Policies

[Busdriver]

I disagree that 1 for garrisons is too much. The happiness from it does not apply while at war when your units are in foreign territory. That's not to say the effect isn't useful; it's great for post war reconstruction, but that's it. You still have to wait until you have built a few happy buildings before you can resume your warmongering, or else as soon as your units leave your cities you will be back in unhappy territory. This policy fulfills exactly the role I would expect of a happiness policy in the Honor tree: help with postwar reconstruction, without removing the need for coliseums and courthouses. I do agree that this probably should be later in the tree rather than the opener, and I think 2 is too much, especially considering that the tradition opener now only gives 2 culture and the liberty opener gives 1 per city.

 

[Thalassicus]

Warfare had a big influence on the culture of early societies - samurai, knights, and other such combatants. It's true this effect has lessened with the modern professionalization of armies, but that's a recent thing, and the Honor policy is in ~3000 BCE.

Liberty is 1 free culture in all cities (excluding the policy investment itself, which is identical when comparing policies).

Honor's culture requires a production investment, and also drains 1-2 per turn (depending on how early we stock our cities with garrisons). These garrisons quickly become obsolete for defense, unless we upgrade them, and upgrading costs extra money and maintenance so there's still a downside. To take full advantage of Honor in the early game we also have to keep our troops in our cities, instead of chasing down barbarians. This means we lose out on the gold and experience from barbarian hunting.

Tradition's main effect is the big border expansion bonus. Legalism gives more culture, for a total of 8 in the very early game. This is a quicker boost than Honor and has a larger effect because early culture is more powerful than later culture. The reason for this is we have fewer cities in the early game, so each point of culture provides a bigger % towards policies (2/100 > 2/1,000).

Overall I feel the advantages and disadvantages of Honor balance out to be approximately as useful as 1 free culture per city, or 2 culture + fast border expansion.

 

[Questdog]

As I said before, any policy that you feel you have to take every game is probably overpowered. And Honor's first perk is one that just can't be passed up. I think for all the Policies, the first perk should be rather lame and you should have to get deeper into the tree to get the useful stuff. I find myself always taking that first Honor perk and usually skipping the rest of the tree.

If the first perk was lame, then you'd be force to make a choice of which Policy tree to unlock, forcing the player to specialize more. As it is, I think the "jack of all trades" option of taking a little here and a little there is the best one. And gamewise, I don't think that's so good because it leads to every game being the same experience.

 

[Seek]

I haven't found the honor opener to be a no-brainer at all. While strong, the later policies in both liberty and tradition offer many more advantages in the early game (so long as I'm not rushing or being rushed). I like the current tension between tree choices.

 

[Thalassicus]

@Questdog
I'm guessing you go for a science victory.

It's important to consider various different playstyles. For science victories I agree choosing just the first policy in the Honor tree is probably a good decision. We don't go conquering much, so our troops spend most of their time garrisoned, but we can afford to pick up Honor. However, this is different from a cultural victory. Since we have to fill out whole trees in a cultural game and most of Honor is not useful for a cultural victory, this sort of game will probably never pick up Honor. This means the policy is not in every game.

Now, let's consider the point I think you're emphasizing more... that in science victories Honor is a good policy to pick up.

• Do you feel Honor's bonus is better than Liberty's free culture?
• What's your usual policy progression?
• Does this progression vary depending on circumstances like how crowded your start location is, or how militaristic your neighbors are?

I originally had the opening policies as rather weak, but Firaxis determined they wanted the opener policies to be strong, and when possible I want to stick relatively close to vanilla in overall gameplay.

 

[Questdog]

Well, to tell the truth I haven't finished but about 4 games with your mod because I'm always reloading a new beta build.....

But lately, I've been going in this order: Honor, Tradition, Trad. (culture build), Trad. (happy/gold boost), then I have varied at this point depending on the circumstances of the game. I usually only ever take the first liberty and I've been waiting until I have at least 3 cities. The only other Liberty that I'd really want is the Happiness boost, but I feel like the picks to get there are better spent elsewhere. (I forgot, I usually take the Free Artist, too).

