A new mod enters the ring - Introducing "Close to Home"

[Cornflakes]

I'm wondering what the actual problem with "removing strategic resources" (bombardment, pillaging or anything else) is. Is it:

a) The advantages and disadvantages produced due to turn order especially in PBs?
b) The annoyance of loosing the production and units for the turn the resource is disconnected?
c) The annoyance of reconnecting the resource at your next turn?
d) The enemies ability to remove the access to a resource in general?

I'm fully aware that some of those points seem equal although I would say they are minor variants of each other that could have drastically different solutions.

(b) is 100% the cause of the annoyance for me. If there was a way to hold resource access through the turn roll as long as you had access when you end your turn that would be ideal. But I think you mentioned previously that it was not practical to code this.

[Ginger()]

I think this is just a larger case of “turnsplits are broken”, and the solution is to play sequential or PBEM. The game was designed around production/research/you-name-it being resolved after you do all your actions. Another player being able to inject themselves into that step is terrible for the balance, especially when it’s only one way. It’s not limited to strategic resource disconnection, but also luxuries, trade cancellations, stepping on worked tiles causing the governor to rearrange tiles, and of course the cherry on top of first puller having one less turn to do anything.

Edit:
On a side note, Charriu, I’d ask that you leave the circumnav trade route bonus at Optics be as is, because I’ve found in the singleplayer CtH games I’ve played that it makes Optics a much more interesting tech choice than it previously was.

[superdeath]

I think this is just a larger case of “turnsplits are broken”, and the solution is to play sequential or PBEM. The game was designed around production/research/you-name-it being resolved after you do all your actions. Another player being able to inject themselves into that step is terrible for the balance, especially when it’s only one way. It’s not limited to strategic resource disconnection, but also luxuries, trade cancellations, stepping on worked tiles causing the governor to rearrange tiles, and of course the cherry on top of first puller having one less turn to do anything.

Edit:
On a side note, Charriu, I’d ask that you leave the circumnav trade route bonus at Optics be as is, because I’ve found in the singleplayer CtH games I’ve played that it makes Optics a much more interesting tech choice than it previously was.

I prefer playing Sequential or the "end turn, production ect happens" kinda pitboss.

[Mjmd]

Ginger I would go back and read the arguments for changing Optics. It might feel good single player, but it doesn't for multiplayer.

As for the rest, standard warning about mission creep and bloat especially in late game stuff that doesn't come up much. Forts I would leave as is, maybe change # of turns to build if you feel its warranted.

[Charriu]

My opinions:
Forts - Using a canal in friendly territory via open borders is fine. Controlling a fort in enemy territory to gain use as a canal is not a good change. Controlling a fort in neutral territory to gain use as a canal is fine, but the can of worms that it opens is what to do if you lose "control" (i.e. exploiting teleportation, or unintentionally moving away your land unit before moving away your ship) ... a simpler solution would be to just always allow forts in neutral territory to be used as canals same as in an open borders situation.

I'm afraid of this "can of worms" too. I think the solution to make forts work as canals in neutral and open border areas is the better and simpler solution. Thanks.

After some more consideration I'm also willing to give the "paratroopers can attack undefended tiles after drop" a chance. If I remember correctly there also was something similar in the unoffical patch.

I'm wondering what the actual problem with "removing strategic resources" (bombardment, pillaging or anything else) is. Is it:

a) The advantages and disadvantages produced due to turn order especially in PBs?
b) The annoyance of loosing the production and units for the turn the resource is disconnected?
c) The annoyance of reconnecting the resource at your next turn?
d) The enemies ability to remove the access to a resource in general?

I'm fully aware that some of those points seem equal although I would say they are minor variants of each other that could have drastically different solutions.

(b) is 100% the cause of the annoyance for me. If there was a way to hold resource access through the turn roll as long as you had access when you end your turn that would be ideal. But I think you mentioned previously that it was not practical to code this.

I've looked into the code and there might be a possibility. Here is what happens there on the turn roll in a city:

1. Check if production can continue (lost wonder races, lost access to resources, obsoletion)
2. If production can't continue remove that object
3. Put production into object and finish object if necessary

What I would try is to move the second point after the third. This of course is a more critical change that requires more testing. Therefore I would not want to do that in a version with multiple changes aka the next. Better to do it in a small version so that any problems can be isolated better.

Edit:
On a side note, Charriu, I’d ask that you leave the circumnav trade route bonus at Optics be as is, because I’ve found in the singleplayer CtH games I’ve played that it makes Optics a much more interesting tech choice than it previously was.

