New Version - May 20th (5/20)

[ryanmusante]

AI being eliminated 'might' make a big swing but only if the AI eliminated is terribly far behind or ahead in tech and there are many catch-up mechanics when behind on tech.

Also, disabling tech trading /brokering and enabling research agreements is a good default for better balance imho.

 

[Randomsheep]

Nope, research agreements will cause jumps as well.

Here is the problem:

One civ on one continent and three unmet civs on another. The dominant unmet civ proceeds to wipe out the other two less developed civs. The civ who has no contact is getting happiness adjustments. It makes no sense.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

Cultural Exchange - now buffs Amphitheater and Opera House instead of Guilds (4/4, was 3/3) (Artistry)

I'm a big fan of this change. Its a buff in general (even Tall cities tend to have 5-6 cities, so you get more hits of the bonus, plus a stronger bonus), and it gives Wide a little something. I'm a fan.

Technically a change from 27/27 to 48/48 for a 6 city tall empire. 80/80 for a 10 city empire.
Sounds good.

Also, disabling tech trading /brokering and enabling research agreements is a good default for better balance imho.

I agree. I always disable tech trade and brokering and enable research agreements. Tech trading is too strong and abusable.

One civ on one continent and three unmet civs on another. The dominant unmet civ proceeds to wipe out the other two less developed civs. The civ who has no contact is getting happiness adjustments. It makes no sense.

No matter if tech trade or research agreements are enabled. The system is working this way. But I agree with you, it doesnt make much sense. But think about the opposite way. You are doing very well on your own continent while endless warfare and stallmate kills the development of the three nations on one continent. In this case, you have a benefit from magically knowing the median needs.
But still... it make no sense.

 

[Moi Magnus]

Tech median value will surely result in more crazy jumps in happiness.

AI trade techs on the same turn whenever one gets it means a big adjustment in happiness.

When an AI is elimated means again a big happiness adjustment.

I can see this making fluctuating happiness worse.

Even if it happen, it will be an happiness jump, and not an unhappiness jump.
The tech median gives unhappiness to those you have more techs, and happiness to those you have less techs

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Wait a moment, is it 4/4 Culture/Production from Cultural Exchange to each building, or if both are built, or is it divided (2/2)? If the first, the policy is far too good. It's going to be better than Serfdom, Divine Right and Burghers put together and that's all in a single policy. 8 per city just doesn't belong in the classical/medieval era trees after everything even remotely comparable has been nerfed, especially on the tree that already is the best at Culture because of the specialist bonus.

 

[Randomsheep]

Even if it happen, it will be an happiness jump, and not an unhappiness jump.
The tech median gives unhappiness to those you have more techs, and happiness to those you have less techs

Yes, so the unmet warmonger wipes out the unmet tech leader on an undiscovered continent, and the civ minding his own business on a separate continent suddenly finds happiness plummeting with no idea why. Makes no sense.

 

[CppMaster]

Yes, so the unmet warmonger wipes out the unmet tech leader on an undiscovered continent, and the civ minding his own business on a separate continent suddenly finds happiness plummeting with no idea why. Makes no sense.

They just don't have the bonus anymore. It's still better than not having the bonus at all.

 

[Randomsheep]

They just don't have the bonus anymore. It's still better than not having the bonus at all.

So they don't have the bonus?...yet they have the bonus?

Thanks.

 

[Moi Magnus]

Yes, so the unmet warmonger wipes out the unmet tech leader on an undiscovered continent, and the civ minding his own business on a separate continent suddenly finds happiness plummeting with no idea why. Makes no sense.

This kind of problem is by design of the happiness system. Every part of the need system refer to the civ existing, and not the civ you know.
(If we were to make a rationnal system, the need system would depend on the influence level of every civ on you, so that only civ that are known by your peoples influence the needs, but it is probably too complex, and quite difficult to balance as an idea)

Moreover, it is a median that will be used. Median are usually quite robust to the erasing of one civ.
In a 8 civ game, the only situation were there will be a jump by eliminating the last player is if there is a significant gap of technologies between the 4th and the 5th civ.

 

[Randomsheep]

This kind of problem is by design of the happiness system. Every part of the need system refer to the civ existing, and not the civ you know.
(If we were to make a rationnal system, the need system would depend on the influence level of every civ on you, so that only civ that are known by your peoples influence the needs, but it is probably too complex, and quite difficult to balance as an idea)

Moreover, it is a median that will be used. Median are usually quite robust to the erasing of one civ.
In a 8 civ game, the only situation were there will be a jump by eliminating the last player is if there is a significant gap of technologies between the 4th and the 5th civ.

