The Netherlands

[Han_YOLO]

How has everyone been playing Netherlands since the major changes to the UA? Which opening policy choice do you think is best?

 

[Txurce]

How has everyone been playing Netherlands since the major changes to the UA? Which opening policy choice do you think is best?

I've played both Tradition and Progress, depending on settling space, and both worked out well. You can't beat early culture -- skip religion if going Tradition and go with God of All Creation, and you are all but guaranteed of being among the policy leaders. And it's very flexible -- including going for major mid-game warmongering, if circumstances or your mood call for it.

 

[Han_YOLO]

In a recent game I had Genghis Khan as a neighbor and chose Authority. The extra culture from the UA really helps Netherlands speed through the tree and it sets you up nicely to grab lots of luxuries and crush your neighbors once you get Seabeggars online. Progress may be better overall since peaceful relations with neighbors synergizes better with the UA early on.

 

[lunker]

I've noticed that William is really stingy with his luxury resources and gold compared to other civs. Shouldn't he be more willing to trade considering his UA?

 

[Txurce]

I've noticed that William is really stingy with his luxury resources and gold compared to other civs. Shouldn't he be more willing to trade considering his UA?

Not if it doesn't hurt him.

 

[CrazyG]

Not if it doesn't hurt him.

I think it does hurt him though, I won't sell him a luxury for just 2 gold

 

[Txurce]

I think it does hurt him though, I won't sell him a luxury for just 2 gold

I can't comment on your example, given the lack of context. I said if it doesn't hurt him. If he's the only guy buying, or offering 1g less, I'm not going to worry about it. In genral, I think civs that are known for trading drive harder bargains. (I'm not referring to civs who don't like you, and offer extortionary prices.)

 

[CrazyG]

I can't comment on your example, given the lack of context. I said if it doesn't hurt him. If he's the only guy buying, or offering 1g less, I'm not going to worry about it. In genral, I think civs that are known for trading drive harder bargains. (I'm not referring to civs who don't like you, and offer extortionary prices.)

In that example he was friendly.

If he gains more from the luxury than others, I don't see why he wouldn't be willinging to pay more for it. AI that takes Goddess of Festivals will pay more, its a very similar mechanic

 

[Favorius]

Are luxury resources coming from allied city states count for monopoly like related statecraft policy or only luxuries from other civs counted?

 

[Enginseer]

Are luxury resources coming from allied city states count for monopoly like related statecraft policy or only luxuries from other civs counted?

No you need a Statecraft policy for that...

 

[Omen of Peace]

Only luxuries coming from city states.

You have to be Netherlands to get monopolies via trading with other civ.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

The Polder appears a bit unsatisfying and weak in my opinion. It's buildable in medieval, but before renaissance it's not worth much - I typically build them, but that's mostly in preparation for when it truly comes online after Chemistry and Economics, at which point it starts feeling like it's really unique and impactful. With two buffs it's good, but that's 5-8 techs after it comes before it's maxed and before it truly feels like it does something meaningful, and then it just won't upgrade anymore. There's no tech to look forward to almost right after it starts feeling like a real midlate-game unique improvement with those two techs, there's only MIC from Autocracy. It feels like the UI is missing a mid industrial era/modern era boost of some sort. It's fine it's effectively a renaissance UI you can already construct before it comes online in mid-renaissance, but it has no tech to give it something later.

Maybe the UI seems to consider the fact it's going to be a more common sight, but it just isn't. Many features spawn on the rivers and near lakes and the rivers and lakes aren't always there to begin with. I can almost always get more Chateauxes per city, more Moais, similar amount of TFarms, definitely more Encampments, more Kasbahs, etc. Of course all depends on what map spawns, but that is the general feeling I got from my games. I'm fine with Polder being the worst UI as it is now because it's civs that should be balanced compared to each other and not their parts, but I'd like it to get a better feeling tech progression at least.

 

[pineappledan]

One thing we have been trying to implement with the Netherlands in 4UC is making the polder cost more moves to enter than a normal tile. Currently, the Polder costs 3 moves to enter in 4UC, same as a regular marsh.

Instead of the bonus to villages/towns, I think this would be a great addition to base VP.

 

[Stalker0]

Ultimately, is the Netherlands a good civ?

The polder is not the most amazing UI....but not every UI can be top. The question is, is the balance of UU, UA, UU all together producing a good civ?

I don't find polders bad to build, and I feel overall the Netherlands has a good theme and play style. I'm not seeing a lot of need for change.

 

[pineappledan]

I don't find polders bad to build, and I feel overall the Netherlands has a good theme and play style. I'm not seeing a lot of need for change.