As Mjmd said we discussed this at length and I don't want to start this discussion again. The circumnav bonus will stay at Optics, but instead of trade routes it will generate +50% trade yield on harbors, weakening the bonus. As of now the bonus is a bit to dominant and is another reason why tech runs a lot faster in later eras.

[Charriu]

Next up I wanted to talk about the traits. First up:

Protective: We had multiple proposals here. Ginger proposed to give it lighthouse (and remove those from ORG). I decided against that for the following reasons:

- Too strong synergy with FIN (and yes I'm aware that the same can be said for ORG)
- Helps too much with the Great Lighthouse as Mjmd has pointed out
- PRO already has some water map based bonus with the whole trade bonus
- In turn this would remove the only water based bonus from ORG. In general it would be nice if every trait has at least 1 bonus some comes into play on water. So far I see these water related bonuses with every trait

FIN: Extra commerce on water tiles
EXP: Water maps can be hammer poor, so it's especially nice to get granaries up faster
CRE: Same as EXP, but this time popping borders in hammer poor cities
CHA: The EXP bonus for ships and also the monument for border pops
PRO: The trade bonus
IMP: Same as EXP with settlers
AGG: Drydock
ORG: Lighthouse
SPI, PHI and IND are the only ones that don't have a stronger connection to water maps

Next up Mjmd proposed a production bonus for the market. I'm not against that and the only reason I do not do it now is because I have other plans with the market. Should those plans be bad then market + PRO is back on the menu.

So what do I want to do with PRO. Well two things:

Move Open Border agreements from Writing to Alphabet
Give it 100% production towards customs house

The first bonus would extend the period in which PRO gets more commerce before it looses those against foreign trade. It would also make Alphabet more worthwhile to get with the nerfs to espionage. The customs house bonus is somewhat anti-synergy with the domestic trade bonus I admit. But as Amicalola has pointed out it would help make PRO better on large maps like PB59 and it still is in theme with trade in general.



Financial: Looking at the newly revealed data from my tracking tool I feel safe to say that FIN now is a late game trait even later then ORG. I think it is safe to say that it is now weaker compared to ORG mainly because of all the other extra stuff that ORG gets (lighthouse, better city maintenance, better espionage and factories). The new "weakness" of FIN gives me a rare opportunity. Add something to FIN that makes it a bit stronger and also more interesting. Mjmd already mentioned the bank bonus, but I feel a bit bold and would go a step further and do

Give 100% production towards markets

This might certainly be controversial and make FIN too strong in some players view. I think it is worth a try. It gives FIN something interesting to do during the mid-game and also some synergy with certain civs. I also have a more accurate tracking for the gold modifier in place for the upcoming games so we will see if this is getting too strong. Should this be too strong I can go back to the bank or even the grocer.



Organized: I already mentioned the lighthouse removal by Ginger above, but I agree with him that ORG is a bit too strong. To that extend I think of

Remove the factory bonus

The factory is probably the single most important building during the industrial and modern era and this is therefore the strongest building bonus in that era. Removing it makes ORG that little bit weaker then it is now without clashing too much with it's identity.



Imperialistic: Only looking at the pure hammer bonus the settler bonus is absolutly comparable to other early expansion bonuses like EXP (30 saved on granary), CRE (30 hammers saved on monument), CHA (15 hammers saved on monument). Of course the settler bonus has some more advantageous, but I feel like IMP is still a bit too weak after that initial phase even with the great general bonus. I therefore plan to do:

Give 100% to factory

I'm not super happy with that. Of course the factory bonus would be perfect with IND, but with the wonder bonus, 100% national wonders (new with upcoming version) and forge I feel IND might get too strong with factories. But it would fit that trait so perfectly. I still wanted to retain the factory bonus as I like it. Giving it to IMP was the next best thing even though it doesn't fit the theme of IMP (what theme other then early expansion does it even have?). And let me ask you this. What would you think if the national wonder bonus goes to IMP. Might fit somewhat thematically with the name, but I think it is too far from home. Your opinions?



Spiritual: Mjmd proposed to give it production bonus towards monasteries. This of course fits perfectly, but would it make SPI that much better? I see three reasons for building monasteries:

1. As a culture building, but culture is already provided by the religion so no reason to build them for border pops only in newly build cities
2. To be able to build missionaries, but this can also be achieved by easy swaps into Organized Religion thanks to SPI
3. For the 10% science bonus. That's nice but certainly not the most important
4. For the monk economy. Here the bonus would be really nice, but you need to setup everything for that.

