Why are luxuries removed?

[Acken]

Magnasanti + the trade route one + buildings + biowells what is your point ?

 

[KrikkitTwo]

#1 and #2 do not depend on the strategy, they are only how you raise your health to normal levels and still are just easily available.

Or please show me how #1 and #2 will get you +20-+30 health without #3. You likely can't in a reasonable number of turn numbers for it to matter. And so we get back to what I'm saying. Health in CivBE is: pick virtue, spam 5turns buildings, done.



Yes that's what I'm saying it's too simple.

You don't need All of # 3 if you have 1 or 2

I guess I should have put it like this
1. High pop cities + health buildings and/OR biowells
2. Prosperity health virtues
3. Industry health virtues

Pick 1 for neutral health
Pick 2 for +20-30 health

 

[Aimeryan]

Maxing local health is neither hard nor particularly much of a meaningful choice. I guess you could try and ignore health, but I'm not sure how viable that actually would be - even then, it may not be competitive. The only thing left on the health front is virtues, which again, you either get or you don't.

The only real choice here is be healthy (max local health, get health virtues) or don't be healthy (thus ignoring the mechanic altogether). The mechanic itself is boring with what we have to work with. It is something to do well at, but it is not something that is a choice or involves choices. It is like playing whack-a-mole: you don't make choices, you just react and apply the correct thing - boring.

 

[Acken]

You don't need All of # 3 if you have 1 or 2

I guess I should have put it like this
1. High pop cities + health buildings and/OR biowells
2. Prosperity health virtues
3. Industry health virtues

Pick 1 for neutral health
Pick 2 for +20-30 health

Ok I agree on this but that isn't a counterargument to what I'm saying or would change my opinion, I was asking you the question just to illustrate my point. That the only "choice" to make is in virtues whether or not you want +30health. Everything else is just spamming since whatever your strategy is you're as capped as the next guy by population. The only choice you make is between 2 and 3, and then wait to get it, great.

 

[Roxlimn]

Magnasanti + the trade route one + buildings + biowells what is your point ?

That's not a complete plan. Beeline Profiteering then beeline Magnasanti? Basic Health buildings only? City size targets? Biowells for large cities? Manufactories or not?

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Ok I agree on this but that isn't a counterargument to what I'm saying or would change my opinion, I was asking you the question just to illustrate my point. That the only "choice" to make is in virtues whether or not you want +30health. Everything else is just spamming since whatever your strategy is you're as capped as the next guy by population. The only choice you make is between 2 and 3, and then wait to get it, great.

No.. as I mentioned, you only need 1 of those if you just want neutral health (and you probably need all 3 to get the full 40+ benefit health)

That said... there isn't really much difference
for CivV happiness was
1. luxuries
2. policies/tenets

The more you got, the wider your empire could be. (that was about it)

(happiness buildings only let you build bigger cities)

Here bigger cities are a Means of Health not a separate unrelated factor.

 

[Acken]

That's not a complete plan. Beeline Profiteering then beeline Magnasanti? Basic Health buildings only? City size targets? Biowells for large cities? Manufactories or not?

I don't really have the time to make a complete write up. But you're free to play a game and illustrate your point that health is a system requiring interesting management or make the write up yoursel.f

No.. as I mentioned, you only need 1 of those if you just want neutral health (and you probably need all 3 to get the full 40+ benefit health)

No what then ? I didn't say the contrary.

That said... there isn't really much difference
for CivV happiness was
1. luxuries
2. policies/tenets

The more you got, the wider your empire could be. (that was about it)

(happiness buildings only let you build bigger cities)

Here bigger cities are a Means of Health not a separate unrelated factor.

Is it a joke ? CivV happiness was
1.luxuries
2.natural wonders discoveries
3.natural wonders bonuses
4.buildings
5.policies+ideologies
6.city states extra luxuries and bonuses (mercantile)
7.World Wonders
8.Buildings
9.Luxuries and trading luxuries
10.Religion
11.Ideological pressure

Not much of a difference

 

[m15a]

Is it a joke ? CivV happiness was
1.luxuries
...
9.Luxuries and trading luxuries
...

...
4.buildings
...
8.Buildings
...

