Suggestion: change the Cohesive Values virtue

[Velasti]

No, you're ignoring timing and turn limits by assuming 0 opportunity cost to a virtue that takes over 100 turns to pay itself back. That is literally the definition of ignoring the importance of timing.

At no point do I assume zero opportunity cost. This is a strategy game.

It is the nth virtue. It pays itself back when the cumulative discount it has provided to you is equal to the culture cost of the nth virtue.

Plus, it gives you the benefit of every subsequent virtue x turns before you would naturally have received them. Eventually, this cumulative benefit adds up to an additional virtue. In the meantime, you have siphoned value from those subsequent virtues a few turns earlier than you otherwise would have.


Long term planning does not rely on short-term vision.

It's not about how much you spend, it's how much you save.

You quote my arguments and then take the CV-dislikes' side about benefit timing being more important than eventual total number of benefits - how is this an argument for CV? We are discussing CV. I don't see confusing misdirection in your posts on other threads so I'm not sure why you're putting so much effort into defending CV with contradictory and incomprehensible posts here.

Because benefit timing (AKA Sooner Benefits) are more important than more benefits. The virtue gives you a discount to your spending. It does not give you a free virtue.

I quote your arguments because I disagree with them, and it is extremely confusing when you disagree with someone but don't reference what you're disagreeing with.

I've just had a game where the AI beat me to Petra by one turn. Less technology cost in science would have equalled sooner Petra.

Sooner benefits lead directly to more benefits. The short-term Pro is sooner-benefits. The long-term benefit is more benefits.

You don't see confusing misdirection in my other posts because you see what you want to see. Any comment on my argument as being incomprehensible, misdirected, illogical or whatever is in the eye of the beholder.

They are incomprehensible to you because you do not understand them. The fact that independent 3rd parties understand with and agree with the post proves that they are not incomprehensible.

Synergy bonuses are not unique to CV. Every virtue gives a point towards some synergy bonus. Citing synergy bonuses as reasons for CV not being bad is a really poor argument. Even a virtue that did nothing at all would do this. It does increase the speed at which you get synergy bonuses slightly, but I think people are way overestimating this effect (feel free to do the math if you think otherwise).

At no point do I cite synergy bonuses as a reason for CV.

I will highlight the advantage that I am citing.

I'll finish virtue trees sooner than you will. I'll get synergy bonuses sooner than you will..

Also can we just have a very candid conversation as to what the social policies in tradition and liberty are?

Tradition Opener: +3 culture in the capital.
Legalism: Free-culture building in first four cities.

Liberty Opener: +1 culture per city.
Representation: Each city you found increases culture cost by 33% less than normal.

 

[GhostSalsa]

The non-CV taker will have to invest more in their cultural infrastructure

Except, that's backwards, because they start out one virtue ahead - the virtue they took instead of CV. The pressure's on the CV-taker to reroute focus into culture output to catch up on useful virtues as soon as possible.

I'm fine with agreeing to disagree - I don't like being as contentious as this thread is demanding! But I think it's pretty clear you could have written all my own replies yourself if you were being critical about your own (moderately) pro-CV posits. "The non-CV taker needs to catch up - no, wait, they don't."

Let's clear this subject of confirmation bias here. CV has no benefit for 100+turns after you take it and that's fatal.

 

[GhostSalsa]

You're playing a strategy game. The long-term advantage is significantly better than your instant gratification.

Because benefit timing (AKA Sooner Benefits) are more important than more benefits.

Which is it, again?

Or should I go back to pointing out, as long as you don't agree that taking CV puts you one benefit in the hole to start with, you're not actually giving this discussion your honesty and intelligence.

Lastly regarding the CiV early culture benefit policies, I've already discussed why CiV incentivized pure culture generation via CS quests and ideology defense and incentivized deferred policy bonuses via tech unlock requirements, three mechanics which BE does not have, in three posts.

 

[Velasti]

Let's clear this subject of confirmation bias here. CV has no benefit for 100+turns after you take it and that's fatal.

Please explain the very next virtue you take, which you receive 2 turns sooner than you otherwise would have? You are categorically ignoring that.'

The only confirmation bias here is your own. You are allowing virtues like Frugality and Labour Logistics to immediately shave-off turns towards growth and building production, and calling that an immediate benefit. You are not allowing CV to immediately shave-off turns towards the next virtue. You are allowing virtues like Frugality to give you an absolute short term advantage over a competitor, and not allowing CV to give you the same absolute short-term advantage over a competitor.

Adaptive Sciences, Special Service, Gift-Economy, Pioneer Spirit, Cohesive Values, Applied Aesthetics, Alternative Markets and Profiteering, like all the virtues, are situational.

Every virtue in the virtue tree has an opportunity cost. Every virtue has a pro, and a con.

Let's think about an example virtue:

Settler clans does not give you any benefit until an outpost turns into a city.

Further, if your health is 7 or lower, that 2 pop could cost you 10% of your production/science across all of your cities.

Can an extra 2 population produce 10% of your science and culture?

that incentivize player culture focus (though it already does that pretty well with Technoartisans).

Guess what?

Taking CV means I get technoartisans before you do.

Which is it, again?

It's both, and it's a nuance that you aren't grasping.

CV gives you an immediate benefit - it shaves off turns towards future virtues.
CV, just like any other virtue that works on the same mechanics, does not give you an absolute advantage until further down the line.

Or should I go back to pointing out, as long as you don't agree that taking CV puts you one benefit in the hole to start with, you're not actually giving this discussion your honesty and intelligence..

And?

The major clue here is the virtue - "Foresight".

Foresight is more or less worthless if you select it when you're unhealthy. However, if you have FORESIGHT, you recognise that this wont' be the case for the entire game.
This is exactly the same situation as most of the other virtues. +10% towards buildings doesn't give you an immediate benefit.

Think about Maddjinn's KP game?

He takes Eudaimonia. That increases his health from 10 to 48.

Later he pushes his health into the mid 50s with buildings.

Eudaimonia is worthless to him, until his health decreases to exactly 20. That's going to take hundreds of turns to pay-off. Which aren't going to occur in the game he is in.

Meanwhile, he went down Prosperity. While he was going down prosperity, his health gets punched down below -10.

The real question is whether the extra population he got as a result of going down prosperity are producing more than 10% of his culture, science and production.

Taking any virtue puts you one virtue in the hole to start with. That's what opportunity cost means.