Suggested revisions ahead of the RT expansion

Yeah, that's the enormous importance of the early game. :)

Balancing this stuff is a bit difficult in general, because early game bonuses can be SO strong if they allow you to get something that gets you even further ahead. But if you make them weaker, then they become boring. If you just boost later bonuses to be strong enough to compensate for the delay, then these may feel like you have to really focus on getting them - which may then feel really limiting very fast. I think part of the problem is that the game doesn't really have that many mechanisms that let you catch up when a sponsor gets ahead.

I think a free clinic in every city would be a lot weaker than the relic. Still a decent bonus to free some production, but you don't get the "free culture" at the same time. +1 Science (and of course health) is still a nice bonus, but I don't think it's as op, if at all.
 
Well, the discussions I remember were differently, but maybe different people had different opinions. Don't think we have to go into too much depth about that, as it's an empty discussion that will lead to no important points anyway.


You were talking about relocating existing population. If you didn't have tiles with decent food yields before getting the specialist slots, then how exactly did that city gain the additional population that now out of nowhere needs to be relocated?



No, you're just wrong here, and it doesn't get right just because you repeat it. Each pop consumes 2 food. Here's the proof:
Spoiler :

And it doesn't matter if it's in a specialist slot or if it's working a tile.


Already covered most of that above and why it is not a good thing to just focus on getting maximum food in the last post - the thing about academies. This is not Civ 5 where stacking population is the most important thing.


Well, if there's no tile left that can build a tile improvement, then getting additional population in that city is very, very low priority anyway. It's still not worth wasting 255 production so you can, somewhere down the line, get +1 science from that additional pop that the mass digester may have squeezed out. I mean going to pop 10 requires 168 food - so that mass digester would need 79 turn to accumulate that 10th population if the alternative is a snow tile. If any ocean tile is available toe "bonus-pop" the mass digester gains you needs 168 turns. It's just not worth it.


(Already went through all of that above - see screenshot, you're wrong.)


Alright, so you ARE talking semantics.


No, Grower Specialists are EXACTLY as lacking as that building that I dreamed up there. You're trading 255 production for +1 science maybe somewhere down the line, if the game takes really, really long, then +2 science.


No. No, just no. Man, you're thinking a lot about that, but you're still missing the key problem that makes Grower Specialists useless at their core. The few situations where Growers COULD indeed be useful just don't happen. I mean taken to the extreme your argument comes down to: "If a city that has nothing but ice tiles need to sustain 8 population, then grower slots are really good." ...YEAH. That's right. But you'll never HAVE a city that has 8 population and nothing but ice tiles. It just can't happen - just as the examples that you mentioned can't happen.

And no, I'm not trying to ridicule your argument, I'm just trying to show you that it's the same thing. You cannot assume a situation where the city already >has< additional Population and then somehow loses the tiles they were working without explaining how the hell that happened. I mentioned the only situation I can think of in the last post (moving tiles between cities), but again: In this case working an academy is the efficient solution. No tiles free for academies? Well, then there's no reason to use growers, because the additional pop will also have no tiles to work and the investment would not pay out.

And that's really the problem about the examples you have given. Either the situation you presume doesn't make sense. Or the payout you get from using Growers is so little that it's better to set up an Academy (or whatever advanced tile improvement you prefer). And if you can't even set up an Academy because there are no free tiles then that pop is still better used to give +1 production while you use the 255 production you'd need to build the mass digester for other stuff - if you don't need anything else, then that's still 64 raw science that you get much faster than the additional pop could give you.

But yeah, other Specialists have more things going for them, I'm not even arguing against that.

If in the example above it were Scientists instead of Growers, yes, then the deal would look a lot different. The problem however is still that the Institute is basically the only Multi-Scientist Building along the way, so in efficient victories you'd need to give up the free endgame tech from the building quest, which means that getting the building early on is basically out of the question. The Xenonursery is great though - if you meet the requirements and have a low-food city with Xenomass (which... won't happen often, but every now and then).

Artists are once again mostly useless in "Mainstream"-Strategies (because you already get all the Culture-Production you need early on and additional Virtues have extremely steep uphill-costs). They may have more use in strategies that get less Culture than they need for all the virtues they want (although it's questionable if the virtues will be worth the loss in Tile Yields and there would probably be a better solution to solve that issue).

Engineers - good for quickly maxing Production for a while if needed for whatever reason. And you even get 2(4) for free on good buildings that are on good techs, that's the best thing about them. (edit: And of course in the "No tiles available"-Situation Engineer slots are the most available, good option to put additional pop in)

Traders are just the most horribly scaled Specialists and should never, never, never, never be used. But they have some utility if everything goes to and you need some additional turns to fix it. They're damage reduction, and again you get 2 for free on a building that you want anyway, so the opportunity/investment costs for making the slots available is 0.

Growers however? Nope.