I'm not totally against the change, but I'm questioning if it has enough effect on the relevance of the trait. The anarchy bonus is certainly the most important and becomes stronger with every civic change. The temple bonus as another happiness resource and monk economy building is also useful especially if you consider that you can build multiple temples from different religions.



Expansive: Yes, I mentioned giving it back the worker bonus. Originally it is a 25% production towards worker, but I think it's better to think in terms of extra hammer per hammers invested. Therefore 25% is more like 1 extra hammer every 4 hammers. Back in BtS this gave you a 10 turn worker instead of 12 turn on the ubiquitous plains hill starts and I argue that was the main benefit of this bonus. Yes you also get extra hammers with it during later production, but even if you produce them with hammers only that only resulted in 12 extra hammers and 7 extra hammers with a whip. Not that much I would argue.
My thinking went into two directions. Reducing it to 1 extra hammer per 5 hammers (20%) or 1 extra hammer per 6 hammer (16.66%). Let's think about those for a moment.
- 1 extra per 5 hammers would give us the 10 turn worker only if you can work a plains hill forest tile from the start. Therefore it would limit the effectiveness of the bonus. It would still give 10 hammers when produced purely with hammers and 6 extra hammers with a whip. I think it is save to say that the biggest effect of reducing the bonus is in the first 50 turns. You would need to think some more about your start and give some more options to the map maker.
- 1 extra per 6 hammers would remove the 10 turn worker if played with standard maps. Of course map makers would still be able to give back the 10 turn worker with some unusual tiles normally not seen on random generated maps. It would give 8 extra hammers if produced purely with hammers and 5 extra on a whip. I think if I go that way I could even just remove the bonus at all as the effect is so marginal overall.

Therefore I would propose:

20% faster production of workers.
Remove the aqueduct bonus

This would give EXP back some identity, which was missed by some players. It still isn't always strong in the early game and a lot more dependent on the start. I remove the aqueduct bonus as I initially added it to compensate somewhat for the lost worker. Aqueducts are also now reduced to 80 hammers.



Philosophical: Together with IND and SPI one of the least played traits and unlike those traits most players with PHI were eliminated in all the games since PB52. This of course does not mean it is weak, but it is noted as something might be lacking here? Everybody also knows that is one of the harder traits to play since you have to plan ahead some more like with SPI. It also has some clearly defined themes with great persons and science. I was thinking about adding the observatory as a building bonus, but that would just add to the late game character. I was curious what people would think about something like +1 or +2 science beakers per city with PHI?

[Amicalola]

I really like the PRO changers.

Financial seems fine as a change, but I prefer banks. It seems more thematic.

I really dislike the ORG change. It makes the trait no weaker in most games, and I also disagree that it leaves the identity. Factories + ORG seems like core identity.

Same with IMP - no thematic flavour and no difference in most games.

I like mjmds change for SPI, it doesn't need a big boost anyway.

I would like EXP to keep the aqueduct bonus. It feels thematic and leaves a fun way to synargise with the generally weak aqueduct UBs. A small worker bonus is probably fine on top of that though.

Not sure how I feel about the PHI idea. I like the theme, but worry it would be too strong early.

[Ginger()]

Next up I wanted to talk about the traits. First up:

Protective: We had multiple proposals here. Ginger proposed to give it lighthouse (and remove those from ORG). I decided against that for the following reasons:

- Too strong synergy with FIN (and yes I'm aware that the same can be said for ORG)
- Helps too much with the Great Lighthouse as Mjmd has pointed out
- PRO already has some water map based bonus with the whole trade bonus
- In turn this would remove the only water based bonus from ORG. In general it would be nice if every trait has at least 1 bonus some comes into play on water. So far I see these water related bonuses with every trait

FIN: Extra commerce on water tiles
EXP: Water maps can be hammer poor, so it's especially nice to get granaries up faster
CRE: Same as EXP, but this time popping borders in hammer poor cities
CHA: The EXP bonus for ships and also the monument for border pops
PRO: The trade bonus
IMP: Same as EXP with settlers
AGG: Drydock
ORG: Lighthouse
SPI, PHI and IND are the only ones that don't have a stronger connection to water maps

Next up Mjmd proposed a production bonus for the market. I'm not against that and the only reason I do not do it now is because I have other plans with the market. Should those plans be bad then market + PRO is back on the menu.

So what do I want to do with PRO. Well two things:

Move Open Border agreements from Writing to Alphabet
Give it 100% production towards customs house

The first bonus would extend the period in which PRO gets more commerce before it looses those against foreign trade. It would also make Alphabet more worthwhile to get with the nerfs to espionage. The customs house bonus is somewhat anti-synergy with the domestic trade bonus I admit. But as Amicalola has pointed out it would help make PRO better on large maps like PB59 and it still is in theme with trade in general.



