Tradition-Honor; How often are they used on Deity

[snarzberry]

I'm playing a deity game now, inspired by this thread, as inca on standard pangaea. It's a lot of fun doing things a little differently. I've taken tradition - patronage and have 6 cities with a 20 pop capital on turn 150. Started out with a slinger rush on a close siam and then settled three more cities in awesome mountain spots. I got big ben as well and I'm going to drop into autocracy for further unit purchase discount, then bulb ahead to some modern era unit. Gpt is massive and I have a nice stable of CS allies. Even now I know that rationalism would have been a superior choice but patronage has quite a lot going for it with what I'm doing. At the end of the day you aren't boxed into choosing liberty, or the other 'standard' SP choices in order to win on deity and mixing up your play leads to better enjoyment of the game, for me at least.

 

[JamesCivFan]

I'm playing a deity game now, inspired by this thread, as inca on standard pangaea. It's a lot of fun doing things a little differently. I've taken tradition - patronage and have 6 cities with a 20 pop capital on turn 150. Started out with a slinger rush on a close siam and then settled three more cities in awesome mountain spots. I got big ben as well and I'm going to drop into autocracy for further unit purchase discount, then bulb ahead to some modern era unit. Gpt is massive and I have a nice stable of CS allies. Even now I know that rationalism would have been a superior choice but patronage has quite a lot going for it with what I'm doing. At the end of the day you aren't boxed into choosing liberty, or the other 'standard' SP choices in order to win on deity and mixing up your play leads to better enjoyment of the game, for me at least.

Sounds awesome indeed. I will try taking Tradition in my next game with India (just lost one right after getting to Stealth on turn 192 due to my neighbor Darius declaring before I actually built my first Stealth Bomber). It's been a while since I took Tradition. The thing is what you said: "I know that --said Policy-- would have been a superior choice...". Some of those need a few buffs and then they'll be on par with Liberty and Rationalism (because it's clearly a no-brainer if you want to slingshot as fast as possible to a key Modern Era tech). Good luck on your game.

 

[Arilian]

It is not a problem that you cannot win with Trad or Honor. It is just you can win easier with Liberty / Rationalism / RA/GS farm.

It's a lot of fun doing things a little differently. I've taken tradition - patronage and have 6 cities with a 20 pop capital on turn 150.

Yes it is fun. I do sometimes for fun, I like Trad. But if you go liberty you can start RAs faster. You can have rationalism faster. You fill have a tech advantage faster. Then you coose how to win.

I hope liberty will be nerfed. (Especially the free settler)

 

[bhavv]

Swap collective rule and republic top to bottom.

Job done.

 

[ense7en]

I just really hope they balance them out a bit.

I don't want to see anything nerfed, but making Tradition and Honor a bit better would be nice.

 

[CYZ]

I agree with those who said Liberty mostly provides short term bonusses while the other two provide long term bonusses. That being said, a free settler and -50% production for settlers? Seriously? The free settler alone is huge.

So I'd keep it to that, just the free settler, not the -50% production (can be put in later in liberty if needed). Also, I'd change the worker too, instead of faster tile improvement (which benefits tall players more) the free worker should get 3 movement. That is nice for wide players as you'll lose alot of turns moving the worker from one city to the next.

 

[Drawmeus]

The big problem with Honor is that the difficulty in winning wars is almost never in actually winning battles, and that's the thing Honor helps with. If the AI was stronger in battle, Honor would be more useful, but even on Deity, it's of limited value because assuming you've kept your economy strong, you expect to win virtually every battle.

The difficulty for warmongering in Civ 5 is the empire management aspect of it, not the battles, and Liberty/Tradition (but especially Liberty, obviously) end up being better for warmongering simply because they help you solve those challenges.

I don't think Liberty vs Tradition is really true for a Tall empire, honestly. You can get the free settler and worker bonus, and then focus on Tradition. They're not exclusive and Tradition, as noted, gives benefits that scale much better into the late game, while several of the benefits from Liberty just aren't that great over the longterm, they're powerful because they put you so far ahead so fast that it lets you snowball from there.

 

[PhilBowles]

The big problem with Honor is that the difficulty in winning wars is almost never in actually winning battles, and that's the thing Honor helps with. If the AI was stronger in battle, Honor would be more useful, but even on Deity, it's of limited value because assuming you've kept your economy strong, you expect to win virtually every battle.

