Too much gold?

[BlueTemplar]

I feel there's another balance issue that came up in my game: gold income (and maybe maintenance costs since they're related)

With all the extra gold I accumulated from Prehistoric to Mid-Classical I was able to sustain my (ok, not that big) army and maintenance costs from all the conquered cities during the time it took me to wipe out 3 civilizations and reach 27 cities total. Then I started a golden age, built up, and now I'm in positive income again.

The problem is that during the whole game I was at 100% research, despite the facts that:
- My focus was on production. So no merchant specialists (though I might have had some priests, and my capital has now 8 Great Military Instructors generating 16 ).
- I did not build any trade mission units.
- I did not build wealth. (except accidental times when the AI bested me at a wonder and the were converted to
- I didn't start to build purely gold-generating buildings until the middle of the war.
(- I did trade with the AI's for gold against resources, but these weren't really big sums.)
Note also that from Mid-Classical I reached Deity.

Now that's one single game of one player, what is YOUR experience?

 

[Koshling]

I feel there's another balance issue that came up in my game: gold income (and maybe maintenance costs since they're related)

With all the extra gold I accumulated from Prehistoric to Mid-Classical I was able to sustain my (ok, not that big) army and maintenance costs from all the conquered cities during the time it took me to wipe out 3 civilizations and reach 27 cities total. Then I started a golden age, built up, and now I'm in positive income again.

The problem is that during the whole game I was at 100% research, despite the facts that:
- My focus was on production. So no merchant specialists (though I might have had some priests, and my capital has now 8 Great Military Instructors generating 16 ).
- I did not build any trade mission units.
- I did not build wealth. (except accidental times when the AI bested me at a wonder and the were converted to
- I didn't start to build purely gold-generating buildings until the middle of the war.
(- I did trade with the AI's for gold against resources, but these weren't really big sums.)
Note also that from Mid-Classical I reached Deity.

Now that's one single game of one player, what is YOUR experience?

There is a massive thread on this already (though it hasn't been actiave foprm maybe 2 monthes or so). Opinion on the matter is...er...polarised

I agree with you. Others forcefully don't. There really doesn't seem to be a consensus.

My own (purely personal please note) view is that if the game allows you to stay at 100% research without too much effor throughout then balance is broken and we might as well not have a research slider.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Koshling is right. This topic has been re-hashed so many times. Even with the - buildings there is still a lot. But when I increase the - people go nuts. Its a loose / loose situation. Turns out the game can be played so many different ways that in one game you could be strapped for cash while another game your rolling in dough. In fact it can even happen in the same game!! Civic choices, what terrain is nearby, how many resources you get even the playing difficulty will chnage this. Even map size and speed plays a part. If you are at war or not and so on. Needless to say I do not think we will ever reach a perfect balance. The game has just too many ways to play it that some combos are bound to give you lots of cash while others will leave you broke.

 

[Koshling]

Koshling is right. This topic has been re-hashed so many times. Even with the - buildings there is still a lot. But when I increase the - people go nuts. Its a loose / loose situation. Turns out the game can be played so many different ways that in one game you could be strapped for cash while another game your rolling in dough. In fact it can even happen in the same game!! Civic choices, what terrain is nearby, how many resources you get even the playing difficulty will chnage this. Even map size and speed plays a part. If you are at war or not and so on. Needless to say I do not think we will ever reach a perfect balance. The game has just too many ways to play it that some combos are bound to give you lots of cash while others will leave you broke.

Yeh, the most eggregious area (IMO) is not (directly anyway) buildings, its trade and trade route modifiers.

 

[BlueTemplar]

Sorry, I should have used the icon instead of . Trade routes (and cottages, resources that give bonus , etc...) do not even enter the equation since I'm converting 100% of my to anyway...

I'm sorry I should have searched for a similar topic first, here it is :
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=441081
Should I move my post there?

The problem with - buildings is that when you increase your % bonuses, like when you build a bank, these costs also increase, which doesn't make sense!
Could these costs be moved to somewhere where neither maintenance % nor % have an effect, like the city base maintenance?

While we're talking about maintenance, why are the City Council buildings increasing maintenance (while Courthouses decrease it), and why are the Corporations affected by maintenance %?
Or should I rather ask this in the maintenance thread?
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=420206

 

[Koshling]

Sorry, I should have used the icon instead of . Trade routes (and cottages, resources that give bonus , etc...) do not even enter the equation since I'm converting 100% of my to anyway...

I'm sorry I should have searched for a similar topic first, here it is :
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=441081
Should I move my post there?

The problem with - buildings is that when you increase your % bonuses, like when you build a bank, these costs also increase, which doesn't make sense!
Could these costs be moved to somewhere where neither maintenance % nor % have an effect, like the city base maintenance?

