Republic in fire

[Sandro]

I think this discussion belongs in the Design:Civics thread:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=159365

That thread is in need of some more feedback, since the civics (not only Republic, but also the all-powerful God King and probably more) needs more work/balancing imho.

 

[onedreamer]

it doesn't add any depth in choice, it's a forced choice. Sure when you have a huge empire you have enough resources to counter it, but if you're not huge Republic is not a choice... and besides that I'm not speaking only of the human player but also and especially of the AI, which always converts to Republic sooner or later in any of my games.

 

[Maniac]

I think this discussion belongs in the Design:Civics thread:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=159365

That thread is in need of some more feedback, since the civics (not only Republic, but also the all-powerful God King and probably more) needs more work/balancing imho.

Perhaps you should try out Rise of Mania which changes many civics?

 

[Sandro]

It definitely looks interesting - I like most of the changes I see. I will probably wait until after it has been fire-updated though

 

[Bringa]

Maniac, I think it might be good if you could list your civic changes and explain the reasoning behind them. The list in your RoM post isn't really helpful because many of these things rely on other stuff you've done in RoM (taking away gold bonus from aristocracy only makes sense with your farm + town concept which I can't see the team adopting any time soon).

 

[Maniac]

I will probably wait until after it has been fire-updated though

That's probably a good idea. Though I don't know when I'll have the time do do that.

Maniac, I think it might be good if you could list your civic changes and explain the reasoning behind them. The list in your RoM post isn't really helpful because many of these things rely on other stuff you've done in RoM (taking away gold bonus from aristocracy only makes sense with your farm + town concept which I can't see the team adopting any time soon).

While the farm effects of Aristocracy and Agriculture wouldn't work in Rise of Mania, I think the way these civics were changed would benefit regular FfH too even without also using the farm->town line. Aristocracy (happiness through military) offers an interesting strategy in RoM. A pity that was removed in v16 of FfH. And while I haven't played any game where the Agriculture civic provided its effect of +2 food, -1 hammer for farms, people have said that civic has become way too attractive in regular FfH. A +10% food production bonus seems more balanced IMO, keeping it an attractive choice throughout the entire game, but not the only good choice.

Anyway, I think these changes would benefit FfH without any other changes necessary:

2. Aristocracy: requires Monarchy. No more farm effects. Provides military happiness. Basically the former Hereditary Rule civic.
3. Default cultural civic added: Naturalism. No effects. All civs’ initial cultural civic changed to Naturalism.
4. Religion requires Mysticism. Provides +1 happiness with Pagan Temple and no longer all five religious temples.
5. Pacifism requires Philosophy. Provides +75% Great People points.
6. Nationhood requires Fanaticism. Provides +1 happiness with Training Yard and Archery Range. Can draft three units per turn. No military production bonus anymore.
7. Basilica gives +2 happiness under Social Order.
8. Consumption no longer provides extra happiness for the Market and Inn. Instead Consumption provides 1 happiness per 20% gold spending. Gambling House de facto removed and recycled as the mechanic which provides 1 happiness per 20% gold spending.
10. Military State: Can no longer draft. Provides free unit maintenance for 25% of the population.
14. Agriculture provides +10% food production, but no more farm effects.
18. Fend for Themselves gives units +1 free XP. Good AIs cannot run the Fend for Themselves civic.
20. Apprenticeship requires Archery instead of Education.
21. Under Military Discipline units gain one extra experience per combat. Not cumulative with Valor.

Anyway, while the FfH team members obviously excel at thinking up creative new ideas and concepts, my impression is they're not very good at (or at least I'm better ) or not interested in balancing the game as a whole, so I'd say you're better off just playing RoM or change stuff yourself instead of waiting for the FfH team to see the light.

 

[TheJopa]

I think that design team desn't really have time to do that kind of stuff, they are more concerned with adding features and bugfixing. That is why I also balanced my FfH. If it will make it more fun to you, do it. But ultimately, I would like to have one, universal FfH which all players will accept as more or less balanced. Then we're off to multiplayer!

 

[Maniac]

I think that design team desn't really have time to do that kind of stuff

There are a couple balance problems often mentioned in the forum, plus possible solutions available. They don't need to do it themselves anymore.

they are more concerned with adding features

Indeed. Personally I'm a bit concerned they're having their priorities wrong. Adding before balancing the old stuff first.

 

[chocmushroom]

it doesn't add any depth in choice, it's a forced choice. Sure when you have a huge empire you have enough resources to counter it, but if you're not huge Republic is not a choice... and besides that I'm not speaking only of the human player but also and especially of the AI, which always converts to Republic sooner or later in any of my games.

Which is why I started this thread, in any games where you don't have Republic you are forced to do everything you can to counter the negative effects republic, all other civs, once one has it will change to republic to counter this effect, which will lead the non-republic civs into getting republic to counter the This leads to most games I play where every civ is a republic, which is not the large choice scope of FFH2

 

[vyapti]

Maybe unhappiness effect should be moved to Liberty which, right now, is a niche civic at best.

