Policy Discussion: Liberty
- Thread starter Stalker0
- Start date
mitsho
Deity
I also have no fear that the middle trees will be quite easier to discuss 
Yes, cheaper roads rather than city connections, was mixing that up.
The idea was to benefit improving cities rather than give something for free. Spreading it out over all the classical buildings achieves that (though it makes them stronger relative to later ones so that might also not be the best way to do it).
We could "clear up" the yields a bit over the other policies (production to 2) f.e.), but is that needed?
Seems logical
Yes, cheaper roads rather than city connections, was mixing that up.
The idea was to benefit improving cities rather than give something for free. Spreading it out over all the classical buildings achieves that (though it makes them stronger relative to later ones so that might also not be the best way to do it).
We could "clear up" the yields a bit over the other policies (production to 2) f.e.), but is that needed?
Seems logical
Yeah the camps makes sense viewed in that light. Although you can just walk in with the archers for gold, the culture is an added incentive to do so instead of bumping up the gold reward (or CS reward)
Giving the yields for free to the city is an obvious wide balance issue. Giving the yields to the buildings is still wide balanced, but is less so. You have to build the thing to get the bonus, which will tend toward growth oriented societies.
Giving the yields for free to the city is an obvious wide balance issue. Giving the yields to the buildings is still wide balanced, but is less so. You have to build the thing to get the bonus, which will tend toward growth oriented societies.
So +1hammer and one additional hammer on every productionbuilding?
Speaking of productionbuildings completely the wrong place to propose this, but we should switch the effects of the windmill and the workshop, it makes no sense that the windmill is just a plain worse verson of it (not to mention %production when building buildings makes more sense as a pre-req building(which the workshop is)
Ofc that would require removing the weird nohill requirement on the windmill, but that was the general intention anyways right? (Also maybe switch name on the windmill but this really should have been posted in the buildingthread)
Lord Tirian
Erratic Poster
Couldn't we just go for percentage bonuses, i.e. Libraries provide +5% science, Markets provide +5% gold, Workshops provide +5% production and Amphitheatres provide +5% culture? (10% feels dangerously good, but 5% a bit low)
I still think percentual values scale too well. What do we have in tradition/honor that could match that? Tradition have a 5% science boost per sciencebuilding in the capital that would be as much science as this policy in ancienct classical while going passed it in late medieval and again in early industrial. And that's JUST one yield, and JUST in he capital (and honestly with the way yields work 5% production is probably just as good as 15% science anyways).
Honestly even if you cut down the policy to just 5% production and 5% gold it's still going to be too good. Percentual values work that way sadly enough.
To put some context around the numbers so you know what the scaling looks like:
Current Liberty: +1 hammers and 5% buildings
Proposed: 10% building, 5% more with a workshop...effectively 15% on buildings.
If we assume the workshop is in play (factored in to the numbers), the new liberty is weaker than old until a city hits a base hammer of 12, then it starts to take a slight lead.
At 22 base hammers, the new liberty provides +1.05 more hammer overall than old liberty. (26.45 vs 27.5...4% increase)
At 32 base hammers, new liberty is providing +2.05 hammers overall.
(37.95 vs 40...5% increase)
At 42 base hammers, new liberty gets a +3.05 hammer advantage.
(49.45 vs 52.5...6% increase)
Comments on the comments!
Opener: 8 culture for every completed building and tech. +1 movement for workers.
If people insist on culture from completed tech and buildings, 5 is probably enough considering it's going to scale with number of cities and so on. I'd still argue that we should keep the percentual %production when building buildings in the opener. Worker movespeed (Which imo should be civilian movespeed) can go somewhere else.
--The issue I have with the scaling production in this case, is people are already balking at 15% total production, which is what it currently puts it at. Also I don't like that it doesn't apply to the first policy...as then the opener is a flat culture bump.
We could do 12% (aka 2% over 6 policies)...but early game that is chump change compared to the +1 hammer the base liberty uses. The +1 hammer is much stronger for small city early building than the percentage bonus. Perhaps we could do, 5% to buildings in the opener, +1% for each policy after (10% total, but gets more of the love right up front).
As for the culture...the only empirical evidence we have (which is my test run, I would be happy to take others results!) is that at 5 culture...liberty doesn't touch tradition after 100 turns. I am confident liberty will overtake it eventually, but in Civ the earlier you get something the better it is, and is it worth taking liberty if its the slowest tree to get policies in?
3) Connected cities generate +1 happy and reduce Illiteracy by 10%.
I'd still suggest removing expansion-unhappiness on connected cities instead, and I have a hard time connecting cityconnections with reduced illiteracy, anything else would be better (cheaper roads for example, civilian movespeed?)
--The reason I didn't go with that is that I know people are trying to keep liberty somewhat WvT neutral which is why I put in the iliteracy. As long as we have some strong happiness component in the tree I'm flexible.
4) Gain 50 Golden Age Points, and 10% of your current global science output when you expend a Great Person.
