Is it? You just take Authority and build 2 more Warriors and give it to CS.... It is a good trade for Siam, it really helps with early culture/faith. However if you do not have faith/culture CS nearby - you're screwed.
Statecraft - what kind, if any, changes would you like to see?
- Thread starter LukaSlovenia29
- Start date
You answered yourself, and gifting units works for everybody. Sure not all civs start with 35 influence (discovering at least one with ~20 is quite common though, and other civs have earlier boosts), but getting that 35 too early/at wrong moment means influence is gone before you can bump it. Realistically you gift to just one of those CS and if it's not cultural/religious and not hostile we're back to step 1.
I'd like to have a nice feeling when I discover a CS as Siam, the 'yay one more pokemon' sort of one, that's why a better meeting reward would be welcome and appropriate.
I'd like to have a nice feeling when I discover a CS as Siam, the 'yay one more pokemon' sort of one, that's why a better meeting reward would be welcome and appropriate.
LukaSlovenia29
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2016
- Messages
- 1,500
Gazebo, thanks for your reply to my suggestions.
To be clear, it's not that I want to avoid CSs being tied to statecraft, but rather I'm hoping that we can slightly modify it to be a little less dependent on having alliances to gain bonuses. Make sense?
G
LukaSlovenia29
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2016
- Messages
- 1,500
I understand and it makes sense. That's why my proposals were geared towards making it easier to establish friendships&alliances (by buffing production of diplo units&buildings,...). But I understand that you also wish to have a certain amount of bonuses independent from CS relations, and for that purpose I think the current opener you've recently introduced works well.
ashendashin
King
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2016
- Messages
- 989
What about focusing it even more towards trade? I was thinking about a buff to city connections from trade routes to city-states. Spread those yields out of the capital and maybe make the city connection yield depend on CS type.
AI unfriendly/just not happening?
In my most recent game (I was Carthage), I choose fealty and still was able to win a diplomatic victory. I allied one CS (a neighbor) and traded with him all game, but totally ignored all other city states. I took freedom's policy for 10 influence per great person, which immediately gave me friends with everyone and eventually allies with most. Then I just dedicated two spies towards coups, this along with random quest completion allowed me to eventually swing every city state to my control. I only used diplomatic units in 4 city states throughout the game.
Freedom's influence tools were more than enough to uproot the statecraft empires' grip on city states. I looked back and didn't see anything in statecraft that I really missed. The massive faith discounts and direct faith generation of fealty enabled me to eventually convert all civs without religions to mine, and eventually swing a founder to my religion as well. In my experience is by far the easiest way to gain WC control is passing world religion on the first session, and I think fealty helps to do this more than statecraft does.
I haven't used statecraft very much in a long time, so perhaps people with more experience can offer better suggestions than I can, but I really think it needs some per city yields. Fealty and even artistry just directly provide more yields and yields win games. Trade route bonuses are interesting and thematic, however the number of trade routes doesn't scale with city number. Furthermore, you compete with Fealty generating 5 gold per city from its scaler alone. There was not a single time that game where I looked back and wished I had statecraft instead.
The current opener is awkward. Its worth about 1 yield for every 4 citizens, which is is better than it sounds but its still crap compared to monasteries. 25 is a really large number, you lose a lot of yields due to rounding
Freedom's influence tools were more than enough to uproot the statecraft empires' grip on city states. I looked back and didn't see anything in statecraft that I really missed. The massive faith discounts and direct faith generation of fealty enabled me to eventually convert all civs without religions to mine, and eventually swing a founder to my religion as well. In my experience is by far the easiest way to gain WC control is passing world religion on the first session, and I think fealty helps to do this more than statecraft does.
I haven't used statecraft very much in a long time, so perhaps people with more experience can offer better suggestions than I can, but I really think it needs some per city yields. Fealty and even artistry just directly provide more yields and yields win games. Trade route bonuses are interesting and thematic, however the number of trade routes doesn't scale with city number. Furthermore, you compete with Fealty generating 5 gold per city from its scaler alone. There was not a single time that game where I looked back and wished I had statecraft instead.
