Policies

[Ahriman]

If all policies increased it by a little bit

There is basically no difference between having each policy give you some culture and just decreasing the cost of social policies. I don't think it is too hard to get social policies at the moment, so I don't really see a need for this.

or there was a policy near the end of piety that gave culture relative to the # of policies you have, would that be so bad?

This would encourage you to just delay finishing Piety until the late-game, which I think would be unfortunate.

I don't think it is too hard to get a culture victory, if anything I think it is too easy.

 

[Atlas627]

There is basically no difference between having each policy give you some culture and just decreasing the cost of social policies. I don't think it is too hard to get social policies at the moment, so I don't really see a need for this.


This would encourage you to just delay finishing Piety until the late-game, which I think would be unfortunate.

I don't think it is too hard to get a culture victory, if anything I think it is too easy.

I agree with the first part, that is very true. But you could have each policy give a different amount of culture, I'm not saying they should all give the same exact amount. Also I'm not sure if it would come out the same, because the difference is flat vs. percentage. Wouldnt tall empires get a greater benefit from the flat bonuses?

The policy would give you more culture as you obtained more policies, it doesn't need to be set in stone when you take it right?

EDIT: I am not talking about it being easy or not, though I still think we disagree. It just happens that you are pigeonholded into the same policies every game you go culturally. Making the tech requirement more lax for culture empires may be the way to fix that, I was just offering ideas.

 

[Ahriman]

But you could have each policy give a different amount of culture, I'm not saying they should all give the same exact amount.

That sounds like it would be pretty confusing.

Wouldnt tall empires get a greater benefit from the flat bonuses?

Tall empires have an advantage because they have fewer cities, and policy cost increases 15% per city. If you want to favor tall empires, then adjust that percentage. Adding culture from policies feels like a weird way to go about balancing that.

It just happens that you are pigeonholded into the same policies every game you go culturally

No more than you're pigeonholed into Patronage if you want a city state strategy, or to Honor if you want a Conquest strategy, at least in my opinion.

Making the tech requirement more lax for culture empires may be the way to fix that

I really like that there are technological barriers to later, more powerful culture trees. If you want to save your culture for that, then you can turn on the game option that allows policy saving, and just save your policy picks until you meet the policy requirement. Being able to access late-game trees early on could be pretty unbalancing.

 

[Atlas627]

No more than you're pigeonholed into Patronage if you want a city state strategy, or to Honor if you want a Conquest strategy, at least in my opinion.

So is this saying that you are pigeonholed in all cases, or that you aren't in any cases?

There are 10 policy branches. Tradition, Liberty, Honor, Piety, Patronage, Commerce, Rationalism, Freedom, Autocracy, Order. Piety and Rationalism don't work together, and Freedom/Autocracy/Order don't work together. So you have available Tradition, Liberty, Honor, Piety/Rationalism, Patronage, Commerce, Freedom/Autocracy/Order. That's 7 non-conflicting branches, of which you must pick 6. EDIT: Piety/Rationalism seems a no-brainer, and Freedom/Autocracy/Order does too. And who grabs Honor for a cultural victory? I find conquerers just want to go all the way. So really, you are probably choosing 6 out of Tradition, Liberty, Piety, Patronage, Commerce, Freedom. Thats 6 of 6. I can see somebody choosing Order over Freedom, but that's 1 decision you get to make. Lame.

If you are going for a culture victory, you are either grabbing tech early and culture later, or grabbing culture early and ignoring tech. If you do the latter, you may be forced into a policy branch you don't want because you can't take a later branch yet. And you certainly can't afford to start a branch without finishing it as a cultural player.

So going cultural early actually harms a cultural player? Why is that? Shouldn't a culturally superior nation be allowed to advance its society faster than other nations? Tech doesn't require gold to win or culture, and conquest requires nothing. The diplomatic and cultural victories both require tech (the diplo less so, as you could hope somebody else builds the UN for you and THEN snatch up all the CS).