Financial: Looking at the newly revealed data from my tracking tool I feel safe to say that FIN now is a late game trait even later then ORG. I think it is safe to say that it is now weaker compared to ORG mainly because of all the other extra stuff that ORG gets (lighthouse, better city maintenance, better espionage and factories). The new "weakness" of FIN gives me a rare opportunity. Add something to FIN that makes it a bit stronger and also more interesting. Mjmd already mentioned the bank bonus, but I feel a bit bold and would go a step further and do

Give 100% production towards markets

This might certainly be controversial and make FIN too strong in some players view. I think it is worth a try. It gives FIN something interesting to do during the mid-game and also some synergy with certain civs. I also have a more accurate tracking for the gold modifier in place for the upcoming games so we will see if this is getting too strong. Should this be too strong I can go back to the bank or even the grocer.



Organized: I already mentioned the lighthouse removal by Ginger above, but I agree with him that ORG is a bit too strong. To that extend I think of

Remove the factory bonus

The factory is probably the single most important building during the industrial and modern era and this is therefore the strongest building bonus in that era. Removing it makes ORG that little bit weaker then it is now without clashing too much with it's identity.



Imperialistic: Only looking at the pure hammer bonus the settler bonus is absolutly comparable to other early expansion bonuses like EXP (30 saved on granary), CRE (30 hammers saved on monument), CHA (15 hammers saved on monument). Of course the settler bonus has some more advantageous, but I feel like IMP is still a bit too weak after that initial phase even with the great general bonus. I therefore plan to do:

Give 100% to factory

I'm not super happy with that. Of course the factory bonus would be perfect with IND, but with the wonder bonus, 100% national wonders (new with upcoming version) and forge I feel IND might get too strong with factories. But it would fit that trait so perfectly. I still wanted to retain the factory bonus as I like it. Giving it to IMP was the next best thing even though it doesn't fit the theme of IMP (what theme other then early expansion does it even have?). And let me ask you this. What would you think if the national wonder bonus goes to IMP. Might fit somewhat thematically with the name, but I think it is too far from home. Your opinions?



Spiritual: Mjmd proposed to give it production bonus towards monasteries. This of course fits perfectly, but would it make SPI that much better? I see three reasons for building monasteries:

1. As a culture building, but culture is already provided by the religion so no reason to build them for border pops only in newly build cities
2. To be able to build missionaries, but this can also be achieved by easy swaps into Organized Religion thanks to SPI
3. For the 10% science bonus. That's nice but certainly not the most important
4. For the monk economy. Here the bonus would be really nice, but you need to setup everything for that.

I'm not totally against the change, but I'm questioning if it has enough effect on the relevance of the trait. The anarchy bonus is certainly the most important and becomes stronger with every civic change. The temple bonus as another happiness resource and monk economy building is also useful especially if you consider that you can build multiple temples from different religions.



Expansive: Yes, I mentioned giving it back the worker bonus. Originally it is a 25% production towards worker, but I think it's better to think in terms of extra hammer per hammers invested. Therefore 25% is more like 1 extra hammer every 4 hammers. Back in BtS this gave you a 10 turn worker instead of 12 turn on the ubiquitous plains hill starts and I argue that was the main benefit of this bonus. Yes you also get extra hammers with it during later production, but even if you produce them with hammers only that only resulted in 12 extra hammers and 7 extra hammers with a whip. Not that much I would argue.
My thinking went into two directions. Reducing it to 1 extra hammer per 5 hammers (20%) or 1 extra hammer per 6 hammer (16.66%). Let's think about those for a moment.
- 1 extra per 5 hammers would give us the 10 turn worker only if you can work a plains hill forest tile from the start. Therefore it would limit the effectiveness of the bonus. It would still give 10 hammers when produced purely with hammers and 6 extra hammers with a whip. I think it is save to say that the biggest effect of reducing the bonus is in the first 50 turns. You would need to think some more about your start and give some more options to the map maker.
- 1 extra per 6 hammers would remove the 10 turn worker if played with standard maps. Of course map makers would still be able to give back the 10 turn worker with some unusual tiles normally not seen on random generated maps. It would give 8 extra hammers if produced purely with hammers and 5 extra on a whip. I think if I go that way I could even just remove the bonus at all as the effect is so marginal overall.

