Improving the expansionist trait

[GodKing]

I go away for a weekend.... well, lots of good ideas. Thanks. Please keep it up. I am thinking you may be right in that graineries might be unbalancing, but then so is the pyramid, which never expires. Oh well. Aquaducts appear to be good. Thanks again.

GK

[Kloreep]

Originally posted by PLATO1003

Originally posted by Louis XXIV
I like the cheaper aqueduct thing (anyone else think Commercial civs should have cheaper Marketplaces?)

I like this idea as well. It should be possible to key a reduced cost for a particular building to a civ trait. Don't they already do this with barracks and militaristic?

Yes, and Religious works the same way with Temples and Cathedrals: you get half-off normal shield cost. You can set these half-off prices in the editor, but Commercial is unfortunately the only trait that cannot be given cheaper buildings, as the flag that should indicate half-off is instead used to indicate what buildings are free with Adam Smith's.

Half-price markets would be unbalancing anyway, IMO. Commercial is already a decent trait after the 1.29 changes; if it did get cheaper buildings, I think it should be limited to Banks and Stock Exchanges, with markets still at full price.

Originally posted by GodKing
I go away for a weekend.... well, lots of good ideas. Thanks. Please keep it up. I am thinking you may be right in that graineries might be unbalancing, but then so is the pyramid, which never expires. Oh well. Aquaducts appear to be good. Thanks again.

Good point about the Pyramids... they're definitely a great wonder. But wonders at least require investment, and the Pyramids require a lot of investment considering how long, and how early, a city must be tied up with building them. Having half-cost granaries just because you pick a particular civ to start with seems even more unbalancing than the Pyramids to me.

[Carver]

A two or three move settler for expansionist civs is a great idea, but not from the begining of the game (that would be crazy). Expansionist civs should get to build an "advanced settler" with a prerequisite tech coming in the idustrial era. Of course the map is almost entirely claimed by then but the speedy settlers would help out greatly after a war with possible razing of cities and/or reduced cultural borders.

As an alternative, the advanced settlers could maintain one movement point but found cities with one free culture improvement, a temple perhaps. Thus, when founding far flung, corrupt cities you wouldn't have to worry about rushing an improvement to expand your borders.

I think one or the other would be a good improvement.

[monkspider]

I have to admit that I am one of those who really like expansionist as it is. But that said, a small tweak here and there probably wouldn't hurt.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Carver
A two or three move settler for expansionist civs is a great idea, but not from the begining of the game (that would be crazy). Expansionist civs should get to build an "advanced settler" with a prerequisite tech coming in the idustrial era. Of course the map is almost entirely claimed by then but the speedy settlers would help out greatly after a war with possible razing of cities and/or reduced cultural borders.

I like this better than a two move settler from the start. Perhaps a "Pioneer"?

[ffitzp]

I favour a 2 part fix. Philosophically, I lke to keep fixes limited. I don't want to re-write the game.
Scout gets an extra movement point. Thats a big advantage.
Exps start with map making. Hence, early harbours, triremes and map trading.
I give privaterr like stealth options to the US and GB SUs, also the Koreans.
I limit Ironclads: either slower, (3mp) or no Ocean.

[Merc]

Expansionist is useless. Getting a few free techs from huts is useful, but the more you get, the more expenisve the next tech you have to reasearch is. While you're trying to reasearch a medieval tech in 40 turns the ai's are all reasearching and trading all the other techs and catch up easily.

A different settler units would be good. With 2 movement points or less cost would actually make sense. I don't know how scouting makes a civilization expansionist.

[Louis XXIV]

Sell them all your techs, and they won't have anything to trade

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

Hi there,

I also favour a 2-part fix

1) Settlers cost expansionist civs only 1 pop point.

2) All expanionist improvements (like granaries, aqueduct and the like) are half cost!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.