On the Agricultural trait.

[OPD]

Originally posted by Dominae
Notice that all my comments about restarts are just that: comments. I'm not calling for everyone to stop restarting lest the game blow up. What I am calling for is a reduction in power of the Agr. trait because (as you've just said yourself) it's the best trait whether you reload or not (on average).

Sometimes I wonder whether I've actually got any better at civ or whether I'm just more picky about start locations.

Agr is damn good, kinda like each city starting with half a granary. But you can't really expect people to not reload just like you can't expect them to not reload if they are Seafaring and start far from the coast.

The thing is it could seriously unbalance Pbem play. The odds are already, typically, slightly unbalanced due to start locations. But this could go too far. In a game against someone with agr and an excellent river start it wouldn't matter how good you were or how much better you played. The good thing about Ind when it was so strong was that everyone could be Ind and things be equal. With agr even if everyone picks it some will be much more powerful than others.

[Dominae]

Double-post.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by ducki
Either I misread that, or you agreed with me in that it's the restarts that cause the imbalance, not the trait.

We're starting to go around in circles, ducki. Here are my opinions:

1. Agricultural is not as strong as people think. There's a lot of buzz around it right now because when people restart to get a "good" Agr. start (which they often do), the trait is extremely powerful. The trait is balanced by the fact that it's map-dependent. If you do not let this map-dependency take effect (i.e. you restart), the trait is too strong in comparison to the other traits.

2. Even if you do let the map-depency factor take effect (i.e. you do not restart often or at all), on average the trait is more powerful than any other. This "on average" qualification defauts your "Industrious is always good" clause. It's an interesting question to ask which is better: pre-C3C Industrious, or the current Agricultural. I'm inclined to say it's Agr.

3. It's not healthy for one trait to be better than the others, even if it is a map-dependent trait. In fact, Agr. is powerful enough that it encourages players to reload more often, which cannot be right.

Which of these three do you disagree with?

If you said to me let's play a comparison epic game at Monarch(or even my first Emperor game) and we'll make everything except for the Civ random...
...I'd pick Egypt because I think they are stronger in all but the most advantageous-to-agriculture start.
That tells me that Rel+Ind is more generically powerful than Agr+Ind.
Yes, Agr+Ind is a recipe for dominance...
if and ONLY if you start with enough river to make it so.

You're overestimating the new Industrious. Agricultural beats it hands down, on average. Even without a River start, I bet once I switched out of Despotism I would put your Industrious Workers to shame.

The IFF part of that says to me that it's a balanced trait.

Yes, this is my point about restarts. Unfortunately, it's not balanced enough.

I don't think we'll see Ag-addicts in the same way we see Ind-addicts like myself. (Hi, I'm ducki and I've been addicted to speed for 2 years now.)

Take a look at any PBEM game that is starting these days. Chances are almost every player will be playing Agricultural. That's not a fluke, IMO.


Dominae

[pvzh]

I do not feel that imposing tile penalty always (on +1 agr. bonus) would be over nerf. Many other traits works only after time: commercial, scientific, religious. +1 Food in city center even after switch is much better than commercial, religious or scientific boni (not at once, obviously).

[vmxa1]

Very interesting and thanks for the effort. I only have one point to bring up and that is that to me most of the attractiveness of the trait is lost by the civs that have it.
Most have an extremely early UU and that is a big problem to me. About the only one that does not is the Dutch and they have seafaring. I do not find this a very attractive trait, even on maps with lots of water.
The civ I would be most interested in Mayans, but they have JT, now that is early and replaces a unit you now want to use badly, the archer.

So all in all you have to give up something to get ag as a trait, so I am not so sure it is in need of a fix. I just don't use it any more as I was sick of getting those quick GA's.

Now if say China switched Mil for Ag, that would be another story.
Even the Arabs switching Exp for Ag, would make me join your cause.

