Policies: The time has come!
- Thread starter Stalker0
- Start date
That is like saying tradition have a goldbonus which would allow you to buy walls and castles. I get your point, but walls and castles could be built by anyone anyways.
What I am suggesting is the particular benefit "Build Walls X% faster", is already done by liberty. Not in some other way, in a direct "I can build walls faster than any one else" kind of way.
Btw...at some point I was going to make the same argument against the X% faster to shrines and temples belief in piety
What I am suggesting is the particular benefit "Build Walls X% faster", is already done by liberty. Not in some other way, in a direct "I can build walls faster than any one else" kind of way.
Btw...at some point I was going to make the same argument against the X% faster to shrines and temples belief in piety
With the new happiness system you're going to want to build walls anyways, and they aren't really expensive. I just don't see that carrying a policy
Just as a note, I do agree with you, I was arguing against putting a defense building bonus in Tradition.
That said, I think even the people arguing for the idea thought it should be an augment to a policy, not really the "policy carrier"
Ok guess I missunderstood you in that case. We should really stop fighting eachother when we both want the same thing, it is weird.
Wodhann
South American Norse God
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2014
- Messages
- 1,507
I wonder if it's possible to have a function that hands out yields based on when a city was founded?
For example "6 food, distributed individually for each non-occupied city based on founding order", so if you have 4 cities, the first two would get 2 food and the others would get 1 food (it would hand out 1 for each of the first four cities, then it would loop again and hand out the remaining 2 among the first two ones).
I don't know how I would word it to be self-explanatory, but it would seem a pretty Tall themed function to have.
For example "6 food, distributed individually for each non-occupied city based on founding order", so if you have 4 cities, the first two would get 2 food and the others would get 1 food (it would hand out 1 for each of the first four cities, then it would loop again and hand out the remaining 2 among the first two ones).
I don't know how I would word it to be self-explanatory, but it would seem a pretty Tall themed function to have.
Cities are stored as integers when founded (each city has an ID #, starting with your capital). If you do a loopcity function, it'll loop through your cities, starting with the smallest number (the capital) and going from there. You could do a function for that which looks something like this (in layman's terms):
for every city in the empire, starting with the capital...
Take 6 food, and pass it out, one city at a time, looping around if there are less than six cities. If there are more than six cities, or you hit six at any point, break the loop.
So, yes.
G
Wodhann
South American Norse God
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2014
- Messages
- 1,507
Awesome. That's one way to tackle one or two policies, in a way that's declaredly Tall. Have it distribute city-specific yields among cities and the least of them you have, the more you will gain from it.
It's certainly giving me ideas.
It's certainly giving me ideas.
It's not a bad idea. (Almost) all game values are stored as integers in this way figuring out how to interact with them is the 'fun' part of dll work.
G
mitsho
Deity
So, thinking about the base changes needed for the mid-game trees, I see two or three ways forward:
1) We focus the trees on victory conditions with Commerce being the "good-for-all" or "time victory tree". These trees are "yield"-focused (tourism, CS influence, etc. ...).
2) We focus the trees on specific game systems. So Instead of Patronage helping you get city states and getting the most out of it, it helps you on the whole diplomatic stage: bonus to research agreements, open borders, trade routes, CS). Aesthetics doesn't only buff tourism, it also helps you with culture and gives you benefits from culturally influencing other civs/cs*. Chances are the player will cherry pick more often than finishing a tree.
3) Trees are related to gameplay styles. Every Tree has a little bit of everything. (CS bonuses spread over the trees).
*Can we assign City States random ideologies and make them behave differently? A policy bonus could then be to disregard the negatives for your longterm allies?
I like option #2 the most at the moment. It's the middle ground and it would mean ~4-5 specific effects (i.e. CS) and 2-3 general yields (i.e. Research Agreement). I can see spreading the science bonuses a bit around.
Patronage: City States / Diplomacy Benefits
Aesthetics: Tourism / Culture
Exploration: Sea / Conquest
Commerce: Making Gold useful / Making small/remote/new cities useful (synergy with gold)
Rationalism: Science / Specialists (?)