Of course, but bear in mind this is a discussion pertaining to the proposed changes in the upcoming version.

The changes will make the problem you identify worse than it is currently. In my opinion it is the wrong direction.

There is too much emphasis on balance and 'rubberbanding' to the detriment of all else. The happiness mechanic has become too unwieldy and is not in the spirit of a civ game.

I would like to see less emphasis on what Deity level players demand and a rethink of happiness to be less obtuse.

 

[CppMaster]

So they don't have the bonus?...yet they have the bonus?

Thanks.

Correction: They won't have the bonus after unmet runaway is wiped out, but it's still better for them that they had the bonus before that not having it at all.

 

[Stalker0]

In this case, you have a benefit from magically knowing the median needs.
But still... it make no sense.

It makes as much sense as a civ you’ve never met building a wonder which kills the building of yours. Sometimes civ is weird

That said, I am concerned about more variability, and I agree the removal of civs needs to be tested. The median may be less variable than an average, but that doesn’t mean it’s not variable.

I would argue the current system is already too swingy, swings of 5 happy a turn occur regularly, and swings as high as 12-14 occur here and there. I know G has put in some buffering in the past to reduce some of that swingyness, but I wouldn’t mind seeing even more.

 

[Gazebo]

Wait a moment, is it 4/4 Culture/Production from Cultural Exchange to each building, or if both are built, or is it divided (2/2)? If the first, the policy is far too good. It's going to be better than Serfdom, Divine Right and Burghers put together and that's all in a single policy. 8 per city just doesn't belong in the classical/medieval era trees after everything even remotely comparable has been nerfed, especially on the tree that already is the best at Culture because of the specialist bonus.

Sorry, it's 2/2 per building.

G

 

[BiteInTheMark]

Sorry, it's 2/2 per building.

G

Hmmmm.... For me, it seemed like it was agreed that this part of social policy was too weak. I dunno how many cities are now typical for tall play, but even with 6 cities, you get now less yields than before.

 

[Gazebo]

Hmmmm.... For me, it seemed like it was agreed that this part of social policy was too weak. I dunno how many cities are now typical for tall play, but even with 6 cities, you get now less yields than before.

4/4 per city from a medieval branch is fine. Artistry is (currently) a solid performer for the AI, and it is overall more potential yields for empires.

G

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Hmmmm.... For me, it seemed like it was agreed that this part of social policy was too weak. I dunno how many cities are now typical for tall play, but even with 6 cities, you get now less yields than before.

I thought it was agreed Artistry was only too weak for wide, with tall being good or maybe even too good? This way both issues are solved, or at least alleviated.

 

[Stalker0]

Sorry, it's 2/2 per building.

G

Ug....well then I'm no longer as excited

I would consider 5-6 cities the default for TALL. This means the we have gone from a 27 culture bonus to a 20-24 one....and the bonus takes longer to get (opera houses come after artist guilds). Further, because the bonuses are spread out away from the capital, you no longer get the advantage of all of the capital multipliers, so its a tad weaker than it initially looks.

I can understand 4/4 being too strong, but I think you should at least stick with 3/3.

 

[Gazebo]

Ug....well then I'm no longer as excited

I would consider 5-6 cities the default for TALL. This means the we have gone from a 27 culture bonus to a 20-24 one....and the bonus takes longer to get (opera houses come after artist guilds). Further, because the bonuses are spread out away from the capital, you no longer get the advantage of all of the capital multipliers, so its a tad weaker than it initially looks.

I can understand 4/4 being too strong, but I think you should at least stick with 3/3.

Testing has shown that 2/2 feels good for now. I'd rather under-shoot this than blow up that tree.

G

 

[chicorbeef]

Testing has shown that 2/2 feels good for now. I'd rather under-shoot this than blow up that tree.

G

Are you referring to wide civs in the testing? Are Tall civs doing better too?

 

[BiteInTheMark]

Testing has shown that 2/2 feels good for now. I'd rather under-shoot this than blow up that tree.

G

I agree 4/4 for ONE building would be a bit much, but with 3/3 you would hit the same yields with a typical tall empire.
Maybe differenciate the yields a bit to 3/2/1 hammer/gold/culture?
But anyway, its still a strong tree, so 2/2 may be a legit decision.