Spring Patch Info

[Siptah]

Or the procedure was done intentionally to keep us alert. News was slow in the last weeks and it could have been a marketing stunt for the fans. Unlikely in my opinion.

 

[Abaxial]

Will the game now load custom maps from the menu?

 

[SupremacyKing2]

Or the procedure was done intentionally to keep us alert. News was slow in the last weeks and it could have been a marketing stunt for the fans. Unlikely in my opinion.

Or it was an intentional leak to get our feedback on the patch changes before they release it?

 

[historix69]

They are testing our reactions by giving us a short view on patch content and then removing it and following the forum discussions to identify shortcomings of the patch prior to release. So they can fix it before patch-release.

Or it was an intentional leak to get our feedback on the patch changes before they release it?

Nice coincidence ^^

 

[Tech Osen]

They are testing our reactions by giving us a short view on patch content and then removing it and following the forum discussions to identify shortcomings of the patch prior to release. So they can fix it before patch-release.

I admire your optimism.

 

[blackbutterfly]

Or it was an intentional leak to get our feedback on the patch changes before they release it?

Well at least modders know to stop work now cos the patch will likely break stuff. So it's a good time to take a break from Civ until they drop the patch. Netflix & chill?

 

[SupremacyKing2]

I do really appreciate that Firaxis listens to this community. It's great that the upcoming patch will address 3 areas that have been widely discussed on this very forum (Magnus' OP promotion, Brokenness of joint wars and Loyalty's shortcomings).

 

[WillowBrook]

Well at least modders know to stop work now cos the patch will likely break stuff. So it's a good time to take a break from Civ until they drop the patch. Netflix & chill?

I decided to start a scenario last night as I still have a bunch of scenario achievements to get. That will distract me until regular game stuff gets straightened out.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

New England Strategy:
1:Build 10 Royal navy dockyard until the last turn
2: Unlock Redcoat
3: Finish all of the dockyards in 1 turn.
4: Conquer the world
5: A dockyard may cost 50~100 hammer, but it gives you a 340 hammer 75-strength redcoat instantly, making them super useful( and imbalanced).

 

[bonafide11]

- cities will same religion will gain loyalty. cities with opposite religion will lose loyalty.

Religion affecting loyalty is a neat idea, but for the life of me, I can't figure out why tourism does not affect loyalty. It would make sense historically and also give tourism an actual gameplay use besides trying for culture victory. The way it stands now, tourism has no affect on anything if you're not going for a culture victory, which is sort of stupid.

 

[Uberfrog]

New England Strategy:
1:Build 10 Royal navy dockyard until the last turn
2: Unlock Redcoat
3: Finish all of the dockyards in 1 turn.
4: Conquer the world
5: A dockyard may cost 50~100 hammer, but it gives you a 340 hammer 75-strength redcoat instantly, making them super useful( and imbalanced).

Yeah, free Redcoats are pretty good, especially considering they otherwise have to be built from scratch. Still it's still much worse than getting one for free whenever you settle a new city. The bonus, of course is that now these RNDs don't have to be on a different continent.

 

[Abraxis]

- More turtles

I'm not sure if this is good or bad.
On one hand turtles are the cutest resource (step aside truffle pigs) so more of them is great.
On the other, sailing around the world looking for turtles was one of the best mini-games.

I wonder why they changed it.

 

[historix69]

As far as I know :
Turtles only spawn on reefs with a small chance and reefs only spawn with a small chance in certain regions of the world in coastal areas, so the combined chance for "correct region" + "coastal" + "reef" + "turtles" was so small that in many games there were no turtles at all.

 

[acluewithout]

Yeah, free Redcoats are pretty good, especially considering they otherwise have to be built from scratch. Still it's still much worse than getting one for free whenever you settle a new city. The bonus, of course is that now these RNDs don't have to be on a different continent.

I thought the patch was going to give you a Melee unit when you settle a new city and when you build a RND. If it's only when you build a RND then ... I mean ... I'm just speechless. That's worse than the previous version of Pax B, which was worse than the version before that, and then England's whole trade thing was nerfed before that...

...is there some sore of England hate I'm missing here?

 

[Abraxis]

no turtles at all.

how dreadful

I hardly ever reveal every tile so I just assumed they were always out there... somewhere... waiting.

