PolyCast Episode 290: "Milk Out of the Fridge"

[DanQ]

Does a civ good. The two-hundred-and-ninetieth episode of PolyCast, "Milk Out of the Fridge", features regular co-hosts Daniel "DanQ" Quick, Stephanie "Makahlua" and Philip "TheMeInTeam" Bellew with returning guest Lotfi "ZTZaorish" Kerzabi and first-time guest Brian "bite" MacNamara. It carries a runtime of 59m59s.

The summary of topics is as follows:

- 01m18s | Forum Talk
The show's most extenstive, and contested, Great Person runthrough for Civilization VI is its last, that for Great Scientists; then, towards a growing consensus on if -- and how -- a civilization receiving a trade route should benefit from its existence (21m45s) and starting from mid-to-late game "drag" in CivVI could be addressed in it and going forward in the series (30m20s).
- 46m46s | News
A new Civilization series board game, "A New Dawn", is announced (recorded for Episode 288), followed by CivVI's "Summer 2017" patch coming first to Mac, then on Linux, though most attention is paid to what is still left to be delivered (51m39s).

- Intro/Outro | Miscellaneous
Boyband throwback, then title tetris (reference).

PolyCast is a bi-weekly audio production recording live every other Saturday throughout the year, in an ongoing effort to give the Civilization community an interactive voice; sibling show ModCast focuses on Civ modding, TurnCast on Civ multiplay.

 

[bite]

protip, see if you can here that we recorded it at 3-5am my time

 

[DanQ]

protip, see if you can he[ar] that we recorded it at 3-5am my time

Is there a yawn from you somewhere? (If so, I don't recall!)

 

[bite]

Is there a yawn from you somewhere? (If so, I don't recall!)

I think I caught them all with the mute button

 

[DanQ]

I think I caught them all with the mute button

Then I expect you're referring to your closing statement then.

 

[kaspergm]

Surprised with your Scientist rating. For me, it's Carl Sagan >>>> everybody else.

I'll admit firsthand, I only play on Emperor, and I generally tend to ignore Campuses for far too long compared to what I should do if I would optimize my win time (I just love my religions too much, and I know it's baaaad ...), and thus classical era Scientists is just not a thing that happens for me. But still, in terms of winning the game, Carl Sagan just cuts away SO MANY useless late game turns that there can be no-one above or beside him. Of course, if you get the combination Stephanie Kwolek + Carl Sagan, that's even better (or Werner Von Braun + Carl Sagan), and yes, they do stack, so if you activate Kwolek/Von Braun first and then Sagan afterwards, I think you get effectively 6000 cogs (or, put in other words, finish all spaceship parts in 5 turns, if you have the technology).

 

[kaspergm]

Oh, and with regards to the trade route discussion: I do agree with the argument that we should not nerf international trade routes, and giving a bonus to receiving city would be an (indirect) nerf, BUT I think it can't be stated clearly enough that the CORE of the problem here is that national (internal) trade routes are just stupidly overpowered. The fact that I can run an entire game and never want to make an international trade route until perhaps, in some situation, I reach modern era, is just wrong.

 

[DanQ]

Surprised with your Scientist rating. For me, it's Carl Sagan >>>> everybody else. [..] ...in terms of winning the game, Carl Sagan just cuts away SO MANY useless late game turns that there can be no-one above or beside him. Of course, if you get the combination Stephanie Kwolek + Carl Sagan, that's even better (or Werner Von Braun + Carl Sagan), and yes, they do stack, so if you activate Kwolek/Von Braun first and then Sagan afterwards, I think you get effectively 6000 cogs (or, put in other words, finish all spaceship parts in 5 turns, if you have the technology).

You will get no argument from me that Carl Sagan is the best Great Scientist to acquire that contributes towards a given Victory Condition (VC), and Stephanie Kwolek is right behind. The trade-off, understandably -- and, I'd argue, necessarily -- is that it is for Space, that one VC. To a lesser but still notable extent, add their -- and again, understandably and necessarily -- late game arrival into the mix, I cannot rank them above some GS' that have earlier, and more generally impactful, effects.

I'll admit firsthand, I only play on Emperor

I maintain that the qualifier "only" does not apply here, not just for the diminutive effect but also gameplay-wise as it is a difficulty level where the Artificial Intelligence is getting what have been affectionately referred to in the past on the show as 'derp bonuses' to prop them up towards countering handicapped decision-making.

and I generally tend to ignore Campuses for far too long compared to what I should do if I would optimize my win time (I just love my religions too much, and I know it's baaaad ...), and thus classical era Scientists is just not a thing that happens for me.

