Policies

[Thalassicus]

I've had wide/conquest games without any national wonders, and world wonders are themselves difficult to get on high difficulty levels. Pangaea is one of the two map types I support with this mod and there's plenty of those games with few coastal cities. I've played culture games with no conquest. Most policies are useful only if we do certain things.

The Harbor and seaport nerfs really hurt!

The changes to harbors/seaport in the past few months are:

• Harbors give +1 on sea resources (was +1 on water tiles).
• 2 maintenance Seaport (was 3).

I'm not sure this is a nerf... if so, it's only one. If the Harbor change was too much I can revert it. Vanilla uses the production method, which is why I adopted the production bonus. I think either bonus is about equally useful so I don't really mind either way.

 

[Txurce]

I've had wide/conquest games without any national wonders, and world wonders are themselves difficult to get on high difficulty levels. Pangaea is one of the two map types I support with this mod and there's plenty of those games with few coastal cities. I've played culture games with no conquest. Most policies are useful only if we do certain things.

There has only been one change to harbor/seaport: harbors give +1 on sea resources instead of +1 on water tiles. If you think this was too much of a change I can put it back the way it was. I think either one is about equally useful, and vanilla uses the production method, which is why I changed it to the production-based bonus.

My experiences mirror yours regarding the first paragraph.

I preferred gold over hammers for harbors because I rarely have a city with enough water resources to justify the hammer version. But I do think there's too much gold in the game, which is probably why the vanilla change was made. That's why I haven't brought up changing it.

 

[Ahriman]

I've had wide/conquest games without any national wonders, and world wonders are themselves difficult to get on high difficulty levels. Pangaea is one of the two map types I support with this mod and there's plenty of those games with few coastal cities. I've played culture games with no conquest.

Playing on Emperor, I have never had any difficulty snagging multiple world wonders, and if you're playing a wide/conquest game, why on earth are you taking Tradition policies?
As I said, its possible to have no coastal cities, and the coastal bonus is the most situational one other than the defense ones. Its just one policy (not 4) and its pretty optional.
The fact that one can play games without any warfare is a process of the fact that the AI isn't aggressive enough; when the AI has a sufficiently larger army than you, it should attack. WWGF modifications have made the AI insufficiently aggressive.

The changes to harbors/seaport in the past few months are:
Harbors give +1 on sea resources (was +1 on water tiles).
2 maintenance Seaport (was 3).

+1 hammer on sea resources is much weaker than +1 gold on every water tile.
The Seaport used to give +2 hammers on sea resources, now it only gives +1.
Both are much weaker.

It used to be that with enough buildings constructed, coast tiles were as good as improved land tiles. That is no longer true. Non-bonus coast tiles are inferior.

 

[Txurce]

Playing on Emperor, I have never had any difficulty snagging multiple world wonders, and if you're playing a wide/conquest game, why on earth are you taking Tradition policies?

The fact that one can play games without any warfare is a process of the fact that the AI isn't aggressive enough; when the AI has a sufficiently larger army than you, it should attack. WWGF modifications have made the AI insufficiently aggressive.

1. I found Wonders hard enough to get that I quit trying for all but a select few. Post-patch, though, they've become noticeably easier to build.

I use Tradition every time I start warring in the Classical period with a Conquest Victory in mind. Such an early start means I won't be building more than two or three cities. Given this, I'd rather have the capital-centric and cultural boosts that Tradition offers, the sooner to finish the Honor tree and have a self-supporting military machine.

2. People do win games without warring in vanilla - there's a thread on this very topic on another forum this week. I happen to like the original effects of WWGD, but the last two patches have made the AI more aggressive in TBC as well.

 

[Thalassicus]

I also play on Emperor, but do consider the upper two difficulty levels for balance. I've seen it said that world wonders are much harder to get there.

The seaport has been 1 on sea resources since April's v7.0, when it gained +50% for naval units. The building is more specialized, but that's different from a nerf. Ship production is generally higher with the 50% method than 2 per resource (even with 3 sea resources). I usually pick cities with many resources, drop a seaport there, and use them to crank out Ships of the Line.

Something else to point out is naval buildings get +2 with the Merchant Navy policy.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Hey Thal, if you'll indulge me, I'd like to say that I *really* preferred the Tradition Tree the way you originally had it-at least from a Realism Perspective.

So you have Oligarchy-which is essentially like the old City States of Greece, hence the City Garrison Bonus.

You Have Aristocracy-which is essentially rule by an elite class-with individual Aristocrats building Monuments to their "Glory".

You Have Legalism-which to me at least represents the Centralization & Standardizing of Legal Power within the capital-hence the happiness & gold benefits it brought.

You have Monarchy-which represents centralized Authority under a single "Aristocrat"-be it an Emporer, King or other affectation-who can organize the population well enough to build Great Wonders.