Not trying to be harsh but this policy is close to useless, 50 GAP is pretty meh and 10% of your current global science output (which would mean one tenth of what you would make in a turn, right?) is nothing honestly.
--Is this one simply a numbers problem? Would 100 GAP and 100% of your turn's science be more attractive?
5) Libraries provide +1 science, markets provide +1 gold, workshops provide +1 hammers.
Solid but boring, people are going to complain about +yields in all cities again.
--I feel like we are hitting a wall on this one, and we need a new conceptual idea. If we can't make buildings better, or give cities base yields, what would people like to see?
Opener: 8 culture for every completed building and tech. +1 movement for workers.
If people insist on culture from completed tech and buildings, 5 is probably enough considering it's going to scale with number of cities and so on. I'd still argue that we should keep the percentual %production when building buildings in the opener. Worker movespeed (Which imo should be civilian movespeed) can go somewhere else.
--The issue I have with the scaling production in this case, is people are already balking at 15% total production, which is what it currently puts it at. Also I don't like that it doesn't apply to the first policy...as then the opener is a flat culture bump.
We could do 12% (aka 2% over 6 policies)...but early game that is chump change compared to the +1 hammer the base liberty uses. The +1 hammer is much stronger for small city early building than the percentage bonus. Perhaps we could do, 5% to buildings in the opener, +1% for each policy after (10% total, but gets more of the love right up front).
As for the culture...the only empirical evidence we have (which is my test run, I would be happy to take others results!) is that at 5 culture...liberty doesn't touch tradition after 100 turns. I am confident liberty will overtake it eventually, but in Civ the earlier you get something the better it is, and is it worth taking liberty if its the slowest tree to get policies in?
3) Connected cities generate +1 happy and reduce Illiteracy by 10%.
I'd still suggest removing expansion-unhappiness on connected cities instead, and I have a hard time connecting cityconnections with reduced illiteracy, anything else would be better (cheaper roads for example, civilian movespeed?)
--The reason I didn't go with that is that I know people are trying to keep liberty somewhat WvT neutral which is why I put in the iliteracy. As long as we have some strong happiness component in the tree I'm flexible.
4) Gain 50 Golden Age Points, and 10% of your current global science output when you expend a Great Person.
Not trying to be harsh but this policy is close to useless, 50 GAP is pretty meh and 10% of your current global science output (which would mean one tenth of what you would make in a turn, right?) is nothing honestly.
--Is this one simply a numbers problem? Would 100 GAP and 100% of your turn's science be more attractive?
5) Libraries provide +1 science, markets provide +1 gold, workshops provide +1 hammers.
Solid but boring, people are going to complain about +yields in all cities again.
--I feel like we are hitting a wall on this one, and we need a new conceptual idea. If we can't make buildings better, or give cities base yields, what would people like to see?
Guess why I have been trying to get those flat hammers into the tree again...? That's why even a small bonus like 1food/1hammer would would make more sense for an openertree than a %based bonus.
Lets just try it at 5% and if it really is as bad as you say then it will probably get buffed? (Weird mechanics are weird, there is a reason why I'm still suggesting 1 culture/city)
I think removing expansion-unhappiness is going to be solid enough it's somewhere between 1 and 2 unhappiness per city.
or 75/75 or something. Honestly I still don't see the synergy between liberty and great people spam but I'll bow to the masses.
I would still suggest an expansionpolicy '25% settler/worker productionspeed and +1 pop on settled cites'?
Grab something out of rule and reform? '+X happiness/luxury, 2science/arena, 1 hammer for every strategic resource(or every non-strategic non-luxury resource maybe?)
Kinda funny how we used to have 2 full trees, now we don't even have one =D
The number 5 was a very arbitrary number, literally just put down because we like the number 5. My number 8 is at least based on SOME actual play
I know we will adjust based on the playtest, but might as well start with a number that at least seems comparable to the base tree (tradition).Is it possible to make this +1 pop to current cities and settled ones? Since tall cities are harder to grow to the next level, it tips the balance a bit back towards Tall, but otherwise it seems like a fun idea.
I don't think its specific to liberty per say, but GP benefits are just one of those things that seems good to put in a tree.
Right now, tradition gets you more GP...liberty gives you more bonus when you spend GP. Seems different enough.
How about you draft up a tree so we can see where we are at. (with the scaling buildingbonus in the opener please)
Possibly too strong. I think the RnR policy did gave you 1food +1pop when you settle. That was a pretty solid and imo fun bonus.
Liberty v1.5
Opener: 8 culture for every completed building and tech. 5% production bonus to buildings, +2% bonus for every additional policy taken in Liberty
1) Free worker appears near capital and +25% tile improvement.
2) Building Maintenance reduced by 15%. Road and Railroad maintenance reduced by 50%.
3) Connected cities have no expansion unhappiness. Workers and Settlers gain +1 movement.
4) Gain 100 Golden Age Points and science equal to your Global Science output when you expend a Great Person.
5) All current and future cities gain +1 population.
Finisher: Free Great Person. Great Engineers can be purchased with faith.
