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 Next Expansion will re-work the Government Plaza and Governors, right?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by acluewithout, Sep 10, 2018.

  1. acluewithout

    acluewithout Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,255
    Overall, I like the GP and Governors. But what frustrates me is how narrow these are, how much potential hasn’t been realised with these mechanics.

    The more I think about it, the more this seems like it would be obvious to Firaxis (FXS) and a good place for expansion.

    In particular:

    - National Wonders. There are two could mods that reintroduce National Wonders. The Government Plaza buildings do capture the idea of National Wonders a bit (particularly the “can only be build one” quality, and “opportunity cost” in that building one rules out others). But it seems so easy to expand this: you’d make National Wonders take up one tile, and require they be adjacent to the Government Plaza. The adjacency requirement would then create greater competition for tiles around the GP, particularly as the GP can also boost normal districts. What would be very cool is if any City could build a National Wonder, but subject to the GP adjacency requirement. So, you could have multiple cities working on NWs at the same time.

    - Court Houses. This seems very easy. Basically, you create a “mini” government plaza districts, that can be built in other cities. These “court houses” could have some inherent benefit (eg loyalty boost) and or boosts based on your government tier (eg loyalty bonus per tier current government) or other bonuses based on policy cards or government buildings or something else.

    - Palace Upgrade. I can’t beleive FXS have gone to the effort of basically giving every Civ an unique palace, but then don’t let you upgrade palaces. Seems so obvious- and so easy to implement. I could easily imagine upgrading palaces to, say, a parliament or presidential palace or congress, perhaps based on your particular Civ (so, Japan might get a Diet etc.)

    - Legacy Cards. The Legacy Card mechanics is a cool way to tailor your Civ and make choosing your government feel more weighty. At the moment though, it’s a bit narrow because you really only ever get two or three the whole game. It seems like a very easy area to expand, particularly as dropping more cards into the game can’t be very difficult either mechanically or in terms of game balance. You could easily get more cards from say particular great people or from government buildings themselves or from choosing ideologies (if they get reintroduced).

    - Governors. The most obvious thing to do would be expand the number of Govenors. Making separate skill trees for each would be tough, but it could probably just be avoided. Instead, you just give each Governor type (eg steward, financier) three or more different personalities to choose from. Each personality would have a different name / picture, but also maybe different stats (eg loyalty, movement speeds) and maybe different staring promotions. That could also maybe open up the possibility of choosing certain governor types more than once - imagine having more than one Pingala?

    My point is not “FXS should do x”.

    Instead, my point is (1) there is a lot of room to develop Government Plazas and Governors, (2) there is a lot of “low hanging fruit” in terms of how they could be developed, and (3) as much as no one can predict what FXS will do, it seems pretty likely given (1) and (2) that FXS will do more with the Government Plaza and Governors.

    On that note, if FXS bring back the world congress, it seems very likely to me FXS will also rework Envoys, Alliances and Emergencies. On the last two, I would have thought regional alliances (ie alliances involving multiple civs) and or players being able to declare emergencies of their choice through a World Congress would be fairly obvious moves.

    I think there is some precedent. For Civ 5, FXS did rework some systems (... and Civs...) introduced in GnK when they later released BNW.

    What do people think?

    Moderator Action: Expanded the FXS abbreviation the first time it is used to make it clear what is meant --NZ
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 10, 2018
  2. WillowBrook

    WillowBrook Lurker

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,195
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    I've found governors to be a bit meh. Especially as I like larger empires, so the effect of a governor on a single city isn't as significant. And I agree the government plaza system could be improved.

    But I'd much rather they spend resources on improving diplomacy and adding a meaningful diplomatic or economic victory than focus on these issues.

    But still, if they are going to spend resources on these, I wonder if there would be a way to extend a governor's area of influence beyond one city once the empire reaches a certain size (number of cities, perhaps?) That could help them not seem so insignificant in large empires.
     
  3. SammyKhalifa

    SammyKhalifa Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    3,697
    I think that kind of defeats the purpose of what governors are supposed to be though (city specialization). I'd rather they be more permanent features (not moving them around to chop chop) with more interesting (but not even necessarily "powerful") abilities. Maybe a "Forester" promotion to help forest tiles, or a guy that lets you ignore district limit , or a mason that gives big bonus to stone or marble.
     
    WillowBrook likes this.
  4. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    1,414
    Location:
    South Wales
    I think they should drop the limit on number of governors and allow each city to have a governor, perhaps after completing a special city centre building.
    This might require reworking a couple of things like Korea's bonus for having a governor in a city.
    Governors shouldn't be seen as individuals but as types. Promotions would work much the same as they do at present in terms of acquiring them, but the governors could do with rebalancing. I'd split Magnus's current abilities between 2 governors, 1 called Pioneer, the other Industrialist.
     
  5. SammyKhalifa

    SammyKhalifa Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    3,697
    But again that defeats the purpose of creating specialized cities with individualized traits. You know people would still work out the one "best" promotion/governor, and then you'd just see governor spam.
     