[ducki]

Originally posted by Dominae


We're starting to go around in circles, ducki. Here are my opinions:

1. Agricultural is not as strong as people think. There's a lot of buzz around it right now because when people restart to get a "good" Agr. start (which they often do), the trait is extremely powerful. The trait is balanced by the fact that it's map-dependent. If you do not let this map-dependency take effect (i.e. you restart), the trait is too strong in comparison to the other traits.

If you change your last phrase to be "the trait is stronger in comparison to the other traits," I'd agree. I disagree that it's "too strong".

2. Even if you do let the map-depency factor take effect (i.e. you do not restart often or at all), on average the trait is more powerful than any other. This "on average" qualification defauts your "Industrious is always good" clause. It's an interesting question to ask which is better: pre-C3C Industrious, or the current Agricultural. I'm inclined to say it's Agr.

If there was a way to test this that would be significant, I'd love to participate; however, MP wouldn't work because player skill differs. Good for an AU course, maybe. I still think, though need to test more, that Industrious is still generically stronger and Agriculture is situationally stronger.

3. It's not healthy for one trait to be better than the others, even if it is a map-dependent trait. In fact, Agr. is powerful enough that it encourages players to reload more often, which cannot be right.

I agree that one trait shouldn't be always better than all the others in every situation. I disagree that restarting is bad. I think we're just seeing a magnification of the importance of a good start. Some folks won't play anything with less than a cow, some require fresh water, some demand luxuries, some want all those. Agriculture, as a trait, has simply put the spotlight on the importance of a good start and the practice of restarts.

Which of these three do you disagree with?

I had to break your 3 down further, and 2 contradicted 1, but overall, we agree on a lot of details and disagree on the big picture.

You're overestimating the new Industrious. Agricultural beats it hands down, on average. Even without a River start, I bet once I switched out of Despotism I would put your Industrious Workers to shame.

I'm nowhere near your skill level, Dom, but we could try a PBEM; although...

Take a look at any PBEM game that is starting these days. Chances are almost every player will be playing Agricultural. That's not a fluke, IMO.

This is a big problem with SP games that add MP. It's near impossible to balance a SP game to be balanced MP. Individual player skill is too big a factor that the only way to balance would be to let the AIs play each other and see what happens, but we all know the AI isn't that bright.
It might not be a fluke. Then again, it might just be a MP anomoly - if you don't get the early game advantage, or at least enough growth to crank out units, your enemy will. How many MP games make it to the Modern Era? How many are over before Industrialization? Is (competitive) MP inherently early-game-centric or am I imagining that?


I'm willing to be proven wrong, I just don't see Agr as inherently overpowered the way you guys do. (Insert generic personal opinion disclaimer here)

[Dominae]

Originally posted by ducki
If you change your last phrase to be "the trait is stronger in comparison to the other traits," I'd agree. I disagree that it's "too strong".

It's strong enough that everyone is playing it, including everyone who is starting a PBEM. People want to play it as an AU course. All you hear is Maya this and Dutch that. I would love to think that it's because Agr. is an interesting trait, but what's probably going on is that it's a powerful trait. Too powerful. Remember that Civ3 players love things that empower them. Why is the Immortal a favorite UU? Because it kicks butt. Yet the Impi is a far more interesting unit.

Agriculture, as a trait, has simply put the spotlight on the importance of a good start and the practice of restarts.

That's exactly it. Players want to do well. So they restart until they get a good Agricultural trait starting location. It just so happens that a River start and the Agr. trait is the best thing you can do for yourself in terms of game setup. So in that sense Agr. is too strong. What about those who do not reload? Well, in part 4 of my first post I've made the case that even then the trait is too powerful (i.e. clearly better than the rest). So, any way that you look at it, Agr. is too strong.

I had to break your 3 down further, and 2 contradicted 1, but overall, we agree on a lot of details and disagree on the big picture.

2 does not contradict 1. Go back and read my original post and you'll see why.

What we disagree on is this: you think that Agr. is only situationally strong, whereas I think that Agr., despite it's map-dependency, is hands down the best trait. Perhaps a little more experience with C3C will settle the issue. However, with the experience I do have I'm reasonably confident in my assertion.

