Should the building cost price increase mechanism in the current version be weakened or cancelled?

[john lisa]

Since the construction cost is linked to the total number of cities in the empire and the number of completed buildings in the current city, the construction cost in the mid-game even exceeds that of wonders. I believe designers should weaken or cancel the building cost price increase mechanism in the next version.

 

[marius_kaparius]

It is a good change and has made the game more interesting for me.

 

[MutilationWave]

I think it's dialed in pretty well for exploration but gets out of hand in modern, so I voted yes for weakening it. In my only post patch modern age I barely built any buildings.

 

[Leucarum]

I do think it's not working perfectly yet - but it's on the right track.

I don't think it's encouraging specialization so much as it's creating a hierarchy of which buildings to prioritize and which to ignore, so maybe there needs to be some accounting for building types? Or a rework of adjacencies?

I also think Urban Centres have become way more attractive relative to other town specializations so I think these need to be reworked too.

 

[stealth_nsk]

This system is fine. Increased building cost within a city surely needs to stay. Increased cost per city needs to stay unless there will be another restricting mechanics like the discussed idea that cities should eat 2 settlement limit points.

 

[UWHabs]

It gets a little out of hand, so I wouldn't hate to see it decrease a little. But maybe just re-scaled so the per-building bonus doesn't include obsolete buildings, for example.

 

[m_mus]

I think the new system of cost-progression really adresses the issue of gold-inflation effectively (and by that yield-inflation in general, since all yield-producing buildings are purchasable via gild).
What I was thinking about was, if that system should also extend to the building of wonders. Right now, after having already built up a huge city one can encounter the strange situation that building a wonder costs considerably less production than ordinary buildings. It feels counter-intuitive when a unique wonder requires less effort to build than a staple building.
Not only that, I think the gameplay-experience could profit as well, since introducing a cost-progression also for wonders would allow players / the AI to catch up. Eg.: Someone lagging behind can have a shot at building wonders, if the wonder in question would be the first for his/her city, whereas the one to compete against would face much higher production costs, if for him/her the wonder would be the 4th, 5th or even 6th. This would also make you think more strategically about which wonders to build, and you'd likely be less inclined to just build any wonder for adjacencies sake, if the specific boni don't interest you.

 

[Siptah]

I think the new system of cost-progression really adresses the issue of gold-inflation effectively (and by that yield-inflation in general, since all yield-producing buildings are purchasable via gild).
What I was thinking about was, if that system should also extend to the building of wonders. Right now, after having already built up a huge city one can encounter the strange situation that building a wonder costs considerably less production than ordinary buildings. It feels counter-intuitive when a unique wonder requires less effort to build than a staple building.
Not only that, I think the gameplay-experience could profit as well, since introducing a cost-progression also for wonders would allow players / the AI to catch up. Eg.: Someone lagging behind can have a shot at building wonders, if the wonder in question would be the first for his/her city, whereas the one to compete against would face much higher production costs, if for him/her the wonder would be the 4th, 5th or even 6th. This would also make you think more strategically about which wonders to build, and you'd likely be less inclined to just build any wonder for adjacencies sake, if the specific boni don't interest you.

This could also mean that the antiquity culture path requires to have 3 or more cities to finish it efficiently, instead of having this one capital that is really a behemoth. Poor Carthage and Khmer though if this would be a thing.

 

[pjotroos]

I don't think it's too aggressive as such, but it is creating the odd scenarios, especially in modern, where cities with a ton of obsolete buildings grind down to a halt. It also does nothing to encourage specialisation.

I'd like to see it changed so the cost increases across the empire for a specific building each time you build or buy one, so where you build your first kiln actually matters (and urban centres, Augustus and so on get some indirect nerfs).

I would also like the obsolete buildings to not count when you are overbuilding.

 

[Krikkit1]

This could also mean that the antiquity culture path requires to have 3 or more cities to finish it efficiently, instead of having this one capital that is really a behemoth. Poor Carthage and Khmer though if this would be a thing.

If there was a Wonder penalty, it should probably be per Wonder in your empire With no city or local building effects (which would make the Antiquity culture Legacy interesting and hard to get the full bonus for.)

 

[Leucarum]

I am curious how new players im particular find it. It is a layer of restriction which isn't super obvious. I wonder if players are finding their stuff gets more expensive, not understanding why, then bouncing off the game. Reviews did go down...

 

[stealth_nsk]

I am curious how new players im particular find it. It is a layer of restriction which isn't super obvious. I wonder if players are finding their stuff gets more expensive, not understanding why, then bouncing off the game. Reviews did go down...

I don't think it's possible to see such effects on reviews (number of positive/negative reviews is pretty small for any statistical correlation by itself and even if there would ve thousands of reviews daily, there are much bigger factors in play).

But yes, that's one of those obscure mechanics, which makes learning the game harder, especially providing help system is not great already.

 

[CliffCo]

They incresed it too much, i feel there should have been some sort of increase but what they did was excessive.

 

[Leucarum]

I don't think it's possible to see such effects on reviews (number of positive/negative reviews is pretty small for any statistical correlation by itself and even if there would ve thousands of reviews daily, there are much bigger factors in play).

But yes, that's one of those obscure mechanics, which makes learning the game harder, especially providing help system is not great already.

Yeah we have no way of knowing. I'm still curious.

 

[Siptah]

I am curious how new players im particular find it. It is a layer of restriction which isn't super obvious. I wonder if players are finding their stuff gets more expensive, not understanding why, then bouncing off the game. Reviews did go down...

Did people bounce off civ VI because of its districts becoming progressively more expensive?

 

[Leucarum]

Did people bounce off civ VI because of its districts becoming progressively more expensive?

This feels far more opaque. I like the changes, I think they are very much needed, but it's not signposted well and I could see it frustrating people, particularly newer ones.

 

[kaspergm]

Did people bounce off civ VI because of its districts becoming progressively more expensive?

The production cost scaling in Civ6 was always one of the worse features of that game imo., so I'm not sure using that as an example is the best argument to prove that things are right. Putting down new cities in Civ6 was notoriously annoying, and I only think people didn't complain too much because there were cheesy go-arounds like faith-buying with Moksha or trade routes that magically made production and food appear out of no-where.

 

[shaglio]

I feel like the poll choices aren’t properly representative of the question being asked. “Yes, it should be weakened “ and “yes, it should be cancelled” are two distinctively different options.

 

[Vandlys]

Since the construction cost is linked to the total number of cities in the empire and the number of completed buildings in the current city, the construction cost in the mid-game even exceeds that of wonders. I believe designers should weaken or cancel the building cost price increase mechanism in the next version.

Poll:

Should it be A or B?

Answer: yes.

 

[Siptah]

The production cost scaling in Civ6 was always one of the worse features of that game imo., so I'm not sure using that as an example is the best argument to prove that things are right. Putting down new cities in Civ6 was notoriously annoying, and I only think people didn't complain too much because there were cheesy go-arounds like faith-buying with Moksha or trade routes that magically made production and food appear out of no-where.

It was a genuine question.