Hopefully they will still be rare-ish.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

I can't figure out why tourism does not affect loyalty. It would make sense historically and also give tourism an actual gameplay use besides trying for culture victory. The way it stands now, tourism has no affect on anything if you're not going for a culture victory, which is sort of stupid.

I completely agree that tourism should have a real gameplay effect and not just be a bucket for the culture victory. But I am not sure how tourism relates to city loyalty. Tourism in the game is the desire for people to visit a certain city because of its cultural attractions (wonders, great works etc). Tourists don't really care who controls the city, they just want to see the cultural attractions. I think culture should affect loyalty absolutely, but not tourism. A city with a high "french" culture should want to remain under French control for example. But I don't think tourism should play any role. The fact that a lot of say German tourists visit Paris to see the Eiffel tower should not make Paris want to flip to Germany. Or are you suggesting that the city sending tourists would want to flip to the city that the tourists are visiting? Basically, the visiting tourists make their home city want to join the civ with the high tourism. So a German city might flip to France because a lot of Germans are visiting French tourists sites? That could work maybe.

I think a better use of tourism would be to affect war. Specifically, a civ that is sending a lot of tourists to another civ should be less likely to declare war on that civ and would incur heavier war weariness if it does declare war. Basically, your people don't like the idea of going to war against a country that they love to visit as tourists. I think that would make sense.

 

[acluewithout]

It would make sense if "cultural strength" generally impacted loyalty. Think of the fall of communism. One thing that drove that (amongst many other things) was some people having access to Western films, literature, etc. and deciding that they liked (some of / all of ) Western life better. "Tourism" as it's used in Civ is probably closest to that sort of influence, although IRL saying "tourism" influences loyalty is a bit weird.

Firaxis seem to be very cautious about how yields and "buckets" interact, in case they create impossible to escape downward spirals or unstoppable snowballing. I suspect they're being cautious about expanding what influences loyalty for that reason. Let's see how religion goes first.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

Firaxis seem to be very cautious about how yields and "buckets" interact, in case they create impossible to escape downward spirals or unstoppable snowballing. I suspect they're being cautious about expanding what influences loyalty for that reason. Let's see how religion goes first.

Yeah, the thing with loyalty is that it needs to apply some pressure but not too much that players lose cities and can't do anything about it. You want to minimize instances of cities instant flipping because the loyalty pressure is too strong. Players should be able to prevent most flipping if they use the available tools correctly. If both religion and culture exert too much loyalty pressure, it could stack and create flips that are impossible to prevent. That could be very frustrating to the player. Getting the balance just right is very tricky.

 

[bonafide11]

I completely agree that tourism should have a real gameplay effect and not just be a bucket for the culture victory. But I am not sure how tourism relates to city loyalty. Tourism in the game is the desire for people to visit a certain city because of its cultural attractions (wonders, great works etc). Tourists don't really care who controls the city, they just want to see the cultural attractions. I think culture should affect loyalty absolutely, but not tourism. A city with a high "french" culture should want to remain under French control for example. But I don't think tourism should play any role. The fact that a lot of say German tourists visit Paris to see the Eiffel tower should not make Paris want to flip to Germany. Or are you suggesting that the city sending tourists would want to flip to the city that the tourists are visiting? Basically, the visiting tourists make their home city want to join the civ with the high tourism. So a German city might flip to France because a lot of Germans are visiting French tourists sites? That could work maybe.

I think a better use of tourism would be to affect war. Specifically, a civ that is sending a lot of tourists to another civ should be less likely to declare war on that civ and would incur heavier war weariness if it does declare war. Basically, your people don't like the idea of going to war against a country that they love to visit as tourists. I think that would make sense.

Technically, yes, culture makes more sense than tourism to affect loyalty, but I like to think tourism is just sort of mis-named. In my mind, tourism is just an abstract concept of how much another Civ desires to imitate your civilization or how inspired by your civilization it is, which if you look at it that way, then historically, it would make sense for "tourism" to affect loyalty. After all, in the game, when your tourism is strong enough, you reach "influence over" another civilization, which obviously should affect loyalty then too. Culture is after all already useful in the larger gameplay sense, while tourism isn't. Being influential over another civilization makes 0 impact on any other aspect of the game until you win a culture victory. Loyalty is the obvious way of fixing that I think.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

The video is back up!