The current opener is awkward. Its worth about 1 yield for every 4 citizens, which is is better than it sounds but its still crap compared to monasteries. 25 is a really large number, you lose a lot of yields due to rounding
Would you look at chaning it to something like +1 hammer and gold for every 5? About as strong, faith isn't thematic, reduces liquidity problems
Well I think the problem with statecraft is that fealty does its job better, lots of gold and production is exactly what I want if I'm pursuing city states.
LukaSlovenia29
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2016
- Messages
- 1,500
CrazyG, do you think removing the "Coup" and "10+ influence" policies from freedom and moving them to Statecraft would be a wise move? How would you buff Statecraft/nerf Fealty to make non-Fealty choices more appealing?
Gazebo, per 15 citizens sounds great!
Gazebo, per 15 citizens sounds great!
@Gazebo, previusly you said that you want Statecraft to help getting alliances, but not to be the only choice for DV. And yields should not be locked behind Statecraft.
If you want other policies to be viable in DV - give them something for DV. Like with Tourism - all three policy trees have some tourism bonuses, but Artistry has more. How do you feel about granting some votes/paper/(something that helps with CS) to Fealty and Artistry?
Ideas:
Fealty:
gets votes for CSs following your religion
gets +10(+5) influence when spreading religion to CS
gets paper from Temples (i dislike this as it is too similar to Statecraft, but i have no other paper ideas about paper)
Artistry:
gets paper from all Guilds
gets paper/votes for every expended Great Writer (for every Great Work of Writing that you have)
Though Statecraft should get more stuff towards DV and as you was always saying - DV should be about playing Wide. This means that Statecraft should get something that helps with City-States and scales with number of cities.
I suggest giving Statecraft paper from Chanceries and WSs and make all CS yields work in every city
If you want other policies to be viable in DV - give them something for DV. Like with Tourism - all three policy trees have some tourism bonuses, but Artistry has more. How do you feel about granting some votes/paper/(something that helps with CS) to Fealty and Artistry?
Ideas:
Fealty:
gets votes for CSs following your religion
gets +10(+5) influence when spreading religion to CS
gets paper from Temples (i dislike this as it is too similar to Statecraft, but i have no other paper ideas about paper)
Artistry:
gets paper from all Guilds
gets paper/votes for every expended Great Writer (for every Great Work of Writing that you have)
Though Statecraft should get more stuff towards DV and as you was always saying - DV should be about playing Wide. This means that Statecraft should get something that helps with City-States and scales with number of cities.
I suggest giving Statecraft paper from Chanceries and WSs and make all CS yields work in every city
tu_79
Deity
Hey, is not that bad that statecraft is not required for diplo victories. In fact, I find it correct. But I think that each medieval tree should give more punch than the others when the conditions are right.
Artistry rewards and helps to produce great people and great works. Statecraft rewards and helps to stablish CS alliances and foreign trade routes. Fealty rewards and helps to expand and spread religion. Right?
Obviously, producing great works, expanding and stablishing CS alliances are not exclusive for those trees, and they are useful for many things. The idea is that a civ 'focusing' on such themes is going to earn more benefits than a civ that fails to focus on the theme of its chosen policy tree.
Theorically, I should be able to win a diplomatic victory with artistry. The extra great people and yields from great works, if done properly, could grant enough yields, that can be used for holding CS alliances and early embassies, via extra Great Diplomats. Fealty could do the same, via world religion. Statecraft only makes more sense, since extra yields from CS allies encourages the players to keep many allies, thus extra votes.
A domination victory is always possible, only it's more difficult when picking artistry. A scientific victory is doable with both fealty and artisty, a bit less with statecraft. A cultural victory is doable with artistry and statecraft (via trade routes), and even with fealty (via historical events) but less likely.
