1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

[R&F] The change to Rationalism.

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Tech Osen, Oct 16, 2018.

  1. Tech Osen

    Tech Osen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2016
    Messages:
    698
    Part of the boost now depends on the adjacency bonus being 3 or higher. Anyone feels this is too much of a boost for civs that get an adjacency bonus for campusses? It makes civs that are already strong in science just that much stronger without any extra effort.
    Without an adjacency bonus I often have a hard time getting them to three, especially when you don’t have (m)any mountains near.
     
    ezzlar likes this.
  2. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Warlord Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    1,544
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, it means starting near Mountains not only gives you an early science boost, from the adjacency bonus, but a later science boost as well, once Rationalism becomes available.

    So much of Civ 6 depends on what you start near, though, that this is probably okay. Starting near a couple of 2F/2P tiles lets you get your empire up and running faster. Starting on a Luxury may, if you're lucky, allow you to buy an extra Settler early and jump start your empire in a different way. Starting with a Culture or Faith resource gives you a jump start in different aspects of the game. Starting near a Natural Wonder can give you an insanely good second City.

    Since the Rationalism boost comes later than a lot of these other map-based bonuses, it's probably less important than most.
     
    Morino1914 likes this.
  3. kryat

    kryat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2017
    Messages:
    217
    Gender:
    Male
    I think the OP is asking whether this boosts the civs like Netherlands, Australia, Japan, etc that explicitly get bonuses to adjacency (obviously this applies not just to Rationalism, but also to any of the ones like it that boost to buildings in a district based on adjacency score and population).

    It’s sort of an indirect buff, in the sense that it penalizes everyone else who may struggle to get to that score, relative to the way the cards worked before where the boost was available without condition. But no more so than the indirect buff to civs that can easily acheive high population.

    I really wish these cards made the bonus scale to the adjacency score and to the population, rather than working off straight thresholds.
     
  4. Mesix

    Mesix One of Porg

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    Messages:
    4,333
    Location:
    Ahch-To
    My impression is that the buff to adjacency bonuses does not boost mechanics which require a +3 or better natural bonus. My only evidence to this is that when placing districts which get +4 or more due to civ specific bonuses, the completion of the district does not trigger the corresponding era bonus to the next golden age. This leads me to believe that other mechanics which are checking for +3 or greater are only looking at the natural bonuses which apply generically to all districts of that type.
     
  5. UWHabs

    UWHabs Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,334
    Location:
    Toronto
    I know I've seen Korea not get the bonus for building a +3 or better campus, likely because they get the bonus for building a Seowon instead. So there may be a problem with unique districts not getting that. But they do get the rationalism bonus.

    Otherwise, I would agree that it's an extra boost for civs that already get a boost. I'm of 2 minds on this - I do really like it, because it does somewhat effectively limit campus spam, since if I plant a tundra city and get a campus there, it's hard to get +3 or 10 pop, which limits the power. And it does encourage you to find the nice campus spots - I know mid to late game, before the change I would often not care about adjacency since +1 or +2 science didn't really make a big difference when my civ is pulling in 200+ per turn. And certainly if the best campus spot destroyed a mine, I would rather put it in a worse flatland spot. So at least the change forces you to keep thinking about adjacency.

    But on the other hand, I do agree that it makes the best even better. I wouldn't mind seeing a system where adjacency matters early in the game, but maybe late in the game other factors come into play more. Like, the best campuses in the ancient era sure may be the ones in the mountains that can peacefully research and explore, but modern campuses, the best ones are more likely the ones in an urban centre. If around the renaissance campuses changed from having bonuses due to mountains to having larger bonuses for other district adjacencies, then that would create a fun dichotomy - do I build the campus for the early bonus near the mountains, or place it next to my city centre for the better late-game bonus?
     
  6. Tech Osen

    Tech Osen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2016
    Messages:
    698
    Yeah, that's what I meant. It was nerf that didn't nerf every civ equally. I'd rather see that it woul just be based on population. 50% for every 5 pop or straight 10% per pop. Would also make going tall a lot more viable.
     
    darkace77450 likes this.
  7. kryat

    kryat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2017
    Messages:
    217
    Gender:
    Male
    That’s not a bad starting point. My structure would be a blend of that and the current system, since I like the idea of rewarding good city planning. 5% per 1 population and 10% per unboosted (by cards) adjacency.

    Some example bonuses:
    10/+3 city = 80% (currently 100%)
    4/+6 city = 80% (currently 50%)
    25/+2 city = 125% (currently 50%)
    30/+4 city = 190% (currently 100%)


    Also add cards for harbors, encampments, and entertainment districts.
     
  8. Tech Osen

    Tech Osen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2016
    Messages:
    698
    I'd like a card that let's culture give a boost to amenities.

    Good point though that still gives a big advantage to the likes of Korea, Japan and to a lesser degree The Netherlands, Australia and Brasil.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 16, 2018
  9. Leathaface

    Leathaface Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,017
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cork, Ireland
    If you're playing against Korea, Japan, The Netherlands, Australia and Brazil, i'm not sure if the AI actually uses the Rationalism card to get that bonus.

