Patch Update by Greg @ 2K

[Louis XXIV]

The one thing I'll say about the nerfing thing is the addition of new small wonders should help. They also improved weak SPs, not just nerfed good ones.

About the band-aid comment, when you release a game, you can't really change core gameplay. You can change how you use that core gameplay or modify it, but they're not going to release an entirely different game. That's not how patches work.

 

[Krill]

Reduced amount of food needed for cities to grow at larger sizes. (Added 12/3)

Critical update. What is the new formula then?

 

[PawelS]

Critical update. What is the new formula then?

I guess the general formula is the same, and they just reduced the exponent.

 

[Raethwyn]

speaking of cities, does anybody know the formula to calculate city strength right now?

I don't know about the formula, but the variables are all in the GlobalDefines.xml file. I leave it to others to determine how these variables are used. Here they are:

Spoiler :

<!-- City Combat Defines -->
<Row Name="CITY_STRENGTH_DEFAULT">
<Value>600</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="CITY_STRENGTH_POPULATION_CHANGE">
<Value>25</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="CITY_STRENGTH_UNIT_DIVISOR">
<Value>500</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="CITY_STRENGTH_TECH_BASE">
<Value>5</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="CITY_STRENGTH_TECH_EXPONENT">
<Value>1.8</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="CITY_STRENGTH_TECH_MULTIPLIER">
<Value>2</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="CITY_STRENGTH_HILL_MOD">
<Value>15</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="CITY_ATTACKING_DAMAGE_MOD">
<Value>50</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="ATTACKING_CITY_MELEE_DAMAGE_MOD">
<Value>100</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="CITY_ATTACK_RANGE">
<Value>2</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="CAN_CITY_USE_INDIRECT_FIRE">
<Value>1</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="CITY_RANGED_ATTACK_STRENGTH_MULTIPLIER">
<Value>50</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="MIN_CITY_STRIKE_DAMAGE">
<Value>1</Value>
</Row>
<Row Name="CITY_CAPTURE_DAMAGE_PERCENT">
<Value>50</Value>
</Row>

 

[kaltorak]

I hope that diplomacy changes are bigger than they sound.

Still nothing to make land more appealing?

Still nothing to make good cities better than massing bad cities? ((

 

[bryanw1995]

well, the happiness penalty for lots of ANY kind of cities looks to be much more severe than before, so it's at least going to be more of a challenge to just throw out more and more ics-type cities. also, the improvement to city growth could help (depending upon how aggressive it is of course). I think I might play aztecs in my first post-patch game to see how large the secondary cities get.

 

[Buccaneer]

Speaking of Band-Aids, we still don't need them to put in research overflow if they are not going to significantly adjust the tech costs upward. I would rather have no overflow then to have techs be researched even more quickly then they are now (which is too fast without the overflow).

 

[civnoob13]

FANTASTIC!!

I would still like to see better diplomacy than available, but other than that it is great.


AI should colonize other continents regularly
AI will emphasize production of an Ocean going explorer unit when the time comes
Optimization when finding routes
AI will be more aggressive about pursuing Diplo victory if they are wealthy.
AI more effective with building, moving, and using aircraft and anti-aircraft more effectively.
AI more likely to effectively use siege units in a city attack.
Better nuke targeting by AI.
Tactical AI Tuning: Reduce chance of AI civs making "suicide" attacks
Cities heal more quickly.
Amount of damage caused during naval combat increased.
Lowered bonuses received from Maritime city-states.
Removed maintenance from defensive buildings
Multiple unit upgrade track adjustments
Open terrain penalty lowered.
Catapults and Trebuchets now weaker against units but stronger VS cities, and reduced effectiveness of Archers & Crossbowmen (and their UUs) VS cities.
Unhappiness beyond a certain point breeds rebels within your empire, based on the number of cities a player has.
Reduced amount of food needed for cities to grow at larger sizes.
Buildings can now no longer provide more Happiness than there is population in a city
Multiple Tech Tree tweaks to address &#8220;slingshot&#8221; tech exploits.
Killing a barb inside a city-state's territory now gives a 5-turn buffer where there is no Influence intrusion penalty.
Reduced and balanced combat bonuses.
Additional updates to the Global Politics screen
AI's attitude towards you is now visible in the diplo screen and diplo drop-down.
Added info tooltip for an AI leader's mood. Lists things that are making an AI player happy/upset
New diplo system: Declaration of Friendship
New diplo system: Denounce

All of the above are great!

 

[bryanw1995]

Speaking of Band-Aids, we still don't need them to put in research overflow if they are not going to significantly adjust the tech costs upward. I would rather have no overflow then to have techs be researched even more quickly then they are now (which is too fast without the overflow).

yeah, maybe we could get a couple more techs in each era without changing of the tech costs, or alternatively just increase tech costs significantly.

