thread... does anyone have any knowledge of how being unable to vassalize affects the AI's decisions like this?
     
  17. Omen of Peace

    Omen of Peace Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2018
    Messages:
    376
    Gender:
    Male
    Weird indeed, but not a big deal in my opinion.

    I get the mechanic - it's to create a reward vs risk trade-off which can lead to some interesting decision-making.

    But I agree on the trade buildings - I don't like that building them make trade routes worse in some aspects! This reminds me of the diplomatic techs issue, where one would avoid researching a tech to get cheaper units.
    Perhaps the trade distance should increase with era (or some other metric), and then the trade buildings actually soften the impact of it? IIRC some techs already extend max length of trade routes.

    Here I disagree. Before that change, in later eras - pillaging wasn't very interesting (100 g at that point means nothing), and having a route pillaged didn't sting (you would just straight up by another trade unit).

    Which map size do you play on again?
    If possible in the code (and if it's not already the case!), perhaps the modifier should be dependent on map size, much like the science/culture one.
     
  18. Crag Hack

    Crag Hack Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2019
    Messages:
    152
    Gender:
    Male
    To continue my thought on the TR controlability issue.

    I think most people will find it reasonable and good to be able to control them. But I guess I know what the issue there is.

    While it might be easy to do it for the human player, this might not be the case for the AI. Imagine 40 Civs each having 10 TR, then every turn the CPU has to calculate 400 TRs and what to do with them and evaluate risk, recall, detour and so on. That might not be a good idea at all, if it is even possible.
     
  19. ridjack

    ridjack King

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2017
    Messages:
    684
    I would absolutely love the ability to recall trade routes, or at least have them be automatically recalled when they're going to a civ that declares on you.
     
  20. Crag Hack

    Crag Hack Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2019
    Messages:
    152
    Gender:
    Male
    I think they are already recalled if a Civ DoWs you. Provided they survive the DoW turn.

    The AI is very efficient at destroying them. Better than the human. I am sure everyone has missed to destroy an enemy TR just by not seeing it...clutter of the map. Well the AI has no such issues at all
     
    Kim Dong Un likes this.

Share This Page