  6. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    1,414
    Location:
    South Wales
    Different governors would be valuable at different stages of the game. "Pioneer" would be more useful early game, "Industrialist" late game
    Some of the governors need drastic rebalancing eg Victor and Moksha
    Victor might give boosts to military production or experience so that hes useful in a military production city as well as one under attack
    So long as the "best" promotions aren't all available from 1 governor that shouldn't happen
    If it was done without changing the promotions from how they work atm then we'd just see Magnus spam but I'm not suggesting that
     
  7. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Warlord Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    1,581
    Gender:
    Male
    I believe one of the key intentions of the Governor system was to provide more of a benefit to smaller empires, who will have more (all?) of their cities with a governor.

    Then they undercut that by allowing you to run Magnus all over your large empire, getting the prime benefit of him for every city you own. Same for Liang if you go the special infrastructure route, but that's of lower overall impact.

    Other than Magnus and Liang, the 5 turn penalty without their bonus is a reasonable offset to the benefit of moving them around. Yes, you can use Reyna to buy districts, but you lose 5 turns of her gold generating abilities while moving her. Similarly, you can get Pingala's 20% production bonus, if you want it, at the cost of losing his 15% bonus to culture & science for 5 turns. Both of these are situational enough you'd likely only move them a few times a game, and wouldn't undermine the idea that governors provide less benefit as your empire gets bigger. And you can use anybody for a quick Loyalty boost, but again at a penalty that now you aren't maxing their other benefits.

    So I other words, the Magnus chop benefit is the main reason mobile governors are either OP or too fiddly or undermine the benefits of specialization or all of the above, depending on your perspective.

    That said, for me the easiest solution to governors is to turf the whole idea. They don't improve the fun factor for me, don't do enough to boost small empires (you still benefit from having as many cities as possible), provide no historical colour, and are yet another new system with its own rules for new players to have to learn, increasing the game complexity without an equivalent improvement in the overall game experience. The entanglement of governors with the loyalty system is the main reason to leave governors alone in Civ 6 (and hope they get re-thought in Civ 7 or abandoned completely).
     
    acluewithout likes this.
  8. iammaxhailme

    iammaxhailme Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2015
    Messages:
    451
    I like the IDEA of a governor being used to make specialized cities, but districts cost so much that I'm not going to be making a holy district, a culture district, a science district, etc in a city unless it's part of my victory plan. At least not until later.

    I think maybe each governor should let a district be built instantly, but only once and it must be in different cities.

    Reyna - Harbor or Commercial
    Victor - Encampment
    Liang - Entertainment or Waterpark
    Magnus - Industrial
    Moksha - Holy
    Pingala - Campus or Theater
    Amani - Not really sure what I'd give her. Aqueduct or Neighborhood?
     
  9. acluewithout

    acluewithout Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,255
    Some good ideas here.

    My original point was not so much “Governors should be like X” or “Governors are bad because X”, although maybe that’s how my OP read.

    My point was more about speculating about a future expansion. i.e. it seems very likely to me that Governors and the Government Plaza will get expanded on.

    I think it’s very unlikely Governors will get removed or radically recast. Although I could see maybe more Governors getting added, or may each Governor getting some alternate personalities.

    We know we’re getting a World Congress and Ideologies. I’d be very surprised if Emergencies aren’t tied to the WC, and equally surprised if Ideologies aren’t tied to Loyalty.

    I’m also going to bet we get either Court Houses (a quasi-government district you build in the cities you don’t have a Government Plaza) and or National Wonders (specific district like buildings you must build adjacent to your Government Plaza), although they might get called something else. Those both seem like things players would generally be excited about, would be easy to add to the game, and would be easy to make work mechanically.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2018
  10. darkace77450

    darkace77450 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    671
    I've been wanting another governor for a while now, but I couldn't think of a theme/specialization that isn't already covered by one or more of the existing governors. You hit on something I hadn't considered though; a naturalist governor - someone who provides bonuses to terrain, bonus resources, natural wonders, and national parks - would actually fit the bill perfectly!
     
    acluewithout likes this.
  11. acluewithout

    acluewithout Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,255
    I do like Governors mechanically overall. I agree they were designed to boost tall, and perhaps also to make loyalty more dynamic. But there are two niggles.

    First, leaving aside whether some promotions are over or underpowered, I find I end up picking the same Governors all the time. It’s not because eg Magnus is so good or something like that. The reason is that it’s usually handy to have 2 or 3 Governors, and there just aren’t that many useful permutations. If you could pick certain types of Governors more than once, it would really open up lots of different sorts of strategies.

    Second, they’re just a bit flavourless. I mean, this topic has been done to death I know. But think of this. There are only a limited pool of Civ leaders to play against, but at least these cycle through some 36 options, don’t repeat in the same game (ie you don’t ever meet two shakas unless you enable duplicate leaders), are all animated, and all represent real historical people. This versus “look, I have Magnus, you have Magnus, we all have Magnus!”.

