Porcelain Tower.

Yes, PT is pretty worthless in MP.

That's not true. If the player can have a superior army by that time, it's preferable to burn an engineer for PT and bulb artillery later for a large dominating window. The +2 free scientists points help to get the extra GS in time to realize this. You need to rush buy a university most of the time because capital have still many things to build.

Otherwise, it's better to rush Himeji and use this wonder for best defence or counter attacks.

This PT rush is very strong. It's the only way to get artillery under 120 turns at quick speed.
 
Research agreements now give a tech boost instead of a free tech. Tech boosts start at 50% of the median value of all techs you can research. Can be boosted to 100% if you both start Rationalism and build the Porcelain Tower.

I interpret this to mean PT affects RAs for you and your partner.
 
I interpret this to mean PT affects RAs for you and your partner.

That would actually be very cool for both balancing the PT and making other players want to trade with you.
Rationalism though wouldn't be a very good idea if you mean that if both players have opened rationalism, then they get +100% beakers from RAs each.
 
I interpret this to mean PT affects RAs for you and your partner.

Assuming you belong to the "PT will now be overpowered" crowd, then this would certainly balance things a bit. That hadn't occured to me, and it's an interesting thought.

However, I just don't interpret it that way. Or in the least, it's a crapshoot trying to decipher the devs sometimes poor grammar ;)

Furthermore, I think I fall into the "PT probably isn't nearly as OP as many are making it out to be". With every patch there is a strong desire to interpret things from a "the sky is falling" viewpoint, which I find is usually wrong. The devs aren't prefect, but they've been doing a pretty good job so far. I for one am giving them the benefit of the doubt, for the most part.

Keep in mind we don't know much at all about re-jiggered tech costs, re-jiggered SP costs, etc, etc etc. The Devil's in the details :undecide:
 
That's not true. If the player can have a superior army by that time, it's preferable to burn an engineer for PT and bulb artillery later for a large dominating window.

So you're beelining Steel, slapping up a Workshop at MC and staffing it while you run up to Education? Interesting.

Keep in mind we don't know much at all about re-jiggered tech costs, re-jiggered SP costs, etc, etc etc. The Devil's in the details :undecide:

None of that stuff matters all that much. France will be able to Liberty -> GE -> HS -> PT with certainty, given what we know. Late game tech costs don't matter since almost every late game tech is achieved via RA or GS. In fact, increasing the tech costs just makes the PT and the Rationalism opener that much better.

It was obvious that the .217 reworks of Meritocracy and Landed Elite were bad ideas; it's similarly obvious that nerfing RAs to half strength but leaving an easily attainable pathway to get the full effect is a bad idea for SP play.
 
yes that's correct Martin, as i said in another post i would of capped the RA bonus at 75% or preferably kept it unaffected at 50% I also would of nerfed scholasticism some more. Still to many ways to easily tech in this game.

As to the Porcelain tower perhaps make it have +1 science per 2pop in the city its built & a GS instead of its new bonus. They could fix HS by giving it a free artist or merchant instead of any GL.
 
And then there are those more realistic scenarios in which 2 civs get wiped out, 2 are hostile/guarded with impossible demands, and 3 remain friendly... for some time.

I have multiple sheets of paper in front of me, they are lists of ticks and crosses concening RAs from previous games versus nine civs. Playing my style (OCCs) on archipelago, never making friendships, never refusing open borders, trading with as many civs as possible and all games finished before 1900, the least amount of RAs in a game is 28 and the most is 39. So it really does depend on what type of game you play!
 
Yes, they said so explicitly in the Patch notes (each gives +50% of beakers per RA, so if RAs give half now, you get 100% beakers again).
 
@Bibor, it's like a drop of blood to a tank of hungry sharks, ;)

@Martin Alvito, note the "etc etc etc" I wrote. I simply disagree that all of the unknown factors such as dev grammar interpretation, changes that are explicitly mentioned but their details are not, the distinct possibility of undocumented changes, the distinct possibility that more changes or tweaks to listed changes will occur, don't, as you put it, "really matter".

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that personally I am not convinced of any "doomsday" scenarios until the patch is out and play testing has confirmed them.
 
It's not really a "doomsday" thing, is it? I think it'll just result in a clear strategy influence (possession of the Porcelain Tower).

Like I mentioned to one of the other posters, from now on any post-mortem will specify whether or not the player got it or not. That's not the case now, because it's not much of an influence.

More and more I'm thinking of how to capture it instead of build it, though.

ps - I don't think there's any reason to believe the PT bonus will apply to both partners of a research agreement, though.
 
ps - I don't think there's any reason to believe the PT bonus will apply to both partners of a research agreement, though.

I'm pretty sure it won't apply to both. Though if it did I suppose you could always try to trade with the guy who got it :p. But I REALLY doubt that's how it will work.