It might not be a fluke. Then again, it might just be a MP anomoly - if you don't get the early game advantage, or at least enough growth to crank out units, your enemy will. How many MP games make it to the Modern Era? How many are over before Industrialization? Is (competitive) MP inherently early-game-centric or am I imagining that?

Civ3 is early-game-centric. That's why the AI is given so many bonuses at the start at the higher difficulty levels. The reason it's possible to win at those levels is that the AI is just not really good at keeping its lead. Pit humans against humans, and any early lead by one player is hugely magnified down the road. This more than anything is indicative of the true power Agricultural trait. Would you feel comfortable playing in a PBEM (against equally-skilled opponents) where you were the only non-Agricultural civ? So what if one of them gets a "bad" Agr. start, one of them will get a good one, and will dominate the game.


Dominae

[steven8r]

I would have to say that after my first two experiences playing an Ag civ, that it's not an overbalanced trait. Or, perhaps I just haven't figured-out how to take advantage of it.

First Ag civ: Sumer (Mesopetamia Conquest) I had lots of rivers to start, but the Babs kept me out of the fertile North, I had to settle for Arabian Desert--which became just OK AFTER irrigation. Second game, Maya epic game, there were no rivers on the map. I couldn't exploit the trait.

Ag trait seems good, but not overpowering (at least in the hands of a novice).

BTW: What's been changed w/ Industrial in C3C?
I haven't seen anything posted yet on that, and in my game the Maya seemed just as Industrial as PTW civs.

[steven8r]

One other negative thought about Agricultural civs, or a possible balancing for Ag civs:

Especially after you get out of Despotism and by the time you get everything railroaded, your cities can grow extremely fast. This massive increase in citizens can cause Unhappines even faster.

With the more limited Luxury Resources, you will have to use the Luxury slider more and more to keep your citizens happy. That's less money that you'd have for military or research. Having super-fast pop explosions could be a bad thing--espessially at higher levels where fewer citizens are 'born happy'.

[Aeson]

Normally, a laborer can produce 2-3 commerce. It only takes 1 commerce to make a laborer content to offset the added unhappiness. So as long as population growth is somewhat uniform across your cities, and you are dealing with corruption effectively, a laborer should always be able to pay for it's own unhappiness. The extra commerce, and all the production produced by that laborer is all profit.

In cases where population growth is too fast to keep up with unhappiness (should only be very corrupt areas), just assign specialists to keep growth slower/stationary. You'll get extra gold or beakers from the population increases even then.

[ducki]

Originally posted by Dominae
It's strong enough that everyone is playing it, including everyone who is starting a PBEM. People want to play it as an AU course. All you hear is Maya this and Dutch that. I would love to think that it's because Agr. is an interesting trait, but what's probably going on is that it's a powerful trait.

Another possibility is that it's one of two new traits, so naturally everyone wants to play it.

...a River start and the Agr. trait is the best thing you can do for yourself in terms of game setup.

I agree wholeheartedly, but maybe I didn't make it clear that I think Agr+River is the best possible situation.

...What about those who do not reload? Well, in part 4 of my first post I've made the case that even then the trait is too powerful (i.e. clearly better than the rest). So, any way that you look at it, Agr. is too strong.

My first thought was to argue against this, but I think instead I'll try some Agricultural civs that are not Industrious and intentionally restart to get a decidedly less than optimal start. I'm not going to do anything on the level of SVC without dropping to Regent, but I can try something matching your "bad" screenshot at Monarch, I think.

2 does not contradict 1. Go back and read my original post and you'll see why.

I started quoting the original, but I'd rather not get bogged down with pedantics, so let's just say I misunderstood what you posted.

What we disagree on is this: you think that Agr. is only situationally strong...

No, maybe that's where I've gone amiss... I think Agr is "strong" on just about every map, especially since being reminded about irrigated deserts - I just disagree with...

whereas I think that Agr., despite it's map-dependency, is hands down the best trait.

That said, I do agree with the next bit. I am not nearly as experienced as you are, nor as most of the regulars here, so my opinion may be a bit newbie-tinted.