    They could, but my gut tells me they don't.
     
  10. kryat

    kryat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2017
    Messages:
    217
    Gender:
    Male
    Moderate advantage, but population is better, because it can keep growing after settling. I think this scheme would benefit Indonesia, Khmer, India, Cree, and Kongo even more than the ones who get adjacency bonuses. The point isn’t to nerf adjacency into oblivion, but to make the ground a little more level for everyone else while still maintaining some semblance of unique flavors.

    However, Australia is OP in just about any scheme, since it benefits from anything rewarding either population or adjacency.
     
  11. darkace77450

    darkace77450 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    624
    I share your sentiments. If these cards simply boosted their respective district yields by, say, 50% at a population of 10 and 100% at 15 then I think they'd offer players more interesting decisions to make.
     
  12. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,598
    Gender:
    Male
    I think +3 is necessary. You can get +2 just by shoving a bunch of campuses together. Lowering it just encourages campus spam. Well even more so. I would encourage even more nerfs to science th.

    Before the change it was better just to slap campuses regardless of placement because opportunity cost of good placement was too high.

    Even now buying tiles to gst better placement early is not a good move often.
     
    acluewithout and Leathaface like this.
  13. SammyKhalifa

    SammyKhalifa Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    3,632
    Yeah, I buy way too many tiles and I know it. Can't stop myself.
     
    Leathaface likes this.
  14. darkace77450

    darkace77450 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    624
    If you don't buy the tile Pedro will. Then he's going to yell at you to get away from his border.
     
    SammyKhalifa likes this.
  15. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,598
    Gender:
    Male
    That is easily fixed. Dead civs don't have borders.
     
    local_hero likes this.
  16. Sostratus

    Sostratus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Messages:
    243
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    I don't think Australia's appeal bonus actually is part of the adjacency computation.
    Korea and Japan and the Dutchies obviously do count. Can you believe the first look videos had the Seowon give the full +6 science as its base? Korea is obviously insane at science, this shouldn't shock anyone.

    The thing is, though, rationalism and its ilk only apply to buildings. Assuming people don't really build that many research labs for most of the game, you end up with +6 from your library and Uni.
    Rationalism card gets you either:
    +6 (no conditions)
    +9 (one condition met)
    +12 (both conditions met.)

    So the marginal case is really a +3 from buildings (going from 1.5x to 2.0x) which is nice, but on the order of what newton can do for you and less than what einstein does.
    The dutch HAVE to have river space and get lucky with a mountain or invest in a district triangle to pull off +3, which is some work. Japan likewise has to build more districts. But even if they enjoy a +4 per campus advantage (extra rationalism plus more adj.) you can easily make that up yourself by just making your cities denser and putting down more campus justs for the buildings. +6 minimum everytime even in the snow. That's where the real issue is: buildings are so overwhelming that a simple number of districts advantage beats quality in almost every case except maybe seowons. Or even just putting down some farms and breeding yourself a few extra beakers to help with the shortfall.

    I think what I really hate about korea is that when you conquer them to stop their science mongering, you end up with useless ex-seowons that aren't next to anything.

    But anyways- I don't think it is too much of a boost, I think with the Dutch it was an intentional way to give them some extra power. It helps them shine a little. Science is powerful but small bonuses to it aren't the end all, especially in a game where your rivals can have eagle warriors and hansas and simply beat you to death with their production or actual obsidian clubs.
     
  17. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,598
    Gender:
    Male
    Yep, it's only a big deal with the 2 Great People, and also why the related cards are terrible since they have no one boosted those. Grand Opera is really only 4 more culture per theater square, and that assumes you built all the buildings of which 2/3 are extremely expensive.

    It is just that science is so important that people would rather crank any science wherever possible. But in any case, adjacency bonuses are still way overrated.
     
  18. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Warlord Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    1,544
    Gender:
    Male
    I'd probably re-word that slightly to "Get adjacency bonuses whenever you can, but don't not build a Campus just because you don't get adjacency bonuses."

    Which I think is what you meant, anyway.
     
  19. UWHabs

    UWHabs Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,334
    Location:
    Toronto
    I do think way too often I still try to build the "best" building, when in reality, I should more often just get it down sooner. In most cases, it's not worth giving up a valuable other tile (a hill or a resource, for example) just to get an extra +1 to the district. Especially since so often, those numbers will change later as you pack in more districts too.

    It's worth it to get at least one district in with the +3 bonus to get the era score for it, and obviously better to get to +3 for a campus than not, but it's probably not even worth missing a chop just to get an extra +1 bonus to adjacency.
     
  20. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,598
    Gender:
    Male
    Yea, basically a +0 campus is still worth putting down and in some cases where you have a better choice but have to spend gold on buying that tile, the benefit is dubious.

    And that applies to most districts.except maybe IZs because the buildings themselves aren't very strong which also leads to the zone itself not being that strong.
     

Share This Page