Venice

[pineappledan]

Maybe give Venice a unique Settler type that doesn't settle cities, it doesn't settle even puppeted cities, but it settles new City States with Italian names that start at 60 influence with Venice (but no other bonuses towards Venice). Or have them have a chance to spawn a new CS-controlled Settler in their lands that will go to settle somewhere nearby, or maybe have the spawning of that CS settler be managed by some action, like building it, spawning a Great Person, process like Public Works (name it "attract competitors" or something) which spawns a new Italian-named CS in the closest possible location to Venice, preferably one that can't take Venice's tiles (so at least 6 tiles away from Venice).

This way, Venetian niche of not settling is kept where it is, but it can deny and indirectly take land by having a controllable way to spawn CS.

However even with that Venice still needs some actual Supply and preferably it's more Great Merchants points back, even if reduced...

lol, I think you just described an incredibly interesting mechanic for a Phoenician civ. Settlers built by this civ create mercantile city states with a unique Tyrian Purple luxury and 60 resting influence With Phoenicia.

2 extra city-states settled at 6-7 tiles distance from Venice would cover that monopoly issue, it would also alleviate the hate about playing vs Venice gobbling up all the city-states in a normal game if he guarantees 2 more than usual.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

lol, I think you just described an incredibly interesting mechanic for a Phoenician civ. Settlers built by this civ create mercantile city states with a unique Tyrian Purple luxury and 60 resting influence With Phoenicia.

2 extra city-states settled at 6-7 tiles distance from Venice would cover that monopoly issue, it would also alleviate the hate about playing vs Venice gobbling up all the city-states in a normal game if he guarantees 2 more than usual.

Why only Mercantile ones for this Phoenicia? That means all you get from early game settling is a few Gold (it gives like 2 per turn ancient era) and more Happiness, the second of which an OCC civ won't need. Any other civ would outyield this Phoenicia easily in Science and Culture thanks to them having more Guilds/etc, especially if the new CS "broke" their AI and didn't make units, in which case they'd not be worth much. Unless it got more yields per CS ally, like by an unique Scrivener's office, of course... The more I think about it the more I like it. Razing a city to put a CS there seems very cool, and it'd be funny to see something like England wrecking your CS empire with espionage and CS takeovers. Or Austria getting random quests, suddenly becoming their ally and then marrying them.

The only real flaw of so many Phoenician Mercantile allies that you can easily settle means AI either successfully takes them down, or you can never accept the peace treaty - they'll be ruined by war weariness, your +Happiness per mercantile one combined with only one city means you can hold the war pretty much forever while they have -50% happiness penalties if your CSs have troops. Granted, a similar thing applies to the Huns, so maybe it's okay.

 

[Stalker0]

Something I want to confirm, because I think this is often lost in the debate.

Is Venice weak in player's hands, or just the AI? If its the former than we approach balance in our usual way. If the later, then we need to really isolate what about Venice does the AI struggle with, and should that mechanic be dropped in favor of something else?

 

[amateurgamer88]

Something I want to confirm, because I think this is often lost in the debate.

Is Venice weak in player's hands, or just the AI? If its the former than we approach balance in our usual way. If the later, then we need to really isolate what about Venice does the AI struggle with, and should that mechanic be dropped in favor of something else?

Personally, I find Venice difficult to gauge because some small changes can make a big difference for the civ. Until we stop making big changes, we can't really balance Venice. In addition, the mechanic is very unique and people like me agree that it will be nice if it's improved where players and AI can both use it pretty well. However, we aren't at the point where balancing Venice seems nearly impossible, especially with talks about changes to be made to Food and Specialists.

 

[Bhawb]

Venice's largest non-balance related weaknesses (supply and getting land) are really big problems for players and AI and really have nothing to do with general balancing of Venice. But if a player is the one controlling the AI, then you're the one in control of the strengths/weaknesses of the civ, instead of a random AI on the map getting to snowball for free because it spawned next to a glorified CS. So while the problems are equal, the affect on how a player "feels" when Venice is in the game as an AI vs playing Venice is very different IMO. I'm fine dealing with Venice's quirkiness when the quirkiness is a unique gameplay experience, and not "oh guess Songhai has two civs now".

 

[Moi Magnus]

When I play Venice, it is to do an OCC with a Civ actually build to play as an OCC.
In fact, I would possibly prefer if Venice did not need to buy CS to be competitive.

If there was no coding constraints, here is how I would want Venice to work:
-> If Venice is in play, increase by one the number of random AI Civs (if possible). Venice spawn location is a city-state spawn location, not a major civ spawn location.

However, this would likely need a ton of code rewriting, so I don't see this happening...

 

[Thibix Magnus]

About supply and monopolies, if possible code-wise: Great generals could pop citadels anywhere without needing to be near your border, as long as they are on the coast. Acquired tiles just belong to your nearest city, or capital. Maybe citadels popped that way should not claim enemy land, only neutral. Arsenale could also increase supply as a % of capital population, or even make naval units not count towards supply limit. Could come in exchange of other nerfs.