 

[nokmirt]

The patch looks good to me, any sort of idea when it will be out? For now I think I will go back and mod civ 4 for awhile. It's been too long.

 

[Yzman]

I don't find tech costs too cheap. They usually come around at the times I would expect them to. Are you all using an ICS strategy that complain of techs being too cheap?

 

[Bibor]

I like the chances.

I'd like even more to see Thalassicus getting paid at some point for giving 2k free tips.

 

[elthrasher]

I don't find tech costs too cheap. They usually come around at the times I would expect them to. Are you all using an ICS strategy that complain of techs being too cheap?

A lot of people are using ICS because it's so effective.

However the complaint is really about how quickly you can move through the tech tree, regardless of your play style. It's fairly easy to have longswords ~10-15 turns after you first are capable of producing swordsmen. Thus, there's not really much of a window where swordsmen are worth using. I've had games where it was kind of a stretch to hook up the iron and by then, might as well just wait for longswords. The classical era can be really freaking short.

Another way to look at it might be that you found a city in the ancient era and set it to build a monument...then don't complete it until medieval. The point being whatever level you're playing at, seems like teching goes way faster than production.

 

[elthrasher]

I'd like even more to see Thalassicus getting paid at some point for giving 2k free tips.

How can he get paid for free tips?

 

[Bibor]

How can he get paid for free tips?

Respect

 

[pete1061]

agreed about cust service at 2k.

did you try a huge map right after cIV came out? the athlon single core that I had at that time struggled on larger maps back then, and my current (very high end) rig struggles on larger maps now as well. I'll just upgrade when bulldozer/sandy bridge come out, get a faster gpu, and play the larger maps then. btw, the memory issues that are being addressed with the patch should help quite a bit.

I admit, I am kinda pushing the envelope with a huge map, I since have scaled back to standard size, which doesn't freeze on me. The major issue causing frustration for me was the major graphic glitches. Which I've found a work around, which is to play in windowed mode. (without the help of 2K)

I guess the bad guys here are 2K for pushing Firaxis too hard.
I would just like a little more acknowledgment from 2K that there are technical issues and that they are doing what they can to resolve them. But like I said, it's like talking to a brick wall.

I'm just tired of spending $50 on buggy games. I'll wait for them to hit the $20 bin before I get them from now on. Maybe it should be standard practice to have a heavily discounted open public beta phase with the agreement to provide bug reports.
So much stuff is riddled with bugs upon "final release", and it takes several patches to fix them. It's like buying a new car that is always in the shop. Obviously, software publishers are pushing unfinished software as finished software, that's just bad business.

BTW: I have a 'decent' computer, it's not the best, but enough to handle the game.

 

[Buccaneer]

A lot of people are using ICS because it's so effective.

However the complaint is really about how quickly you can move through the tech tree, regardless of your play style. It's fairly easy to have longswords ~10-15 turns after you first are capable of producing swordsmen. Thus, there's not really much of a window where swordsmen are worth using. I've had games where it was kind of a stretch to hook up the iron and by then, might as well just wait for longswords. The classical era can be really freaking short.

Another way to look at it might be that you found a city in the ancient era and set it to build a monument...then don't complete it until medieval. The point being whatever level you're playing at, seems like teching goes way faster than production.

elthrasher is correct. I do not, nor will I play ICS-style and even at that, techs come too quickly with slingshots and at a pace with small windows (standard speed), as well as beelines. Unfortunately, some like it that way (and wants to make it even faster) so they play through a game in one sitting.

Also, I believe there is no such thing as "come around at the times I would expect them to". What does that mean? Historical? The timelines of the game should have very little to do with historical timelines.

Civ4 suffered the same problem, but for a different reason. But they made Epic speed, well, epic to play at it while it's not that way yet in Civ5.

 

[GenericPlayer]

There are two changes I don't like
* Policies must be selected the turn they are earned. (Added 11/18)
* Have culture cost for policies never go down (trading away cities to reduce culture cost exploit).

Sometimes I will skip adapting a policy if the 'Christ the Redeemer' wonder is nearing completion. This was neat and allowed me to adapt the policy later at a lower cost.

Also, I do not know what trading away cities would be a culture exploit. Handing over a city to an AI is a pretty big deal, so there is a pretty big downside to it, too big for it to be called an exploit. I often sell cities I capture to the AI in the early game to raise money.

This also means that when a city is razed, the culture cost will not go down after the city is gone. I understood that the cost goes up while the city is still burning, but with this change
it will not go back down when the city is gone. Is 2k essentially saying here that you shouldn't go to war if you want your culture cost to stay in check?

 

[Buccaneer]

GenericPlayer, read the rest of the updates.

 

[Slowpoke]

I like the chances.

I'd like even more to see Thalassicus getting paid at some point for giving 2k free tips.

Hey I want me free internet cookie too!