Why the change to Tradition?

[EsoEs]

Yes this is another liberty v tradition thread, be warned So looking over the 106 changes I see that the tradition opener was dropped to +2 culture in the cap (was 3). What was the exact reasoning behind this? I know this has been debated to death but Tradition, in my mind, has always taken a backseat to Liberty, even with the nerf to the Liberty finisher (from van -> VEM), I still take Liberty over Tradition 95% of the time.

1) The tradition finisher is definately better than Liberty finisher, but I really dislike how the Wonder production bonus policy is a tier 3 policy rather than tier 2 (where it could potentially help build some of the early Ancient Wonders).

2) Looking at the change to the Tradition opener vs Liberty and the policy that gives a settler and 50% production bonus, I can theoretically have 3.5 cities with a liberty opener vs 2 cities with tradition. So with 2 policies in liberty we can get ~4 cities relatively easily, each with +1 culture. Compared to any 2 opening Tradition policies I don't see how there's a contest between the 2 branches at all.

Edit: Oh wow just saw the new Liberty finisher, +1 free happiness in every city?? Wow so powerful, not so sure about the Tradition finisher being better than Liberty anymore.. So again I ask, why are we nerfing Tradition at all, when it really seems (to me) clearly underpowered compared to Liberty

 

[Ahriman]

I think you're underrating Tradition.

The +5 gold policy is certainly useful in the early game, over 25 turns it contributes 125 gold, which is half of a a city state influence purchase, and the -50% unhappiness lets you sell off your first luxuries for more gold with which to buy a maritime CS alliance and grow your capital faster.

Yes, you can get lots of cities out with Liberty, but you'll run into happiness problems quickly, and if you have 4 cities early, you won't also have workers to support them - and you'll have a lot of difficulty defending them from an aggressive AI. 4 cities with 1 culture each will also have a pretty low new policy rate, because each new city increases policy costs by 15%.

I definitely find that Monarchy remains powerful and is certainly possible to reach in time to help with construction of wonders in the early game. I think it would be too powerful if it were available any earlier.

I think in part I would say; what difficulty are you playing on? On lower difficulty levels I can certainly see that Liberty would be more useful, but on high difficulty levels where the AI attacks more aggressively and has a larger early game army, and where happiness is much more of a constraint, I find Liberty can be very useful. Its policies also tend to have much larger staying power over the course of the game, whereas most Liberty policies scale poorly beyond the early game.

 

[EsoEs]

I think you're underrating Tradition.

I think in part I would say; what difficulty are you playing on? On lower difficulty levels I can certainly see that Liberty would be more useful, but on high difficulty levels where the AI attacks more aggressively and has a larger early game army, and where happiness is much more of a constraint, I find Liberty can be very useful. Its policies also tend to have much larger staying power over the course of the game, whereas most Liberty policies scale poorly beyond the early game.

Well I usually play Emperor if I want a more or less guarenteed win and immortal when I'm in the mood for a challenge and I won't mind maybe losing

You make some nice points, and are certainly swaying me into thinking about trying a tradition opener.. I think I still have this CIV mentality of "expand expand expand", I see nice land and I just have to have it, I can't help myself

 

[Seek]

One nice thing about the later first policy is that there's time to scout around your cap before committing to one tree or another. To get back OT, I don't see it as a big deal one way or another if the opener is 2 or 3 culture, but I think Thal was getting feedback from some people (myself included) that Tradition was relatively more powerful than Liberty now - so he minimally nerfed it.

 

[Thalassicus]

Right, I've been getting feedback that people often go Tradition opener -> Liberty opener, since the Tradition opener provides such a big boost to policy rate and border expansion. I don't want any single policy path to be an obvious choice. It should depend on circumstances of our starting position.

In v106.3 I returned Tradition to 3, but moved the border expansion bonus to Ceremonial Rites (which Ahriman felt needed a buff).

 

[Txurce]

In v106.3 I returned Tradition to 3, but moved the border expansion bonus to Ceremonial Rites (which Ahriman felt needed a buff).

Talk about splitting hairs... that's a good solution.

 

[Ahriman]

Well, except.... there is very poor flavor in Ceremonial Rites giving border expansion.

 

[Txurce]

Well, except.... there is very poor flavor in Ceremonial Rites giving border expansion.

I don't know... cultural buildings generate culture, and culture expands borders (in Civ even more than in RL). On the other hand, Ceremonial Rites is a policy that, as implemented, is frequently postponed. This works against the value of the cultural expansion.

I didn't have a problem with CR as it was, and would have no problem shifting the cultural expansion mechanic to some other early Tradition policy.

 

[Thalassicus]

I could put it on Landed Elite to buff the left side of the tree?

I'm not sure how to buff Ceremonial Rites in the early game. Piety already has a culture building construction speed bonus. It'd make sense to move that to Ceremonial Rites, but then what should I put on Piety? I'm open to ideas with these policies, and the Piety tree as a whole.