But, and I'm only guessing here, it could be that civs with a focus in city states and trade routes, just have a difficult start, since trade routes are few, and diplomatic buildings come later. (incidentally, the same it's very difficult to profit from artistry in the beginning without a tradition start). So it could be happening that the yields from the policy are right, but the play style is weak, at least until industrial age, when you can purchase diplo units to your heart's content.
Artistry rewards and helps to produce great people and great works. Statecraft rewards and helps to stablish CS alliances and foreign trade routes. Fealty rewards and helps to expand and spread religion. Right?
Obviously, producing great works, expanding and stablishing CS alliances are not exclusive for those trees, and they are useful for many things. The idea is that a civ 'focusing' on such themes is going to earn more benefits than a civ that fails to focus on the theme of its chosen policy tree.
Theorically, I should be able to win a diplomatic victory with artistry. The extra great people and yields from great works, if done properly, could grant enough yields, that can be used for holding CS alliances and early embassies, via extra Great Diplomats. Fealty could do the same, via world religion. Statecraft only makes more sense, since extra yields from CS allies encourages the players to keep many allies, thus extra votes.
A domination victory is always possible, only it's more difficult when picking artistry. A scientific victory is doable with both fealty and artisty, a bit less with statecraft. A cultural victory is doable with artistry and statecraft (via trade routes), and even with fealty (via historical events) but less likely.
But, and I'm only guessing here, it could be that civs with a focus in city states and trade routes, just have a difficult start, since trade routes are few, and diplomatic buildings come later. (incidentally, the same it's very difficult to profit from artistry in the beginning without a tradition start). So it could be happening that the yields from the policy are right, but the play style is weak, at least until industrial age, when you can purchase diplo units to your heart's content.
tu_79
Deity
If this is the case, then any buff to Statecraft should be stronger in the short term. Buffings spies when there are only 1-2 spies now, and there are 8 spies end game is the opposite. Trade routes also increase a lot later.
Granting a special promotion to all diplo units with extra 5 or 10 flat influence is short termed. It's much better in early diplo units, when influence is around 35. It also helps civs that recently took statecraft (and they did because many city states are reachable) to make new allies. Diplo units are not so limited when statecraft is picked, even if you can only have one diplo at the same time, you could produce/purchase another as soon as the first one is expended. Generally, there's a lot of buildings waiting to be built and military units waiting to be produced, so if you invest in diplo units non stop, you need a very good reason.
So what I'm considering doing is this:
This widens statecraft a bit, and narrows fealty a bit, bringing them back towards the center.
G
I like everything except that statecraft opener :/ Flat wide production is already the realm of another tree; it's obviously going to work and the numbers are at first impression balanced, it's just bland.
Edit: and, yeah, I have no meaningful idea to contribute to the discussion yet.
Edit: and, yeah, I have no meaningful idea to contribute to the discussion yet.
There just aren't a lot of ways to add yields to statecraft without stepping on the toes of other branches (Within the existing code, mind you). I could add yields to city connections, perhaps, but by medieval that's largely tantamount to just giving out yields. And I'm desperately trying to avoid new code.
G
LukaSlovenia29
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2016
- Messages
- 1,500
Gazebo, what happens with monasteries if this is the new Fealty opener?
In general, I like the Fealty nerf.
Statecraft opener and scaler seem weak to me. I know you're trying to add yields to statecraft, but I'd still rather have +% to building diplomatic units/buildings and +% to city state's yields in the opener or scaler. Or, given the new scarcity of paper, perhaps the added yields in statecraft would be 1 paper per 1,2,..., city, which I'd rather have than 4 production in each city.
In general, I like the Fealty nerf.
Statecraft opener and scaler seem weak to me. I know you're trying to add yields to statecraft, but I'd still rather have +% to building diplomatic units/buildings and +% to city state's yields in the opener or scaler. Or, given the new scarcity of paper, perhaps the added yields in statecraft would be 1 paper per 1,2,..., city, which I'd rather have than 4 production in each city.