-----------------


/edit:

Ah, right. I'm sorry.

I think most of your points are very reasonable and I agree with them. Especially the point that building quests should be visible somewhere (which is something that I was against in the past, but I changed my mind) - some building quests are just very important and to really evaluate a building that information needs to be readily available.

Manual Specialist Control is also something that would be really useful, just as a "Stagnate City Growth"-option. Although the latter one probably has not as much use as it had in Civ 5 it would still come in very handy.

Sponsor Abilities: I personally think they should be more powerful than what you mentioned, so Sponsors actually feel a lot different from each other - but of course, that would make balancing Effords a lot harder (and it would make my mod obsolete, so keep them grounded!). Your solution for Africa would not really work though, as the huge bonus have it that they don't have to build the relic early and get that culture rolling while being able to build something else. Later Relics just aren't as much of a deal. It's an awkward solution to this, but I think just making the Old Earth Relic cheaper (something like 30 Production, no Maintenance by default) to reduce the bonus passively would reduce both, the strength of Africa AND the Artists-Loadout at the same time.
The discussion was some other guy, or discussiodiscussions I was involved in. I doubt you would remember the ones I recall.
Regarding your screen shot, in the base game without mods, every 1 pop city consumes 2 food on turn 1. Check for yourself. 1 for the pop and one for the city tile. 1 food per citizen. On turn 1, food consumed is always 2.

The screen shot disproves nothing. It shows that growers PRODUCE 2 food and that citizens consume 1 each, irrespective of whether they are tile workers, Specialists or the City Governor. As your entire argument is founded on an incorrect fact...

I am correct. Disproving me with incorrect values doesn't prove I'm wrong, it just proves you aren't willing to change your beliefs in the face of new evidence.

Regarding the nitpickyness of Min-maxxers - no, +food doesn't take 168 turns to payoff. System is more than sum of parts. It pays off whenever it gives you the advantage you otherwise would not have had, and when it provides some advantage over other options, which is what opportunity cost is.

I'm not arguing to extremis, and taking my argument to extremis doesn't disprove it. Further there are more yields than just science. What about hills for production? Hills frequently don't have any food production, unless they have forests on them. How are you going to build your lovely stuff if you don't have as much production as you would like? The Mass Digester frees up 1 citizen to a tile that does not have a food yield. The first grower frees up 2. You seem to be basing your gameplay on the fact that there is already sufficient food to allow for your current growth as well as your future rate of growth. . But the whole reason that you would be investing in increased food production is because your current rate of growth isn't large enough? That's the disconnect I see in your arguments.


That last paragraph is to do with the ridicule your argument point. You say 'well, I've planned this city. It will have 10 citizens, 5 of whom will work academies and 5 of whom will work manufactories, and the city will stagnate at 10 pop from here on after.'

But you don't say 'To Stagnate at 10 pop, I need to produce 11 food per turn. And to grow this city as fast as possible, I need to maximise my food production, additional to what I get from trade, and that this goal is not complementary with maximising academies and manufactories, so these citizens will work farms until 7 pop, and then they'll transfer to the academies' and that will get me more pop working academies sooner.

Which is the ridiculousness of your argument. You assume that the City has always been maximised to produce the maximum amount of science soonest (and that optimising the city's production, which is the requirement for every victory, is not optimal play) but you don't really think about what the requirements of that are. Producing 16F per turn with 6 citizens is totally wasteful, I'd be better to produce 8F. Of course, my growth would be much slower, but Science!!!!!!

Further, you say you're minmaxxing, but when it comes to actually min-maxxing your city on any given turn, you seem reluctant to do so, and don't have any wriggle room, because your city is so rigidly planned that if you move from a +1F +3S to a +0F +4P (or better), your city will starve. Which is really the overarching issue here. When it comes to producing stuff, you can't pull your citizens off your academies and into the production slots because your city can't take the hit to your food production.


I should note this whole post is based on a memory that non-desert hills often don't give food, and I am fairly sure that memory is inaccurate, that I just have a magnetism for desert hills, which would be solved by the Vivarium. I cancan't remember either way.


I agree that artists are silly.

Anyway do you have any videos of how you play, I'd love to see that.




Regarding free clinics - they aren't as versatile as OER, but +1 science for free isn't bad. You'd have to improve their quest... it would probably be better to have the +2 science building.
 
Regarding your screen shot, in the base game without mods, every 1 pop city consumes 2 food one turn 1. Check for yourself. 1 for the pop and one for the city tile. 1 food per citizen. On turn 1, food consumed is always 2.

The screen shot disproves nothing. It shows that growers PRODUCE 2 food and that citizens consume 1 each, irrespective of whether they are tile workers, Specialists or the City Governor. As your entire argument is founded on an incorrect fact...

I am correct. Disproving me with incorrect values doesn't prove I'm wrong, it just proves you aren't willing to change your beliefs in the face of new evidence.

