Policies

[Thalassicus]

The inability to purchase diplomacy units is a bug I've been trying to solve. Other than that though, I don't feel production will always trump gold. They're the same thing (ways to get something) so it's a matter of balancing build-over-time vs build-instantly. Gold also has the advantage of being global, while production is local, and that means one city can help produce things in another city with gold. This is particularly useful for expansive empires.

I wonder... could one problem be the high purchase cost modifiers of tier-1 buildings like the Monument and Library? It's inherently less-efficient to buy things in a brand new city, and that's exactly where I typically spent gold in Civ IV with Universal Suffrage.

There's also the fact that when Civ V came out, trading post spam was king. It's just gone too far the other way now.

 

[Stalker0]

I wonder... could one problem be the high purchase cost modifiers of tier-1 buildings like the Monument and Library? It's inherently less-efficient to buy things in a brand new city, and that's exactly where I typically spent gold in Civ IV with Universal Suffrage.

I think that's a decent place to start, rush buy is very expensive even with cost reducers.

Other than maintenance, most things seem to cost a lot of gold. I find I tend to build up a huge stack of gold, but with a few buys I can annihilate my surplus.

Just a quick thought, would it be possible to grant units xps with gold?

 

[Thalassicus]

Purchasing training would be easy to do for the human player but without access to the core game code, we couldn't do it for the AI.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Hey there. I've been playing the game again recently with your Combined Balance mod-& I've just run into a problem with the Meritocracy Social Policy. I get the option to select a Great Person, but when I click on the button nothing happens. Is this a bug &-if so-what can be done to fix it?

If it helps, I'm also using the Active City Defense Mod, the City State Diplomacy Mod, the City State Unique Units Mod & the Extra City States mod. Is there any of these that is none to cause a conflict with your Balance Mods Thal? Thanks in advance for your assistance .

Aussie.

 

[Babri]

Hey there. I've been playing the game again recently with your Combined Balance mod-& I've just run into a problem with the Meritocracy Social Policy. I get the option to select a Great Person, but when I click on the button nothing happens. Is this a bug &-if so-what can be done to fix it?

If it helps, I'm also using the Active City Defense Mod, the City State Diplomacy Mod, the City State Unique Units Mod & the Extra City States mod. Is there any of these that is none to cause a conflict with your Balance Mods Thal? Thanks in advance for your assistance .

Aussie.

This is a vanilla bug.

 

[Thalassicus]

Active City Defense is obsolete, it's likely the source of the problem. Try it without that one.

I know for sure CSD works with this mod, though I'm not sure about the last two.

 

[Stalker0]

I like how the commerce and honor policies are evolving.

The commerce tree is looking much more interesting, we will see if it holds up to patronage and freedom (which are both very good trees)

 

[Thalassicus]

Here's the next iteration of the Commerce tree I'm going to try. It's very similar to Seek's most recent suggestion.

Commerce
+10% Gold in all cities, and starts a Golden Age.

Guilds
+1 Movement for non-combat units (settlers, workers, great people, embarked units, diplomacy units, etc).
-50% Maintenance for Roads and Railroads.

Mercantilism
-25% Purchase cost for units and buildings.

Merchant Navy
+1 Movement and +1 Sight for naval units.
+2 Production in coastal cities (was 3).

Patent Law
+1 on Villages.
+2 Fishing Boats and Customs Houses.

Monopolization
+1 Happiness per luxury, including surplus copies.

⇒⇘Commerce ⇗ Guilds _____ ⇘
⇗⇘Commerce ⇒ Mercantilism_⇒ Patent Law___⇒ Monopolization
⇗⇘Commerce ⇒ Mercantilism_⇘ Merchant Navy

I'll also change the Rationalism opener to give a great scientist instead of a golden age. Golden ages boost gold and production so it makes more sense to be in a tree focused on gold.

Since this means Arabia's trait will now be a policy instead, I'll discuss alternatives for that civ on the Leaders thread.

 

[QDI]

I would prefer merchant navy a bit more accessible since it is kinda different from the rest and people might be interested by taking just Commerce for it but probably not Commerce + Mercantilism...

QDI

 

[iWant921nooow]

I would prefer merchant navy a bit more accessible since it is kinda different from the rest and people might be interested by taking just Commerce for it but probably not Commerce + Mercantilism...

QDI

I agree.
I really like the change to commerce opener. I didnt really like the bonus to only the capital because sometimes you have other cities with more gold income. And the golden age is

 

[Stalker0]

I like giving "protectionism....aka monopolization" a bit more incentive, however, I think the benefit you gave it runs against the whole point of commerce.