I appreciate your noting this as it provides meaningful context. (I too prioritized religion in CivVI in the first few months the game came out, as I was treating its mechanic like it was CivV's, so I can empathize with the emotion of loving it still.)

Oh, and with regards to the trade route discussion: I do agree with the argument that we should not nerf international trade routes, and giving a bonus to receiving city would be an (indirect) nerf

I still maintain that through balancing, the value(s) of the item(s) that the receiving city in an international trade route would receive would not result in a nerf of them of any kind but, as came out during discussion of them on this episode, I see -- well, heh -- value in tying such resulting yields to establishing, and maintaining, positive diplomatic ties between the owners of the receiving and sending cities.

BUT I think it can't be stated clearly enough that the CORE of the problem here is that national (internal) trade routes are just stupidly overpowered. The fact that I can run an entire game and never want to make an international trade route until perhaps, in some situation, I reach modern era, is just wrong.

Does this lack of desire to create international trade routes, generally full stop, include to Commercial City States?

 

[kaspergm]

Does this lack of desire to create international trade routes, generally full stop, include to Commercial City States?

In general, yes. I just feel I need the production (and food) from the trade routes far more than I need the gold. Sometimes I will send one trade route out for gold, but there are many ways to earn gold in the game - including a plethora of policy cards - and production is just always in shortage for me. I will send trade routes out if it earns me envoys, and in my current game, I had a rare case where I could send an international trade route to Aztecs for 2 food + 2 production + 10-12 gold + 1 science + 1 culture, which actually made me forfeit the extra 2 food and production I could get from internal routes on some of my caravans - but that is an extreme outlier. In normal games, if I look on the yields of the route alone, I'll practically always go internal.

 

[DanQ]

In general, yes. I just feel I need the production (and food) from the trade routes far more than I need the gold. Sometimes I will send one trade route out for gold, but there are many ways to earn gold in the game - including a plethora of policy cards - and production is just always in shortage for me.

The strength of gold in the game presently, which is a ready substitution for production time and again, is the primary reason why I would prioritize Commercial CS trade routes in particular more often than not over internal trade routes. (With respect to food output, I typically cover that through tile improvements like farming where housing capacity limits temper city growth timing in response to such outputs.)

 

[kaspergm]

The strength of gold in the game presently, which is a ready substitution for production time and again, is the primary reason why I would prioritize Commercial CS trade routes in particular more often than not over internal trade routes. (With respect to food output, I typically cover that through tile improvements like farming where housing capacity limits temper city growth timing in response to such outputs.)

I'd be interested in seeing someone doing the math, but it seems to me that with the 8-12 GPT I think I can normally get from a CS trade route early game, the 3-4 PPT I can get from an internal trade route gives me the better payoff, given that the exchange rate of gold to production is 4:1, if I'm not mistaken (actually, these numbers would suggest equal value, but I didn't check them in detail). But I may be off on this if one scrutinizes the actual numbers, it may well be a psychological issue also, since I just like to see the production time numbers go down when I get the extra production. Of course, the food from the internal trade route should not be forgotten.

 

[The Highwayman]

Good discussion on the podcast this week. Sagan and Stephanie are tops for Science Victories, but Newton and Einstein are the most impactful game to game, regardless of civ/victory condition. One note on the Scientist that heals adjacent units, it is amazing with Arabia's Mamluks. Healing 25 hits points per turn in enemy territory every turn makes them un-killable. Very specific, but worth mentioning nevertheless.

 

[DanQ]

Good discussion on the podcast this week.

On behalf of myself and fellow panelists, thank you kindly.

Sagan and Stephanie are tops for Science Victories, but Newton and Einstein are the most impactful game to game, regardless of civ/victory condition.

 

[Uberfrog]

That was a really useful discussion about Great Scientists, nice to hear a range of opinions. I have to admit I'm with @kaspergm here, I'm rarely organised enough with Campuses to get Classical or Medieval Scientists. In fact I find in general that with the AI beelining out of the early eras extremely quickly on higher difficulties, getting early GP of any sort is something you have to really go for. I really don't like the fact that even unclaimed GP get made obsolete quickly as the AI progress through the eras.

I agree with Dan's point at the end of the section about trade routes - I think trade routes should be tied with diplomacy order to unlock benefits to both parties (as that is surely the very definition of trade). It seems slightly archaic in fact that since Civ V BNW, trade has operated on two unrelated levels: the classic gold/gpt for luxuries in the diplomacy screen, and the map-based trader units. I think I'd like to see more coherence between map trade and the diplomatic side of the game in general.