As somebody said earlier, I think allowing policy branches to be unlocked if you have completed 2,3, or 4 earlier branches would be helpful for a cultural victory so that it does not require tech. Tech still helps (as it does with everything) and empires not going for culture still get a fair use out of culture, but it removes some restrictions on the cultural player while still encouraging the type of play we want from them.

 

[Atlas627]

I really like that there are technological barriers to later, more powerful culture trees. If you want to save your culture for that, then you can turn on the game option that allows policy saving, and just save your policy picks until you meet the policy requirement. Being able to access late-game trees early on could be pretty unbalancing.

I forgot to respond to this. I like the idea of unlocking better trees, but I really just don't think they are that much better. Does anybody take Autocracy? Its good, the problem is if you actually want the tree you probably don't have the culture for it, and if you do have the culture, you probably don't want the tree.

Unlocking trees is nice, but does it have to be by tech? There should be an alternative, such as completing policy branches. Perhaps a GA could be sacrificed to unlock the tech requirement for any tree? Or could there be capitol buildings that could unlock associated trees? Kind of like National Wonders but you only need one in the capitol?

 

[Zaldron]

...And who grabs Honor for a cultural victory? ...

In fact I typically take honor over liberty for cultural games. The cheaper upgrades, tons of happiness on defense buildings, faster GGs are all great traits for a tall culture win. And if an AI declares on me I get tons of money from killing units.

 

[bwoww78]

In fact I typically take honor over liberty for cultural games. The cheaper upgrades, tons of happiness on defense buildings, faster GGs are all great traits for a tall culture win. And if an AI declares on me I get tons of money from killing units.

not to mention peacetime barbarian culture farming with the opener...

 

[tlaurila]

Is it just me playing in a skewed way, or is Tradition really overpowered, and Liberty a complete loser?

Tradition opener, with more than doubling of initial culture, just seems like the only way there is to open up policies. Else it'll take forever for the second policy. And then Tradition has something for everyone: Those growth bonuses are a must for tall civs, and the happiness from wonders is always a big bonus for me. I always manage to grab a couple of the Wonders+National wonders.

In contrast, Liberty's great side should be happiness for cities and growth, but I find the wonder happiness bonus from Monarchy making it pointless. And those early bonuses on settlers + workers might be nice, especially on higher difficulties when you really need to rush, but liberty opener stops your cultural tracks compared to Tradition opener.

Maybe it's my playstyle, I always end up feeling like I'm playing a tall, militaristic civ, since on Immortal the AI (even when I reduced their start units) ends up grabbing the land so fast I'm lucky to get 2 cities up. And then you have to fight to get the lebensraum to stay in the race. Maybe Liberty is better balanced with more room to expand, like on huge maps, and/or more lenient AI?

Dunno, how do others play their Policies? Do you always go for Tradition?

Finally, the gold looted per killed unit by Professional Army in Honor is stupendously much. Especially at harder difficulties where AIs throws in masses of units (often to wanton tactical slaughter). I very much like the idea of the loot, gives some morbid gaming pleasure, but as it stands I find the loot becoming most of my income, and actually worth farming for.

Anyways, based on above experiences, I might suggest:

1) Reducing the happiness/wonder bonus, perhaps even change it to culture/wonder.
2) Make Tradition starter less powerful in initial culture compared to Liberty. For example, increase initial culture (from palace) by 1, and decrease what Tradition gives in Capital by 1.
3) Keep loot, but reduce amounts and how much Honor matters: Everyone gets loot at 20% of what Professional Army now gets, the Policy increases that number to 50%. (Or something along those lines)

sidenote:
4) Sharply increase encampment destruction gold reward, to give disincentive to farming them.

 

[Ahriman]

Woah, lots of multiquotes.

Spoiler :

That's 7 non-conflicting branches, of which you must pick 6.

FWIW, I personally preferred the old design where cultural victory required only 5 trees, but where policies got much more expensive (so the overall cost was similar), but Thal decided against this.

I would much prefer to revert to a system like this, than to remove the tech requirements.

And who grabs Honor for a cultural victory?

Its still useful; extra culture from garrisons, extra happiness gets converted to culture by mandate of heaven, and more gold/lower upgrade costs.

So going cultural early actually harms a cultural player?