I've taken it as Songhai (one policy left in order to complete), and will use it to farm gold (plan was to do so from barbarians, but they seem to have vanished and I'm at war with Greece and Egypt, so I'll farm them instead) - I usually take the opener whatever my civ to farm culture.

And while winning battles isn't often a struggle, getting extra experience every time you do is a reasonable bonus, and the strength modifier and early GG mean you win battles while still having primitive units in fighting condition rather than having to retire to heal. Faster production for melee - enough said. Then there's the happiness boost for a garrison, and more trivial but still useful culture boost from the same policy. Cheaper unit upgrades are hardly to be sniffed at either even if you aren't in a position when you need to buy many units.

I think Honor is a solid early-game tree whatever the AI's combat abilities - only the 10% bonus for adjacent units (and the free GG opener) directly affects combat, and yes I agree that this is the least useful policy in the tree.

 

[JamesCivFan]

I just really hope they balance them out a bit.

I don't want to see anything nerfed, but making Tradition and Honor a bit better would be nice.

This.

 

[JamesCivFan]

I don't think Liberty vs Tradition is really true for a Tall empire, honestly. You can get the free settler and worker bonus, and then focus on Tradition. They're not exclusive and Tradition, as noted, gives benefits that scale much better into the late game, while several of the benefits from Liberty just aren't that great over the long term, they're powerful because they put you so far ahead so fast that it lets you snowball from there.

The thing is, that if you're not going for a Cultural Victory, you won't have enough culture to fill in the 4 policies of Rationalism (Opener+left column) , right after Finishing the whole Liberty Tree and taking the free Great Person. So all in all, it's still not a viable strategy to take some of Tradition and some of Liberty, especially on Deity.

 

[snarzberry]

Well I wouldn't say it's not viable, that's going a little too far, but I'd just point out that taking two or three policies in liberty and then or during all of tradition deprives you of two or three policies from the later trees if you'd gone straight tradition. The same is of course true however you mix and match the early trees and that has to be a consideration however you go about your social policy choices, especially now that there are finishing bonuses promoting the completion of whole trees.

I tend to think that if you're not going to go all the way for the great person then just dabbling in liberty probably isn't usually going to be worth it, you're better off getting three policies in piety or rationalism later than just the liberty opener/worker/settler alone.

If that is true then you're stuck with the choice of taking some combination of liberty/tradition/honour, or just taking one and then getting further in the later trees. Both of those choices are certainly viable but it is something to think about when making your decisions. In most cases, special examples like siam, egypt or possibly songhai in some play styles aside, then I think you're almost always better off just finishing one early tree and then opening a later one.

 

[JamesCivFan]

Well I wouldn't say it's not viable, that's going a little too far, but I'd just point out that taking two or three policies in liberty and then or during all of tradition deprives you of two or three policies from the later trees if you'd gone straight tradition. The same is of course true however you mix and match the early trees and that has to be a consideration however you go about your social policy choices, especially now that there are finishing bonuses promoting the completion of whole trees.

I tend to think that if you're not going to go all the way for the great person then just dabbling in liberty probably isn't usually going to be worth it, you're better off getting three policies in piety or rationalism later than just the liberty opener/worker/settler alone.

If that is true then you're stuck with the choice of taking some combination of liberty/tradition/honour, or just taking one and then getting further in the later trees. Both of those choices are certainly viable but it is something to think about when making your decisions. In most cases, special examples like siam, egypt or possibly songhai in some play styles aside, then I think you're almost always better off just finishing one early tree and then opening a later one.

First of all yes, you can win by getting half Liberty, half Honor for example. Or half Liberty, half Tradition. But ask yourself: "What's clearly, objectively the best and fastest way to win?" I believe the answer is to take Liberty, get the free Great Person on turn ~90, jumping into the Renaissance on turn 105-110. Bulbing Astronomy in order to get the Rationalism opener, and using its left column, to be at Stealth Bombers/Rocketry (for Science Victories) by turn 190. Then, the world is yours. Now, if Tradition and Honor get buffed a bit, since the opener will change, the whole game will be changed along with it.

