Organization Policy in Progress Tree feels awfully weak.

Discussion in 'General Balance' started by SolutionIt, Jan 20, 2021.

?

Buff Organization Policy with suggested changes.

Poll closed Jan 27, 2021.
  1. Yes, give it a extra trade route and apply production bonus to settlers.

    9.1%
  2. No, (Please explain)

    90.9%
  3. Other buff idea (Please explain)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    8,465
    I have done 3 experiments where I tried the exact same start, one as tradition, and one as progress. The results are noted in the Strategy area, but the general summary was that Tradition is faster at cities 2-4, they both caught up at around city 5, and then progress is faster on cities 6+. As noted above, with progress your secondary cities become "settler producing" much quicker than Tradition cities, so a good progress player shifts to using secondary cities earlier to offset the weaker capital for settler production.
     
    InkAxis and SolutionIt like this.
  2. doublex55

    doublex55 Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2016
    Messages:
    520
    Workers are the most gold efficient purchase early game, if you have enough gold income to get them reasonably quickly. It’s better to build 2 warriors and buy a worker than to buy 2 warriors and build a worker.

    And because progress gets extra building production investing in buildings becomes less good compared to buying units.

    I would love for that policy to reduce purchase cost of workers and trade units as well.
     
    SolutionIt and Delvemor like this.
  3. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    8,465
    This I can get behind. Most of the the (build X faster) type policies annoy me that they don't effect the purchase cost as well.
     
    SolutionIt and Delvemor like this.
  4. Delvemor

    Delvemor Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2020
    Messages:
    97
    Gender:
    Male
    I had to check in game to be sure but yes that's true. I always though the gold cost of units and buildings was equally proportional to the production cost but clearly it's not the case. It will be something to consider in my next game.
     
  5. SolutionIt

    SolutionIt Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2020
    Messages:
    120
    You're assuming I don't do any of those strategies so please reassess where I'm coming from. It'd be stupid not to kill encampments regardless of whether or not you pick up Authority, and it is dumber not to rush a shrine or monument as needed. Early pantheons matter too much.

    I think it is safe to assume the issue might stem from game speeds rather than the policy itself being weak (though I still personally think there are better ways to get the growth and production needed earlier as I explained in some posts.) I'll likely sticky to the top of this forum my full-fledged explanation though and make some comparisons to other policies you can pick up in comparison to it.

    Anyways if I recall correctly fraternity needs you to build roads and connect your cities in the first place to see the benefits of it and is locked behind two policies. Picking up tradition policies twice should give a universal 2 food to non-capital cities without having to build a road network. Obviously tradition isn't ideal for expanding but my point stands there, you can build more settlers quickly with tradition because of the unconditional food increase, and the free 2 pop to your capital which means 2 more tiles you can work and at the bare minimum the 4 pop needed to make at least one settler. Progress doesn't get anything like that immediately.

    At the bare minimum you should at least be ok with Settler's getting a production boost on that policy, especially if you consider Authority can get you +2 production and a free settler with a free tile claim and gold and prod on that tile claim which is already better than what tradition offered and as I explained is better for getting a settler quickly.
     
  6. SolutionIt

    SolutionIt Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2020
    Messages:
    120
    Alright so does anyone want a new thread specifically just to vote for specific changes on that policy they would want? Obviously there is blowback against the +1 trade route but I see a gold cost reduction suggestion, and it doesn't seem contradictory to give settlers the 25% production boost either.

    The new thread will specifically be just to put input on a desired change for the policy and no arguing for it. Just pure voting. Here are the current options I'll put in that new thread if people are ok with a new thread:

    - Buff with +1 Trade route (Just in case someone has an explicit interest in it)
    - Buff by giving Settlers the 25% production boost. (Suggested by some community members before)
    - Buff by reducing the gold cost of Workers and Trade Units (Ideally this is probably the best way to buff it) Thanks @doublex55 for giving a good option to consider.
    - No Buff it is fine.

    I'm not going to go through the effort of my fullblown explanation for why I think the policy is pretty weak personally. I made this thread thinking this would be a pretty common opinion but I was pretty surprised. Might just be my preferred playstyle that isn't letting me see the full benefit of this policy. But I think a small buff could still be appreciated since I look at the other two trees available at the start of the game and don't really see one truly lackluster policy in them.
     
    Delvemor likes this.
  7. SpankmyMetroid

    SpankmyMetroid Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Messages:
    296
    The extra movement point is the difference between having to wait a turn to start building an improvement on a hill and starting that same turn. That adds up, very, very quickly.

    I disagree and actually find it one of the better policies in the tree.
     
  8. Delvemor

    Delvemor Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2020
    Messages:
    97
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes I probably assumed a little bit too much indeed. Just because you buy workers early instead of units (or instead of more units) doesn't imply anything in itself.

    I agree with you on Tradition. As Stalker0 pointed out Tradition does allow faster settling of the first 3-4 cities but then Progress will do better if you want more cities than that. This is what I have experienced too.

    About the Fraternity policy, you do need city connections for the science, but not for the food. The +3 food is unconditional. So for Progress you have +3 food in each city and for Tradition you have +2 food in the capital only plus the increased growth in all cities. The increased growth is not enough that early in the game to match +3 food of Progress, but Tradition doesn't need the secondary cities to grow as fast anyway so I guess it's ok.

    I would be ok with a production boost to settlers instead of workers and trade units, especially since I've learned that workers are actually a good deal if you buy them compared to units, and Organization doesn't reduce the purchase cost.
     
    SolutionIt likes this.

Share This Page