Now as the earlier trees are quite strong, the bonuses here would need to be even better but require some triggers (i.e. using them), right? Looking at that list above, it seems to me that game systems aren't that much different from victory trees after all. I guess it's in the details.
The unlocks are about right the way they are now. I'd push exploration a bit earlier (to offer the basic dichotomy between 'diplo' and 'war' and have the other tree follow suit at Renaissance - if we 'nerf' rationalism it doesn't have to be in competition with the ideologies, no?).
Shall we open specific threads for the trees? The Honor/Liberty/Tradition/Piety discussion can go on regardless. (and the buildings and espionage ones) Sorry to push but the forum is quite right now and could use some stirring up.
EDIT: Just found Gazebo's list from page #3 which is quite similar:
1) We focus the trees on victory conditions with Commerce being the "good-for-all" or "time victory tree". These trees are "yield"-focused (tourism, CS influence, etc. ...).
2) We focus the trees on specific game systems. So Instead of Patronage helping you get city states and getting the most out of it, it helps you on the whole diplomatic stage: bonus to research agreements, open borders, trade routes, CS). Aesthetics doesn't only buff tourism, it also helps you with culture and gives you benefits from culturally influencing other civs/cs*. Chances are the player will cherry pick more often than finishing a tree.
3) Trees are related to gameplay styles. Every Tree has a little bit of everything. (CS bonuses spread over the trees).
*Can we assign City States random ideologies and make them behave differently? A policy bonus could then be to disregard the negatives for your longterm allies?
I like option #2 the most at the moment. It's the middle ground and it would mean ~4-5 specific effects (i.e. CS) and 2-3 general yields (i.e. Research Agreement). I can see spreading the science bonuses a bit around.
Patronage: City States / Diplomacy Benefits
Aesthetics: Tourism / Culture
Exploration: Sea / Conquest
Commerce: Making Gold useful / Making small/remote/new cities useful (synergy with gold)
Rationalism: Science / Specialists (?)
Now as the earlier trees are quite strong, the bonuses here would need to be even better but require some triggers (i.e. using them), right? Looking at that list above, it seems to me that game systems aren't that much different from victory trees after all. I guess it's in the details.
The unlocks are about right the way they are now. I'd push exploration a bit earlier (to offer the basic dichotomy between 'diplo' and 'war' and have the other tree follow suit at Renaissance - if we 'nerf' rationalism it doesn't have to be in competition with the ideologies, no?).
Shall we open specific threads for the trees? The Honor/Liberty/Tradition/Piety discussion can go on regardless. (and the buildings and espionage ones
) Sorry to push but the forum is quite right now and could use some stirring up.EDIT: Just found Gazebo's list from page #3 which is quite similar:
Spoiler :
jma22tb
Prince
I really like Gazebo's idea. I was thinking about what to do with Exploration because it's really just a niche tree for Terra or heavy water maps atm.
I've always been more inclined for the later policies to be victory oriented rather than generalized, so that it feels like your government is making its shift toward the grand strategy.
I also agree with this lockout for Renaissance because that way, policies are being spent on a solid foundation in the ancient - renaissance period. Patronage, for example, is not something you want to invest in early, early on because the economy isn't there.
It's a middle stage between ancient fundamental policies and endgame Ideologies.
+1 Gazebo
I've always been more inclined for the later policies to be victory oriented rather than generalized, so that it feels like your government is making its shift toward the grand strategy.
I also agree with this lockout for Renaissance because that way, policies are being spent on a solid foundation in the ancient - renaissance period. Patronage, for example, is not something you want to invest in early, early on because the economy isn't there.
It's a middle stage between ancient fundamental policies and endgame Ideologies.
+1 Gazebo
mitsho
Deity
I fear that you'll get not enough choices for where to put in your policies depending on your playstyle. Piety would be the obvious tree #2 for any religious civ, while conquerors would probably chose Liberty as #2 and Builders would alternate between Tradition and Liberty as well.
