Why the change to Tradition?

[Ahriman]

I propose CR to give additionally 4 beakers in the Capital

This would be ok.
The other thing I find that stops me from taking the policy early is that I want to get free temples, not free monuments, so I tend to be blocked from taking it until I have already set up my 4 core cities and built monuments in them. I would be much more willing to take Rites early on if it never gave free monuments, only free temples (or higher).

 

[Txurce]

Given that VEM tries to stick close to vanilla when possible, the idea of getting rid of CR just because some players don't like it should be a non-starter, in my opinion.

I propose CR to give additionally 4 beakers in the Capital, one for each temple. Gameplay reason: it's a unique effect you cannot get anywhere else. Tall empires do go for science, so it suits well... Historically, priests create the ceremonial rites, and priests also have time to study the sky and the environment. the one-beaker-per-temple hints at a centralisation, a High Priest located gathering all the information.

I don't think CR needs any boost at all, and note that the policy has been around a long time without this issue being brought up. That said, mitsho's basic approach would be in keeping with how vanilla and VEM have been balancing things lately. Do I find the priests pushing science to that degree a stretch? Yes - but not more so than I do a lot of other secondary effects (or even primary ones like garrisons giving culture).

 

[Ahriman]

and note that the policy has been around a long time without this issue being brought up

The policy has been brought up and discussed many times.

Do I find the priests pushing science to that degree a stretch?

Really? In most societies religious scholars were the main people devoted to learning and education until the Enlightenment. Basically, religion meant that people gave food and goods to the priesthood, who then were able to spend their time reading books and teaching rather than actually working. My understanding is that Egyptian priesthoods knew a lot about farming, irrigation systems and the Nile floods, that medieval Christian monks were the main scholars of their day, etc. etc.

Having said that, I don't feel that strongly about a need for change. It will continue to be the last policy I pick, but so be it.

 

[Txurce]

The policy has been brought up and discussed many times.


Really? In most societies religious scholars were the main people devoted to learning and education until the Enlightenment. Basically, religion meant that people gave food and goods to the priesthood, who then were able to spend their time reading books and teaching rather than actually working. My understanding is that Egyptian priesthoods knew a lot about farming, irrigation systems and the Nile floods, that medieval Christian monks were the main scholars of their day, etc. etc.

Having said that, I don't feel that strongly about a need for change. It will continue to be the last policy I pick, but so be it.

I don't recall CR specifically being pointed out as too weak until the last few weeks. I know it wasn't pointed out when the name was changed to CR! But I might have missed something.

Given when it's available, CR to me doesn't have much to do with Christian monks, who were indeed the scholars of their day in Europe. I do realize that academics were often generalists until the last 200 years or so, meaning that religious figures could well also have been scientists. I didn't know about the scientific contributions of the Egyptian priests. And to buttress your point, I think the same could be said of Mayan priests. But given when CR is available I tend to think of the Greeks and Romans, where there was essentially no spillover.

 

[Atlas627]

Its not that I think CB is weak, or just isn't my playstyle, I think its bad design in general. It rewards you for NOT using it, rewards micromanagement, is not unique (you can build the buildings yourself), and practically negates the Piety opener (which is now somewhere else).

I think bonus science in the capital is definitely reasonable, but a flat bonus would be just as beneficial for wide. How about +1 beaker per pop in capital?

 

[Sneaks]

I really really don't think CR needs anything else added to it. Free buildings are easily one of the strongest bonuses possible for tall empires, as managing production opportunity cost is one of the most crucial elements of large cities.

 

[Atlas627]

I really really don't think CR needs anything else added to it. Free buildings are easily one of the strongest bonuses possible for tall empires, as managing production opportunity cost is one of the most crucial elements of large cities.

I don't want to add to it, I want to scrap it entirely and redo it. I think the free building mechanic is dumb overall.

 

[Thalassicus]

There's not many other options available for policies, and it's very difficult to add entirely new effects.

 

[Atlas627]

There's not many other options available for policies, and it's very difficult to add entirely new effects.

Sad panda. You can't add 1 beaker per pop in the capital? Or 0.5 or whatever?

 

[Sneaks]

Its not that I think CB is weak, or just isn't my playstyle, I think its bad design in general. It rewards you for NOT using it, rewards micromanagement, is not unique (you can build the buildings yourself), and practically negates the Piety opener (which is now somewhere else).

I think bonus science in the capital is definitely reasonable, but a flat bonus would be just as beneficial for wide. How about +1 beaker per pop in capital?

It rewards you for using it immediately AND rewards you for delaying use and micromanaging the policy. Immediate use means youre getting an early +4 or +5 per turn from the tree just in your capital. This is pretty massive. Using it later to time with OH or Museum is obviously a much greater one time boost and the opportunity cost of delayed early culture and policies. Waiting for later buildings also makes the argument of a useless Piety opener untrue. Hell, the Piety opener is not really lessened because of the policy at all. It still helps the other 4-5 culture buildings that CB did NOT give you.

