The COAL POLL 1: How many cities (out of 6) should have access to full coal?

[Stalker0]

We are trying to gauge how plentiful coal should be as a strategic resource.

In this scenario, imagine you have a 6 city empire. You do not have any extra coal from special things like statecraft, Autocracy's third alternative, or any refineries. This is just the BASE amount of coal you have access to on the map.

We define "full coal" as a city that has 2 coal to build both a factory and either a train station or sea port.


The question: How many of your 6 cities do you think in a typical game should have full access to coal (defined as 2 coal per city)?

 

[Rekk]

What meaningful difference is there between your two coal polls?

 

[Stalker0]

What meaningful difference is there between your two coal polls?

So there may be people that feel that every city in a tall civ (6 or fewer cities) should have max coal, but in poll 2 (10 cities) maybe they feel that not every city in a wider civ should have full coal. That's what we are gleaning.

 

[Little Billy]

I think a more precise question would be "How much coal should a 6/10 city civ have?" I value train stations and seaports more than factories and build them first unless I have enough coal for everything, so often I will end up with a bunch of cities with "half coal" rather than all having full or none

 

[ma_kuh]

I'm putting a lot of stock in Refineries making up the difference, I think, for "fully" kitting the fair number of cities with coal. With such a small empire I feel like having less than 50% coverage from terrain is fair.

 

[azum4roll]

Refineries should be necessary for 6 full cities of coal. I'd go with 3 without.

EDIT: Also this should be a multiple choice poll, if you want any meaningful result.

 

[pineappledan]

This is precisely what those other posters were criticizing when they pointed out this need to “smooth” everything out in the mod. The strategic resource quantities is something that you’re supposed to adjust to in a playthrough, i have no interest in seeing them homogenized to fit a handful of players’ predetermined preferences.

It seems like the sentiment that is prevailing here is that you shouldn’t have to react to the map, but should change the map to relieve any sort of discomfort or need to adjust your game plan.

 

[KlHannibal2]

This is precisely what those other posters were criticizing when they pointed out this need to “smooth” everything out in the mod. The strategic resource quantities is something that you’re supposed to adjust to in a playthrough, i have no interest in seeing them homogenized to fit a handful of players’ predetermined preferences.

It seems like the sentiment that is prevailing here is that you shouldn’t have to react to the map, but should change the map to relieve any sort of discomfort or need to adjust your game plan.

Yeah, I support fluctuation between games. On average, I would like about 50% full coal for all cities. That should fluctuate to some degree (maybe up to 30-70%).
If you select strategic balanced resources, the fluctuation should shrink.

This way, you always have some incentive for different coal sources like autocracy. But their value would change between games. Sometimes, it might suffice to get refineries, take a city state, or general a coal tile or two.

 

[Stalker0]

Refineries should be necessary for 6 full cities of coal. I'd go with 3 without.

EDIT: Also this should be a multiple choice poll, if you want any meaningful result.

I don't see how multi-choice provides a better option here. Most people I think should have a singular preference. You might be "ok" with 5, but if you think 4 is the best answer choose that.

 

[Stalker0]

This is precisely what those other posters were criticizing when they pointed out this need to “smooth” everything out in the mod. The strategic resource quantities is something that you’re supposed to adjust to in a playthrough, i have no interest in seeing them homogenized to fit a handful of players’ predetermined preferences.

It seems like the sentiment that is prevailing here is that you shouldn’t have to react to the map, but should change the map to relieve any sort of discomfort or need to adjust your game plan.

The goal with such a poll is to check actual vs expectations.

I am not saying "all 6 cities need to have full coal in every single game ever". But if people are generally expecting 6 cities, and the maps are only giving them 3 cities on average.....that highlights a potential problem. Now If I'm expecting 6 and I get 5, ok that's fine, or if I get 7, great a little extra. Variance is fine within reason, the test is whether we are in that point of reasonability or not.

 

[Rekk]

So there may be people that feel that every city in a tall civ (6 or fewer cities) should have max coal, but in poll 2 (10 cities) maybe they feel that not every city in a wider civ should have full coal. That's what we are gleaning.

They're both the same poll.

A 10 city empire with enough coal to fully operate 6 cities is the same answer as a 6 city empire with enough coal to operate... 6 cities.

The question "how many cities should an empire be able to fully provide with coal" covers all types of empires.

 

[Stalker0]

They're both the same poll.

A 10 city empire with enough coal to fully operate 6 cities is the same answer as a 6 city empire with enough coal to operate... 6 cities.

The question "how many cities should an empire be able to fully provide with coal" covers all types of empires.

Its really not. For example maybe people think in a 6 city civ you should get 3 cities "full coaled", but in a 10 city civ they expect generally 6 cities (because you should in theory have access to "twice as much coal").

That's just one example where the two polls might give different results.

 

[azum4roll]

I don't see how multi-choice provides a better option here. Most people I think should have a singular preference. You might be "ok" with 5, but if you think 4 is the best answer choose that.

If 40% people vote 1, 20% vote 4, 20% vote 5, 20% vote 6, does that mean we should have only 1 city with full coal?

The answer 6 here means we should just remove coal, btw.

 

[CppMaster]

If 40% people vote 1, 20% vote 4, 20% vote 5, 20% vote 6, does that mean we should have only 1 city with full coal?

The answer 6 here means we should just remove coal, btw.

No, it means that 40% of voters thinks 1 city should have full access to coal.

 

[azum4roll]

No, it means that 40% of voters thinks 1 city should have full access to coal.

Which means nothing to our final decision.

 

[Jozrael]

I'd be fine with 3, but 2 feels low, and I expect variance, so put 4.

 

[CppMaster]

Which means nothing to our final decision.

What? Opinions of the community members doesn't matter? I thought it's primarily what matters for the decision. That's the point of the poll, no?

 

[azum4roll]

What? Opinions of the community members doesn't matter? I thought it's primarily what matters for the decision. That's the point of the poll, no?

If 40% people vote 1, 20% vote 4, 20% vote 5, 20% vote 6, does that mean we should have only 1 city with full coal?

No, it means that 40% of voters thinks 1 city should have full access to coal.

So, in this case, what number of coal should a civ with 6 cities have in the new VP version? Or is this just for opinion and we aren't going to do anything about this?

 

[CppMaster]

IDK, it's not decided yet. Yes, it's just a collection of opinions, but it could be considered for the final decision. It's not VP Congress vote.

 

[Stalker0]

So, in this case, what number of coal should a civ with 6 cities have in the new VP version? Or is this just for opinion and we aren't going to do anything about this?

So it is still preliminary but we are getting some pretty strong results so far. The picture they paint to me is the following:

1) For a Tall civ, we want ~7 coal (between 3-4 cities worth). That is right where the map is now.
2) For wider civs, people want about 12 coal (6 cities).
3) Right now coal being "too tight" is winning by a good margin.


So it suggests that the 7 per civ the map currently uses works out alright when your playing tall, but doesn't scale up enough for wider play, and so people feel coal is too tight in general.