It offers not much choice, so I would put at least 2 trees onto medieval, namely Commerce and Exploration (I'm neutral on the name changes). But that's gameplay testing related and I'm open to test the all-renaissance unlocks.
I do feel like a lot of the "reward on conquest"-effects would fit better with "Imperialism", aka the conquest tree while more general war bonuses would still feel at home in Honor. Because honestly, those -occupation unhappy % are mostly worth it when the conquest ball has begun rolling, so not the ancient or classical era when you'll conquer just one to three cities?
Basically make Honor the "exploration" tree that may get something out of conquering 1 or 2 cities, but then come medieval/renaissance times you'll decide to go for conquest victory or use your "expanded land base" for another victory (Tradition would then be the "safe" choice independent of terrain and context and Liberty the "headstart by infrastructure" tree, all allowing you to go for different victories later on as well).
It offers not much choice, so I would put at least 2 trees onto medieval, namely Commerce and Exploration (I'm neutral on the name changes). But that's gameplay testing related and I'm open to test the all-renaissance unlocks.
I do feel like a lot of the "reward on conquest"-effects would fit better with "Imperialism", aka the conquest tree while more general war bonuses would still feel at home in Honor. Because honestly, those -occupation unhappy % are mostly worth it when the conquest ball has begun rolling, so not the ancient or classical era when you'll conquer just one to three cities?
Basically make Honor the "exploration" tree that may get something out of conquering 1 or 2 cities, but then come medieval/renaissance times you'll decide to go for conquest victory or use your "expanded land base" for another victory (Tradition would then be the "safe" choice independent of terrain and context and Liberty the "headstart by infrastructure" tree, all allowing you to go for different victories later on as well).
killmeplease
Mk Z on Steam
i like the idea of making tradition a "safe" choice, while liberty, honor and piety would be "risky" ones. but in this case tradition should be the weaker.
tradition should be about a capital's growth (not first 4 cities), which is good for everyone, while other trees have their special purpose. trees also should help to overcome specific problems related to corresponding strategies.
e.g. liberty needs to combat maintenance costs, unhappiness and provide faster city development, i suggest these effects:
Opener: 2 culture per city
Militia - free garrisons (take it away from tradition), +2 gold from walls
Private Property: bonus resources are auto-improved (cow, wheat, fish etc), 33% discount on land purchasing
Home Rule: free settler, 50% discount on rushbuying settlers
Public Goods: +50% production towards granaries, lighthouses and workshops (basic buildings); +1 happiness from colosseum and circus
Representation: +1 happiness per connected city, number of cities policy cost discount
Finisher: new cities start with 2 citizens, or maybe +2 science per city to offset the number of cities penalty?
so new cities would faster become worthy, they'd have some bonus happiness and there would be more gold to buy new settlers or whatever
honor may be renamed to POWER and made more agressive
what we need early in the game - capture enemy capital or two asap and get profit of it. its pointless to build walls, holding units in garrisons for culture etc what original honor provides. so my view:
Opener: 15 xp from palace, culture from barbs
Aristocracy: 5 units are maintenance free; 2 free axemen near the capital - go hunt barbs right away
Despotism: garrisoned units +2 happiness in occupied cities, +1 in own
Raiding: all melee units get city raider promotion; get slaves on city capture and raze: slaves build improvements like workers and can hurry production in cities for ~100 hammers. so the player would make use of crappy enemy sities getting slaves from their destruction.
Leadership: free GG, barracks +2 culture
Vassalage: chanse to capture enemy units - especially good if you're backwards
Finisher: gold from kills
PIETY has to have something to get pantheon, +2 faith from palace?
free monuments can be its effect also, taken away from tradition.. and maybe a bonus to wonder production too? i think piety should be pretty self-sufficient, not necessarily a #2 tree.
there can be some pagan buildings/units purchased with faith
soothsayers - conducting missions to city-states like great merchants
ziggurats - providing more faith and GE/GS points
Imperialism ideas:
Expeditionary Corps: faster healing promotion for land units - would speed up conquest greatly
Hegemony: +2 gold and culture in the capital per puppeted city
Realpolitik: +5 happiness per destroyed civ; +15% towards military units production
tradition should be about a capital's growth (not first 4 cities), which is good for everyone, while other trees have their special purpose. trees also should help to overcome specific problems related to corresponding strategies.