It doesn't. If you want the later trees, then turn on the game option that allows policy saving. With policy saving on, you can never be worse off, because you can preserve your picks until you meet the tech requirements.

Shouldn't a culturally superior nation be allowed to advance its society faster than other nations?

It can; it can pick more policies. I don't see why it should be able to get around tech requirements though, if it lags in tech.

but I really just don't think they are that much better. Does anybody take Autocracy?

I wouldn't take autocracy in a culture game, but certainly it can be powerful for a conquest strategy, especially reduced maintenance and purchase costs. You can have a very large army with Autocracy. I do think the late-game trees could use a bit of tweaking though, I want to get a bit more experience with them before I make recommendations.

Is it just me playing in a skewed way, or is Tradition really overpowered, and Liberty a complete loser?

I am finding Liberty a bit weak these days, it provides the productive ability to expand rapidly but not enough happiness to actually do so.

I think the Openers for Liberty and Tradition are pretty balanced, the problem is that rapid expansion isn't that advantageous (especially with luxuries from 5 happy -> 4 and 3 unhappy per city) and many Liberty policies have poor staying power after the early game.

Finally, the gold looted per killed unit by Professional Army in Honor is stupendously much.

Agreed. It is insane how much gold I can farm from wars without ever taking any damage, using camel archers or keshiks. I would halve this gold, at least.

Reducing the happiness/wonder bonus, perhaps even change it to culture/wonder.

I'm not sure about this, but 1 happy 1 culture per wonder might be fair.

Make Tradition starter less powerful in initial culture compared to Liberty. For example, increase initial culture (from palace) by 1, and decrease what Tradition gives in Capital by 1.

I disagree with this. If Liberty gives +1 culture per city and Tradition gives +2 culture only in the capital (and the small bonus to tile-grabbing) then Tradition would be too weak.

Everyone gets loot at 20% of what Professional Army now gets

I don't like this. I'd prefer gold from unit death to be something unique to honor, it cheapens it if everyone gets something.

Sharply increase encampment destruction gold reward, to give disincentive to farming them.

Maybe, but I don't find farming that much of an exploit, as usually if you kill the unit then the Ai will come along and take the camp out.

 

[Sneaks]

To address some policy concerns:

Yes, Tradition feels brutally strong in VEM. I think Liberty might need a nudge up to enter the same realm, especially in regards to its lackluster finisher. That being said, Liberty provides a ton of RIGHT THIS INSTANT benefits with the worker and settler.

I agree that the tree feels a bit too entangled at the end. I would consider altering the mutual ban of Freedom and Order. As it stands, Freedom is leagues better than Order for most victory conditions, save conquest, where Autocracy would be the choice.

 

[bwoww78]

To address some policy concerns:

Yes, Tradition feels brutally strong in VEM. I think Liberty might need a nudge up to enter the same realm, especially in regards to its lackluster finisher. That being said, Liberty provides a ton of RIGHT THIS INSTANT benefits with the worker and settler.

I agree that the tree feels a bit too entangled at the end. I would consider altering the mutual ban of Freedom and Order. As it stands, Freedom is leagues better than Order for most victory conditions, save conquest, where Autocracy would be the choice.

While one can argue that the free settler (it is a free city, after all, and saves opportunity cost when pursuing early wonders) and the free worker + 25% boost are long lasting, I definitely would agree with Sneaks and add that the Liberty finisher is hardly enticing unless you have huge happiness problems.

When i go for liberty at all, i rarely find myself doing more than the the two 1st tier and representation. And maybe i'm not optimizing in my strategy, but i almost inevitably get the tradition opener at some point early on (who doesn't want a quick culture boost + expansion/more capital tiles early on when you're inevitably expanding, even if only to 3 or 4 cities?).

my two cents is also to remove the freedom/order restriction and buff liberty vs. nerfing tradition. as Thal says, everything should feel overpowered!

 

[Zaldron]

Is it just me playing in a skewed way, or is Tradition really overpowered, and Liberty a complete loser?