Even when I am warmongering, I feel the Honor tree just isn't as worthy a choice as some of the others (except for the first perk). I don't usually need to boost the military's prowess; I usually need more help keeping the cash flowing and the natives happy.

One thing I have found is concentrating your early Policy picks on Culture really pays off in the long run, regardless of what victory your going for (though in my games that always means science or domination). And in your mod, the policies come rather fast, so I sometimes have to take policies I really wouldn't otherwise, just because there is nothing else to pick.

 

[Questdog]

One other thing I'd like to say about my Civ gaming: I never play trying to maximize my advantages over the AI. I usually play with House rules to make the game a bit more challenging. One rule I have is that I cannot make a beeline in the research department. I must always research every tech in a row before I move to the next row. That's the big one. It ensures that I am rarely the first to any new units until the industrial age when my research usually overtakes everyone else.

Sometimes I play where I cannot explore further than a certain number of hexes from any of my cities. Makes for interesting games where you build a city and later wish you could have it in a different place. Also cuts down the happiness boost from finding all the wonders and keeps me from being tempted to monopolize all the city state relationships (though lately, I've been leaning toward games with no city states)

One rule that I have recently instituted is that I cannot fire a ranged weapon into the same hex in consecutive turns. Helps mitigate the AI's tendency to be caught like a deer in the headlights by your archers (where they futily try to heal rather than flee or attack).

I sometimes also play where I cannot build a city further than 10 hexes from one of my current cities. Keeps me from snatching up all the iron and luxury resources.

Sometimes I set other silly goals for myself which have nothing to do with helping me win the game. But I never set out to see how bad I can humiliate the AI. It's just too easy to do and you are no longer competing against the AI, but just trying to outdo your last score.

 

[Seek]

Both Republic and Representation in liberty are *very* strong options even with a small empire. When warmongering, Spoils of War can be incredible. The trad SPs are great, but I tend to pick them later. Try shaking up your SP choices and I bet you'll see that every tree is equally strong now.

 

[Thalassicus]

For a large empire, in the long run Representation is stronger for policy generation than the other early culture boosters.

I don't usually need to boost the military's prowess; I usually need more help keeping the cash flowing

The central path of the Honor tree does not provide combat bonuses: it boosts gold, production, and culture. If you need money in a conquest game, give this central path a try - PA and SoW give a lot of cash.

This was my route in my recent conquest game on epic/large/emperor with Wu Zetain:

1. Representation and quick expand.
2. Spoils of War.
3. An AI or two usually declares war between #1 and #2 since I don't build many military units yet. If no one's declared war I skip to #6.
4. I fight defensively while building up my force, gaining experience for my units.
5. Continue fighting until they ask for surrender, accept it for a few thousand gold.
6. Conquer nearby citystates.
7. #6 makes nearby civs mad, and I attack those who have DoW'd or attack a neighbor.

I completed on turn 303 in 1415 AD with a score of 10650. I had the Liberty, Honor, Commerce, and Autocracy trees filled out; all very useful for a warmonger. I've tried conquest game openers of tradition, liberty, or honor... and have found liberty -> fast expand -> honor seems to result in my strongest game. It does depend on which leader is selected however, and circumstances of the game.

 

[Questdog]

Well, I started a game with 7.2 on Epic/Large as you said you did and I can't tell you yet what I think of the new (for me) Policy path, but I CAN say it feels like there are no Barbarians at all!

I've been playing on tiny maps (modified Perfect World 3/ less desert) with 4 civs and on those you are quickly surrounded by Barbarian camps who keep a constant flow of Brutes heading your way. As soon as one is dead, his replacement(s) arrive. Playing on a large map feels like I'm playing the SIMS, rather than Civilization; everything being so peaceful and all....

 

[Txurce]

If you need money in a conquest game, give this central path a try - PA and SoW give a lot of cash.

This was my route in my recent conquest game on epic/large/emperor with Wu Zetain:

1. Representation and quick expand.
2. Spoils of War.
3. An AI or two usually declares war between #1 and #2 since I don't build many military units yet. If no one's declared war I skip to #6.
4. I fight defensively while building up my force, gaining experience for my units.
5. Continue fighting until they ask for surrender, accept it for a few thousand gold.
6. Conquer nearby citystates.
7. #6 makes nearby civs mad, and I attack those who have DoW'd or attack a neighbor.