This is why I still feel that Monarchy should require Legalism and Aristocracy as prerequisites-as it seems to be a good marrying together of the 2 ideas, central authority & a ruling class.

Anyway, just a thought!

Aussie.

 

[Thalassicus]

I do think the name "cerimonial rites" fits the theme of free monuments and temples. I agree it also makes sense that aristocrats might build such things out of vanity. I think it can go both ways - names are subjective because there's so many interpretations of what the word "aristocracy" should represent.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

BTW, I also definitely think the happiness bonus for Monastaries under Organized Religion should be retained.

Aussie.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I think it can go both ways - things like names are subjective because there's so many interpretations of what "aristocracy" should represent.

I know what you're saying its just that, when I compare my pre 8.6.3 experience of the Policies to my post 8.6.3 experience-I was definitely happier with the feel of the previous version.

Aussie.

 

[Txurce]

You have Monarchy-which represents centralized Authority under a single "Aristocrat"-be it an Emporer, King or other affectation-who can organize the population well enough to build Great Wonders.

This is why I still feel that Monarchy should require Legalism and Aristocracy as prerequisites-as it seems to be a good marrying together of the 2 ideas, central authority & a ruling class.

I do think the name "cerimonial rites" fits the theme of free monuments and temples. I agree it also makes sense that aristocrats might build such things out of vanity. I think it can go both ways - names are subjective because there's so many interpretations of what the word "aristocracy" should represent.

BTW, I also definitely think the happiness bonus for Monastaries under Organized Religion should be retained.

The names are definitely subjective - a point I made regarding the Tradition tree early. Monarchy does seem to be a culmination of a tree at this early stage of the game, but most of them are pretty arbitrary.

But if something in these trees isn't arbitrary, it's that Monasteries belong in Organized Religion. You aren't going to find a more seamless mesh, and its relative rarity makes potential imbalance irrelevant (meaning it's not going to sway a game one way or another).

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

The names are definitely subjective - a point I made regarding the Tradition tree early. Monarchy does seem to be a culmination of a tree at this early stage of the game, but most of them are pretty arbitrary.

But if something in these trees isn't arbitrary, it's that Monasteries belong in Organized Religion. You aren't going to find a more seamless mesh, and its relative rarity makes potential imbalance irrelevant (meaning it's not going to sway a game one way or another).

They're not really that subjective to me though. I've always been more of a role-player than a game-player.....if that makes sense, so I like the names to fit with the society I'm trying to create in the game.

Aussie.

 

[Txurce]

They're not really that subjective to me though. I've always been more of a role-player than a game-player.....if that makes sense, so I like the names to fit with the society I'm trying to create in the game.

Aussie.

What I meant by "subjective" referred to the connection between name and function. I stated earlier that I was happy enough with the status quo in 8.6.3, and saw no reason to change it. But I viewed the issue as subjective enough not to strongly resist a differing viewpoint.

If you're saying that you want to flip the names back to 8.6.3, I have no problem with that.

 

[Slin]

I haven't read through all the pages so sorry if all my comments have been proven wrong before. I have a few comments on some of the policies in the Tradition and Liberty trees:

I think the 2 first policies in the Liberty tree (Collective Rule & Citizenship) are way better than any other options at the start of the game. They are just so insanely more powerful than any of the other you can take so I always end up taking Liberty.

The Tradition policy that increases wonder production and gives 3 happiness/wonder (Monarchy) is ridiculously good with some settings. It is probably balanced if you play against 10+ other players and building wonders is extremely risky and you can only get a few. I always play with 4-8 computers and I always get to build a good amount of wonders. Even with just the national wonders this policy is better than most other happiness bonus policies.

The +2 food/production on defensive buildings (Landed Elite & Meritocracy) are totally broken. They grant +2 early with the walls which you want anyways in most of your cities and then they keep on giving when you build the castle, armory etc. Some comparisons to similar policies:
Lets assume the other bonuses than + hammers are about equal.
Meritocracy vs Merchant Navy vs Communism
+8/city vs +3/coastal City vs +2/city
Hmmm I wonder which one I want. Even with just walls in each city Meritocracy is about equal to Communism which is one of the hardest/latest policies you can get.
I would say Landed Elite is about as good because food is about as good as production.

 

[Thalassicus]

Something to remember is each policy tree is useful for different playstyles, so if you always fast expand the Liberty is clearly best for you.

It might depend on difficulty level, but I personally find Honor more useful in the early game for conquest victories, especially if close to warmonger AI's. A free settler and worker can't help defend against the AIs' initial rushes. 20% military production help a lot. I also like to get the Honor finisher as soon as possible since it gives a lot of gold. The whole policy tree is very useful when a conqueror does our first archer+spearman rush on a citystate. I start conquering as soon as I have two cities, so the Expansion-focused liberty isn't particularly useful, and I don't build walls until the first wars are already underway.

