Upcoming Piety Changes

[Owlbebach]

Pastures and serfdom mix so well, though. Enclosure, sharecropping, etc. etc.

Maybe it should improve horses sheeps and cows instead of pastures? So that planting Great People on resources is not a loss of yields. Also maybe +1 instead of +1? It will help cities with lots of sheeps and hills and pastures have quite a lot of production already

 

[tu_79]

I dislike obvious choices. Right now, planting a GPTI is a no brainer over ivory (nothing to improve camps other than a rarely chosen pantheon, and a building that improves ivory). and has little to think over any other luxury. The most important thing about luxuries is being connected, for getting the happiness and the monopoly bonuses. Horses might get preference over other luxuries, since there is nothing improving pastures, except for another rarely chosen pantheon, but horses themselves are improved by the stable. GPTI can be even planted long before the stable is available, making scaling GPTI yields worthy earlier. Iron, on the other hand, loses a lot of yields when being connected by a GPTI, specially a deared beaker.

So, having buildings that improve pastures and camps will make us think twice where to put those GPTI. Having this on policies encourages using fewer GPTI when taking that policy, and also this conflicts with Tradition, which directly encourages planting GPTI (+1 food).

In a sense, having a policy improve pastures (and I might add camps) works better for empires with little GP or for Tradition empires that prefer bulbing over GPTI.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

Gazebo, I've been thinking about your reply re: Statecraft bonuses for being friends with CS. If Siam can have this as its UA (75% increase of yields from friendly&allied CS) and if it's not been snowballing for Siam in your control games, then it's probably not a danger for snowballing out of control if it became a part of statecraft, perhaps to the tune of 33% or 50% increase or sth like that?

 

[Dawnpromise]

If the Fealty opener is going to stay as it is perhaps a few pity buffs for temples are in order? Without the old buffs from Piety I don't see why anyone would build them now. At the very least grant them a culture and/or faith boost.

 

[Gazebo]

If the Fealty opener is going to stay as it is perhaps a few pity buffs for temples are in order? Without the old buffs from Piety I don't see why anyone would build them now. At the very least grant them a culture and/or faith boost.

Already on it. Getting a buff from Grand Temple.

G

 

[Dawnpromise]

Already on it. Getting a buff from Grand Temple.

G

Is the golden age effect still there? It'll be mildly amusing to see how many city's suddenly construct temples during that golden age!

 

[Bromar1]

• Scaler - +1 Yield in owned Cities following Religion.

What does this mean?

 

[grmagne]

• Scaler - +1 Yield in owned Cities following Religion.

What does this mean?

I believe it's food, gold, culture, science, faith and production. Probably not golden age points though.

 

[Bromar1]

As for the overall layout of medieval policy trees, I think the philosophy behind them is solid. Each is focused on a specific element of gameplay, which may push toward a particular victory type, but should benefit the other types as well. What I would like to see most is more diverse options for tall empires. Currently Aesthetics is often the only viable choice for a tall civ, which is especially problematic since it pushes so hard toward tourism, which might not be what you want to focus on. You usually need to go wide to secure city-state alliances, so Statecraft won't be a viable choice for tall unless you're going to shift its focus. That leaves Piety, whose focus on religion doesn't inherently pull it toward either side of the spectrum. I'd like to see Piety give a little more to tall empires, to make it a viable alternative to Aesthetics.

I agree with this. Tradition into aesthetics is such a no brainer, there's rarely any reason to not go aesthetics if you're tall

 

[Bromar1]

Thoughts 2.0:



Please note that I'm using existing functions for this proposal.