e.g. liberty needs to combat maintenance costs, unhappiness and provide faster city development, i suggest these effects:
Opener: 2 culture per city
Militia - free garrisons (take it away from tradition), +2 gold from walls
Private Property: bonus resources are auto-improved (cow, wheat, fish etc), 33% discount on land purchasing
Home Rule: free settler, 50% discount on rushbuying settlers
Public Goods: +50% production towards granaries, lighthouses and workshops (basic buildings); +1 happiness from colosseum and circus
Representation: +1 happiness per connected city, number of cities policy cost discount
Finisher: new cities start with 2 citizens, or maybe +2 science per city to offset the number of cities penalty?
so new cities would faster become worthy, they'd have some bonus happiness and there would be more gold to buy new settlers or whatever
honor may be renamed to POWER and made more agressive
what we need early in the game - capture enemy capital or two asap and get profit of it. its pointless to build walls, holding units in garrisons for culture etc what original honor provides. so my view:
Opener: 15 xp from palace, culture from barbs
Aristocracy: 5 units are maintenance free; 2 free axemen near the capital - go hunt barbs right away
Despotism: garrisoned units +2 happiness in occupied cities, +1 in own
Raiding: all melee units get city raider promotion; get slaves on city capture and raze: slaves build improvements like workers and can hurry production in cities for ~100 hammers. so the player would make use of crappy enemy sities getting slaves from their destruction.
Leadership: free GG, barracks +2 culture
Vassalage: chanse to capture enemy units - especially good if you're backwards
Finisher: gold from kills
PIETY has to have something to get pantheon, +2 faith from palace?
free monuments can be its effect also, taken away from tradition.. and maybe a bonus to wonder production too? i think piety should be pretty self-sufficient, not necessarily a #2 tree.
there can be some pagan buildings/units purchased with faith
soothsayers - conducting missions to city-states like great merchants
ziggurats - providing more faith and GE/GS points
Imperialism ideas:
Expeditionary Corps: faster healing promotion for land units - would speed up conquest greatly
Hegemony: +2 gold and culture in the capital per puppeted city
Realpolitik: +5 happiness per destroyed civ; +15% towards military units production
jma22tb
Prince
Over time, having played a lot of games with different approaches to customization vs linear, I have pretty much given up on the idea of having different options just to have them.
This policy idea G has is a compromise between open-ended, which Civ has to be early on, and linear, where building a civ a certain way over time is more advantageous.
I disagree about Conquest not having those advantages because a) without yield bonuses it's just bad and b) once you have catapults it's on. There's plenty of production bonuses and I found that Conquest and Tradition with the Engineer slot in the capital makes it really efficient to crank out a 2x Swords, 3x Catapult invasion force that can crush even a larger force with proper tactics.
TBH I think there's more synergy between Tradition and Conquest because of the expanded borders synergy. Liberty is an excellent #2 if you're going for a more peaceful victory but Conquerors are better off having that Engineer, faster borders, and faster Great People for later on once you have Workshops, Universities, the Guilds, etc.
As far as medieval unlocks, that might be more reasonable, but the extended wait makes the victory policies a more significant decision once it arrives. Also, nobody could go wrong with 2 maxed Ancient and cherry picking in the others as a foundation before the Renaissance, player or AI. Once the Renaissance arrives with that setup, *it's on.* Tension and release kinda thing.
mitsho
Deity
jma22tb, you got me convinced. Let's try it one way first
(I do agree that the border expansion would fit better with liberty as well btw., but I am not sure on your reservations on my honor thoughts. If you compare killmeplease's proposals above, it's far less centered on rewarding conquest of cities than on making killing "fun". Killing is a thing you'll do from the start, while really conquering many cities take some time. Renaissance would be too late, but medieval seems right for that. After all, that would only concern one policy I'll have to take a look at the gameplay there anew
As for your proposals, killmeplease, I like the fresh ideas overall with the exception of the slavers idea, seems like a hassle. It's unlikely though that we'll remodel the trees again completely, the discussion on these specific trees is best brought to the specific threads after all.