Tradition opener, with more than doubling of initial culture, just seems like the only way there is to open up policies. Else it'll take forever for the second policy. And then Tradition has something for everyone: Those growth bonuses are a must for tall civs, and the happiness from wonders is always a big bonus for me. I always manage to grab a couple of the Wonders+National wonders.

In contrast, Liberty's great side should be happiness for cities and growth, but I find the wonder happiness bonus from Monarchy making it pointless. And those early bonuses on settlers + workers might be nice, especially on higher difficulties when you really need to rush, but liberty opener stops your cultural tracks compared to Tradition opener.

Maybe it's my playstyle, I always end up feeling like I'm playing a tall, militaristic civ, since on Immortal the AI (even when I reduced their start units) ends up grabbing the land so fast I'm lucky to get 2 cities up. And then you have to fight to get the lebensraum to stay in the race. Maybe Liberty is better balanced with more room to expand, like on huge maps, and/or more lenient AI?

Dunno, how do others play their Policies? Do you always go for Tradition?

Finally, the gold looted per killed unit by Professional Army in Honor is stupendously much. Especially at harder difficulties where AIs throws in masses of units (often to wanton tactical slaughter). I very much like the idea of the loot, gives some morbid gaming pleasure, but as it stands I find the loot becoming most of my income, and actually worth farming for.

Anyways, based on above experiences, I might suggest:

1) Reducing the happiness/wonder bonus, perhaps even change it to culture/wonder.
2) Make Tradition starter less powerful in initial culture compared to Liberty. For example, increase initial culture (from palace) by 1, and decrease what Tradition gives in Capital by 1.
3) Keep loot, but reduce amounts and how much Honor matters: Everyone gets loot at 20% of what Professional Army now gets, the Policy increases that number to 50%. (Or something along those lines)

sidenote:
4) Sharply increase encampment destruction gold reward, to give disincentive to farming them.

Tradition is no doubt powerful but liberty is definitely not a loser. I've actually started building monuments early, it's only ten turns and provides a solid culture boost. Wide peaceful empires aren't going to be building a lot of wonders of either sort so that policy is much weaker for them. Ditto for happiness in capital.

Liberty's free settler, worker, and bonus production are absolutely fantastic with larger peaceful empires of 6-10 cities. A free settler means you can be cranking out just about anything else in your capital and STILL get an early second city on that perfect location.

I almost always go liberty in vanilla (2 really bad policies in tradition) and almost always go tradition in VEM (I prefer tall empires).

I do agree that professional army is "possibly" too high, but as an example in my last game (tall empire) I had net profits of 300-450/turn just from my 5 cities. If you crank down professional army too much it's not actually really useful.

In response to your thoughts:
1) I find that the happy/wonder bonus is perfect for growing a tall empire early and provides just enough to balance things out. I don't find it OP at 2 at all.

2) That seems like it would make the tradition started incredibly weak. It's already been indirectly nerfed about 50% by the increase of the initial policy cost from 25 to 50. The liberty opener scales as you build more cities.

3) I don't see a reason why non-honor players should get the gold loot from combat: Their trees already provide opportunities for income. Probably somewhere around 80% of current values would be the most I would suggest adjusting it.

4) I'm not sure about this. It would be nice if it could scale by turn or something. Otherwise an early encampment could be half a library or something.

 

[Thalassicus]

I kept track for one full conquest-victory game, and Honor's gold loot provides less income than the Commerce opener. It just seems like more because it's "spiky" (lots in short periods of time) and displays onscreen, instead of a passive background effect. Professional Army makes up for this weakness with the upgrade cost reduction.

If you are going for a culture victory, you are either grabbing tech early and culture later, or grabbing culture early and ignoring tech. If you do the latter, you may be forced into a policy branch you don't want because you can't take a later branch yet. And you certainly can't afford to start a branch without finishing it as a cultural player.

I think the simplest solution is to disable the policy-saving ban in game setup options. The ban was a band-aid for two underlying problems when Civ was released. Those problems have since been fixed, so there's no reason to have the ban in the game anymore.

I agree that the tree feels a bit too entangled at the end. I would consider altering the mutual ban of Freedom and Order. As it stands, Freedom is leagues better than Order for most victory conditions, save conquest, where Autocracy would be the choice.

