Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AU mod: The Agricultural trait

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AU mod: The Agricultural trait

    The Problem:

    The Agricultural trait provides one extra food in the center tile of each city, which is not subject to the Despotism penalty for cities adjacent to rivers. The trait also provides cheaper Aqueducts, Solar Plants, and Recycling Centers, and gives an extra food from irrigated desert.

    With early growth being so important in Civ3, the above advantages result in Agricultural being the most powerful trait in the game, and often results in a game one difficulty level lower (or even more).

    Since the AU mod is intended primarily for single player mode, unbalanced traits are not an urgent issue. However, balanced traits do encourage variety in play style and civ selection.

    Possible Solution:

    The real power of the Agricultural trait comes not directly from population growth, but more specifically from the ability to set up more powerful Settler and Worker pumps.

    The extra food from the center tile means that you need a food surplus of just 4 per turn from the rest of the tiles to set up a 4-turn Settler pump, which frees your Agricultural citizens to work some high production/low food tiles to get the necessary production for 30 shields in time. If we increase the shield cost of the Settler for Agricultural civs, then it might sometimes become necessary to sacrifice even more food to get more shields in order to get the required production for a Settler pump. You might have to mine a plains tile instead of irrigating it, or use a forest tile instead of a grassland tile, for example. That would push the food surplus back to the levels of non-Agricultural civs.

    Therefore, the proposed solution is:

    Increase Settler cost to 35 shields for Agricultural civilizations.

    I think this change would be enough to reduce the early-game advantage of Agricultural civilizations just enough for the trait to come back in line with the other traits in Civ3 (except Seafaring, of course, but that’s for another thread )

    By the way, the AI would benefit from a Settler shield cost increase, as it often waits on towns to grow to sufficient size with a Settler already completed.

    So do you agree that the Agricultural trait is the most powerful trait in the game? Do we need to balance it in this mod? Do you have any ideas to balance it? Do you think the above solution is too drastic, or not drastic enough? Please comment!


    Background reading: On the Agricultural trait, by Dominae.

  • #2
    Regardless of the drastic-ness of the proposed solution, my question is this: is it possible to create a "common" unit with a different cost for specific civilizations? Wouldn't we end up having to create a special "Ag Settler" unit for just those civs?
    I make movies. Come check 'em out.

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes, of course.

      Probably a "Settler " (with a space at the end of the name), with the same animation as Settlers, but unbuildable by everyone except Agricultural civs.

      Comment


      • #4
        Why 35? Would this still allow an Agr. civ to have a 4-turn pump on identical terrain to a non-Agr. civ that could get a 4-turn pump?

        So do you agree that the Agricultural trait is the most powerful trait in the game? Do we need to balance it in this mod? Do you have any ideas to balance it? Do you think the above solution is too drastic, or not drastic enough? Please comment!
        AU 502 is likely to elicit a lot of responses and opinions on these matters, with so many "good" players all working from an identical Argicultural start, good timing.
        "Just once, do me a favor, don't play Gray, don't even play Dark... I want to see Center-of-a-Black-Hole Side!!! " - Theseus nee rpodos

        Comment


        • #5
          There seems to be a problem that you missed: If there is no water nearby, then that civ is going to have a disadvantage instead of being in line with the other civs. A change in cost is never going to be fare all of the time.
          Is it possible to get rid of the extra food from the city tile? I doubt it, but if possible...

          EDIT 1)Cross post(ish)
          2) Agricultural is powerful, but it's the combination with Industrius that makes the strongest REX in the game (with the a 4-turn settler pump)
          You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ducki
            Why 35? Would this still allow an Agr. civ to have a 4-turn pump on identical terrain to a non-Agr. civ that could get a 4-turn pump?
            Only if the city in question is on the limit in terms of getting enough shields for the pump. And strictly speaking, it would be identical for a 5-turn pump in this case.

