1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

PolyCast Episode 195: "That's a Different Argument"

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by DanQ, Mar 22, 2014.

  1. DanQ

    DanQ Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2000
    Messages:
    4,767
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    To say the least. The one-hundred-and-ninety-fifth episode of PolyCast, "That's a Different Argument", features regular co-hosts Daniel "DanQ" Quick, "Makahlua", Philip "TheMeInTeam" Bellew and "MadDjinn" with first-time guest co-host Chaz "chazzycat". Carrying a runtime of 59m59s, the summary of topics is as follows:

    - 01m59s | Senate
    A focus on the gateway that is Morocco in Civilization V: Brave New World followed by a similar treatment for Portugal (15m56s).
    - 29m10s | Research Lab
    What if a would-be Civilization VI's map was a hexagon tessellated sphere and then given this, what about global warming mechanics (34m54s).
    - 46m35s | Open Mic
    Responding to criticism and praise for the show's one-hundred-and-ninty-third episode (recorded for Episode 194).

    - Intro/Outro | Miscellaneous
    Learning word choice and suggestive joining.

    Recording live before a listening audience every other Saturday, PolyCast is a bi-weekly audio production in an ongoing effort to give the Civ community an interactive voice on game strategy; listeners are encouraged to follow the show on Twitter, and check out the YouTube channel for caption capability. Sibling show RevCast focuses on Civilization: Revolution, ModCast on Civ modding, SCivCast on Civ social gaming and TurnCast on Civ multiplay.
     
  2. joncnunn

    joncnunn Senior Java Wizard Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    8,621
    Location:
    Missouri
    Wow, three references to me in this episode. :blush:

    I didn't mean to make it sound like I was taking the author of those guides to task so much. I just have a bad tendency to skip everything good and focus on what I disagree with. I'm happy to nominate all races guides for inclusion into the war academy.

    Terrain specific world wonders (and those requiring policy openers that open in Ancient & Classical era) carry with them much higher risk than trees that require a later tree.
    For instance, it's unlikely you will meet all AIs before it's time to decide if you want to build Petra or not.

    General comment about future Civ VI system requirements: Given where the industry is; it would be a very bad idea to assume that in two years from now people will have much better power or graphics on their desk tops / note books than they currently do; replacement buys fell off a cliff on the wintel side about the time Windows 8 came out. (It would be much worse than when Civ IV got a full year ahead of the average system's graphics capabilities.) By contrast, it's currently smart phones & tablets that are getting much better; if they want to be state of the art, I'd suggest instead ensuring that you can have a tablet logged onto your home computer running Civ VI (both connected to internet) so you could play a few turns of Civ VI from your tablet when away from home. (That idea could also be used for all of 2K's upcoming games)

    The only boost I can see making Great Merchants about equal to the others would be if it provided the influence / gold that Great Merchant of Venice do. (GMOV would still has a unique bonus the ability to buy city states)
    But it may be better to balance via nerfing both Great Scientists / Great Engineers.
    In case of Great Scientists in theory both yield from bulbing and yield from academy (include science bonuses) could be cut in half and RA yield could also cut by the same percent (just throwing out a number; sub in whatever value you think would bring it into balance with Great Merchants)
    Nerfing GEs to the right amount seems trickier: I'm now leaning towards a hard cap of about 500 hammers (standard speed) to bring it into balance with GE which would still allow a mid game wonder to be done in one turn but only be a savings on late game ones. (Lowering the yield per pop size under assumption player has built his capital on the coast will cut it too much for those with an interior start while lowering the yield per pop size under the assumption the player is interior will leave in place the ignored limit for those on the coast.) I'm currently not aware of anyone (other than the AI) using GEs for manufactories so I didn't include a nerf to that.

    Proper balancing of Cargo ships vs Caravans though seems much easier: Just only apply the 2X bonuses when the route is between cities on different landmasses. I've found that the hammer cost of protecting a sea route that stays on the coastline of your home landmass against barbs is negligible. (Just one naval unit needed) It's only sea routes that are crossing to a different landmass that have increased risk from barbs.
     
  3. GoStu

    GoStu Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2013
    Messages:
    656
    Location:
    Calgary
    After hearing more on the great person issue and thinking it over, I think it is more of a matter of balancing the great people against each other. I think the issue deserves its own thread and discussion though; I'll put it together when I have some time.
     
  4. joncnunn

    joncnunn Senior Java Wizard Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    8,621
    Location:
    Missouri
    Yes it does, unfortunately it's likely a mod would exile a thread exclusively devoted to an idea on how to change the game over to the suggestions forum within about twelve hours though (alternatively if it included code that would change it then it would be moved to the mod forum); so my note above was mostly that I'd like it if a future episode would include a couple of minutes on what the hosts idea on what the proper balance between Great Merchant and the other shared counter Great People would be since it seemed they were in agreement that currently Great Merchants are weaker than the other two.

    Edit:
    Dan, I did enjoy the episode, (I'm editing an existing post here to avoid spamming this thread)
     
  5. DanQ

    DanQ Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2000
    Messages:
    4,767
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    No worries, jon. Hope you enjoyed the episode, and to you too Stu.
     
  6. Magma_Dragoon

    Magma_Dragoon Reploid

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,354
    Why is tessellation with hexagons and a few pentagons the only thing people want to talk about when it comes to a spherical map? The obvious solution is triangular tiles, since triangles can approximate any non recursive, non pathological surface.

    Spoiler :
     
  7. kaspergm

    kaspergm Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    4,411
    Hi guys, thank you for taking time to respond to my criticism of your discussion in episode 193. Obviously we disagree about the GP question, and that's fine, I'm not so much going to enter that discussion again (because I think we both have said what needs to be said) but would like to add that I think part of our disagreement stems from the perspective in which we see the discussion.