I hate to abandon my current game, but I think I'll go experiment with some bad Agr starts. Maybe I'll prove myself wrong. Maybe I should try moving up a level, though I haven't really mastered Monarch, but if the trait is that strong, maybe it wouldn't matter.

As always, utmost respect for your opinion and analysis, Dom. Maybe you're right - maybe I don't want to think it unbalanced because I want to be powerful. I'm off to experiment.
/sigh I'll probably never get back to Carthage, though. Pity, that.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by steven8r
First Ag civ: Sumer (Mesopetamia Conquest) I had lots of rivers to start, but the Babs kept me out of the fertile North, I had to settle for Arabian Desert--which became just OK AFTER irrigation.

The Conquests were thoroughly tested to ensure no position was too easy, so they're not really indicative of the power of the Agricultural trait. Play a few epic games as an Agricultural civ, then try to go back to "normal" (non-Agricultural) play. I think you'll find an appreciable difference in power level between the two.


Dominae

[The Slayer]

This is perhaps the best thread I have read in this forum. Very instructive, even for a person that the english is not his/her natural language.

But, now, I'll ask and/or think in an issue I didn't know people do it so much.

The reload of a game.

I mean, ok, surely I'll love an start with 1 iron, some luxuries and a bonues resorse.. next to a coast or a river.. without the trait you play with.

But, if I reload and reload a game.... where do you leave the "challenge" thing in the game??. When your start doesn't have any "good things" around ... ok, let's try it. Perhaps I can do it!. If I get my @** kicked, ok, I lost. I know no one wants to lost, but.. thats the challenge!!!.

If you win in this situations... god!, you're best than Sid then!

It's MHO that restarting is bad for players thamselves, cause they'll never have the "challenge" I'm talking about.

Anyway, perhaps each civ player have hisher way to became a master.

The Slayer.

(I hope you can understand me - sorry for the grammar mistakes and the like. )

[MrWhereItsAt]

Very thought-provoking first post, Dom, and some great points form others in later posts.

Admittedly, the extra food from irrigated deserts was something I didn't think of after reading post #1. However, if you remove the extra food bonus for non-fresh water cities from Monarchy onwards, you effectively consign Agricultural to having no greater effect in any government than it does in Despotism, since those cities next to fresh water get the bonus then anyway. This sounds bad to me, who thinks there should be incentives to get Ag civs to head towards more advanced government forms and building, rather than Despotic warmongering, however this may further lead towards your aim of depowering Ag.

But I would like the idea of removing the bonus food for non-freshwater cities if Ag civs started with a greater chance of being near freshwater to begin with. As ducki has made clear here, Ag is a very terrain-specific trait: if you get the good terrain you will rule, if not all you get are the half price Aqueducts (something that distinctly underwhelms me). Compare this to the bonus commerce from already commerce-rich sea cities and reduced sinking chances of Seafaring - very terrain specific. But even on Pangaea maps Seafaring has been helped along by being given that extra chance for it to be somewhat useful (if not as useful as it would be, say, on Archipelagoes) by starting where the terrain-sepcific can be used. I think the same should be for Ag - if you get a dry start you are stuffed, so to further balance Ag civs, give them a greater chance to start where their attribute can help. Then removing that food bonus for no-freshwater cities makes great sense, and IMO puts Ag back in the land of the more balanced attributes.

Additionally, this should help curb restarts too.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Aeson
Don't forget about the extra food from irrigated deserts. That in and of itself can be a lifesaver nonpareil. It takes many of the truely horrid starts and makes them at least average.

Yup - forgot about that after reading Dominae's first post. This too is of course map situational, but it is a huge safety net against the case of having lots of desert tiles nearby. You need workers to keep up with tile improvements of course, but so long as you have sufficient workers, desert tiles effectively become plains tiles for an Ag civ. Without an Ag civ, desert tiles are not worth a whole lot until RR unless all desert tiles are also nearby flood plains, allowing food from floodplains and shields from mined desert.

Catt