Upcoming Patch Info

[SupremacyKing2]

here is Aspyr's update on the MAC version of the patch:

As noted, the Mac version is now live and playable, but there’s still work to be done. Firaxis/2K have a planned patch on the way, and we’ve been working hard to get it implemented for the Mac. Our goal is to release the update on Mac at the same time as Windows PC, primarily to keep versions in sync for our cross-platform multiplayer… players.
Unfortunately, we’ve hit a few snags, as the implementation of the patch so far is not playing well with the rest of the game. We’re still working hard on it, but we want to let our players know that these unforeseen difficulties may delay the patch implementation for the Mac as well as Linux. We’ll have more info in the coming week(s).

 

[liv]

That's just it, though. The can make any terrain work. They, however, just don't MAKE it work because it already works - no work needed. What can a just-founded city in a hell-hole contribute to the magnificent capital? Cheap labour? Sure. A city of ten thousand can surely outproduce a city of a hundred thousand (i.e. a 1 size city with a bigger discrepancy will generate more production than a size 10 city with a smaller discrepancy; size to number of citizens was completely random on my part). Food? Where from? Sure, you can terraform... but the food still comes, and more at that, if you don't. Food is not really food? OK. Call it growth. Let's say small town people emigrate to the capital and this creates growth... only at the same time the small town grows even more rapidly than before the human drain. What gives?

Of course, if you want it badly enough, you can make anything make sense to you. Just look at scientologists. This doesn't mean the stuff actually makes sense, you have just resigned to accepting it.

Yes that is it
And it is over powered to the extent nothing else in the game matters.
You have to build more and more cities, buy the depot have trade routes ready to go and your science, growth, energy, production are all being created tht way.
Ruins everything else you could do. Because why do it when making small cities is so much more effective.

 

[Manannan]

Unfortunately, we’ve hit a few snags, as the implementation of the patch so far is not playing well with the rest of the game.

Edit: I really wish I could get a hold of this patch and see what they mean by this. Honestly, I'm shocked by the suggestion it can get worse.

 

[Anomandaris]

More food doesn't come when you don't terraform.

Which trade route would produce more food (assume capital at 60 surplus)?
a) City size 6 with 6 working terrascapes (+ecoscaping)
b) City size 6 with 3 working terrascapes
I rest my case.
Seriously, though, I understood what you meant. The yield is calculated by the difference between the food surpluses, not the food produced. In any case, there is no possibility for a food producing tile to increase the trade route yield, assuming a trade partner with a positive food surplus.

About the growth: In order to increase total population when making a transfer between two populations, there has to be an internal production increase or an outside source. So, excluding an outside source, the trading should stimulate reproduction. Which is actually totally feasible. Trade stimulates sex! Moving on.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

Edit: I really wish I could get a hold of this patch and see what they mean by this. Honestly, I'm shocked by the suggestion it can get worse.

I too am curious what they mean by this. Are the talking about something technical that is causing a glitch with the iOS on the MAC or they are talking about a balance change that has made the game even more unbalanced so they are having to rebalance things again?

 

[Roxlimn]

Anomandaris:

I think the core misunderstanding is the think that anything above food neutral is a negative.

This is where posters used to be: "The only thing I understand is that new cities produce better TRs." Indeed, a lot of people continue to just stay at this level of understanding.

"I understand that differentials is what creates the TR output for ITRs." - This is where you are. It defines your entire point and viewpoint.

"I understand that logarithmic differentials creates the TR output for ITRs." - This is actually short of where you need to be, but it's a step forward.

Creating outputs in peripheral cities doesn't immediately affect the output of the TR, and the effect accelerates as the differences become smaller. At large differences, developing the tiles and the cities may not even have an effect on the TR output numbers.

To answer your question, a size 6 city consumes 12 food. Six Ecoscape Terrascapes only generates 18, for a surplus of 6. 3 Terrascapes only produce 9 - the city would be in starvation off of the TR. This difference in surplus is small enough that I expect maybe a 1 or 0 difference in the food output of the TR, depending on where the next breakpoint is. The most likely effect is no difference at all.

 

[Manannan]

I too am curious what they mean by this. Are the talking about something technical that is causing a glitch with the iOS on the MAC or they are talking about a balance change that has made the game even more unbalanced so they are having to rebalance things again?

That's what I'm wondering about. If it's a technical issue oh well, what can you do, but if they're having issues with getting the balance right? I'm getting increasingly concerned my vision for a balanced game and the designers' vision are completely separate items.

 

[Joch]

Unfortunately, we’ve hit a few snags, as the implementation of the patch so far is not playing well with the rest of the game.

Edit: I really wish I could get a hold of this patch and see what they mean by this. Honestly, I'm shocked by the suggestion it can get worse.

code speak for: the new patch fixes most/all of the old problems, but breaks other aspects of the game/causes hardware conflicts/etc. Not at all unusual for a large patch.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Anomandaris:

I think the core misunderstanding is the think that anything above food neutral is a negative.

