Why to stick with one tree?

[marco_atk85]

Hi there,

I am new in VP and try to read as much as I can in order to have valuable opinions about the game mechanics. One thing that I couldn't understand very well is why the experts insist to stick one complete ancient era.

Here is my thinking. I believe with only one city it is much important to open tradition as it gives instant growth and border expansion for the capital. Then also soverignity is a must in order to find a religion as early as possible and justice in order to give production boost to the capital.

After opening this three policy, I probably will 2-3 cities already and it seems to me the gain in progress is much more then completing the tradition tree as the progress policies are much more effective to build better infrastructed cities even playing tall.

Where do I miss something baring tree finishing benefits?

 

[Stalker0]

the finishers are a strong reason to stick to a tree. but that said, there are a few synergies between trees where it may make sense to sprinkle your picks. i would love to find more, i think it creates more variety in play

 

[CrabHelmet]

If you pick 5 mixed policies, you don't get a finisher. So someone who does 5 from the same tree effectively has a free 6th policy compared to someone who did 6 mixed. The finishers are also normally quite powerful.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

Finishers and scalers, basically. If you pick, let's say, Statecraft opener instead of a third Fealty policy, you delay the Fealty finisher, and you lose 1 Food 3 Def per city as openers do not provide the benefit of a scaler. Scaler is usually not worth that much, but it's a nice sweetener.

 

[Workerspam]

I am new in VP and try to read as much as I can in order to have valuable opinions about the game mechanics. One thing that I couldn't understand very well is why the experts insist to stick one complete ancient era.

Policy trees, particularly the Ancient trees, are well balanced to suit your civs needs. Let's say you grab those first 3 policies in Tradition, then switch over to Progress to grab the 3 policies ending with 2/2 per city. Strong capital, strong secondary cities, best of all worlds. But where is your science? You skipped over the science policies in both trees and will likely lag behind any civ that stays with 1 tree. If you go down the right side of Progress to grab the 3/3 policy you will struggle with culture and gold (since you skipped all policies that provide your secondary cities those yields).

If you're new to VP it's best to pick a tree and stick with it to fully understand the strengths and weaknesses of each one, and so you get the finishers which are effectively an extra policy. Once you are more experienced you can try mixing trees; sometimes there can be synergies that work for your given situation. But experienced players will still complete 3 trees most of the time.

 

[tu_79]

Policy trees, particularly the Ancient trees, are well balanced to suit your civs needs. Let's say you grab those first 3 policies in Tradition, then switch over to Progress to grab the 3 policies ending with 2/2 per city. Strong capital, strong secondary cities, best of all worlds. But where is your science? You skipped over the science policies in both trees and will likely lag behind any civ that stays with 1 tree. If you go down the right side of Progress to grab the 3/3 policy you will struggle with culture and gold (since you skipped all policies that provide your secondary cities those yields).

If you're new to VP it's best to pick a tree and stick with it to fully understand the strengths and weaknesses of each one, and so you get the finishers which are effectively an extra policy. Once you are more experienced you can try mixing trees; sometimes there can be synergies that work for your given situation. But experienced players will still complete 3 trees most of the time.

I fully agree. Each policy tree is a game style. It gives the tools and the rewards for playing in a certain way. If you mix policies, how should you play to get the best out of it? Mixing authority and progress, should you focus on military or infrastructure? If you don't build enough units, you don't get the best of some authority policies (might not be able to demand tribute, for example). If you don't build enough buildings, the extra production for buildings is underemployed.

There can be other sinergies, fine, but even then, the bonus for completion is lost. And the race for some unique wonders too.

 

[CrazyG]

I tested mixing progress and tradition and I was really disappointed with the results. Progress first is just really bad. The culture is slower and everytime I would have rather had Justice or Sovereignty earlier. Also you will only get 20 science if you take tradition after progress, not 40 for 2 citizens (bug?).

Tradition first, then progress is better, but it doesn't really seem stronger short term or long term than pure tradition. Taking the progress opener really hurts your culture, long term this policy is like 2 culture per turn that scales with era. The science also is really low long term. You can an immediate science boost which does look really good compared to tradition's science policy, but long term its really insignificant.

If I already have 3 policies in tradition, I want to rush towards the 2 culture per monument on the 5th policy. You need a building every 5 turns to match that culture. I guess by renaissance the progress starts doing better, however taking the progress opener slowed down all your culture a ton. You will earn like 2 culture per turn for the techs, long term taking the progress opener is like skipping a social policy.

Maybe in like a 1v1 you could go tradition--> progress to unlock some weapon faster? Or maybe Maya can use it to rush mathematics? I looked pretty hard and I couldn't find anything really worth it. Your culture is much stronger if you just take pure tradition.

Mixing with tradition with authority has some merit though. Notably sovereignty and tribute has great synergy. A strong capital and military aggression pair surprisingly well during the early game.

Progress/authority mixes used to be pretty good because authority's finisher and late policies were fairly weak. I think changes to authority make that a lot less appealing. Also progress and authority just fundamentally want to do different things.

 

[Stalker0]

I have had better luck doing synergies with the second tier of policies. Fealty, Statecraft, and Artistry all have very good openers...and while their finishers are also good they aren't as essential, so I have found mix and matching to be useful in certain cases.

 

[tommytoxen]

i always go authority
then statecraft
then imperialism
then half-way through imperialism its time to choose ideology. then i just alternate between going further down imperialism and adding ideological traits.
i wanna try something new next game though, was thinking of maybe trying different trees.

if you're spreading them out and picking and choosing from different ones you may not be able to finish any of them, at least not for a long time, policy costs culture points, so you'll never get the bonuses and sometimes useful* stuff from completing them

 

[CrazyG]

I have had better luck doing synergies with the second tier of policies. Fealty, Statecraft, and Artistry all have very good openers...and while their finishers are also good they aren't as essential, so I have found mix and matching to be useful in certain cases.

I'd be interested in exploring combining these trees, as well as possibly combining them with progress.

 

[TwoPodRay]

i always go authority
then statecraft
then imperialism
then half-way through imperialism its time to choose ideology. then i just alternate between going further down imperialism and adding ideological traits.
i wanna try something new next game though, was thinking of maybe trying different trees.

if you're spreading them out and picking and choosing from different ones you may not be able to finish any of them, at least not for a long time, policy costs culture points, so you'll never get the bonuses and sometimes useful* stuff from completing them

Are you always playing the same Civ and the same strategy? Not every game is optimal to choose that policy path. Also, you shouldn’t be able to unlock Ideologies halfway through your third tree, unless you’re getting to the Atomic Era before finishing Imperialism, or unless you’re picking a few openers of other trees along the way. If you get to Atomic before picking an Ideology, it’ll prompt you to pick one. Otherwise you’ll pick an Ideology after 18 policies, including openers.

 

[CppMaster]

Yeah, it' weird to me too. I haven't had a game yet when I picked an Ideology before completing 3rd policy tree. It might be a case when you produce high amount of science and very low amount of culture or if AIs are way ahead in tech. @tommytoxen what game setup do you play? Speed, Size, Difficulty, Civ, Mods?

 

[tommytoxen]

22civs huge epic
it takes me a long time to get through policy trees i always lag behind

thinking of trying a different tree next game. by later game i dominate military wise but early game is always a bit of a struggle for me and i lag behind in tech etc

 

[Stalker0]

With certain civs like Korea I can get the ideology before 3rd tree. I've done it with Russia too, but its pretty tough in general.