Freedom and Order have never been mutually exclusive in this mod.

 

[Ahriman]

I kept track for one full conquest-victory game, and Honor's gold loot provides less income than the Commerce opener

I do not observe this. I have made thousands of gold from professional army in my current game. It is probably providing on average 40 gold per turn, ignoring the reduced upkeep costs.

 

[Thalassicus]

My current game in the Medieval era is 460 gross income * 10% (commerce) = 46/turn, more than the 40/turn estimate of Professional Army's income. I feel that's appropriate even if professional army is slightly stronger than Commerce in a few games. Professional Army is 4th tier while Commerce is an opener, and they unlock at approximately the same time - I usually reach the Medieval era before filling out the Honor tree completely.

The loot's power is an illusion intentionally created by a combination of 1) spiky reward 2) onscreen display. One of my general principles in game design is to make everything feel overpowered but actually be balanced.

 

[Txurce]

I realize that Rationalism comes a little after Commerce, and that a single GM is probably more powerful than a single GS at certain stages of the game, but... isn't a free GS on the Rationalism opener a no-brainer in almost any sort of game?

 

[Thalassicus]

It's mutually exclusive with Piety, so culture games are one exception. Conquest games are probably more likely to spend policies filling out Commerce, then later Autocracy and/or Order.

 

[Ahriman]

My current game in the Medieval era is 460 gross income * 10% (commerce) = 46/turn, more than the 40/turn estimate of Professional Army's income.

I don't think this is right. My understanding of the Commerce opener bonus is that it is just like any other modifier; it increases *base* gold income, before modifiers like markets and banks are taken into account, and it does not affect trade income or income from other sources (diplomatic trade, etc.).

So the modifier from the Commerce opener will be much less than you say. Also, the Professional Army bonus will scale faster into the later eras, and thousands of gold can be saved from the upgrade cost reductions.

 

[Ahriman]

Also on policies:
Communism is far too weak. It is arguably weaker than Meritocracy, and it is the hardest to reach policy in the game. It should be much stronger. Get rid of production bonus to buildings; by the very late game that is not very valuable.
I would consider something like: +1 hammer to trading posts.
I don't like having United Front tie into city states, Order should be about big sprawling empires, not about city state alliances. That is for patronage.
The trade bonus on Nationalism still makes no logical/realism sense, as discussed before.
Fascism feels weak now. I thought the old balance was better (+100%, and without the +50% available to everyone); if you wanted more oil/aluminium it would be better to increase the number of these resources per tile.
The Freedom tree feels much more powerful than Order or Autocracy.
Theocracy feels boring and unflavorful (why would Theocracy give *gold*?).
Free religion feels very strong; +3 happy per city *and* a free policy?
I would move the happiness effect to Theocracy, and have Free Religion give a free policy and a minor gold bonus (eg: +5% gold from monument, temple, monastery).
Liberty needs a bit more staying power, probably the best fix is to return Meritocracy to +1 happy per connected city. Most other trees give at least +1 happy per city, often +2 or even +3.

 

[gunnergoz]

It must be how I play, but I almost feel compelled to take policies in the same order in every game because of how logical it seems. I start with Tradition for the +3 culture, Liberty for the +1 culture (and proximity to free worker and settler) and Honor for the anti-barbarian effect. If I happen to play a map with no barbs, I often skip Honor until someone DW's me, then I have to rush it to get Discipline for the combat boost. I'm a pacific empire builder focusing on culture and wonders, obviously, and seldom DW anyone unless they are interfering with my own expansion. Of late I've been building extra scouts and when they see an enemy settler, I use them to corral him in for many turns, keeping him away from where I want to settle myself. The AI hates it but seldom DW's over it.

I pretty much enjoy the policy tree as it is now because there are ways to lean depending upon inclination of the player and also how the game is trending. I'm more of a generalist and can push for science as well as culture or wonders, not to mention policies. What I seldom go for (hardly ever) is conquest. But I find that the more and quicker I expand to new cities, the more I have to deal with AI's DW'ing me, sometimes 2-3 at a time.