 

[Drawmeus]

First of all yes, you can win by getting half Liberty, half Honor for example. Or half Liberty, half Tradition. But ask yourself: "What's clearly, objectively the best and fastest way to win?" I believe the answer is to take Liberty, get the free Great Person on turn ~90, jumping into the Renaissance on turn 105-110. Bulbing Astronomy in order to get the Rationalism opener, and using its left column, to be at Stealth Bombers/Rocketry (for Science Victories) by turn 190. Then, the world is yours. Now, if Tradition and Honor get buffed a bit, since the opener will change, the whole game will be changed along with it.

I'm not sure this is a problem with Liberty vs Tradition.

Civ V is a game with just one or two best ways to win. There are optimal plays. Individual components of those optimal plays aren't necessarily overpowered just by virtue of being part of the optimal path.

I think your observation that buffs to Tradition/Honor would change the whole optimal path is spot on. I'll just observe that if they manipulated late game military units a bit, that would ALSO change the whole optimal path, including possibly whether you want just Liberty, just Tradition or a mix of the two.

Now, that's not to say there isn't any sense in which one thing is better than the other. I can't imagine a scenario where changes to game rules make Honor a superior choice, *even if it guaranteed your units 1 shot kills in all combats* - because the true challenge is having enough happiness/revenue to support the larger empire, not conquering it in the first place. Changes to AI logic, yes. I suppose if they actually made AI units stronger than player units on higher difficulties, maybe that would make Honor stronger. But because Honor is nice bonuses that make you more likely to win individual battles, and no human player should be losing individual battles anyway, Honor is objectively less useful in single player than the other two. (It's also possible that Honor is objectively less useful even in multiplayer, given how much of an impact an economy has on your total military strength, but I don't play MP and am not qualified to comment).

 

[Kaosprophet]

I'm not sure this is a problem with Liberty vs Tradition.

Civ V is a game with just one or two best ways to win. There are optimal plays. Individual components of those optimal plays aren't necessarily overpowered just by virtue of being part of the optimal path.

I think your observation that buffs to Tradition/Honor would change the whole optimal path is spot on. I'll just observe that if they manipulated late game military units a bit, that would ALSO change the whole optimal path, including possibly whether you want just Liberty, just Tradition or a mix of the two.

Now, that's not to say there isn't any sense in which one thing is better than the other. I can't imagine a scenario where changes to game rules make Honor a superior choice, *even if it guaranteed your units 1 shot kills in all combats* - because the true challenge is having enough happiness/revenue to support the larger empire, not conquering it in the first place.

Professional Army, off the Honor tree, does eventually provide no-maintenance happiness to your empire - albeit through a handful of buildings that would otherwise be rarely if ever actually used.

 

[Tabarnak]

I just really hope they balance them out a bit.

I don't want to see anything nerfed, but making Tradition and Honor a bit better would be nice.

They already done that before june 2011. Their mistake come from the june 2011 patch.

Fortunately Gods and Kings will bring a whole new macro view of these policies

 

[TyBoy]

I'd like to see them adjust things so that the three trees were more tailored to help provide the bonuses necessary to execute and strengthen the three early game types (build buildings, build settlers/workers, build/use army) in the early and mid game. Right now liberty focuses its bonuses in the early game, while tradition and honor are each about half early bonuses (not necessarily early in the tree) and half late bonuses. Because the civ games don't tend to provide a lot of checks against runaway winners those late bonuses need to be a heck of a lot better than an early one to be worth using early policies on and they just aren't.

I think any policy in any of those three trees should have provided a worthwhile boost by turn 100 or its not a good policy for an early game tree.

In general; Tradition should be wonder/building boosts, free "mandatory" units/buildings in a limited number of cities or just the capital (to free up production), growth boosts, possibly economic boosts (though a later game tall friendly tree would be a better place to see those) and mid-size city happiness boosts. Liberty should be per-city boosts (I'd love to see the order finisher moved to liberty), strong early happiness boosts, early defense boosts (Oligarchy could actually be a good policy for a rapid expansion empire), settler and worker production boosts. Honor should provide unit production, strength and experience bonuses as well as some pillaging/killing bonuses. I actually think it is currently really close to on point, Military Caste just needs a little number boost, the opener is way weaker than the other two (it would not be over the top to just make it an early game only version of the Aztec UA) and I'd like to see some kind of bonus for conquering a city. The happiness boost on professional army is strange, but the tree does need some kind of happiness booster. It might be more appropriate to have a % based reduction in unhappiness from puppeted population/cities.