The commerce tree is about money and trade for the most part. Normally a great way to gain money is to trade all of your surplus luxuries. Monopolization now encourages you to stop doing that.

Now what if it did the opposite, you got +1 happy for every luxury you traded or something of that note. Or...just drop the happiness thing entirely (which is more for the piety tree anyway).


I also think patent law is too far down the tree. Rationalism gives +1 sci/village with 2 policies, and I think the +1 gold/village is weaker (though still useful). 2 policies deep is all you need imo.

 

[Babri]

I like giving "protectionism....aka monopolization" a bit more incentive, however, I think the benefit you gave it runs against the whole point of commerce.

The commerce tree is about money and trade for the most part. Normally a great way to gain money is to trade all of your surplus luxuries. Monopolization now encourages you to stop doing that.

Now what if it did the opposite, you got +1 happy for every luxury you traded or something of that note. Or...just drop the happiness thing entirely (which is more for the piety tree anyway).


I also think patent law is too far down the tree. Rationalism gives +1 sci/village with 2 policies, and I think the +1 gold/village is weaker (though still useful). 2 policies deep is all you need imo.

I don't think so. You get about 360 on epic from selling a luxury resource. Many times you can't sell your luxuries so monopoly can be very useful. Also it makes perfect sense as monopolies would mean that you would try to grab more luxuries just like a trading nation in real world.

 

[Thalassicus]

Monopolize has a huge effect on founding cities. Creating cities near luxuries we already have is normally mediocre at best. With Monopolize, that previously-useless cluster of three surplus spice resources has just become a free Colosseum! Since we're getting those resources it also blocks other players from acquiring them. It rewards us for grabbing all the resources on the planet, even if we already have them, which is the spirit of monopolization.

Trading resources gives 8 per turn, which I'd say is more valuable than 1. It's rare when an extra citizen can earn that much gold.

Merchant Navy does combine two vanilla policies into one, and the original was already useful. Some people have said it's too powerful to be a first-tier policy, others say it's not... for now I'm going to leave it on the same tier as vanilla. The prerequisite and other policies in the tree are very useful anyway for coastal empires, since coastlines give tons of gold.

Patent Law is tier 2 in this latest round, same as Free Thought.

 

[Txurce]

Monopolize has a huge effect on founding cities. Creating cities near luxuries we already have is normally mediocre at best. With Monopolize, that previously-useless cluster of three surplus spice resources has just become a free Colosseum! Since we're getting those resources it also blocks other players from acquiring them. It rewards us for grabbing all the resources on the planet, even if we already have them, which is the spirit of monopolization.

Trading resources gives 8 per turn, which I'd say is more valuable than 1. It's rare when an extra citizen can earn that much gold.

I've always believed in taking extra luxuries just to guarantee a monopoly... but this puts it in a whole other league. I think the new version of Commerce is spectacular. It is now a viable competitor to the other trees - especially coming as early as it does. This is a major improvement to the game.

 

[Babri]

3 1 with Free Thought.

I do want to improve the value of villages, I think Firaxis' nerf to villages while buffing mines/lumbermills skewed balance too much. I preferred the method in my mod where I only buffed mines/lumbermills without a village nerf. Still, I do want to stay close to vanilla and try and work with their own ideas, so I'm seeking ways to buff villages.

I've a suggestion. Why don't you make TPs evolve like in cIV so that they become a good investment.

 

[Thalassicus]

I'm doing that to some extent, added tech bonuses for villages, and now policy bonuses. I know what you mean about making them increase in value over time, but without access to the c++ AI, it'd favor the human player too much.

Getting back to the Commerce tree, the question might be, why would you want to go there no matter what it offers instead of Patronage (or later instead of Rationalism or Freedom). In retrospect it's probably overkill for Arabia, but may make more sense for a warmonger who could skip Patronage in order to finance his wars.

I've been thinking about your question and thought of an answer. Commerce is ideal when our rate of building stuff can't keep up with research.

A good example of this is when playing Washington. His cities grow quickly, and since science is only based on population, research can quickly surpass our capability to keep up. In my current game as Washington all my cities had a dozen buildings I needed, and not enough time to build them. Commerce is the only policy tree in the first half of the game that offers any meaningful production boosts. Once I heavily invested in Commerce I was able to catch up with my research pace.

Patronage and Rationalism would exacerbate that problem, with a lack of production bonuses and plenty of research boosts.