As for not unique, I just see that as a subjective argument. Arguing that it gives you something you could otherwise get albeit further along in the game at much greater opportunity cost could be used for any policy that drops policy costs, give free techs, give free policies, give free great people, etc. They all essentially are policies that reduce the opportunity cost of said reward by a certain amount.

 

[Txurce]

Sad panda. You can't add 1 beaker per pop in the capital? Or 0.5 or whatever?

Why buff it if you just wrote that it's not weak a couple of posts up?

 

[Sneaks]

Sad panda. You can't add 1 beaker per pop in the capital? Or 0.5 or whatever?

Tradition already has science boosters indirectly via population growth. As is, Tradition boosts Defense, Gold, Production, Culture, and Happiness.

My biggest objection to all this change talk is we have a policy that is currently:

1. Powerful.
2. Variable in utility depending on when it is picked up.

The objections seem to be:

1. Micromanagement is needed
Rebuttal: Absolutely not true. Could it be better used micromanaged? Yes. Would it still be a good policy without? Yes. It allows the same level of flexiblity as, say, manually controlling plots work as opposed to using auto-focus.

2. Flavor is poor
Rebuttal: Not so much rebuttal, as just having an alternate take on the particular issue. I find it flavorful much more so than I would policies that just give a percentage boost to X, Y, or Z.

3. Too strong/weak
Rebuttal: The fact that opinion varies so much tells me the policy is probably somewhere in between the two extremes, AKA balanced.

 

[Txurce]

It rewards you for using it immediately AND rewards you for delaying use and micromanaging the policy. Immediate use means youre getting an early +4 or +5 per turn from the tree just in your capital. This is pretty massive.

This is a point that's worth highlighting. There's been a consensus that CR is best used later. I'm more likely to do that when playing for a Culture win (rare as that's been), but in all other games I either do it right away (temple in capital, monuments everywhere else) or if playing very tall (3 cities, maybe 4) and with good hammers wait for temples all around. In both cases I'd rather have the early culture. I am always very aware of the benefit, and that may be why I like the policy so much.

 

[Thalassicus]

@Sneaks
Based on your statement you use it to create Wats, I think we can agree it's a policy that's mainly useful later? It's probably reasonable to add an effect which is useful early.

Sad panda. You can't add 1 beaker per pop in the capital? Or 0.5 or whatever?

It's possible to add yields from population... what I was saying is if we scrapped the old effect entirely, it'd be difficult to come up with something to replace it with.

 

[Txurce]

@Sneaks
Based on your statement you use it to create Wats, I think we can agree it's a policy that's mainly useful later? I think it's reasonable to add an effect which is useful early.

I got the opposite impression from the post I quoted.

 

[Sneaks]

@Sneaks
Based on your statement you use it to create Wats, I think we can agree it's a policy that's mainly useful later? I think it's reasonable to add an effect which is useful early.



It's possible to add yields from population... what I was saying is if we scrapped the old effect entirely, it'd be difficult to come up with something to replace it with.

No, not what I am saying at all.

I was using the Wats example of the policy at its most powerful iteration.

Ways in which I often use it:

Culture games:
Approach 1: In high production starts, I regularly pop this policy ASAP to earn early policies like Monarchy so I can focus on hammers and wonders. This early boost often sets me on track to place myself in a very comfortable position by late Medieval.

Approach 2: I hold off on the policy, placing myself in a defecit in game, usually near the bottom of the pack. I hard build Temples and Monuments everywhere, and tech my way to Acoustics as fast as possible. Upon teching Acoustics, I pop CR, and immediately start building Hermitage in my capital. Compared to Approach 1, this approach has higher risk and reward if pulled off. It is also expressly more valuable in low production starts (coastal, desert) where free OHs mean saving tons of hammers.

Non-culture games:
I almost always grab this policy ASAP to attempt to finish as much of Tradition as I can before swapping to Freedom.

Special exceptions:
I will always use the policy for Burial Tombs, MPMs, and Wats when playing those particular civs.

 

[Thalassicus]

I think you mixed up the freedom/liberty names like I did earlier? Yay for synonyms!

 

[Sneaks]

Probably! Ceremonial Burial and Ceremonial Rites are TOO similar in name.

 

[Thalassicus]

You mentioned finishing Tradition before Freedom, which seemed like an odd statement in context of discussing early-game strategies. Did you intend to say Freedom or Liberty?

 

[Sneaks]

You mentioned finishing Tradition before Freedom, which seemed like an odd statement in context of discussing early-game strategies. Did you intend to say Freedom or Liberty?

Oh, Freedom. The second Freedom is available, I almost always abandon my current tree and start working on that.