Viable Tradition Civs

[crdvis16]

Worth mentioning that you don't start a game thinking what policy you will do.

I do exactly that in every game that I play. I know my ancient era tree ahead of time, and more than likely have decided on my renaissance and industrial trees as well. Maybe even ideology. I've probably decided ahead of time what I'm generally doing with religion, how much I'll try to conquer, what wonders I'll aim for, and what victory condition I'm going for. I'll admit that it might not be the best way to win every game but I find more pleasure in trying specific strategies and trying to make them work.

Having said that, if I'm planning to go tradition and my starting location sucks for food I might consider a restart. If I find that my neighbors are Aztec, Songhai, and Zulu I'm still going tradition and if I die trying, oh well. Tradition at least has the benefit of not needing much room to settle so even against aggressive neighbors you can potentially turtle behind some good terrain and citadels.

 

[Legen]

Brazil usually plays Tradition because this tree is the only Ancient Era tree that provides Golden Age Points, which fuels the UA. Also, Brazil's +25% Culture during Carnivals works best if you have high culture per turn in your cities, in which Tradition beats Progress and Authority. The civ is flexible, though, I'd say the only mandatory tree for its strength is Artistry, whose sources of GAP are rather wide-friendly.

So far my analysis is as follows:

Tradition gives me:
+a capital with very early bonusses and specialist slots
+a growth modifier for capital and secondary cities
+the ability to get early great persons
+a good shot at a religion

Tradition's problems
- not enough production to build the important buildings and enough military
- less gold than progress (so less investments)
- secondary cities that grow but are not as strong as either Authority or Progress
- not enough faith production to spread my religion well
- not enough production and paper to play the CS's well enough
- not enough food to use all the specialist slots, farms and Great Person tiles that I need to (yes even with the bonusses)

This tree usually benefits from early sources of culture, gold and/or production, be them uniques or pantheons. Culture can snowball with Tradition due to its many sources of culture, so one policy quickly leads to the next. Production and Gold uniques help propelling your satellite cities and military, making up for Tradition's lack of bonuses in these area.

Paper isn't a problem for Tradition, they are tied to specific wonders and Great Diplomats.

 

[Ninal]

Arabia is very, very tradition oriented.

Korea, India, Netherlands, are also good with tradition.

Interesting to see that only very few civs are considered as "typically Tradition". Considering we have three early social policies I would expect that about a third of the civs would be considered "typically" Tradition and maybe a few more than that as "viable" with Tradition.

Seeing how much more trouble me and my friends have in making Tradition work I keep wondering why the experts here are so reluctant to make Tradition stronger. Has there been a history where Tradition was overpowered in earlier version of the mod or is it that the AI does exceptionally well with Tradition? I'm not saying Tradition is underpowered. I'm just looking for the reasoning behind it.

I'm noticing that it feels underpowered to me and my friends. All of us succeeded in winning deity victories using progress and some of us as authority as well.

 

[Patine]

Brazil -> Tradition, Artistry, Rationalism or Industry, Freedom, Culture Victory.

I had no idea Brazil was actually exceptionally in all these areas.

Oh, you meant the game Brazil, not the real Brazil. Sorry.

(Sorry, couldn't resist)

 

[Stalker0]

I'm not saying Tradition is underpowered.....I'm noticing that it feels underpowered to me and my friends.

So....you are or are not saying Tradition is underpowered?

Ultimately I don't think Tradition is weak, but I think the playstyle can be very difficult for some players......especially a passive version of it. Doing early warring and puppet Tradition is pretty good. Going completely Tall with no warring, only defense...it can be very very tricky and takes a completely different mindset compared to heavy warring or going wide progress styles.

 

[Ninal]

No I am not saying it is underpowered. I am saying that from my position it feels underpowered. I even suspect it to be underpowered. But I think there are more experienced and capable players here that have a more nuanced oppinion and a better view of the mods as a whole. If these people collectively say 'tradition is fine' than I tend to believe them and will try and look for the mistakes in my playstyle.

 

[Ninal]

especially a passive version of it. Doing early warring and puppet Tradition is pretty good. Going completely Tall with no warring, only defense...it can be very very tricky

That is my main point of concern. I think theme-wise it would be nice to play a small, tall empire peacefully (of course without neglecting your defenses). It really feels like taking out a neighbour is more or less an obligation for tradition play.

Other noticeably worrisome remarks I have heard are things like "Austria should go authority or it will not even survive". I think the peacefull-tall strategy should at least be viable (and preferably competitive) for tradition and I doubt it is right now.

 

[CrazyG]

Interesting to see that only very few civs are considered as "typically Tradition". Considering we have three early social policies I would expect that about a third of the civs would be considered "typically" Tradition and maybe a few more than that as "viable" with Tradition.

Most civs are flexible, the only civ I would call "typically progress" is Carthage and maybe Indonesia or China, and even then tradition or authority aren't bad at all.

I made this game to try and help players with tradition. Let me know if you helps, or if you other challenges are slowing you down.
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/korea-photojournal-attempt-2.635532/

 

[crdvis16]

That is my main point of concern. I think theme-wise it would be nice to play a small, tall empire peacefully (of course without neglecting your defenses). It really feels like taking out a neighbour is more or less an obligation for tradition play.

Other noticeably worrisome remarks I have heard are things like "Austria should go authority or it will not even survive". I think the peacefull-tall strategy should at least be viable (and preferably competitive) for tradition and I doubt it is right now.