(I do agree that the border expansion would fit better with liberty as well btw., but I am not sure on your reservations on my honor thoughts. If you compare killmeplease's proposals above, it's far less centered on rewarding conquest of cities than on making killing "fun". Killing is a thing you'll do from the start, while really conquering many cities take some time. Renaissance would be too late, but medieval seems right for that. After all, that would only concern one policy
I'll have to take a look at the gameplay there anew As for your proposals, killmeplease, I like the fresh ideas overall with the exception of the slavers idea, seems like a hassle. It's unlikely though that we'll remodel the trees again completely, the discussion on these specific trees is best brought to the specific threads after all.
killmeplease
Mk Z on Steam
yeah the player wont have many cities conquered in early game so giving the Honor bonuses towards this means it wont be picked. players'd pick it if it had something to solve the early warmongering problems - army maintenance, army production and capital development, as while you build an army and campaigning you fall behind in infrastructure. this is what slaves are needed for - they can build improvements as well as helping the capital by hurrying construction of buildings/wonders. so you get your production and expansion and culture but in your way, which allows you to train your army for the later large-scale conquest.
technically slaves can be replaced with plain hammers/food given to the capital on capturing/razing/pillaging - e.g. receive food in the capital for pillaged pastures (cattle raiding)
jma22tb
Prince
Maybe army maintenance is better for Conquest than city-management. That replacement idea for Exploration that builds international military expansion could do that since by then you've got the tech to keep cities more efficiently than early on.
That doesn't stop me from capturing their Capital, razing their other cities, and building my own cities where theirs used to be in the Classical Era, but I didn't consider how people are viewing this as Policy v. Policy instead of making it work as is.
Idk if they'd be able to do slave units as you suggest with that production boost active use, but getting a free worker on conquest would be easier. Maybe Conquest could eliminate maintenance costs from workers as a policy as a more subtle way to reduce army maintenance. As distasteful as it is, slavery did exist for a very, very long time and Conquest seems like the policy line that would make the most sense for it.
Yeah Mitsho I'm more inclined to try something appealing out ASAP, see if it works, and then make changes as appropriate. Debating takes time (too much IMO) and the suggestion G has is simple. Ockham's Razor ftw.
Edit: Wanted to add that I tweaked CEP to have the Renaissance unlock for the Patronage thru Ideology policies and was surprised at how much better the AI was due to spending more policies in the ancient era policies. Nearly everybody had 5 honor and were not pushovers in war time, as well as 5 liberty/tradition/piety. Their yields were better, they expanded into the New World quickly (I play Terra maps exclusively), and nobody was so weak that they were pushovers.
That doesn't stop me from capturing their Capital, razing their other cities, and building my own cities where theirs used to be in the Classical Era, but I didn't consider how people are viewing this as Policy v. Policy instead of making it work as is.
Idk if they'd be able to do slave units as you suggest with that production boost active use, but getting a free worker on conquest would be easier. Maybe Conquest could eliminate maintenance costs from workers as a policy as a more subtle way to reduce army maintenance. As distasteful as it is, slavery did exist for a very, very long time and Conquest seems like the policy line that would make the most sense for it.
Yeah Mitsho I'm more inclined to try something appealing out ASAP, see if it works, and then make changes as appropriate. Debating takes time (too much IMO) and the suggestion G has is simple. Ockham's Razor ftw.
Edit: Wanted to add that I tweaked CEP to have the Renaissance unlock for the Patronage thru Ideology policies and was surprised at how much better the AI was due to spending more policies in the ancient era policies. Nearly everybody had 5 honor and were not pushovers in war time, as well as 5 liberty/tradition/piety. Their yields were better, they expanded into the New World quickly (I play Terra maps exclusively), and nobody was so weak that they were pushovers.