Personally I know I will most likely just skip the PT if RAs are still as bad as I think they are. Not because it isn't good... but because I don't believe the RA mechanics have been fixed enough to bring them into balance with the rest of the options. So I think my games may be harder but also more fun by still avoiding RAs :).

RAs are more powerful than so many other options that they take too much of the game away from me. Fun == variety.
 
agh, re: difficulty, don't agree. I think we're going to be in serious catch-up mode now with the late NC, and I'll be spraying RA's, trying for Scholasticism, and constructing my own research buildings in major cities.

In other words, I think it'll be hard even with RA's.

I can overcome a mass handicap (AI tactically weak) and a gold generation handicap ("exploits"), but lagging in tech is a killer.
 
The Hagia Sophia pre-patch would actually be capable of producing more free wonders than the new one, to be fair. Yes it didn't produce it instantly... but that +33% could be turned into many extra GEs than just 1. Also it could be used before to grab many extra techs via extra GSs.

I know that an extra +33% GPP generation != +33% extra GP... but it comes close if you have enough cities dedicated to it. So I don't think it is out of line to suggest that over the game that extra +33% could generate you 4 or 5 extra GPs. So now it actually generates less but gives you a free GP. So I think its kind of a wash. It's not better or worse (on an entire game scale). Now because you can time and select that first GP... well that might boost it up a bit. But I'd argue you could get a GE about the same time by aiming for metal casting and building a workshop about the same time. If the HS didn't give a GP then it would barely better than building a garden in cities that you want GPP.

Depending on how RAs ultimately work, it will take at least 24 landings to get that 6 extra free techs from the PT. And if they are targetting expensive techs (or random techs) it may take even more to get a free tech from it. GSs can be used to target very expensive techs anytime they are available. So generating 4 or 5 extra GSes may actually be much more powerful than boosting RAs.

These numbers are rough and may not refelct your actual playstyle. So boosts from HS and PT may vary :). However it may have been a very wise idea on the part of the devs to limit the production of GPP via +%s as they may very well be the new power teching option.

Maybe you loose out on one GP (post patch) in the course of the game, but you are recompensed for the (one) with a free one of your choice at a critical time when if you intend to play the RA pursuit game, the Porcelain Tower is a must have! I havn't changed my mind, now that I have experimented post patch.
I share your admiration for the Hagia Sofia pre patch.
GL
 
I interpret this to mean PT affects RAs for you and your partner.

I have played enough post patch games now to believe this is not the case. I would even go as far as saying the AI are more likely to break a research agreement with us after we have aquired the PT! Early days as yet, I know, but I was having a higher percentage of RAs broken than ever before and they allways seemed to occur after getting the PT.
I have given up on that type of game for now, so strongly do I believe the above mentioned to be the case. I keep scanning the forum in the hopes that someone else will touch on the subject, I must assume that if they do not, then I am wrong!
I was very very cross a couple of days back, I had pre planned a couple of RAs (my first two), to coincide with the building of the PT. Five turns before completion Rome arrived at my borders with a sizeable army (20 hexes from their nearest City) and only Eight turns away from our RA completion. The very turn I completed the PT they built a City and declared war and the USA followed suit. Two RAs almost complete down the swanny! I had no problem capturing their City but that is not the point.
I have taken to playing one v one games until I am convinced (through this forum) one way or the other about AI responses to us building the Porcelain Tower!

GL with the new patch to all of you.
 
Colin, my apologies for initially stopping over an insignificant little feature of your OP instead of replying to your post.

I too think the PT is problematic - and same with the Hagia. I'm afraid your football allegory is spot-on.

I would be very surprised if it was found PT/Rationalism makes RA more beneficial to 'opponent' as well. I've got nothing to back it up, though.

With that said, I think you may possibly be correct about new AI reluctance to form RA's in the form of DOWing after having signed one. Post patch, I've been able to snag the Tower in nearly every game (Prince, Emperor and Immortal levels, finished as much as three or four games) and I've lost a lot of agreements due to DOWs. You may be on to something - or it may be just the AI acting up, as usual.
 
Porcelain Tower is great, but not game breaking OP. You need to put effort into maximzing RA's, with a req tech, policy (excluding Piety), wonder and some gold.
It follows the intention that when you put effort into it, you can have great things. Same gos for happiness. That makes civ so great.
 
Porcelain Tower is great, but not game breaking OP. You need to put effort into maximzing RA's, with a req tech, policy (excluding Piety), wonder and some gold.
It follows the intention that when you put effort into it, you can have great things. Same gos for happiness. That makes civ so great.

It has to improve with map size, too. I usually play small maps, so I might not get the mileage out of it that others do.
 
Top Bottom