 

[Txurce]

I'm doing that to some extent, added tech bonuses for villages, and now policy bonuses. I know what you mean about making them increase in value over time, but without access to the c++ AI, it'd favor the human player too much.


I've been thinking about your question and thought of an answer. Commerce is ideal when our rate of building stuff can't keep up with research.

A good example of this is when playing Washington. His cities grow quickly, and since science is only based on population, research can quickly surpass our capability to keep up. In my current game as Washington all my cities had a dozen buildings I needed, and not enough time to build them. Commerce is the only policy tree in the first half of the game that offers any meaningful production boosts. Once I heavily invested in Commerce I was able to catch up with my research pace.

Patronage and Rationalism would exacerbate that problem, with a lack of production bonuses and plenty of research boosts.

I see two ways to answer my question. One is as you did - the useful way - creating a correlation where gold provides production to lagging research. That's the equation I was looking for. It could also apply in a game like my current one with Babylon, where research may go out of control due to academies and three Maritimes. (I'm going to keep it in mind.) And then of course my earlier warmonger example, where extra gold can always be spent on the military.

The other reason to choose Commerce is because now it looks good. This is akin to the "fun" factor. I think it has a lot to do with instant gratification, whether it be because you get a big gift right away, or because you can "see" the benefits more easily than you could others.

 

[Busdriver]

I just played a game as Arabia with your commerce changes (started on Friday before the most recent changes) and I really like it. Commerce is really useful for a conqueror, as it allows you to build units cheaper (especially if you feel like going into autocracy) and rush build a lot of infrastructure in newly captured cities. Patent law didn't feel overpowered, as I worried it might; rather it makes trading posts feel truly worthwhile. I still think merchants need a bit more of a buff, though, since I don't think the buff to customs house alone makes them worthwhile.
Edit: I should add that I find commerce to be a worthwhile choice over patronage, especially with the bonuses from conquering city-states. Conquering a cultural CS or two in the middle ages can really help power through the commerce tree quicker. By conquering just two CSs I was able to get all the SPs in commerce except merchant navy in time to go straight into rationalism in the renaissance. This allowed me to get 31 villages very quickly.

One thought I have about tradition is that I don't like the position of the policy that gives free culture buildings in 4 cities. Since it is a prereq for 2 other useful policies, I often find I take it before it actually has the potential to be really good. I think placing it in the third tier, replacing it with either landed elite or monarchy might make it much better, so that I could wait to take it until I have a few cities with monuments and get temples instead with it. This would also help in getting the national epic sooner for a small cultural empire.

 

[Txurce]

Commerce is really useful for a conqueror, as it allows you to build units cheaper (especially if you feel like going into autocracy) and rush build a lot of infrastructure in newly captured cities.

I still think merchants need a bit more of a buff, though, since I don't think the buff to customs house alone makes them worthwhile.

I should add that I find commerce to be a worthwhile choice over patronage, especially with the bonuses from conquering city-states.

One thought I have about tradition is that I don't like the position of the policy that gives free culture buildings in 4 cities. Since it is a prereq for 2 other useful policies, I often find I take it before it actually has the potential to be really good. I think placing it in the third tier, replacing it with either landed elite or monarchy might make it much better, so that I could wait to take it until I have a few cities with monuments and get temples instead with it. This would also help in getting the national epic sooner for a small cultural empire.

I agree with the first three points - Commerce has a lot of synergy with warmongering.

I disagree with moving Legalism. It's meant to give you a quick cultural jump with a monument. Landed Elite and Monarchy, on the other hand, are more useful a bit later, when you have the pop to merit either (including specialist slots).

If you want to get more out of Legalism by waiting until you've built four monuments, then you may want to take the three other Tradition policies first, and then move on to other trees before coming back for those insta-temples.

 

[Thalassicus]

Conquering a cultural CS or two in the middle ages can really help power through the commerce tree quicker. By conquering just two CSs I was able to get all the SPs in commerce except merchant navy in time to go straight into rationalism in the renaissance.

That's a really good strategy!

I can see the merit in moving Legalism later so we can get four insta-temples. It does make sense, especially since I reduced the purchase cost of monuments. As Txurce pointed out Landed Elite is better for later in the game, but I'm not so sure about Monarchy. Monarchy's value rises with the population of the capital, but falls as we get more cities, so I think it's equally useful (or not) at any point in the game. By swapping them we can increase the importance of Monarchy and allow the quick National Epic as Busdriver described.

It's at least worth trying out with some playtesting.