Something that is really a side question, not a big balance solution: couldn't arsenale di venezia unlock the great galeass? I really like the branching mechanic at play here and it could go further.

(I feel it could even be used to reintroduce other missing UU in the main mod, but having to choose between those and other civ perks, for example, Korea could choose to build two mutually exclusive buildings that unlock either Hwach'a or turtle ship). (edited: nvm, just saw 3rd 4rth mod............).

 

[pineappledan]

(I feel it could even be used to reintroduce other missing UU in the main mod, but having to choose between those and other civ perks, for example, Korea could choose to build two mutually exclusive buildings that unlock either Hwach'a or turtle ship).

....Am I a joke to you?

 

[Thibix Magnus]

....Am I a joke to you?
View attachment 529211

still familiarizing with VP content out there, and lo and behold I just clicked on your link

but maybe mutually exclusive buildings like venice could allow for some more units in the core mod?

(but yeah, it was a side remark really, I just played main mod for a while, I derailed my own citadel suggestion...)

 

[Gazebo]

0w0 what's this?

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

thx Gazebob but does it mean MoV has an ability to settle cities like you've implied in another thread, or that Venice can settle puppets with settlers? If the former, it doesn't sound like something appealing - an entire Great Person lost for such a small benefit (CSs have buildings, CSs have army to take over, CSs deny diplomacy to others, diplomatic yields/votes to others, etc).

 

[Gazebo]

thx Gazebob but does it mean MoV has an ability to settle cities like you've implied in another thread, or that Venice can settle puppets with settlers? If the former, it doesn't sound like something appealing - an entire Great Person lost for such a small benefit (CSs have buildings, CSs have army to take over, CSs deny diplomacy to others, diplomatic yields/votes to others, etc).

Former - MoV can now settle puppet cities (up to 3 total founded puppets can be controlled at any one time). The city starts with extra population and territory, however, so it's stronger than just a settler.

G

 

[Thibix Magnus]

well that... settles it

 

[crdvis16]

Former - MoV can now settle puppet cities (up to 3 total founded puppets can be controlled at any one time). The city starts with extra population and territory, however, so it's stronger than just a settler.

G

Sounds promising! Are you thinking of a change to Venice's unit cap as well? Lack of unit cap seems to be the likely culprit for Venice being eaten. Though admittedly being able to settle a few nearby cities and having some consolidated land will also help somewhat.

 

[pineappledan]

Could add a +100% from population too St Mark’s maybe?

 

[Chandler]

I was just going to suggest the settle thing, but I wasn't sure how well it'd be received ^^u. Have you also considered giving those founded puppets a free Market? I think it'd suit them nicely.

Also, just wondering... Which cities will be the ones we can found? I know there can only be three at any point, but... Always the same three? Or do you have many names prepared for that?

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

I think besides Settling Venice could use the old Merchant bonus per puppet back, perhaps as a flat value (1-2 MoV points to capital to puppet for puppet instead of the old percent) and supply from puppets so you can actually defend the puppets. If the puppets provided their supply, the problem'd be solved - if it's a flat value or only based on Venice's populace it's going to punish any sort of expansive game plan as Venice which should be allowed imho - after all, there's the Arsenale di Venezia.

 

[Bromar1]

well that... settles it

found the redditor

 

[BiteInTheMark]

Former - MoV can now settle puppet cities (up to 3 total founded puppets can be controlled at any one time). The city starts with extra population and territory, however, so it's stronger than just a settler.

I think this wont change anything.
This makes it only more gently for humans who are willing to use the MoV for catching the monopoly luxuries and simply capture CS you normally would buy.
Venice isnt weak in human hands, Ive had no problem with Venice to go for a killing spree. Its the AI which is unable to use Venice correctly, and this addition will not change anything. How many MoV are you able to get before all the free space is settled?

This change will only help the human, but not the AI. My prediction.

 

[crdvis16]

I think this wont change anything.
This makes it only more gently for humans who are willing to use the MoV for catching the monopoly luxuries and simply capture CS you normally would buy.
Venice isnt weak in human hands, Ive had no problem with Venice to go for a killing spree. Its the AI which is unable to use Venice correctly, and this addition will not change anything. How many MoV are you able to get before all the free space is settled?

This change will only help the human, but not the AI. My prediction.

I think this change is aimed to help the general game play when Venice is in the game period. A major complaint was that Venice being in the game meant that nearby civs had tons of available land to settle. Now Venice will presumably settle a few cities and cut down on that.

I think the main reason Venice is weak has more to do with its unit cap. Low unit cap leads to small armies which leads to other civs DoWing the weakling (which also happens to usually screw up Venice's main advantage in trade routes). I'm hoping G has a fix for that too.