Whenever the subject of mid-to-late game drag comes up I'm reminded of an idea I saw on these forums (https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...-science-victories-need-to-be-changed.620338/) where a technological runaway in any era can complete a series of projects/wonders in order to win a Science Victory early in the game. Also, as mentioned in this episode, Civ IV's Domination Victory, while not exactly the most exciting victory conceptually, certainly helps by calling the game early when one civ is miles ahead in terms of land and population. It really does seem to me that the fun goes out of the window when the outcome is a foregone conclusion, whether you are winning or not.

All in all, an excellent episode with lots to think about!

 

[kaspergm]

Whenever the subject of mid-to-late game drag comes up I'm reminded of an idea I saw on these forums (https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...-science-victories-need-to-be-changed.620338/) where a technological runaway in any era can complete a series of projects/wonders in order to win a Science Victory early in the game. Also, as mentioned in this episode, Civ IV's Domination Victory, while not exactly the most exciting victory conceptually, certainly helps by calling the game early when one civ is miles ahead in terms of land and population. It really does seem to me that the fun goes out of the window when the outcome is a foregone conclusion, whether you are winning or not.

I kind of like the idea of an earlier science victory. If one was going to come up with a different approach for science victory, I'd probably advocate for some sort of system with quests/projects several times during the game, which would earn you some sort of victory points towards science victory. I don't think there should be one for every era, but there could be one for Medieval era, one for Industrial era, perhaps one for Atomic era and then one for Information era (current space race).

I think for this to work, it should be something which is activated at certain points for all players, possibly similar to the joint projects of Civ5, but rather than (just) requiring hammers, you should be able to allocate science to it, i.e. to invent a certain number of specific objects or parts of the project. There could be a number of different objects/technologies to invent, some requiring more science (giving more points) and some requiring less science. This would make it a race between players and also add strategy - i.e. even if science leader gets to invent the object(s) for more points, other players can focus on less objects and thus still earn some points. A player could also choose to skip out on the project completely, if he's behind in science for instance, which would give him some room to catch up with tech leaders by researching "normal" technologies while they spent time researching the "project" technologies.

Besides earning victory points, the player could also get certain benefits from inventing these things. I think the medieval project should revolve around warfare and warmachines (perhaps something about siege engineering, gunpowder or canons) and could give you certain benefits to your military units. The one in industrial era should revolve about industry (something with steam engines, etc.) and give you benefits to your industrial zones. The one in atomic era should be related to atomic physics and give you advantages to scientific buildings, it could even tie in with the Manhatten project.

Anyway, these are just loose spur-of-the-moment ideas.

 

[Uberfrog]

Some ideas I've had for the earlier eras that seem fitting to a science victory would be represented by accumulating a number of specific great people and then completing a wonder.

For the Classical era you could repurpose the Great Library and if you complete that and fill it with, say, Socrates and Plato you'd win an early Science Victory.

In the Medieval, you could do a similar thing with Baghdad's House of Wisdom.

Then for the Renaissance, something like the Encyclopédie.

Then the Space Race resumes as usual once you reach the Modern and the shift goes towards Production instead of Great People.

 

[antimony]

I'd be interested in seeing someone doing the math, but it seems to me that with the 8-12 GPT I think I can normally get from a CS trade route early game, the 3-4 PPT I can get from an internal trade route gives me the better payoff, given that the exchange rate of gold to production is 4:1, if I'm not mistaken (actually, these numbers would suggest equal value, but I didn't check them in detail). But I may be off on this if one scrutinizes the actual numbers, it may well be a psychological issue also, since I just like to see the production time numbers go down when I get the extra production. Of course, the food from the internal trade route should not be forgotten.

4 gold to 1 prod is the worst exchange rate you can get, though, and gold has advantages over production in terms of convenience.

Unit upgrades without the policy card and great people patronage are about 3 to 1, and that gets better with the policy card and democracy, respectively. Of course there are other gold and production modifiers to consider.

 

[MadDjinn]

yeah, gold isn't really a 4:1 ratio anymore. it's far more valuable to go more gold than more production in civvi. Especially when sources of gold are more plentiful than production sources.

 

[kaspergm]

yeah, gold isn't really a 4:1 ratio anymore. it's far more valuable to go more gold than more production in civvi. Especially when sources of gold are more plentiful than production sources.

I don't quite understand the reasoning here. If sources of gold are more plentiful, that would seem to make production more valuable?

 

[DanQ]

I don't quite understand the reasoning here. If sources of gold are more plentiful, that would seem to make production more valuable?

In this case, production being less plentiful makes it less valuable in comparison to gold. Along with its greater versatility, gold generation outpaces production generation and in turn their respective investment capacity. Certainly any substantive means for increasing production is valuable for increasing production, as production sources aren't as plentiful, but its potential is not as great as gold as gold sources are more plentiful.