 

[Txurce]

I could put it on Landed Elite to buff the left side of the tree?

I'm not sure how to buff Ceremonial Rites in the early game. Piety already has a culture building construction speed bonus. It'd make sense to move that to Ceremonial Rites, but then what should I put on Piety? I'm open to ideas with these policies, and the Piety tree as a whole.

I think that a policy that could in theory deliver four museums is powerful enough. Put it this way - I go for Tradition most of the time, and never think "there's the weak sister."

 

[Ahriman]

Put it this way - I go for Tradition most of the time, and never think "there's the weak sister."

Huh. I got for Tradition a lot and *always* think "this is the weak sister". By far.

 

[Thalassicus]

It probably depends on playstyle and strategies. Rites can be part of a big culture boost if it gives 4 temples to lead into an immediate National Epic. Normally it'd take a very long time in the early game to build the prerequisite temples.

The culture then pays for itself by speeding the rate of later policies. Within a few dozen turns I'll bet we have all the same policies we would have had if we'd skipped Rites.

 

[Txurce]

It probably depends on playstyle and strategies. Rites can be part of a big culture boost if it gives 4 temples to lead into an immediate National Epic. Normally it'd take a very long time in the early game to build the prerequisite temples. That culture then pays for itself by speeding the rate of later policies.

That's a good example. I can see the policy not being someone's favorite, but to me it's clearly a "clear value" one. My least favorite aspect of it is deciding when to use it!

 

[Gorhaax]

I could put it on Landed Elite to buff the left side of the tree?

I'm not sure how to buff Ceremonial Rites in the early game. Piety already has a culture building construction speed bonus. It'd make sense to move that to Ceremonial Rites, but then what should I put on Piety? I'm open to ideas with these policies, and the Piety tree as a whole.

I agreee. I used to always get the two openers together, was just so darn powerful.

I was thinking, what about switching Monarchy and Obilarchy's position. That way you'd have 3 hard second tier choices; wonder bonus, culture bonus or happiness/gold bonus.

Having Obilarchy under Legalism makes sense towards the gold bonus.
Having Landed Elite under Monarchy helps grow your cities so that they can build more wonders!

Though not quite sure what to do about buff Ceremonial rites, other than giving it a culture bonus as well as the free building, but then that might make it OP

 

[Gorhaax]

I could put it on Landed Elite to buff the left side of the tree?

I'm not sure how to buff Ceremonial Rites in the early game. Piety already has a culture building construction speed bonus. It'd make sense to move that to Ceremonial Rites, but then what should I put on Piety? I'm open to ideas with these policies, and the Piety tree as a whole.

Eureka! What if you were to make Organized Religion the opener and move the current opener to the second tier.

My reasoning for this is that usually people who are going for a cultural victory take tradition, to keep the policy cost low and get 4 free buildings, and then take Piety, as it is an awesome culture tree. The problem is that the Piety opener kind of becomes useless for quite a while because you already got the free building, but making the culture boost a second tier should help it come closer to when you actually need it.

 

[Thalassicus]

The idea with Tradition is we have two paths to take. The right side of the tree is good if our start location is safe. However, if we're close to other AIs (particularly militaristic ones) the left side of the tree is more desirable for the garrison and defense building bonuses. Building wonders when surrounded by hostile AIs is a sure way to get rushed.

 

[Gorhaax]

The idea with Tradition is we have two paths to take. The right side of the tree is good if our start location is safe. However, if we're close to other AIs (particularly militaristic ones) the left side of the tree is more desirable for the garrison and defense building bonuses. Building wonders when surrounded by hostile AIs is a sure way to get rushed.

Oh, well i wasn't thinking of it that way, was just thinking of it in terms of making it harder to choose.

Anways, what do you thinking of my idea for the piety opener change or would that make it to easy for people to just pick the opener and thats it?

 

[mitsho]

Can you make the 4 buildings (FREE) buildings? So they don't cost maintenance? That'd be a buff while it wouldn't be overpowered if you take the policy in the Industrial age. How much maintenance is a Temple? 2? or 1? It's a minor buff for sure, but well. Alternatively a buff that is not found anywhere else would be a minor science buff, like each of the four temples provide a free beaker. (but how to limit it to those four temples?). In any case, it should be related to the four temples, that's the flavour of the policy, even if I don't like it

 

[Ahriman]

Can you make the 4 buildings (FREE) buildings? So they don't cost maintenance?

That would be a moderate but nontrivial boost, I like it. Part of what I dislike about the policy is that it ends up giving you something that you could generate yourself easily with a few gold or hammers, and after you have the buildings, you are in an identical situation whether you got them from the policy or from building them. Making them free would help distinguish the policy.

 

[Thalassicus]

I investigated that. There's a GetNumFreeBuildings function, but unfortunately they forgot to create a SetNumFreeBuildings function. Whatever they use to do that in the game core.

Can anyone think of a different buff for the policy? Some secondary effect that's useful early on?