While we're talking about maintenance, why are the City Council buildings increasing maintenance (while Courthouses decrease it), and why are the Corporations affected by maintenance %?
Or should I rather ask this in the maintenance thread?
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=420206

Mofidiers (like banks) do NOT amplify negatives per se, buit they DO operate on the aggregate value. Thus if your aggregate base total (just adding together the raw inputs from buildings etc.) is negative then banks REDUCE the deficit (modifier acts in inverse). Key piece of code is:

		//	Don't apply rate modifiers to negative commerce or you get counter-intuitive results
		//	like intelligence agencies makign your negative espionage worse!
		if ( iNewCommerce > 0 )
		{
			iNewCommerce = (iNewCommerce * getTotalCommerceRateModifier(eIndex)) / 100;
		}
		else
		{
			iNewCommerce = (iNewCommerce * 100) / getTotalCommerceRateModifier(eIndex);
		}

I suspect there may be a bug in the actuals displayed in this area however.

 

[BlueTemplar]

So, do you mean that banks will "only" increase - if the city generates positive ? But that's almost always!

Anyway I looked at a particular city, Ahhiyawa (42,64) :
+1 from priest
+1 from Judaism
+12-2=+10 from buildings
+4%+20%+15% bonus = +39% total

I should have (1+1+12-2)*1.39=12*1.39=16.68

or if the - was unaffected by the +%,
I should have (1+1+12)*1.39-2=14*1.39-2=17.46

The total top left shows 16.68 all right, but when you pass over it with the cursor, it shows total 16.84 in the pop-up!

Even weirder when you get to the Capital, Hattusas (38,72):
base gold : 88 * 2.5 = 220, but top left shows 242 (so *2.75, not *2.5) and pop-up shows 251.68...
For sure, when you look at the buildings that generate -, they all take the +% into account... (and *2.75 in my capital, not *2.5)
And the estimated gold display for priests is wrong too : it shows +4.81/-0.69 to add/remove a priest, while it should be +2.5/-2.5 ...

 

[Koshling]

So, do you mean that banks will "only" increase - if the city generates positive ? But that's almost always!

Anyway I looked at a particular city, Ahhiyawa (42,64) :
+1 from priest
+1 from Judaism
+12-2=+10 from buildings
+4%+20%+15% bonus = +39% total

I should have (1+1+12-2)*1.39=12*1.39=16.68

or if the - was unaffected by the +%,
I should have (1+1+12)*1.39-2=14*1.39-2=17.46

The total top left shows 16.68 all right, but when you pass over it with the cursor, it shows total 16.84 in the pop-up!

Even weirder when you get to the Capital, Hattusas (38,72):
base gold : 88 * 2.5 = 220, but top left shows 242 (so *2.75, not *2.5) and pop-up shows 251.68...
For sure, when you look at the buildings that generate -, they all take the +% into account... (and *2.75 in my capital, not *2.5)
And the estimated gold display for priests is wrong too : it shows +4.81/-0.69 to add/remove a priest, while it should be +2.5/-2.5 ...

No, banks will NEVER increase the deficit. If the aggregate raw commerce production for a city is negative then the modifiers act inversely reducing the (magnitude of the) negative amount. As I say, I'm not sure the 'actual' displays are getting this right however.

 

[Hydromancerx]

No, banks will NEVER increase the deficit. If the aggregate raw commerce production for a city is negative then the modifiers act inversely reducing the (magnitude of the) negative amount. As I say, I'm not sure the 'actual' displays are getting this right however.

The actual display should be fixed since people are getting scared off by increasing -.

 

[Koshling]

The actual display should be fixed since people are getting scared off by increasing -.

For sure. I'll look into it sometime in the next few days.

 

[AIAndy]

No, banks will NEVER increase the deficit.

Seen on the level of individual buildings banks can increase the deficit and that is what I think BlueTemplar is saying.

- buildings are more expensive in cities with high percentage gold modifier than in cities without it except when you run a net deficit in the city (then it is the other way round). This does not matter a lot when you consider building another percentage modifier building but it does matter when you want to build a - building.

While that might be counterintuitive at first it has some interesting effects.

 

[Koshling]

Seen on the level of individual buildings banks can increase the deficit and that is what I think BlueTemplar is saying.

- buildings are more expensive in cities with high percentage gold modifier than in cities without it except when you run a net deficit in the city (then it is the other way round). This does not matter a lot when you consider building another percentage modifier building but it does matter when you want to build a - building.

While that might be counterintuitive at first it has some interesting effects.

Yes, true. However, banks themselves should NEVER show a negative actual, whichbi think were being told they do sometimes.

 

[Epona222]

I don't know how you are making money in the prehistoric era, it's usually a bit of a struggle for me (although in v21 I have found that production of percussion instruments helps to keep my nascent economy afloat - that might need to be tweaked a bit to tone down the benefits if it hasn't already ).

As a bit of an expansionist, I tend to have all possible hunting units (including 15 Cree Trackers if I can get Cree culture) and many scout units out and there are certain subdued animals I want to bring home rather than butcher in the field, all with their associated supply costs, I consider myself lucky to break even and have gone through periods of my research bar being at 0% beakers in order to support getting a valuable animal like a horse or camel or even herd animals which are only good for food/hammers type herd (or to make herds so I can build buffalo or mule trainer, for better worker units) rather than potential military use back across the map (I play on gigantic Terra map, that's a lot of land, a lot of hunting/recon units, and potentially a lot of subdued animals).