    Your reply made it clear that your focus was very much a "small balance patch" perspective, whereas my vision is more like an "ideal case scenario" (i.e. wish for major overhaul or even future installments of the game). I do agree 100 % with you that separating the counters of the GE/GS/GM will be disastrous for balance if everything is left as it is otherwise. That really goes without discussion. Thus, if one envisions a world with separate counters, one would have to take meassures to prevent having one city spam scientists, another spamming engineers, and a third spamming merchants. Possible meassures to achive this could be:
    1. Re-scaling of the amount of GP points needed to spawn a GP and the increment between them.
    2. Global rather than local counters towards GP spawning.
    3. GM/GS/GE spawning linked more tightly to certain key buildings, similar to how GA/GW/GM are tied to artist guilds.
    4. Last but not least, one could address strength of Great People - i.e. perhaps have GE and GS become slightly "less great".
    Point 1 is pretty straightforward and shouldn't need much explanation. This point, in combination with point 2, would make it possible to have a system where you re-balance the new system to give you roughly the same amount of GP as you get currently. Global pools will mean that you can't have three different cities spamming each kind of GP at high frequency, because increased costs will mean you'll have to put several cities to focus on the same type of person to match current rates of birth.

    Point 3 is more of a lose idea than a well-formed concept. I'm not keen on how artists guilds are now the ONLY way with which you form great artists, but perhaps one could have some sort of balance where your still get GP points from wonders and specialists, but the "guild equivalents" will be a major contributor you can build in one city. Not sure this would actually be the best solution, but it's an idea one could consider ...

    Point 4 is independant from the rest, and really should be done no matter what imo. Specifically, Great Scientists should be freezed at their time of birth similar to how musicians and (I think) writers work, because GS hoarding imo. is lame. Great Engineers, much as it pains me (because I love my great engineers) probably should be rebalanced to give you a production bonus equal to 8 turns of production or something like that, rather than the massive production that will often correspond to two or three times that amount you get currently, and which imo. is a bit silly (free wonders are nice, but not that great for balance). This might also make the manufactory an actual option you'd consider ...

    Finally, I would like to point out a few reasons why I think a general overhaul of the GP mechanism (including separating the counters) might actually be beneficial:
    • It will encourage greater variation in the amount of GP you spawn - rather than focusing on only one type of GP (usually Great Scientist on higher levels, or Great Engineer on lower levels)
    • It will remove awkward situations where spawning a GP (Great Merchant) actually hurts your empire
    • It will reduce micromanagement (if global counters are added) because it will put less focus on specialist management to time GP spawning and you won't have to worry about which city you place wonders that increase certain types of GP
     
  8. DanQ

    DanQ Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2000
    Messages:
    4,767
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Thanks for your feedback Magma, kasper, and for listening to the show. I've made note of your points to be covered on Episode 196 set to record this Saturday.
     
  9. zwolf

    zwolf Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2014
    Messages:
    20
    Hey guys, big fan of Polycast here.

    I would like to listen you discuss why on earth there is nothing on Civ5 relating tourism to natural wonders. On real life people travel and pay to see these places so why not create a World Congress resolution, social policy bonus, tech bonus or something for tourism and natural wonders?
     
  10. joncnunn

    joncnunn Senior Java Wizard Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    8,621
    Location:
    Missouri
    There is: it's the resolution that adds culture to natural resources.
    You just need to also build a Hotel and an Airport in that city that will add tourism from culture sources.
     
  11. Sagax

    Sagax Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,209
    Well we do have the Natural Heritage Sites proposal. The culture turns into tourism once you build hotels and airports - kinda makes sense.

    EDIT: ninja'ed :(
     
  12. zwolf

    zwolf Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2014
    Messages:
    20
    Thanks guys.
    But are you sure that works on natural wonders too?
     
  13. chazzycat

    chazzycat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,866
    Actually I don't think it does. I seem to recall the rule for culture converting to tourism is that the tile must have an improvement on it. It's why if you go sacred path (+1 culture on jungle) you have to build a trading post to convert to tourism.

    further reading: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=13058425
     
  14. Magma_Dragoon

    Magma_Dragoon Reploid

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,354
    except the hotel/airport description explicitly states culture from natural wonders
     
  15. chazzycat

    chazzycat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,866
    you are totally right, my bad. I've never actually gone for that resolution and probably still won't :)
     
  16. zwolf

    zwolf Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2014
    Messages:
    20
    Yes, thats right, thanks.

    So one resolution and 2 buildings should do the job :)
     
  17. joncnunn

    joncnunn Senior Java Wizard Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    8,621
    Location:
    Missouri
    I've gone for Natural Heritage a couple of times; it's more for if you aren't seeking a cultural victory since there's much better ones if you are.
    Anyway, in my experience, it won't anger any AIs, however, the only AIs that will support it are those with a natural wonder within their territory (as you would expect), so it's difficult to pass early unless you both built FP and are the first leader.
     
  18. chazzycat

    chazzycat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,866
    totally agree. In a culture game there are far better options. But it can be useful for when you want the world congress to accomplish absolutely nothing, which is sometimes the best course of action. I propose it and then vote against it so I can still have the option next time. You're right there is no diplo effect at all.
     
  19. Securion

    Securion Civ Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    746
    Location:
    Earth (mostly..)
    Did MadDjinn say you cant build Feitoras on already improved tiles, or is this red wine im drinking affecting my brain in strange ways?

    You CAN build Feitoras on already improved tiles. (and theres no need to question me on that since you know im always right.)

    :popcorn:
     
  20. reddishrecue

    reddishrecue Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,206
    Gender:
    Male
    You can build feitorias on any improved tile. Just like building a mine over a farm that has a new coal resource on top of it.
     

Share This Page