Gazebo:
Capitalism (edited) - 10 Specialists in each of your cities generate Happiness instead of creating Unhappiness.
if i see correct, before 5 specialist not generate Unhappiness, almost of my games in my case i have 20-25 city when i unlock this, in that case. this negate 25 - 31,25 Unhappiness, and its a really god, but now its 10 Specialist not only negate, now its give happines, i think its 0,25 per Specialist, now int my games
negate 50-62,5 Unhappines and add me 50-62,5 Unhappines, i can consider i "obtain" 100-125 Unhappines modifier (negate+added) and its a 400% of that value before, i complain because i see too strong for me. For other changes i like it
I'm never play autocracy xD, i don't know how really afect the changes you trying to make. the reason i don't play autocracy its for my play style xD.
but i play 95% fredom and the other 5% order xD
0.33 unhappiness per guy IIRC, so it's... +3.33 happiness per city instead of losing the amount, so 6.66 net gain per city. Gazebo's devilish plot is now revealed, that's way too much. It beats the Police State at Happiness even for Persia, and does it pretty much two times over, that's crazy. I agree, it's way too much. It'd be better to simply negate 10, that's still 3.3 happiness net gain per city. Good enough for a policy. Not much use to have so much happiness for a non-warmongering tree, but with the lightning warfare not being nuts I could see myself going to order/freedom for warmongering needs too.
Rather than repeatedly bashing tenets you find terrible, could you offer suggestions? I really like the UST design, though I agree the bonus for pillaging is rather pointless
Also if seaports or anything else isn't well balanced in your opinion, why not address that in a relevant thread? I keep seeing "Autocracy tenet XYZ is terrible because something else is terrible", which is just a dead end for discussion. If seaports, internal trade routes, police stations, or something else is underperforming, then lets do something about it (regardless of what happens in Autocracy)
I also need to point out that you keep making a ton of assumptions when pointing out that things are bad, which aren't always true. I'm not going authority-piety-imperialism every time I pick autocracy. I don't have a wide empire every time either. If a tenet doesn't fit your own personal playstyle it doesn't mean it deserves an "F". If you want a bunch of production and science in every city, take order. Maybe you are just a communist at heart
Autocracy already has some production and science though, and that's good. The seaport idea also contains production, too. If it only has "abstract" stuff and nothing solid, it's not going to be good, just like pre-buffs Imperialism wasn't good despite having tons of weird traits. They're still there, but they had to be reinforced by base yields/solid stuff to actually make the tree good. If you removed all the yields and the CS bonuses were as they are now, this tree wouldn't have a point.
Still, the tenet wouldn't be more than a weak A/C even if Seaports were balanced with Trains because in the end, not all cities can get that. It'd always come out unfavourably from any comparison with Order's now T1 that buffs Factories for 10% Science. Every city can and will get a Factory, but even if they were outright better, many won't be able to get a Seaport. It's not about not fitting "me", I've explained why the policy - in the current gamestate - is going to be obsolete. You didn't counter my points at all, instead saying random stuff like "maybe Autocracy doesn't fit you". I've made no real assumptions, just pointing out facts about the train station and spaceport. If my claims aren't true, care to point out how? I can't exactly defend my point of view if you just make blanket statements.
Also Autocracy did fit me before the changes well enough, though I did admittedly go the same route every time. Now the amount of policies I won't bother taking is way smaller, the T3s finally look more appealing so all goes in the right direction, but it can be better. If the beta was there, I wouldn't be posting but playing as it's weekend, so no work, and what better place to discuss than the changelog thread?
I've made lots of suggestions both here but primarily in the Autocracy thread which is why my last few posts didn't make any new ones. I see no point in that at the moment before I see how the beta plays out, but I'll be honest - I make assumptions. Everyone does and that's the only thing anyone will be able to do before the test patch is release. If Gazebo said "I'm going to make Progress balanced by adding +500 of all yields per turn to the opener", everyone'd say it'd result in a broken policy, that'd just be assumptions. Logical ones, and those are okay. It's no rocket science, if something gets +50%/100% powerful, you can pretty much always say if it'll be good or bad after the adjustment and be right most of the time. Not always, sometimes a straw breaks a camel's back after all, but often. The same way I can look at how much of my yields come from CS/vassals when I'm big and scary to say Iron Fist at 100% instead of 50% might be good for me as a T1 if I can get some food CSs or enough allies, but the second part of it won't affect me as I've had dozens of vassals throughout many games and they've only left me when someone took their last city when I wasn't paying attention, which happened very often. That doesn't count. I didn't even know they can actually leave without my say-so, the text said so once but they never did in the end.
I agree that some stuff like police station/seaport/internal trade route need adjustments, but in the case of Police Station/Internal Trade Route, their respective previous policies (regular Autarky, NWO without +production to constabularies/police stations) wouldn't be very good even if internal trade routes and police stations were must haves.
Yeah I don't really get his view that the 10% extra gold makes the train station so superior. There's so many other gold sources by that point that I honestly get most of my wartime/preparation gold from literally anything besides GPT. I can easily spend 10s of thousands in 5 turns just upgrading and buying loads of stuff to get ready, and 10% extra gold on every single one of my already low pop cities isn't going to help too much. For the most part GPT is just something I'm desperate to keep positive by that point because fluctuating happiness can make negatives really crippling.
10% Gold is not as significant, those train roads are expensive. It compensates for that, but workers often just build railroads to seaported cities anyway - not that I mind, they're useful to move stuff around faster. However it also has +10% Production on top of that IIRC, and it costs way less to boot. Even if the policy existed in this way, in the current version you'd be taking an entire policy to make the alternative building almost as good as the cheaper version when in most cases outside of one-tile islands, you can just get train station instead. Not to mention you might have the stations/ports built before you even get to picking a T2, and it'd be a questionable choice to spend more production to raise a building that will be only equalish after who knows how many turns.
If I already succeeded in getting 30-50 cities by that point then I'll just pick Order and rush to the end.
But Autocracy as a tree is all supposed to be about using your scary big guy status to get even scarier and bigger from what I understand (that's the picture the policies give) or pretend to be so, and I see no way to get to this point without many cities.