I completed on turn 303 in 1415 AD with a score of 10650. I had the Liberty, Honor, Commerce, and Autocracy trees filled out; all very useful for a warmonger. I've tried conquest game openers of tradition, liberty, or honor... and have found liberty -> fast expand -> honor seems to result in my strongest game. It does depend on which leader is selected however, and circumstances of the game.

1. Totally agree with the SOW gold comment - and then some. It basically pays for not just war, but city infrastructure. For this reason, I think it's a little OP.

2. That's basically the strategy I'm following, but my progress is slower - no way I'll be done by turn 303. First, I'm playing standard/continents. Were you on a Pangaea map? And does playing epic/large result in a faster or slower win?

Otherwise, I'm imagining that one difference is unit production. I still tend to build units in only the really hammer-heavy cities, which may be only the capital for a while, then slowly expands. Are you more liberal with your troop-building?

 

[Mentos]

Spoils of War:
I hoped it got "fixed" during Beta but unfortunately hasn't been so far.

Is there a reasonable explanation for units running around with so much gold, especially later units with 500+ in Modern Era?
How comes units run around with more gold than any leaders, including me, often have available? I sounds like an alchemist's dream making gold from straw.
Is there really a point to start with any other policy than Honor because of this sheer hilarious gold income? I mean, for what are all the buildings with gold income? Totally pointless after Spoils of War.

Thal mate, please reduce this to 1/100 of Unit Cost with minimum of 1 Gold per defeated unit!
That would cover enough maintenance instead of providing the ultimate income for purchasing anything in the game in no time.

Sorry, but this is no fun.

 

[Thalassicus]

When a swordsman is killed the sword doesn't vanish. Capturing equipment and supplies from battlefields has historically been a major part of warfare. The captured supplies can be sold for gold to spend on just about any purpose.

In the classical era, 2 luxury resources gives 16/turn. This is the same as 1 swordsman every 7 turns, so Spoils is about as powerful as ~2 extra luxuries in the early game.

In the renaissance era of my current game, the Commerce policy gives about 60/turn (450*0.1=45, plus 17 from the Customs House). This is the same as constantly killing 1 Rifleman every 4 turns - a very high rate to sustain. The frequency of kills depends on circumstances of the game, but overall I think Spoils of War is about as strong as the Commerce opener.

Is there really a point to start with any other policy than Honor

If we don't go to war, why would we go deep in the honor tree? Culture games or isolated start locations have little reason to invest heavily in that tree.

@Txurce
I only have one city producing military units, unless I'm rushed by multiple AIs and need a lot of units early on.

 

[gandalf51]

To be specific, this is the cumulative culture cost as a percentage of vanilla.

Examples of how to read the chart:

• -50% culture to get 12 policies.
• +25% culture to achieve a cultural victory.

It's also worth pointing out I raised the capital's culture from 1 to 2. Since both income and expense are doubled, the end result is a reduction of early non-palace sources like ancient ruins culture.

What about Napoleon ?
I fear he's useless now

 

[Thalassicus]

Napoleon is a very strong leader and was ranked among the top 5 leaders on the "Favorite Leaders" poll in March. I don't believe he could go from first-tier to useless just by a moderate increase in cost of the first few policies.

 

[Txurce]

Napoleon is a very strong leader and was ranked among the top 5 leaders on the "Favorite Leaders" poll in March. I don't believe he could go from first-tier to useless just by a moderate increase in cost of the first few policies.

Am I missing something, or wouldn't Napoleon's advantage be reduced only if SP's became extremely easy to get?

 

[Mentos]

Thal, I like the plundering idea of Spoils of War in general. It only feels like playing Sid Meier's Pirates! capturing one Spanish Treasure Fleet Galleon after the other at moment.