I've had no trouble going peacefully tall/tradition at the Immortal difficulty level. Someone else would have to chime in on its viability at deity. At immortal you can most definitely play Austria as tradition/peaceful and win (and that's exactly how I would play them for the same thematic reasons you suggest). I've seen people argue that Authority Austria will win the game sooner or easier. That may be true but it is most definitely not the only way to win.

In general, war is probably the easiest area where a human player can make gains on an AI so it should be no surprise that strategies that involve war are strong. Purposely staying peaceful is probably not optimal for winning but you can most certainly still win that way.

It's possible that you and your friends are able to win at high difficulties because you are proficient at war but maybe still lacking in the areas that are needed for tall/peaceful play. I think the are a number of suggestions in this thread that might help with that.

 

[Ninal]

@CrazyG
Yeah I have read that report already but I will read it again! Thanks for reposting it...

@crdvis16
I managed to do peacefull small cultural victories at Immortal as well. It's just that at deity it doesn't seem to work anymore. I am actually more proficient at Progress playing (mostly) peacefull but with about 8-10 cities than I am at war. Though I did eventually succeed in winning Deity with warmongering and authority as well. It's just peacefull small / Tradition that seems impossible to win at deity for me.

 

[Minh Le]

Unless its one city challenge, Ive never won a total peaceful Tradition deity game as well. The secondary cities seem too weak to carry its weight.

 

[Ninal]

That is exactly the impression I am getting as well. I'm not saying it is impossible. The best of the best can still do it apparently. I am however suspecting it is more difficult than winnin deity with a progress or authority start.

I always assumed that the goal of Vox Populi was to make both wide and tall play and both peacefull and warlike strategies equally viable. As far as my limited experience goes the mod does a great job but seems to favour the (agressive) warlike tendencies a bit too much. I define aggressive here as being the agressor in wars. I think we all agree that you deserve to lose if you only build economy and neglect your army.

 

[neo_arcadia]

Well yeah. By being aggressive and then successfully taking cities, you are removing your competitor's asset and added it to your own. I would love to have peaceful game and win it, but without taking cities it is only viable on King, at least for me.

 

[tu_79]

That is exactly the impression I am getting as well. I'm not saying it is impossible. The best of the best can still do it apparently. I am however suspecting it is more difficult than winnin deity with a progress or authority start.

I always assumed that the goal of Vox Populi was to make both wide and tall play and both peacefull and warlike strategies equally viable. As far as my limited experience goes the mod does a great job but seems to favour the (agressive) warlike tendencies a bit too much. I define aggressive here as being the agressor in wars. I think we all agree that you deserve to lose if you only build economy and neglect your army.

I would like also things more balanced towards peaceful game, but the main developer is a history teacher and he thinks there are not any great completely peaceful and small empires that accomplished anything, ever. Switzerland and Canada do not count.
That's because I'm the builder type gamer. But I have to admit that VP has forced me to play aggressively and learn how to figth, (I'm still learning how to stop fighting). The game forces all mechanics to be used in every game, warmongering could not be left out.
This means that warmonger players are forced to pay attention to their economy and their relationships too.

For customized experiences, it's advisable to lower the difficulty. I see it as doing challenges (done for fun, not for victory). For example, turn the whole world into a single religion. This is something I may try at king difficulty. Maybe a completely peaceful game with just 2-3 cities can be seen as a challenge.

 

[Gazebo]

I would like also things more balanced towards peaceful game, but the main developer is a history teacher and he thinks there are not any great completely peaceful and small empires that accomplished anything, ever. Switzerland and Canada do not count.
That's because I'm the builder type gamer. But I have to admit that VP has forced me to play aggressively and learn how to figth, (I'm still learning how to stop fighting). The game forces all mechanics to be used in every game, warmongering could not be left out.
This means that warmonger players are forced to pay attention to their economy and their relationships too.

For customized experiences, it's advisable to lower the difficulty. I see it as doing challenges (done for fun, not for victory). For example, turn the whole world into a single religion. This is something I may try at king difficulty. Maybe a completely peaceful game with just 2-3 cities can be seen as a challenge.

Where on earth have I said that?

G

 

[crdvis16]

From what I remember of my history courses, switzerland had some pretty strong military tendencies back in the day even if they try to be neutral now.

And Canada has been involved in plenty of wars, too. They stormed a beach at Normandy right? You might argue that they didn't do much "conquest" but there's probably indigenous people who would take exception to that.

Maybe it's correct to view peaceful play as purposely restricting yourself in which case it should be no surprise that doing so makes the game harder. It would be like playing a game where you purposely neglect diplomacy (no CS alliances, no diplomats for more votes) and then wondering why the game should be harder just because you were being a hermit kingdom. You're purposely avoiding an aspect of the game, it should be harder!

Having said all that, I'd probably still play Korea as tall/peaceful and just play defense because I like to play civ in a somewhat role-play fashion even if it's slightly harder.

 

[Minh Le]

OCC tradition is quite strong though. You have very trong and early culture, science and production. I think with tradition the optimum number of cities should be 1

 

[CppMaster]

Even in not OCC? You will be overwhelmed.

 

[Stalker0]

Even in not OCC? You will be overwhelmed.

Agreed. The key to remember is that each new city increases your science and culture needs by 10%. So while you do get to a scenario where new cities are actually a detriment to your capital its always useful to have some more cities than your capital....as overall you get more science, culture, and hammers.

 

[Minh Le]

Yeah, I mean those cities are not totally useless but they slow you down considerably. They need at least a hundred turns or even more to be worth 10% increase in cost not to mention you need to sacrify growth and production for those settler, which mean losing some key wonders which is very important early as Tradition. And some realy good belief and policies are only tied to Capital or Holy city though.