Be gentle.
G

For Artisanry: giving +5 production to University and workshops heavily skews your tech path to the top of the tree. I think it would be more balanced to give smaller yields to several buildings, not just 2. Like +3 production to University and grocer, +3 gold to workshop and armories. Spreading out the bonus yields in different parts of the tech tree would help in balance

 

[Gokudo01]

For Artisanry: giving +5 production to University and workshops heavily skews your tech path to the top of the tree. I think it would be more balanced to give smaller yields to several buildings, not just 2. Like +3 production to University and grocer, +3 gold to workshop and armories. Spreading out the bonus yields in different parts of the tech tree would help in balance

which post are you quoting ? because we are already at 5.0 ^^

 

[Bromar1]

Friendship bonuses scale out of control pretty easily. I'd rather leave that to Siam.

5.0:

There seems to be much less happiness available in Artistry and Statecraft than there used to be. Having a reliable +1 happiness per building is really strong and only allowing it for fealty seems unbalanced

 

[ElliotS]

There seems to be much less happiness available in Artistry and Statecraft than there used to be. Having a reliable +1 happiness per building is really strong and only allowing it for fealty seems unbalanced

Having it in every tree is boring though. I think Artistry might deserve 1 per 2 policies, and statecraft should get double happiness from trade routes when the east India empire building is built. (Or is that's too hard, +3 or +5 happiness on it.)

Then again maybe not. I guess testing will show.

 

[Dawnpromise]

Then again maybe not. I guess testing will show.

With changes this broad I'm leaning towards this. And yes, I'd rather have each tree have a different flavor instead of all the same effect but different building.

 

[GodDamnItAlexander]

I have no idea what's going on but just reading through this thread is fascinating.

 

[Txurce]

I only discovered the tree changes last night, and read the shorter threds first, so of course commented before seeing that we are now on v.5. I think it looks great. Amazingly quick progress, there.

The Grand Temple adjustment will help.

Clearly the metaphor is 'carburetors should not be left idling on a hot summer day.'

Except carburetors have gone the way of the hand-crank.

 

[Galbias]

5.0:

Partly for personal reference, I made a list of what each policy tree gained and lost:

Piety/Fealty
Lost:
-15% gold and 1 Happiness on Temples
-50% religious spread range
-50% religious pressure in nearby cities without majority religion
-50% faster religious spread over trade routes
-1 of all yields in all cities (from the finisher)
-double border growth during Golden Age
-free Great Artist
-33% additional yields from internal trade route originating in Capital/Holy City


Gained:
-5 food, gold, prod in all cities (scaler)
-All positive Happiness is added to your Empire-wide Culture rate
- -25% Unhappiness from Boredom
- +1 Gold and Production from Pastures
- +1 Culture in Cities for every 4 non-Specialist Citizens.
- +15% production during WLTKD
- Castles and Armories built 100% faster
- Castles grant +1 Happiness and 10% food
- Tourism modifier for shared religion +25%



Aesthetics/Artistry
Lost:
-5% GWAM rate in all cities
-100 scaling Culture on GP use
-All positive Happiness is added to your Empire-wide Culture rate
- +1 Happiness from all Guilds.
-Double theming bonuses
-2 Science on Amphitheaters, Opera Houses, Museums, and Broadcast Towers
- 1 Gold and Culture on Great Works
- All World Wonders produce +2 Tourism.
- 2 Culture on GP improvements.

Gained:
-5 Science/Culture in all cities
-Great Works and Landmarks gain 2 science, 1 GAP
- +4% Science for every Great Work in a City (up to %20).
- 50 scaling Gold on GP use
- +1 Happiness for every 3 Policies unlocked.
- +10% Culture in all Cities during Golden Ages.
- World Wonders produce +2 Culture, and Natural Wonders produce +5 Science
- +50 Golden Age Points when you construct World or National Wonders, scaling with Era.
- The Tourism modifier for Trade Routes with other Civilizations increases by 15%.


Statecraft
Lost:
-3 Gold from Trade Routes with City States
-Influence degrades 25% slower
-Allied City-States will occasionally gift you Great People
-Allied City-States give you 33% of their Science
- +1 Happiness from Chanceries
- Resources from City-States doubled
- chance of rigging elections in City-States is increased by 50%.