            AU 502 is likely to elicit a lot of responses and opinions on these matters
            Yes, I know, hence the timing of this thread.
            No time to make a change before 502 anyway.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Krill
              A change in cost is never going to be fare all of the time.
              I agree. But the agricultural trait is so powerful now that on average it's still going to be a great trait, even after the proposed change. See Dominae's thread linked from the first post for examples of how often to expect a bad start as an Agricultural civ.

              Is it possible to get rid of the extra food from the city tile? I doubt it, but if possible...
              If only it were...

              Comment


              • #8
                Whether or not '35 shields' is the correct magic number - I do not know, but the fundemental idea is very sound.

                Ision
                Civilization is the progress toward a society of privacy. The savage's whole existence is public, ruled by the laws of his tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men.

                Comment


                • #9
                  One other thing:

                  Originally posted by Krill
                  If there is no water nearby, then that civ is going to have a disadvantage instead of being in line with the other civs.
                  In that case, your early Settler pumps will likely be limited by the available food, not shields, so the 30 to 35 shield difference will not matter for a pump. The Agricultural trait will not really be worse off by the change, and not only that, but the extra food once you exit Despotism will give you a population boom that will make it very much worthwhile to have to pay an extra 5 shields per settler in the beginning.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Any way to have that extra food from the city square ALWAYS get eaten by despotism, instead of the current situation, where you get the bonus food if you're on fresh water?

                    Also, I think if you really want to discuss the balance (or lack thereof) of the trait, maybe AU should do a course with an Agricultural civ that has a non-river/lake start. Not a hellhole, mind you, just a start where your first city or two will not have fresh water.

                    -Arrian
                    grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

                    The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I could always modify AU502's capitol area a bit.
                      "Just once, do me a favor, don't play Gray, don't even play Dark... I want to see Center-of-a-Black-Hole Side!!! " - Theseus nee rpodos

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Personally, I don't think modifying civ traits fits well with the purposes of the AU Mod. The selection of what civ to play is not a strategic choice within the game, but rather is part of the choice of what flavor of game a player wants, just as the selections of map size and type and barbarian settings are. Players who don't like the power of the Agricultural triat can easily deal with the issue either by not playing Agricultural civs or by restarting until they find a starting position that won't make the Agricultural trait more powerful than they want it to be. Similarly, AU game designers can factor the trait's power into their design decisions when they set up AU games using Agricultural civs.

                        But if we sabotage the trait with something like more-expensive settlers, the only way players could deal with the sabotage would be either to modify the Mod themselves for their own use (if they have the skills and willingness to tinker) or to play standard rules instead of using the Mod. That would raise some interesting issues even if we could find an elegant solution that makes the Agricultural trait less powerful without ever making it (at least in the early game) a liability. If we can't find anything more elegant than making settlers more expensive for all of an Agricultural civ's cities - including cities without fresh water - the situation is even more problematical.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by alexman

                          In that case, your early Settler pumps will likely be limited by the available food, not shields, so the 30 to 35 shield difference will not matter for a pump.
                          Unless, of course, the city is one that could be a nice settler pump whether the civ was Agricultural or not. Four-turn settler pumps did not originate with the introduction of the Agricultural trait. Six-turn pumps can also be constrained by shields under some circumstances, especially if corruption eats a couple shields and the player doesn't want to bump up the luxury slider just for a single city.

                          Granted, a civ could usually (but not always) find it practical to use such cities as worker pumps and get its settlers elsewhere. But if I had to do that because of a special change in the Mod, I would be annoyed to an extent totally out of proportion to the actual impact on my gameplay.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I agree that - since the Settler is not a UU - changing its cost is inelegant at best. There's no way we could balance the cost so as not to disadvantage Agricultural in certain situations during the phase of the game that - IMO - it is most suited to have the advantage.

                            Color me stodgy.

                            I'll withhold further comment, though, until after AU502.
                            "Just once, do me a favor, don't play Gray, don't even play Dark... I want to see Center-of-a-Black-Hole Side!!! " - Theseus nee rpodos

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Ducki seams 100% right...leave the conversation until after 502. Therefore, Ducki, why not release the game right about, oh, I don't know, now?
                              Last edited by Krill; March 16, 2004, 13:09.
                              You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X