This bit of argument needs to end. Each citizen consumes 2 food. It's right in the XML:

-<Row Name="FOOD_CONSUMPTION_PER_POPULATION">
<Value>2</Value>

The city center tile never consumes food--only citizens consume food.
 
Regarding your screen shot, in the base game without mods, every 1 pop city consumes 2 food one turn 1. Check for yourself. 1 for the pop and one for the city tile. 1 food per citizen. On turn 1, food consumed is always 2.

The screen shot disproves nothing. It shows that growers PRODUCE 2 food and that citizens consume 1 each, irrespective of whether they are tile workers, Specialists or the City Governor. As your entire argument is founded on an incorrect fact...

I am correct. Disproving me with incorrect values doesn't prove I'm wrong, it just proves you aren't willing to change your beliefs in the face of new evidence.
Here's another screenshot that disproves your theory, this time with 4 pop eating 8 food:

Spoiler :


So just stop defending thin nonsense. You were wrong and that's fine.

Regarding the nitpickyness of Min-maxxers - no, +food doesn't take 168 turns to payoff. System is more than sum of parts. It pays off whenever it gives you the advantage you otherwise would not have had, and when it provides some advantage overover other options, which is what opportunity cost is.
Yeah, you're actually right about that. There are of course 2 benefits, one being the temporary bonus that you get once you hit that additional pop earlier than you would have and then there's the permanent bonus when the additional food put you ahead a full pop (which probably doesn't even exist in this, because every pop becomes more expensive, making that point impossible to reach). My thoughts didn't go far enough here.

I don't think that really changes anything about the usefulness though.

I'm not arguing to extremis, and taking my argument to extremis doesn't disprove it. Further there are more yields than just science. What about hills for production? Hills frequently don't have any food production, unless they have forests on them. How are you going to build your lovely stuff if you don't have as much production as you would like? The Mass Digester frees up 1 citizen to a tile that does not have a food yield. The first grower frees up 2. You seem to be basing your gameplay on the fact that there is already sufficient food to allow for your current growth as well as your future rate of growth. . But the whole reason that you would be investing in increased food production is because your current rate of growth isn't large enough? That's the disconnect I see in your arguments.
No, see screenshot above. A grower does not "free" up anything, because it eats as much food as it produces, it just keeps itself alive while producing +1 Science.

And yes, I already said the Mass Digester would be somewhat useful at sustaining population if it just appeared out of nowhere. It doesn't though and the 255 Production you have to spend still exist. The "free" alternatives - Building an Academy (and if you have the extra pop you have the food to just build it on a 0-food tile), using an existing specialist slot of another type, or even just accepting the +1 production are all options that don't need to spend production.

But honestly, we're not even talking about the same base situation here. You were convinced that a Grower produces more food than it eats (and I really, really hope that screenshot made you re-check for yourself and you either saw that you're wrong or bring the counter-evidence that proves me wrong so we finally get to a common denominator, because otherwise that discussion is just not going to get anywhere), I am convinced that it doesn't, so we're really arguing on completely different base assumptions. If it actually produced more food than it ate, then my evaluation would probably turn out very different, because they'd contribute twice as much to reaching the next population in low food areas and in that case the investment cost could very well turn out a positive.

But as it stands? No, for the reasons already mentioned.

Anyway does you have any videos of how you play, I'd love to see that.
Nope. I'm not good at commenting (and my "spoken" English is a lot worse than my written English) and the only videos really worth watching without commenting are those from players who are really, really good at a game, which I am not.

/edit: Woops, started typing when your post wasn't there yet, Browd! (Yes, I take that long)
 

Attachments

  • youarewrong.jpg
    youarewrong.jpg
    480.1 KB · Views: 138
Jesus at this point I have no ideas what you guys are arguing about.

-All pop consumes 2 food. Specialists included.
-Grower specialist is like putting a citizen on a tile producing 2 food. 2F 2Gold with the prosperity stuff.
 
I wasn't arguing about that Consumption-stuff, he just didn't know that I was right. 8)

But yeah, using a grower is like putting a citizen on a 2-food-tile that can't be improved (unless you choose a specific virtue in which case you get a "free" Generator each). But the actual question was if it's worth it to do that if you...

...have to pay 255 production to get a (well, 3) 2-food-tile that can't be improved...
...have the alternative to get 3 instant-science instead...
...have the option of instead getting 2 production with no investment cost if there's no tile to put an academy.

And, more generally, if it's worth delaying the direct bonus the pop that is put onto that 2-food-tile to get an additional pop.
 
I find that doubtful.

First you'd need to have a city in such a bad place that it doesn't have better alternatives. Then the city has to be of a size small enough for the +2 food to matter in a meaningful time. Like below size 10 or something. And the city has to have the building fast enough.
 
See. Exactly my points!
 
Top Bottom