For a lot of the prehistoric and ancient eras I just cross my fingers for a goody hut giving me cash so that I can sustain being in the red for a bit longer. I've had units go on strike because I can't afford to pay them, it's not a time of economic brilliance and building up monetary reserves in my games, with my playstyle - more like push it as far as I can and hope I don't break the bank!

I did 'suffer' an excess of income in previous versions from the Classical onwards, but it seems to be a lot more reasonable now with the changes such as negative financial impact of various buildings such as defense structures and science output buildings and I have to make decisions about whether I really need them, rather than just building everything and knowing it would still be OK. It's better as it is now than how it was in earlier versions.

 

[JosEPh_II]

A purely personal view, back before v18 I could run 90% and occasionally 100% Research. Last 3 versions if I run 40-60% Research I consider that a Good economy.

I agree with Epona222's appraisal as it mirrors my playstyle basics. I can Never seem to run 100% research anymore. And I've only made the Modern Era once in the last 3 versions so I have No opinion on late game economics and Pop.

OT: I'm starting to find that by the time I get to Modern Era the game is bogging down in tedium (and I'm a Micromanager deluxe!). So for me to get bored with it tells me that the game has too much Bloat, too much of everything. And I swear I Never thought I would say this, Please! trim the fat.

JosEPh

 

[BlueTemplar]

Indeed, Hydromancerx will probably kill me for saying that, but IMHO there are just too many different buildings and manufactured goods : I'm not sure that the clutter they bring is worth it...
Or maybe I just need to change my playstyle away from micromanaging and start trusting the city governors...

 

[Petete]

Well, I play on deity and I do have a 30 + cash overflow at the moment, but when war hits... I've had to pump out around 50 lightswordsmen to counter two huge stacks of real swordsmen that landed on my shores. And then build a massive fleet of decaremes and triremes to keep the rest from landing. Which easily put me at -60 for the whole war which lasted about 75~100 turns.

Had it not been for that surplus, I would have not made it. Not to mention the war weariness throughout my empire.

 

[BlueTemplar]

Yes, but did you need to reduce your research rate to cover those costs (as it should be) or did your treasury gold from all that extra cash before suffice?

 

[DRJ]

Well, I play on deity and I do have a 30 + cash overflow at the moment, but when war hits... I've had to pump out around 50 lightswordsmen to counter two huge stacks of real swordsmen that landed on my shores. And then build a massive fleet of decaremes and triremes to keep the rest from landing. Which easily put me at -60 for the whole war which lasted about 75~100 turns.

Had it not been for that surplus, I would have not made it. Not to mention the war weariness throughout my empire.

Absolutely! Imagine the one AI that just declared war on you suddenly also blocks the trade routes to the rest of civs on continent you are friendly with. Imagine another civ is far advanced (like 800 GNP you have to 5000 GNP of AI): to catch up you need the money surplus of peace times to buy the rest of techs and have a base capital to be able to make good trades.

I think it's alright and everybody who moans shall play higher level and adept to other tactics and just then moan again.

Indeed, Hydromancerx will probably kill me for saying that, but IMHO there are just too many different buildings and manufactured goods : I'm not sure that the clutter they bring is worth it...
Or maybe I just need to change my playstyle away from micromanaging and start trusting the city governors...

Yes, once I have more than 10 cities, now I do trusting the city governors (for my strategic but not frontier settlements); if you activate automatic production and also klick on the food or hammer or research under the production automation tab in city screen, then you can avoid getting unpromoted units now which the governor would promote otherwise. This new feature is practical to specialize and pseudo-micromanage cities. Try it out!

 

[Hydromancerx]

A purely personal view, back before v18 I could run 90% and occasionally 100% Research. Last 3 versions if I run 40-60% Research I consider that a Good economy.

I agree with Epona222's appraisal as it mirrors my playstyle basics. I can Never seem to run 100% research anymore. And I've only made the Modern Era once in the last 3 versions so I have No opinion on late game economics and Pop.

OT: I'm starting to find that by the time I get to Modern Era the game is bogging down in tedium (and I'm a Micromanager deluxe!). So for me to get bored with it tells me that the game has too much Bloat, too much of everything. And I swear I Never thought I would say this, Please! trim the fat.

JosEPh

This is great to know. This means the game has at least some balance. This is one reason I have not gone in to make anything harsher for -:gold" buildings. My guide for buildings is based on the sim city 4 model ...

Residential = +
Commercial = +
Industrial/Farms = +
Public (Police, Firefighting, Education, Healthcare) = -
Utilities (Water, Electricity, Garbage) = -

Some thing I have had to decide on my own are things like Walls and Towers which have -. Other things like Parks should have - but don't. For the most part if you want or you will need to build some - buildings.

 

[CIVPlayer8]

Well I've been thinking... It wouldn't be way outta line to suggest dark ages again, would it? It would help because you go through periods of prosperity, but once you have a dark age, you better have enough gold to last you through! Now I understand this concept needs improving on, but it wouldn't be that hard to change, would it?