I don't want to argue too much with plausibility but a defeated military unit after combat shouldn't offer basically a free unit/building as reward. Usually after battle, they are only corpses left with pictures of mum or smoking vehicle wrecks, and hardly bars of gold or American Express Gold Cards. An unscathed sword or ammo box shouldn't justify for a whole unit purchase.
Plundering is more a matter of robbing cities. Yeah, there you can overdo it because capturing cities is the point of warfare in the end: resources and power over others. I don't know the capture mechanic, but you could also make the amount of gold/culture reward depending on pop size besides tech-advancement when capturing cities.
We don't have rich merchant units to rob, except the Great Merchant maybe, in the game where huge gold rewards would be thinkable.

The AI is still not the best unit-formation user and often spreads its unit out and places it in bad positions making it easy prey for a Siege+Mounted/Armor combo attack. Also consider the Barbarians which can be easily farmed for gold this way. Okay, you could reduce the Cost of Barbarian units but the AI isn't much better in the end either.

I've got the feeling you try to put too much balance into policies where it's not really needed. I see it this way with policies. Either I want to go to war and get some useful combat bonuses from Honor/Autocracy or I want Gold and take Commerce. Earning Gold while warmongering is fine but it shouldn't be a replacement for a serious economy.
America in real life didn't help winning the world wars by honor or autocracy either but by a strong economy. The Germans were often more experienced and sometimes better equipped, like picking honor/autocracy, but in the end they were overwhelmed by the sheer mass what the Allies lined up by their powerful economy.
The AI and human players have the choice to pick more than one policy-tree at same time depending on desired/flavored playstyle, and you should really be forced to do that. With Spoils of War, it feels like I'm already settled with everything after my first 4 policy picks in Honor tree. The 50% upgrade cost reduction alone is already a very fine gold-saver.

I'd still like keep building, expansion, combat, economy/gold, production, research, etc. more seperated in policies, that's all.

 

[Txurce]

Thal, I like the plundering idea of Spoils of War in general...

Plundering is more a matter of robbing cities. Yeah, there you can overdo it because capturing cities is the point of warfare in the end: resources and power over others. I don't know the capture mechanic, but you could also make the amount of gold/culture reward depending on pop size besides tech-advancement when capturing cities.

I've got the feeling you try to put too much balance into policies where it's not really needed. I see it this way with policies... Earning Gold while warmongering is fine but it shouldn't be a replacement for a serious economy.

I'd still like keep building, expansion, combat, economy/gold, production, research, etc. more seperated in policies, that's all.

I've said elsewhere that SOW feels a bit OP, and the tilt is definitely because of unit-killing. In fact, I'm always surprised by how little taking a city gives me in comparison.

Philosophically, I have always felt that the different trees should be more different from each other.

 

[Seek]

It seems that a consensus is forming that SoW should be nerfed - It is simply too strong. Thal, I understand your argument comparing it to commerce and how many units must be killed to make it comparable, but I don't think it holds water because:

1) Honor is available from the start and thus one can accumulate much more gold during those extra 80 or so turns.
2) One can have wars with multiple civs simultaneously and the number of units one can kill varies from game to game. With SoW as it is now, it can be quite powerful to instigate wars and only defend just for the gold income, particularly if there aren't a lot of lux sales to be made to the AI.
3) (Related to point #1)What can and should be purchased in the earlier eras have a lower cost, so it's not entirely fair to compare the income earned to a later policy. (The 60GPT at T100 is probably close to 10GPT at T40.)
4) I think this may be the most important point: Any income from SoW will be a great bonus because you must compare it to zero income. When thought of in this light (never mind comparing it to the only other gold SP in the ancient era, which yields ~5GPT) it seems clear to me that a bonus of half or less would still be *very* significant.

As I said in an earlier post, SoW is so good it's worth getting even in a peaceful game that only hints at bloodshed and that makes it OP in my opinion. And I haven't even mentioned the culture gains!

 

[Txurce]

I understand your argument comparing it to commerce and how many units must be killed to make it comparable, but...

I would add that some people find it preferable that there not be a direct comparison to Commerce's gold, or to other trees' distinctive tilts. These make choice less meaningful. In my opinion the comparison should only be about whether a particular policy is attractive enough to draw someone... just like we can't directly compare Germany to Japan.