Gained:
-20% more CS quest rewards
-50% more influence from diplomatic/trade missions
-earn Great Diplomats 25% faster
-Tourism modifier for open borders is increased by 20%.
- +3% Culture in Capital for every active Spy or Diplomat (up to 30%)
- +25% Yields for Trade Routes originating from your Capital or a Holy City.
-World Wonders require 1 less policy per 3 CS Allies you maintain (used to be 4)
-Every Session, gain Culture, Science, and Gold based on the number of Delegates you control, scaling with Era
- 1 free Trade Route
- +1 Happiness for every active Trade Route.
- Resources from City-States count towards Global Monopolies

I'm liking the changes a lot, random thoughts
-Fealty lost a bunch of minor religious bonuses and gained some nice, generally useful stuff. The bonus to Castles/Armories is going to be huge for Happiness in a part of the game where it can be a major issue, especially for a wide empire, which is good.
-Artistry looks a fair amount weaker, the loss of double theming bonuses really hurts how much Tourism it can potentially give you and the Happiness it gives will now come a lot slower. It was probably the best Medieval tree so I guess that's not entirely unwarranted, but I'm not sure if I would take it now if I'm not going for a cultural victory. Will have to try and see I guess.
-Statecraft seems nicely boosted in general, boost to influence gained is welcome and much more useful than decay reduction. I still don't like having bonuses that could potentially interrupt production (mainly the WW policy reduction bonus) tied to X number of City-state alliances since they fluctuate constantly but I don't have a better idea offhand.

Also, I feel like Fealty could use a new Policy wonder, Taj Mahal doesn't really fit with it thematically and I feel like it's not really good enough to be a policy wonder anyways. Maybe Brandenberg Gate?

 

[Dawnpromise]

Also, I feel like Fealty could use a new Policy wonder, Taj Mahal doesn't really fit with it thematically and I feel like it's not really good enough to be a policy wonder anyways. Maybe Brandenberg Gate?

I did not think of this, but I agree.

 

[Gazebo]

Partly for personal reference, I made a list of what each policy tree gained and lost:



I'm liking the changes a lot, random thoughts
-Fealty lost a bunch of minor religious bonuses and gained some nice, generally useful stuff. The bonus to Castles/Armories is going to be huge for Happiness in a part of the game where it can be a major issue, especially for a wide empire, which is good.
-Artistry looks a fair amount weaker, the loss of double theming bonuses really hurts how much Tourism it can potentially give you and the Happiness it gives will now come a lot slower. It was probably the best Medieval tree so I guess that's not entirely unwarranted, but I'm not sure if I would take it now if I'm not going for a cultural victory. Will have to try and see I guess.
-Statecraft seems nicely boosted in general, boost to influence gained is welcome and much more useful than decay reduction. I still don't like having bonuses that could potentially interrupt production (mainly the WW policy reduction bonus) tied to X number of City-state alliances since they fluctuate constantly but I don't have a better idea offhand.

Also, I feel like Fealty could use a new Policy wonder, Taj Mahal doesn't really fit with it thematically and I feel like it's not really good enough to be a policy wonder anyways. Maybe Brandenberg Gate?

This is great, thanks for this.

Taj Mahal is actually pretty solid for Fealty, considering that it reduces religious unrest and gives Fealty an immediate Golden Age (which might otherwise be hard to get for a wide civ).

G

 

[Dawnpromise]

This is great, thanks for this.

Taj Mahal is actually pretty solid for Fealty, considering that it reduces religious unrest and gives Fealty an immediate Golden Age (which might otherwise be hard to get for a wide civ).

G

It's more a complaint of theme. Fealty may have a religious sub-theme but Feudalism is the main theme like you said.

I think something like Himeji Castle or the Red Fort would be a good fit, or perhaps Notre Dame would be good if you want to keep the Religious theme and GA.

Also Religious unrest will be virtually non-existent or self resolving due to Organized Religion, unless you know something about that we don't know there.