Yield Balance and Pre-Launch Prediction

[PauI]

Influence in 7 will be a currency used to influence city-states, espionage missions, enact foreign deals that improve or deteriorate relations. (research agreements, trade sanctions, etc.) It is the only way to do such things.

If a diplomatic legacy path were to come in later this would certainly play a role. Luckily it is like bypassing World Congress, and just letting diplo favor do direct initiated deals with each other.

No world congress in 7 is one of the biggest ++ for me so far. I DESPISE that thing in 6.

 

[Siptah]

From my limited impression, it seems that the streamers overvalued food and military in the sense that they had too much of both. They had more units standing around than necessary, and cities/towns grew very quickly, but couldn't keep up with buildings and science. It's not much more than guess work at this stage though, the evidence is very limited.

 

[stealth_nsk]

No world congress in 7 is one of the biggest ++ for me so far. I DESPISE that thing in 6.

Wait for the expansion. Civ7 is almost perfect Ed's game with natural disasters and revolts available right in vanilla. World Congress is the only thing left to complete usual Ed's vision and it's likely to come together with 4th age in the expansion.

 

[GeneralZIft]

No world congress in 7 is one of the biggest ++ for me so far. I DESPISE that thing in 6.

Just because it's bad in 6 doesn't mean it's bad idea.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Just because it's bad in 6 doesn't mean it's bad idea.

I'd say it's bad in every Civ version we've seen so far. Sure, potentially it could be done well, but its inclusion is a reason to be worried.

 

[Acken]

It's indeed usually a pretty boring or annoying system. I don't get why people are so attached to it. It distracts, the player usually doesn't care for most of the resolutions available or being voted. If I take civ5 as an example its only interesting aspect was to decide when to pass the world fairs and getting the most boring victory.

I'd prefer effort spent on better/more bilateral diplomatic options or something entirely unrelated.

 

[Krikkit1]

I think, that given the new Diplomacy model it could work well.

Right now Endeavors and Sanctions are limited in the number you can make.... what if you could have an multilateral Endeavor (all that don't reject it benefit)
There is a Currency that could work for votes.
Vote For(cost Influence)*
Vote Against (cost Influence)*
Abstain

*can be done multiple times... after you have multiple votes equal to your number of Suzerins+2.. additional votes cost increasing amounts.
If 2x more votes for than against, it passes and all who didn't reject get benefits (more for those that supported... who all get a relationship boost with each other)

 

[Acken]

My problem with it in previous games isn't how you get votes, it's what you vote for.

 

[King Flevance]

I think the only way it could work decently, is if you had to opt in for a bonus benefit. Forced World Congress makes no sense. I preferred it when it was simply a mechanic of the UN.

I agree that what gets voted on is usually lame plus it is presented randomly. This makes the mechanic usually feel "shoved in" with little or no purpose. Unless they have a clear vision and purpose for its inclusion, I would prefer they just leave it out.

 

[GeneralZIft]

The Civ5 world Congress was really fun. It felt like an ability to change the game's rules literally. Also it was fairly substantial in being able to influence the AI, being able to hurt particular players, being able to buy votes, there was a lot of versatility in it that was totally lost in the Civ6 world congress.

I couldn't care less about the Diplomatic Victories, their design was indeed trash. But that doesn't detract from the very fun aspect of being able to meet with all the players in the game (this is especially good in Multiplayer) and sort of pivot the game.

In this regard, the game needs some kind of feature like this because it was just very fun

 

[Isengardtom]

I think it changes as you progress : early on a food focus seems important to grow your settlement quicker, but later on that’s less important and you want high production

It would be nice if they release a dev diary explaining all the different yields and what they are important for

 

[UWHabs]

From my limited impression, it seems that the streamers overvalued food and military in the sense that they had too much of both. They had more units standing around than necessary, and cities/towns grew very quickly, but couldn't keep up with buildings and science. It's not much more than guess work at this stage though, the evidence is very limited.

I'm not necessarily sure that they over-valued the military, maybe it was how they were playing and the setup, but it definitely felt like they got attacked by the AI a bunch, and they needed to have a good standing army. It seemed like Gold was a very valuable resource to build up towns, so they didn't tend to spend on buying up an army when a neighbour was at their doorstep.

They definitely put a lot into food - I have a feeling because tile yields are pretty bonkers, growing your city into a beast early has felt like a big strategy. Although I think a lot of the crazy yields are building adjacency, so I still think that production is still a very important resource to manage, to get those buildings up.

 

[Acken]

Are there yields that depend on population size ? Like +1 science per pop in civ5 followed by +1 per 2 pop from buildings.

 

[Seek]

Are there yields that depend on population size ? Like +1 science per pop in civ5 followed by +1 per 2 pop from buildings.

No, there aren’t any effects like this - I suspect it’s because buildings add to population.