I think you're padding your list just a tiny bit.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Is it a joke ? CivV happiness was
1.luxuries
2.natural wonders discoveries
3.natural wonders bonuses
4.buildings
5.policies+ideologies
6.city states extra luxuries and bonuses (mercantile)
7.World Wonders
8.Buildings
9.Luxuries and trading luxuries
10.Ideological pressure

Not much of a difference

cut out duplicates

2/3. Natural Wonders were minor (on the same lines as difficulty level) and definitely not a part of a strategy (unless you realized you had the Fountain in range)


4. buildings didn't give global happiness, because the division was much stronger (1 pop=1 unhappiness=1 local happiness allowed)..unlike in BE where local buildings actually contribute to global happiness*
*this does mean that local and global were separate strategies and that is interesting, but BE merged them with 0.75 unhealth per pop

6. I can give you the mercantiles, that was an important area of happiness/strategy

7. Except for Forbidden Palace generally minor

10. that was a source of unhappiness from another system


Generally the big difference is (with luxuries + natural wonders + world wonders build by others) the map had a big impact on happiness.
In CivV you could expand to certain locations/do diplomacy to Get happiness.

In BE it Is just tech/building/improvements and virtues.

however that is the general nature of BE, terrain is less important.

 

[Roxlimn]

Yeah. A teeny bit. The thing is, Civ 5 didn't have tile improvements that adjusted your Health up or down. I suppose you could just use that reactively, but that's not much of a plan. Biowells being local means that they're capped by the population, overlapping with Building Health, so you're using that to bridge local Health gaps, or you're eschewing the buildings altogether, or you're using them together because you're super aggressive about growing your cities.

Tallying effective Global Health as an expansion currency is a good way to think of it, with negative Health being a "tax" that has more or less playable penalties up to a certain point. Magnasanti, then, can be thought of as a global bonus that simply uses the expansion currency as a medium.

As the game progresses, realistic achievable Health bonuses change, depending on bonuses taken. At some point, you're making a decision whether +25% Internal Routes or Alternative Markets is worth delaying Health Bonuses, and of course you need a lot of Buildings to really make that count. It's more situational than Liberty's flat bonus, or even Freedom's flat bonus for Specialists.

Moreover, with Manufactories and Oil Wells, you're also expending your Health currency in ways other than with Cities or Pop growth. Delaying an Oil Well can be good play to keep critical health up; expending Health with Manufactories can be good depending on where and how.

 

[Acken]

cut out duplicates

2/3. Natural Wonders were minor (on the same lines as difficulty level) and definitely not a part of a strategy (unless you realized you had the Fountain in range)

4. buildings didn't give global happiness, because the division was much stronger (1 pop=1 unhappiness=1 local happiness allowed)..unlike in BE where local buildings actually contribute to global happiness*
*this does mean that local and global were separate strategies and that is interesting, but BE merged them with 0.75 unhealth per pop

6. I can give you the mercantiles, that was an important area of happiness/strategy

7. Except for Forbidden Palace generally minor

10. that was a source of unhappiness from another system

Sorry about duplicates was in a hurry.

I forgot Religion by the way.
2/3 is still a factor
7 and Notre Dame
10 what do you mean ? it still influences happiness.

Also BE has tile improvements which civ5 doesn't like Roxlimn said.

In BE it Is just tech/building/improvements and virtues.

however that is the general nature of BE, terrain is less important.

Agree on both points and that's what I dislike about it. And that health is a system you don't have to put effort into to reach your goal. You never starve on health due to the map, the whole map and other civs is totally irrelevant to health and that is exactly what I'm criticizing.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Sorry about duplicates was in a hurry.

I forgot Religion by the way.
2/3 is still a factor
7 and Notre Dame
10 what do you mean ? it still influences happiness.

Also BE has tile improvements which civ5 doesn't like Roxlimn said.


Agree on both points and that's what I dislike about it. And that health is a system you don't have to put effort into to reach your goal. You never starve on health due to the map, the whole map and other civs is totally irrelevant to health and that is exactly what I'm criticizing.