 

[PhilBowles]

I'd like to see them adjust things so that the three trees were more tailored to help provide the bonuses necessary to execute and strengthen the three early game types (build buildings, build settlers/workers, build/use army) in the early and mid game. Right now liberty focuses its bonuses in the early game, while tradition and honor are each about half early bonuses (not necessarily early in the tree) and half late bonuses. Because the civ games don't tend to provide a lot of checks against runaway winners those late bonuses need to be a heck of a lot better than an early one to be worth using early policies on and they just aren't.

I think any policy in any of those three trees should have provided a worthwhile boost by turn 100 or its not a good policy for an early game tree.

In general; Tradition should be wonder/building boosts, free "mandatory" units/buildings in a limited number of cities or just the capital (to free up production), growth boosts, possibly economic boosts (though a later game tall friendly tree would be a better place to see those) and mid-size city happiness boosts. Liberty should be per-city boosts (I'd love to see the order finisher moved to liberty), strong early happiness boosts, early defense boosts (Oligarchy could actually be a good policy for a rapid expansion empire), settler and worker production boosts. Honor should provide unit production, strength and experience bonuses as well as some pillaging/killing bonuses. I actually think it is currently really close to on point, Military Caste just needs a little number boost, the opener is way weaker than the other two (it would not be over the top to just make it an early game only version of the Aztec UA) and I'd like to see some kind of bonus for conquering a city. The happiness boost on professional army is strange, but the tree does need some kind of happiness booster. It might be more appropriate to have a % based reduction in unhappiness from puppeted population/cities.

Maybe change the happiness effect to Barracks etc. rather than Walls etc.? It does after all make sense that the larger and better-trained the garrison, the more content/oppressed the populace - who's going to care about a wall if there's no one manning it (other than perhaps for tourist income)?

 

[ense7en]

They already done that before june 2011. Their mistake come from the june 2011 patch.

Fortunately Gods and Kings will bring a whole new macro view of these policies

I did not play Civ5 back then.

What was nerfed, Tradition and Honor?

 

[snarzberry]

Sounds awesome indeed. I will try taking Tradition in my next game with India (just lost one right after getting to Stealth on turn 192 due to my neighbor Darius declaring before I actually built my first Stealth Bomber). It's been a while since I took Tradition. The thing is what you said: "I know that --said Policy-- would have been a superior choice...". Some of those need a few buffs and then they'll be on par with Liberty and Rationalism (because it's clearly a no-brainer if you want to slingshot as fast as possible to a key Modern Era tech). Good luck on your game.

My game was a success and I had a lot of fun winning while taking Tradition - Patronage - Autocracy. I actually am beginning to think that Rationalism might be overkill for science as it's so easy to get all of your teching done by turn 200 even if you don't take it and there are nice non-science related benefits in the other trees that you miss out on.

You don't need to go Liberty (or Rationalsim) in order to put together civ 5's version of the SoD

Big Ben + Autocracy results in SB's being 680 per pop to purchase, during golden ages that means I can buy more than one per turn, and I have 4 production cities that can spit a SB out in 3 - 5 turns each. Equals a lot of SBs fast. So the 'lesser' trees, the ones that aren't as popular, still have something going for them and can be used to good effect. Seriously, who wants to just go Liberty - Rationalism every time anyway?

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

Spoiler :

My game was a success and I had a lot of fun winning while taking Tradition - Patronage - Autocracy. I actually am beginning to think that Rationalism might be overkill for science as it's so easy to get all of your teching done by turn 200 even if you don't take it and there are nice non-science related benefits in the other trees that you miss out on.

You don't need to go Liberty (or Rationalsim) in order to put together civ 5's version of the SoD

Big Ben + Autocracy results in SB's being 680 per pop to purchase, during golden ages that means I can buy more than one per turn, and I have 4 production cities that can spit a SB out in 3 - 5 turns each. Equals a lot of SBs fast. So the 'lesser' trees, the ones that aren't as popular, still have something going for them and can be used to good effect. Seriously, who wants to just go Liberty - Rationalism every time anyway?

Proof that stacking limits need to apply to aircraft.