Opener: 8 culture for every completed building and tech. 5% production bonus to buildings, +2% bonus for every additional policy taken in Liberty
1) Free worker appears near capital and +25% tile improvement.
2) Building Maintenance reduced by 15%. Road and Railroad maintenance reduced by 50%.
3) Connected cities have no expansion unhappiness. Workers and Settlers gain +1 movement.
4) Gain 100 Golden Age Points and science equal to your Global Science output when you expend a Great Person.
5) All current and future cities gain +1 population.
Finisher: Free Great Person. Great Engineers can be purchased with faith.
Opener: 5 culture for every completed building and tech. +3% bonus for every additional policy taken in Liberty
1) Free worker appears near capital and +25% tile improvement.
2) 1 production in all cities +1 production on workshop.
3) Connected cities have no expansion unhappiness. Road and Railroad maintenance reduced by 50%.
4) Gain 100 Golden Age Points and science equal to your Global Science output when you expend a Great Person.
5) +1 food in every city newly settled cities start with one extra pop
Finisher: Free Great Person. Great Engineers can be purchased with faith.
That's what I would do instead, buildingmaintenance is too powerful for this tree. (continues to scale all game)
Also think 75/75% on the GP expend would be a better fit, but that's just a hunch.
1) Free worker appears near capital and +25% tile improvement.
2) 1 production in all cities +1 production on workshop.
3) Connected cities have no expansion unhappiness. Road and Railroad maintenance reduced by 50%.
4) Gain 100 Golden Age Points and science equal to your Global Science output when you expend a Great Person.
5) +1 food in every city newly settled cities start with one extra pop
Finisher: Free Great Person. Great Engineers can be purchased with faith.
That's what I would do instead, buildingmaintenance is too powerful for this tree. (continues to scale all game)
Also think 75/75% on the GP expend would be a better fit, but that's just a hunch.
I don't see the problem with the percentage yield boosts. If they're still too weak, use +1 boosts on buildings to go with them (not on cities). The reason for buildings getting bonuses rather than cities is the buildings offers an extended choice over what to build next in a city while the per city change basically acts as a subtle expand with more cities bonus. Which we are trying to avoid.
I would max out the building rate bonus to 10%. It doesn't need to be higher than that really. 15% maybe high enough, but it feels too high. I didn't see a huge problem with the numbers Stalker presented. It eventually catches up. And that's fine that the tree starts off slower and scales up in some respects. It's about development and infrastructure, which take time to develop and build. It is okay for some policies to be about long-term gains rather than provide instant effects.
100/100 or 75/75% is fine to test. It's the concept that would be at issue and numbers tweaking and haggling now isn't as important as getting it available and in use to see.
I'm not sure we need to raise the opener beyond 6 culture/building or tech. 5 is fine honestly, certainly to test it more thoroughly.
I am indifferent to whether there should be a +1 pop effect. It should be in any city though if included, not just newly settled. Again, the tree is no longer explicitly about expansion. Plus that approach avoids the messy nature of founding a city and then getting the policy the next turn (or having the settler sit there a turn or two). Does the AI know to do that (probably not), so just give the bonus globally if it's to be given.
I'd avoid both building upkeep and road upkeep reductions being here, preferably neither. The buildings one has a better synergy with the rest of the tree if one has to be used.
I would max out the building rate bonus to 10%. It doesn't need to be higher than that really. 15% maybe high enough, but it feels too high. I didn't see a huge problem with the numbers Stalker presented. It eventually catches up. And that's fine that the tree starts off slower and scales up in some respects. It's about development and infrastructure, which take time to develop and build. It is okay for some policies to be about long-term gains rather than provide instant effects.
100/100 or 75/75% is fine to test. It's the concept that would be at issue and numbers tweaking and haggling now isn't as important as getting it available and in use to see.
I'm not sure we need to raise the opener beyond 6 culture/building or tech. 5 is fine honestly, certainly to test it more thoroughly.
I am indifferent to whether there should be a +1 pop effect. It should be in any city though if included, not just newly settled. Again, the tree is no longer explicitly about expansion. Plus that approach avoids the messy nature of founding a city and then getting the policy the next turn (or having the settler sit there a turn or two). Does the AI know to do that (probably not), so just give the bonus globally if it's to be given.
I'd avoid both building upkeep and road upkeep reductions being here, preferably neither. The buildings one has a better synergy with the rest of the tree if one has to be used.
If we're haggling over a numerical balance rather than a concept, we should just move on until we get some playtested feedback on how this does over the course of a game. Not just the raw numbers being in some variety of balance, but also the feel of the balance matters (does it seem to offer a sufficient incentive to take the pick, etc).
I accept it is possible it may have to be raised from 5, but I don't think it is worth holding up implementing the tree to the mod to do it. It's a very simple fix later if we have to adjust it.
I accept it is possible it may have to be raised from 5, but I don't think it is worth holding up implementing the tree to the mod to do it. It's a very simple fix later if we have to adjust it.