Therefore I would propose:

20% faster production of workers.
Remove the aqueduct bonus

This would give EXP back some identity, which was missed by some players. It still isn't always strong in the early game and a lot more dependent on the start. I remove the aqueduct bonus as I initially added it to compensate somewhat for the lost worker. Aqueducts are also now reduced to 80 hammers.



Philosophical: Together with IND and SPI one of the least played traits and unlike those traits most players with PHI were eliminated in all the games since PB52. This of course does not mean it is weak, but it is noted as something might be lacking here? Everybody also knows that is one of the harder traits to play since you have to plan ahead some more like with SPI. It also has some clearly defined themes with great persons and science. I was thinking about adding the observatory as a building bonus, but that would just add to the late game character. I was curious what people would think about something like +1 or +2 science beakers per city with PHI?

Not sure Financial needs a buff, it seems to be in a good place relative the other traits, and trying to make it compete with ORG (arguably the #1) smacks of powercreep. Also if we're in agreement that the Org/Fin scales are tipped, I would only adjust one side at a time until the balance is found.

Spiritual is a bit funny because it's the death and taxes of Civ4 traits, barely changes at all from mod to mod because it has a core identity that accomplishes something unique but not overpowered. You could toss it a bone with a monastery bonus, but it doesn't feel necessary, nor does it feel like it would be too much either, so *shrug*

No comment on the OB shift to Alphabet, I know that's been done before, but I don't know enough about MP meta to comment on what that would change. I expect some ripple effects.

Expansive, fiddling with the percentages creates a weird interaction with the mapmaker. Are they going to craft starts for the players that are EXP-friendly? Is that an intentional consideration? Seems like it could have wobbly implications. Also, I'm a little sad I won't get to try out EXP Otto/Khmer, that always looked cool, but alas.

Philosophical, I'm not convinced it needs the help, but if you want to buff it, Observatories would be a great choice because Astronomy is a major bulb-target. Beakers per city is far from home and weirdly infringes on PRO

[Mjmd]

I don't like moving open borders to Alphabet. We've had this conversion before. Its not Close to Home. Again protective is a dual trait both economic and military. Trying to get it to be closer. to the other economic traits ignores this. Edit: protective economically also gains benefit from maps with no or few islands / a low number of players.

When I suggested markets to Pro I noted it should probably only be 50% bonus. The market is an incredible important powerful building and I would urge no trait get 100% bonus to it. I also prefer thematic bonus to banks.

No strong opinion on the factory change, but I kind of like it even if its not thematic. I'll give it a think.

Spiritual has won a descent number of games in CtH but I like the monastery as little thematic buff. I don't think the trait needs a lot, but just something to make it a little more interesting.

I like your proposed 20% worker expansive change, but I agree with keeping the bonus to aqueduct.

I'll give Phil a think. Observatory bonus seems like a simple add though.

Edit: with exp getting worker bonus back, it does seem like Imp needs something else...... maybe stable bonus back?

[chumchu]

Protective: I would be for moving open borders to alphabet as you are playing without tech trading and spy missions. I do it in my mod and it makes decisions more interesting in early classical era as it adds another potential target. I do not think you need to do more than that at the moment.

Financial: I would suggest removing the change to require lighthouse to get the bonus on water if you want a small buff of financial. It cuts down on the change log and makes it closer to home.

Organized: I agree that is maybe the strongest trait at the moment. I would rather decrease the lighthouse bonus to 50% than to remove factory bonus. Especially if you are not giving it to industrious. Lighthouse from ORG always felt strange to me.

Imperialistic: Imp is fine as it is. On certain settings like late starts and maps with high commerce potential it is among the best traits.

Spiritual: Giving it a bonus on monastery is not a problem but neither really necessary I think.

Expansive: I think it is mostly fine at the moment. If I would do something it would be to make health matter a bit more in the early game. This would allow expansives core theme to shine. My suggestion would be to change flood plains from - 0.4 health to -0.5. This makes the arithmetic much easier, especially combined with forests and slightly nerfs the strongest terrain in the game. I have tested this in my mod and it makes for more interesting decisions for settling in flood plain areas. This also makes the aqueduct more useful

Philosophical: Also somewhat dependent on map settings and on player skill. It has got potential though. A fun change would be for it to get double yield from settled great persons. That option is very rarely used and can give a phislospohical players more early game options. Trying to rush an early prophet or scientist to ruch out of the early game slump.

Industrious: Very dependent on map settings and what other players are doing. An increased bonus on NW as planned is fine. It will be picked but a bit more rarely I think. That is not a big problem to me.

Aggressive: still waiting to see exactly how strong it is now.