This is where posters used to be: "The only thing I understand is that new cities produce better TRs." Indeed, a lot of people continue to just stay at this level of understanding.

"I understand that differentials is what creates the TR output for ITRs." - This is where you are. It defines your entire point and viewpoint.

"I understand that logarithmic differentials creates the TR output for ITRs." - This is actually short of where you need to be, but it's a step forward.

Creating outputs in peripheral cities doesn't immediately affect the output of the TR, and the effect accelerates as the differences become smaller. At large differences, developing the tiles and the cities may not even have an effect on the TR output numbers.

To answer your question, a size 6 city consumes 12 food. Six Ecoscape Terrascapes only generates 18, for a surplus of 6. 3 Terrascapes only produce 9 - the city would be in starvation off of the TR. This difference in surplus is small enough that I expect maybe a 1 or 0 difference in the food output of the TR, depending on where the next breakpoint is. The most likely effect is no difference at all.

The problem Is that
1. logarithmic differentials* (with apparent caps) create TRs
2. those yields are too high

So while improving tiles/building yield buildings in the small city may* be an overall net benefit, the idea of building something other than settler/depot/factory/convoy/vessels is not worth the investment cost.
ie workers, output buildings

*because the yield is a logarithmic differential, this can be hard to predict (as opposed to buidlings and tiles, where it is a more straight forward bonus (add totals and apply a % modifier (that is clearly visible))

If trade routes were a flat 30% of the differential (up to a max of 10), they would be better because they would be understandable, even though they would be more overpowered.

 

[Roxlimn]

KrikkitTwo:

So while improving tiles/building yield buildings in the small city may* be an overall net benefit, the idea of building something other than settler/depot/factory/convoy/vessels is not worth the investment cost.
ie workers, output buildings

That is a Health issue, since it deals with expansion.

 

[Svetkavitsa]

Please, Please, PLEASE move the conversations about trade routes to the trade route thread(s). I would like to view this thread, take a quick peak and see if there's any information about the PATCH, and not pages and pages and pages about trade routes.

 

[Yucatan]

We just know they have version issues atm. Patch seems delayed at least for mac/linux. http://blog.gameagent.com/civilization-beyond-earth-mac-linux-dev-update-6/

 

[manu-fan]

Please, Please, PLEASE move the conversations about trade routes to the trade route thread(s). I would like to view this thread, take a quick peak and see if there's any information about the PATCH, and not pages and pages and pages about trade routes.

Totally agree with this.

 

[Serenya]

AI Cheats are boring but not losing a single city since Civ 3 isn't?

Is that what you just basically stated?


Aye yi yi.

That makes me wonder something. Am I the only one on the forums who looks at Civ as a building game, not a war game? I picked up Civ 3 after I'd been playing Sim City and a few other single player building/strategy games, and that's still my usual focus. I *will* go to war, but it's never my first choice.

 

[Bandobras Took]

That makes me wonder something. Am I the only one on the forums who looks at Civ as a building game, not a war game? I picked up Civ 3 after I'd been playing Sim City and a few other single player building/strategy games, and that's still my usual focus. I *will* go to war, but it's never my first choice.

No, I look on it as a building game, too, but since the AI is usually incompetent at War in Civ games, that has been the go-to method of winning for the bulk of those who handicap themselves by choosing a difficulty other than the default.

 

[m15a]

code speak for: the new patch fixes most/all of the old problems, but breaks other aspects of the game/causes hardware conflicts/etc. Not at all unusual for a large patch.

Definitely this and not a "balance" issue. Balance/gameplay isn't Aspyr's job.

 

[Lucius_]

Would Aspyr comment on gameplay issues? I'd suspect they are only talking technical; ie compatibility and bugs, not actual balance and such. So when they say breaking, I doubt they mean game mechanics out of balance, but more literally the patch breaking other things as in now x is bugged.

Edit: what ^ said. This is what happens when you start a post and don't come back to it until over an hour later lol

 

[Harun Al Rashid]

I like very much a Corky Bucek

 

[oakdragon]

here is Aspyr's update on the MAC version of the patch:

Thanks for the update!

I'm actually surprised. From my view, a delay would have been the norm, so the fact that they're already working on it and are trying for a simultaneous release comes as a pleasant surprise!

 

[oakdragon]

I too am curious what they mean by this. Are the talking about something technical that is causing a glitch with the iOS on the MAC or they are talking about a balance change that has made the game even more unbalanced so they are having to rebalance things again?

Probably the former. I doubt a cross-platform issue (or crossing the platform, rather) could be gameplay-related.

Edit: what ^ said. This is what happens when you start a post and don't come back to it until over an hour later lol

edit: or what happens when I don't read the whole thread before replying. Oops.