Not necessarily a balance concern, but adding a defensive movement buff would be very historical and unique. Other tile improvements provide defense, but no other tiles compound your movement advantage in your own territory

It might even be possible with a current table: improvementMoveChange, but I don’t know how this deals with negative values, and how it deals with roads

 

[Stalker0]

Not necessarily a balance concern, but adding a defensive movement buff would be very historical and unique. Other tile improvements provide defense, but no other tiles compound your movement advantage in your own territory

The Netherlands already are pretty unique with their approach to trade and luxuries. I certainly play them differently than I play other civs. So why do we need more more more?

This is the "ain't broke, don't fix it" coming out in me. For me to want to change a civ at this point in the game, I feel it either needs to have true balance issues (Denmark), or just be completely bland and have nothing interesting about it. Netherlands doesn't fall into that category for me.

 

[pineappledan]

For me to want to change a civ at this point in the game, I feel it either needs to have true balance issues (Denmark), or just be completely bland and have nothing interesting about it.

Not to suggest that the rest of the Dutch kit is bland, but the current Polder certainly is.

The Polder gives yields. That's really all it is.
There are other unique improvements which only give yields, but most of them do it in a unique way, or require you to look for otherwise marginal land formations in order to maximise the UI's use (moai coastline spam, Hunnic Eki). Netherlands used to be able to take unique advantage of marshland, but they were always too rare for that to be a proper niche. Otherwise Netherlands just settles on rivers, something every other civ does anyways, and gets yields in return.

No defensive abilities (Chateau, Encampment, Kasbah)
No unique terrain mini-games (moai, Eki, Terrace Farm)
No unique resource (Brazilwood)
No being the most unique snowflake UI (Feitoria)

Kuna is also a very bland UI, also only giving yields, but Kuna is the only UI which gives Faith, which is kinda neat. Polders just give //, the 3 most common yields from any improvement, they just give more of them.

As I said, the code to implement my suggested change might already exist, or might only require minor tweaking.

So this is mostly a question to G:

1. Would there be any interest in adding a movement-inhibiting effect to Polder, in order to make it more unique/historically accurate?
2. Would the current MovesChange column be able to accomplish this, by adding '-2' to this table?
3. Is there be way to countravene the negative effects of this MovesChange for the defenders? For instance, could negative MovesChange values be ignored if you own the tile, or could a road on the tile cause MovesChange to be ignored entirely?

 

[Stalker0]

Not to suggest that the rest of the Dutch kit is bland, but the current Polder certainly is.

The Polder gives yields. That's really all it is.
There are other unique improvements which only give yields, but most of them do it in a unique way, or require you to look for otherwise marginal land formations in order to maximise the UI's use (moai coastline spam, Hunnic Eki). Netherlands used to be able to take unique advantage of marshland, but they were always too rare for that to be a proper niche. Otherwise Netherlands just settles on rivers, something every other civ does anyways, and gets yields in return.

No defensive abilities (Chateau, Encampment, Kasbah)
No unique terrain mini-games (moai, Eki, Terrace Farm)
No unique resource (Brazilwood)
No being the most unique snowflake UI (Feitoria)

Kuna is also a very bland UI, also only giving yields, but Kuna is the only UI which gives Faith, which is kinda neat. Polders just give //, the 3 most common yields from any improvement, they just give more of them.

As I said, the code to implement my suggested change might already exist, or might only require minor tweaking.

I’m not arguing the polder is bland, i agree it is. But to me that doesn’t make the Netherlands bland...which to me is the Crux of the argument.

They have a very interesting UA, enough that the civ plays fun and interesting. Some civs have a bland UA but interesting UI, UU, or UB. It’s diffefent levers to make something good.

I’m making this point so strongly, because I fear if we get into the notion that every single piece of a civ has to be interesting...we will be debating civs until the end of time

 

[pineappledan]

But to me that doesn’t make the Netherlands bland... which to me is the Crux of the argument.

Um... You don't really get to tell me what my argument is. You pretty much gave me the precise definition of strawmanning. I specifically said that I am not arguing that the Dutch are bland as a whole; that was literally line 1 of the post you quoted.

I’m making this point so strongly, because I fear if we get into the notion that every single piece of a civ has to be interesting...we will be debating civs until the end of time

.... We are basically already doing that. We've been debating these leaders so intently that balance re: specific leaders is its own subforum, detached from general balance issues. This is how it has been for years; you don't get to just come in and stifle debate like that without me calling bull-malarky. Sorry.

Suggesting ways in which a civ might be improved by making them more unique/historically relevant doesn't have to hit some sort of saturation, otherwise we would have locked these threads at some point.
I fail to understand your logic, @Stalker0. If a possible change is minor, and the effort in implementing it is also minor, why is "good enough" good enough, so to speak?

 

[chicorbeef]

Polders do give Culture and are buffed by adjacent Villages/Towns, so they are quite powerful. They are quite a bit better than the base improvements they compete with.

I suppose reduced movement wouldn't hurt any one but the balance of the Polder itself is fine imo, this would just be fluff. Polders are worth working even in later eras.