I don't really mind the map being disconnected from health. (it should be more strongly connected to other things though)

I do dislike other civs being disconnected
ie your #10 (I left it off because it is not really a 'how to get health' strategy...same reason I left manufacturies off for BE) however it is important and I would really hope something like that can be added* concept in my signature

 

[Roxlimn]

I didn't like Happiness being so strongly tied to map. It leads to "swingy" games where you can just expand freely if the map provides. Other AI being sources of health just opens the door to AI exploits. I like neither of those. If I wanted to play Exploit The AI, I'd play a bad implementation of Tic Tac Toe.

 

[Acken]

You're exaggerating here. When comparing trading between CivBE and Civ5, CivBE gets the most blame for an AI being there only to be exploited. It was worse pre patch but now the same abuses are available with a friendship. Once they fix these, while you won't abuse as much as you used to, you probably start to feel there is less and less meaningful diplomacy interaction. There is not enough trading going on sadly (and to be honest civ5 wasn't that great there either).

Regarding health vs happiness I already said that I know people preffer health for being less restrictive and easier. No problem. Im just stating that I don't like it in comparison to both C5 , precisely because I think it's easier, not restrictive enough and non map/AI dependent. I just get a kick out of thinking how to be able to stay happy in Civ5, for CivBE I just know how I'll do it every single game. If you look at a C5 community game you'll find people saying "I had trouble managing happiness in this one", that doesn't happen in CBE and that's what I ultimately miss. And that kind of feeling echoes many issues I have with the game where you just are disconnected from the map you're playing. No "I couldnt find a good city spot" etc...

 

[Roxlimn]

Yeah.

I think all of those are intentional themes for BE. It IS about settling a completely alien planet. And terraforming. It's kind of weird to have all those themes in the game and then just not be able to use dirt for some trivial reason. Heck, we have entire cities in the actual desert right now. We're raising whole new islands out of the sea by main force at this very moment. The game talks about engineering the entire planet. It'd be a very poor scifi settler in the far flung future who couldn't make a little desert work out.

Civ5 is a game married to the land because for most of history, that's what determines the fate of men. That's an entire theme in Jared's "Guns, Germs, and Steel." But that's a historical theme that CivBE is intentionally stepping away from.

In CivBE, you are who you choose to be. It's not the game's fault if you choose to be the same thing every single game.

 

[Acken]

Maybe but thematic reasons never hold much water with me if I don't enjoy the resulting gameplay.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Maybe but thematic reasons never hold much water with me if I don't enjoy the resulting gameplay.

Exactly.
If something is relatively unimportant in terms of gameplay it should be
1. Eliminated
Or
2. Made important

I think basic resources should be more important...just not for health.
They should unlock significant buildings/have large effects on TR, etc.

Regular terrain is probably better to eliminate (with some improvement)
I'd probably make desert 2 energy with no vivarium boost. (To increase importance)
Tundra i'd merge with snow-yield 0 but improvable (still get the digester boost..and maybe give them a vivarium type boost)
Plains I would eliminate (want production get hills, special resources, or manufacturies)
And hills/floodplains/terrascapes not getting any of the benefits from desert/snow

That way terrain is simplified (and slightly more important)
And if resources are more important for non health facters, then you can still have
"I got lousy terrain"
Or
"I had to go with strategy X because of the terrain"
Or
"I Really want that spot"

 

[bc1]

I fully agree with Acken that Civ V's happiness mechanics is more FUN than Civ BE's health.

In Civ V, you have to COMPETE for happiness: compete for that luxury filled terrain patch, compete for wonders, compete for city state favors... BE health feels more like a spreadsheet: pick virtues, buildings and terrain improvements that fit the health curve matching your X-turn population expansion plan.

Meh...

 

[Serenum]

I'd love to have luxury resources back, simply because they bring in a new layer of interactivity with the map. Right now, cities are almost self-sustaining, you can build one anywhere and with the right buildings it can give positive health and prosper. The only resources you care about are the strategic ones, which run out after a while or cease to be relevant if you acquire enough.

Some kind of luxury resource would make gameplay more varied and some of those boring buildings and the mandatory dip in Prosperity virtues less necessary.

 

[Gorbles]

How do you balance "fun"?