 

[Gamestation]

I'd like Liberty to have the unhappiness effect. Just make the AI priority to adopt Liberty is really low otherwise we'll be seeing the AI switching to Liberty even in the middle of a war. Actually that already happens which is not good for the AI at all.

 

[AlterMann]

There are a couple balance problems often mentioned in the forum, plus possible solutions available. They don't need to do it themselves anymore.



Indeed. Personally I'm a bit concerned they're having their priorities wrong. Adding before balancing the old stuff first.

stop this blasphemy und have patience

 

[Adrogans]

I like the ideas regarding it being on liberty. Both the effect moved to it and the high dislike by the vast majority of leaders to switching to it.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Indeed. Personally I'm a bit concerned they're having their priorities wrong. Adding before balancing the old stuff first.

As far as I can see, this has always been their priority set. Add in all the big stuff before balancing it all with respect to everything else. Probably saves a heck of a lot of work, as they'd otherwise have to go through a balance phase in between everything they add.

I personally don't see a problem with Republic. There's still the option of sticking with civics you prefer more, it just becomes tougher as the game goes on. Each game you have to ask yourself: what's better for my empire? Negating a few unhappies in my cities by switching to Republic, or sticking with [instert civic here] because of the other benefits?

Now, the unhappies (or the benefits of Republic) could probably be turned down a little, especially with the emphasis on the late game in Fire, but the mechanic itself is far from being a gamebreaker.

Edit: also, moving it to another civic could also work if Republic is too strong with the other features right now.

 

[Maniac]

As far as I can see, this has always been their priority set. Add in all the big stuff before balancing it all with respect to everything else. Probably saves a heck of a lot of work, as they'd otherwise have to go through a balance phase in between everything they add.

I'm not talking about balancing the new stuff, but the old stuff which I assume isn't scheduled to change anymore. You know, civics, issues such as the hunter being too attractive a tier 2 unit, the mounted/archery tech branches being useless... But whatever...

 

[loki1232]

Well in a way we have balanced the hunter with the addition of two mechanics--
ore system (axemen become useable without copper at the same strenght as hunters, so you can upgrade your already experienced warriors)
and seperate attack defense, so the archer is now 2/4 with +25% city defense(i think), the best defensive unit of the t2s.

Mounted are still a little underpowered but I think we're expanding the ore system to the melee ones soon.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

I'm not talking about balancing the new stuff, but the old stuff which I assume isn't scheduled to change anymore. You know, civics, issues such as the hunter being too attractive a tier 2 unit, the mounted/archery tech branches being useless... But whatever...

I never said I necessarily liked the policy, but there it is.

Well in a way we have balanced the hunter with the addition of two mechanics--
ore system (axemen become useable without copper at the same strenght as hunters, so you can upgrade your already experienced warriors)
and seperate attack defense, so the archer is now 2/4 with +25% city defense(i think), the best defensive unit of the t2s.

Mounted are still a little underpowered but I think we're expanding the ore system to the melee ones soon.

Any chance of making horsemen, say, 4A/2D? I know how much Kael loathes patterns, but it would very effectively make horses hit-and-run only, and make them very good at it.

 

[loki1232]

Any chance of making horsemen, say, 4A/2D? I know how much Kael loathes patterns, but it would very effectively make horses hit-and-run only, and make them very good at it.

Hmm. Not a bad idea.
Another thing I'd like to see is mounted units just getting a base +20% in general to show that well trained horsemen are devastating against equivalent units on foot.

 

[Lloyien]

Hmm. Not a bad idea.
Another thing I'd like to see is mounted units just getting a base +20% in general to show that well trained horsemen are devastating against equivalent units on foot.

I would like to see the mounted tech line given more emphasis, personally. Unless I play Grigori or Hippus, I just ignore it. Hippus because...well, it's obvious, and the Grigori because there's nothing quite like a Horseman with Forest Stealth and Sentry 2.

For example, maybe a production or commerce bonus added to Pastures (and possibly camps and plantations) to emphasize improved efficiency, much like sanitation adds a +1 food bonus to farms, and gunpowder (I believe) adds a +1 production bonus to mines. Which tech to give these tile improvements bonii to, I wouldn't necessarily know.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

For example, maybe a production or commerce bonus added to Pastures (and possibly camps and plantations) to emphasize improved efficiency, much like sanitation adds a +1 food bonus to farms, and gunpowder (I believe) adds a +1 production bonus to mines. Which tech to give these tile improvements bonii to, I wouldn't necessarily know.

I like this. Maybe add a midway tech between Stirrups and Horseback Riding that is devoted to this... alternately, rename Stirrups to something that would make sense with an improvement upgrade.