    I can see the next expansion tackling the first issue, either by FXS creating more Governors (the .xml suggests that already), or FXS maybe (but less likely) enabling each type of Governor to have 2 or 3 personalities and allowing you to select more than one. But I can’t see FXS now making Governors more historical. They’ve made a decision to use sort of composite personalities and I think they’ll stick with that.

    If I had my way, I would have made “Governors” either represents estates (Clergy, Merchants, Nobles, Professions) or Great Houses or Great Families (eg Merovingians). You could keep the mechanics basically the same, but could have opened up other cool options, eg patronage, marriage, +/- loyalty for certain policies, risk family or estate might break away etc. I think FXS basically went with Governors because that’s what all the other game companies have in their games...
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2018
  12. Art Morte

    Art Morte Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2017
    Messages:
    491
    Gender:
    Male
    I think both the Plaza and the Governors are rather half-baked ideas that don't add much anything interesting into the game - apart from their loyalty bonuses perhaps. If they work on them, great, but they'd have to change these so much to make them interesting to me that I don't think it's going to happen. Most likely they will stay the way they are.
     
    shaglio likes this.
  13. UWHabs

    UWHabs Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,334
    Location:
    Toronto
    I think what they should have done with them is have a larger pool of governors, each with unique bonuses, but maybe have them chosen kind of like great people. So you would have 5 or 7 or whatever versions of a Castellan governor, but maybe another civ ends up recruiting them all because they want a castellan in each city. You could even give each the same tree of promotions, but simply differ them based on their "base" ability. I think it would be too much to ask them to create 40 unique promotion trees, but creating 40 unique base abilities would be reasonable to a certain extent. And then you get the interesting choices - maybe your top choice of Stewart is not available right now in choice - do you save your governor title for them, or spend it now?

    And while this perhaps doesn't specialize the cities as much, if you end up throwing a Reyna in every city, but it would be more about specializing your empire.
     
  14. liv

    liv Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,376
    Governors are a bit schizo. They are meant to specialize in our big cities but seem to be more valuable used to expand. Bar Magnus, that is really all I use them for as a warmonger
    Perhaps their ability to create instant loyalty should be taken away and some other means of creating loyalty (building, walls) be available in stead
     
  15. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Warlord Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    1,581
    Gender:
    Male
    For a building, Courthouse would be appropriate: rule of law tends to help people get comfortable with new overlords.

    A policy card that boosts Loyalty at the expense of gold would also be appropriate. Call it "Local Governance" or some such. Basically, you let each of your cities run some of their own affairs, thereby collecting less tax revenue centrally in return for happier newly conquered cities.

    Frankly, those, these concepts would work better if Loyalty was related to ethnic memory, rather than the current straight population count, and Loyalty was something you needed to manage as your empire got bigger and bigger from conquest. Right now, conquest makes Loyalty easier and easier to manage, other than in the most immediately conquered city (which can often ignore and just continue on to conquer all it's neighbours, solving the problem that way).
     
    SammyKhalifa likes this.
  16. Naktis

    Naktis Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    131
    Gender:
    Male
    To fix that a patch is enough , expanssion should add NEW game changing stuff
     
    LoneDragon likes this.
  17. acluewithout

    acluewithout Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,255
    This would do me (more or less). I agree 40 promotion trees won’t work, but different opening abilities might.

    I think this is intentional. Your caught between having lots or having few. You can also see that with promotions - some are designed for moving Governors around, some for keeping them in place and specialising.

    I think the core loyalty Mechanic is pretty good, ie loyalty. It’s maybe not “accurate”, but it’s easy to understand, allows fun gameplay, and is effective. What’s needed are some more modifiers, including eg cultural identity. Look how much better loyalty got when they just added a small modifier for Religion. A few more modifiers like that would be awesome.
     
    darkace77450 likes this.
  18. darkace77450

    darkace77450 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    671
    This is the first I'm hearing of unused governor code. Is there anything that can be gleaned from what's there?
     
  19. acluewithout

    acluewithout Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    1,255
    A further thought on this topic: if you look at BNW, there’s a lot there that could basically be carried across to Civ VI. I wonder if that’s what FXS are more or less planning to do.

    In particular:

    - tourism and loyalty seem totally set up for ideologies. As it did in Civ V, your ideology etc could compete with other Ideologies, impacting your tourism, and then maybe tourism and ideology effecting loyalty and loyalty flipping;

    - Legacy cards are just built for ideologies. You could see a system where you progress through your idealogy, unlocking new and more powerful legacy cards tied to that ideology. That would maybe make happier those people who want cards to only be available for certain governments etc.

    - alliances and emergencies seem completely set for some sort of world congress.
    Guess we’ll see.

    I honestly can't remember, and I can't find my post about it now. Sorry. From memory, there's something in the .xml which suggests there could have been or could be unique governors or something. It was just an extra column somewhere, but I can't seem to track it down now.
     

Share This Page