Tradition is more useful than Liberty if going for a culture victory, or rushing an early game world wonder. We usually have just the capital for a while in this situation.

There were several opinions stated here my original settings for Monarchy at +15% and 2 per wonder were weak / useless, which is why I buffed it. On the hardest two difficulty levels I hear it's not very easy to get world wonders (I personally play on Emperor). Still, someone else did say 3 is too strong, and you have as well, so I could drop it back down to the original value of 2.

I don't think many people build any defensive buildings before the policy buffs, since they're less useful than units. I know I personally never did more than walls. If that policy makes them really desirable, especially the later game defense buildings, then it's a great thing. Keep in mind the defense itself on the defense building rarely sees any use since AI units are killed before they get to cities, so the food/prod/happy bonuses need to make them valuable enough to build on their own merits.

The reason it's better to kill enemies with units before they get to cities is that cities:

• Cannot move
• Deal low damage
• Do not gain experience
• Do not contribute to great general creation

 

[Zaldron]

Tradition is more useful than Liberty if going for a culture victory, or rushing an early game world wonder. We usually have just the capital for a while in this situation.

I just want to comment on this one statement here. I like going for cultural victories and I've played several games with 8.x now, starting with both tradition and liberty (in different games obviously). Even when I'm intentionally going for cultural victory I personally would say that liberty is hands down the far better choice to start with. I get liberty, the free worker and settler, and sometimes even the +production before going back and filling out tradition. The amount of production in your capital you can save from the free units easily outweighs slowing down tradition a bit. The +happy/wonder does some strong, but I'm not sure if it's too strong or just nice to have (I onlyplay king/emperor so I still can snag world wonders that I beeline). What about +15% wonders +2 happy per wonder BUT count the palace as a wonder again (this helps balance the early game when 2 extra happy can really help out someone going into tradition)?

 

[Txurce]

I just want to comment on this one statement here. I like going for cultural victories and I've played several games with 8.x now, starting with both tradition and liberty (in different games obviously). Even when I'm intentionally going for cultural victory I personally would say that liberty is hands down the far better choice to start with. I get liberty, the free worker and settler, and sometimes even the +production before going back and filling out tradition. The amount of production in your capital you can save from the free units easily outweighs slowing down tradition a bit. The +happy/wonder does some strong, but I'm not sure if it's too strong or just nice to have (I onlyplay king/emperor so I still can snag world wonders that I beeline). What about +15% wonders +2 happy per wonder BUT count the palace as a wonder again (this helps balance the early game when 2 extra happy can really help out someone going into tradition)?

Whether Liberty is better than Tradition for a CV start is obviously open for debate - an NC start tilts me toward Tradition, then filling in Liberty in time to build my second city when I want it.

But reducing Monarchy to 15% makes it not worth much and pretty boring, in my opinion. I'd say that every time we balance a weakened policy with a secondary bonus (happiness, etc), we are conceding the imperfection of the policy. This may be unavoidable in some cases, but I think it's worth avoiding whenever possible.

 

[GoodRevrnd]

I feel like Tradition probably provides better short term benefits to CV (esp if building NC), but if you're doing a one or the other comparison Liberty will always win out in the long term even with a low number of cities.

 

[Txurce]

I feel like Tradition probably provides better short term benefits to CV (esp if building NC), but if you're doing a one or the other comparison Liberty will always win out in the long term even with a low number of cities.

Sounds like we need to buff Monarchy and the rest of Tradition, then!

 

[GoodRevrnd]

Sounds like we need to buff Monarchy and the rest of Tradition, then!

In my terribleness, I'm not exactly the best person to turn to for nuanced balancing like this though. This is just my general sense.

 

[Thalassicus]

What about +15% wonders +2 per wonder

This is how Monarchy's currently set up. I had it at 2, then 3, then back to 2 again because there were opinions it was too powerful. If Tradition is better in the short run and Liberty in the long run, would that be a point to keep it at 3? In some of my games that's easily 20+ happiness. An alternative I considered is moving the +5 from Meritocracy to Monarchy since the flat bonus is more useful for small empires, then figuring out something else to replace that with on Meritocracy. That'd increase Tradition's short-term usefulness though, not long-term.

Do yall consider Landed Elite or Monarchy more useful with these stats:

• Landed Elite
  +4 in the
  +2 per defensive building
• Monarchy
  +3 per wonder
  +15% for wonders

I'd like both sides of the Tradition tree to be about equally valuable. If the tree as a whole is too weak, I can buff each policy individually, or buff its finisher. I didn't realize the +10% and +10% is less useful than filling out Liberty for a tall empire... I don't play tall games often.