Uselessness of Expansionist Trait

[ShredZ]

Hmm a lot of great idea here...

Doesnt it make sense that if a Scientific Civ get half priced Libraries that an Expansionist Civ would get half priced graneries?

[Inverse Icarus]

one idea i read somewhere is to give them a special kind of settler (in addition to the origional one), that was wheeled with 2 moves.

that way they could stride plains / grasslands in no time, but wouldnt be able to cross mountains / jungles.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by ShredZ
Hmm a lot of great idea here...

Doesnt it make sense that if a Scientific Civ get half priced Libraries that an Expansionist Civ would get half priced graneries?

interesting. graneries / acquaducts / hospitals and maybe even harbors would be nice.

[Inverse Icarus]

oh, and the prices arent halved, it's less than that (Dan Magaha corrected me a while back)

[nato]

Sir Ralph - Great summary of how strong expansionist can be. I agree it can be super powerful, sometimes. Like I said it is a gamble.

However, this is part of the problem. Expansionist tends to be either super powerful, or super useless. Neither one is good for a game. I don't want a useless trait. Also, I don't want a super advantage. Getting all those things you listed would ruin the game ... why would I want such a huge advantage?

That is why expansionist is broken ... it is either too good (sometimes) or useless (most times). Both makes it unplayable.

Thats just how I see it though.

Solver - Totally right, 50% cheaper settlers would be way way too much. That is why I like the one extra food idea, it might allow less than 50% cheaper bonus.

TheEvilCheater - Thats brilliant too! Cheaper granneries would be great because it would again be similar to the scientific and religious bonuses. It also would probably be simpler and have less unintended side effects than 1 extra food. I think that is a real great idea too, good work.

This would require some calculation about how much quicker cheaper granneries would be versus just building settlers ... I think its a very good idea though.

[Pythagoras]

Originally posted by UberKruX
one idea i read somewhere is to give them a special kind of settler (in addition to the origional one), that was wheeled with 2 moves.

that way they could stride plains / grasslands in no time, but wouldnt be able to cross mountains / jungles.

I kind of favor the idea of turning the scout into a poineer unit that can explore, settle, and do worker actions the unit would be more expensive (30 shields, the cost of a settler).

[BillChin]

In my opinion, a food bonus or 20 shield settlers are too much, because they upset game balance. Remember the AI civs get these bonuses too. Imagine how fast an AI expansionist civ might go with these additional bonuses. Same with the half price granary--too big a bonus early in the game. Americans could get a granary before turn seven on many maps at 30 shields (forest cut for ten shields in 5 turns).

Half price aqueducts and hospitals sound like a great idea. These are built long after the scout and goody hut era, when expansionists civs are in a need of a boost as other civs build their cheap buildings.

I like the idea of a special two-move settler, but maybe have it cost 40 shields instead of 30.

[MosesPresley]

Originally posted by UberKruX
the goody hut bonus they get is also for early game, infact in one game as the english ( ::shiver:: ) i got 3 settlers from huts within the first 10 turns.

A quick question, not to derail this thread. Uber, what size map were you using? I have never seen a goody hut spawn a settler on a standard size map.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by MosesPresley


A quick question, not to derail this thread. Uber, what size map were you using? I have never seen a goody hut spawn a settler on a standard size map.

i was playing a large one (not huge, 1 step up from standard).

if i'm correct, only expansionist civs can get settlers from a hut.

[delsolsi]

Originally posted by MosesPresley


A quick question, not to derail this thread. Uber, what size map were you using? I have never seen a goody hut spawn a settler on a standard size map.

I just started a new game today and I had a settle spawn from a goody hut on a standard size map.

[MiloMilo]

Hmmm, lots of good ideas put forth here - I'm impressed with you guys.
I agree that the trait needs something else to balance it with the other traits...
1-pop settlers is way to much, especially considering the power of pop-rushing under despotism...
20-shield settlers is probably too much also, you could build 50% more cites if you did it right, this plus better goodie huts is way to powerful.
The 1 extra food per town is a cool idea, because it mirrors the commercial or industrious 1 extra commerce or shield per city. It also matches up well against the industrious advantage Vel has been ranting about; they can work the land faster, but an exp. civ wouldn't have to: they could work a forest tile from the beginning, for instance. Again, though, may be too powerful, when combined with better goodie huts.

So, the ideas that I like best are these three (and only one should be implemented, not all):
1) Combine the scout and worker. As someone said, pioneers didn't just explore, they chopped down trees and built houses etc. So give exp. civs a 2-move worker unit. It could explore and find huts, and also come home and work the land. You would have a land-working advantage, since they could move into a flat tile ans start working it the same turn, but it would be quite mild: 25% on some tiles, 0% on others, probably an average 0f 10% overall.
2) Give them some cheaper buildings. Most other traits get this. The logic of cheaper granaries, is pretty weak (they're expansionistic, not culinary) but its effects would go to their strength, so yeah, cheaper (2/3?) granaries. [Note, I also think commercial civs should get cheaper marketplaces and harbors, that's another trait that suffers.]
3) This is a bit radical, but: how about allowing expansionist caravels traverse ocean squares from the get-go, without Navigation. Not sure how unbalancing this would be but it would extend their advantages past the ancient age, which is what a lot of people want to do. They would have an advantage in meeting other civs, which the scout already gives them so is already approved as one of theri advantages, and would be maybe able to expand a bit more onto islands, which is, well, expansionist.

[Pythagoras]

Originally posted by MiloMilo
Hmmm, lots of good ideas put forth here - I'm impressed with you guys.
I agree that the trait needs something else to balance it with the other traits...
1-pop settlers is way to much, especially considering the power of pop-rushing under despotism...
20-shield settlers is probably too much also, you could build 50% more cites if you did it right, this plus better goodie huts is way to powerful.
The 1 extra food per town is a cool idea, because it mirrors the commercial or industrious 1 extra commerce or shield per city. It also matches up well against the industrious advantage Vel has been ranting about; they can work the land faster, but an exp. civ wouldn't have to: they could work a forest tile from the beginning, for instance. Again, though, may be too powerful, when combined with better goodie huts.

So, the ideas that I like best are these three (and only one should be implemented, not all):
1) Combine the scout and worker. As someone said, pioneers didn't just explore, they chopped down trees and built houses etc. So give exp. civs a 2-move worker unit. It could explore and find huts, and also come home and work the land. You would have a land-working advantage, since they could move into a flat tile ans start working it the same turn, but it would be quite mild: 25% on some tiles, 0% on others, probably an average 0f 10% overall.
2) Give them some cheaper buildings. Most other traits get this. The logic of cheaper granaries, is pretty weak (they're expansionistic, not culinary) but its effects would go to their strength, so yeah, cheaper (2/3?) granaries. [Note, I also think commercial civs should get cheaper marketplaces and harbors, that's another trait that suffers.]
3) This is a bit radical, but: how about allowing expansionist caravels traverse ocean squares from the get-go, without Navigation. Not sure how unbalancing this would be but it would extend their advantages past the ancient age, which is what a lot of people want to do. They would have an advantage in meeting other civs, which the scout already gives them so is already approved as one of theri advantages, and would be maybe able to expand a bit more onto islands, which is, well, expansionist.

With:

1) How would you feel about adding settling abilities to the scout and making it cost 30 shields? Also perhaps the initial scout should by removed. BTW this is pretty easy to mod, Im going to try it out my next game. Im considering giving it a defense of 1. That is they cant be captured. But its not like youd build them in abudance for worker tasks since workers are cheaper, but they do help in moving into potentially hazardous zones to build stuff.

2) I dont know about this idea. I agree it could be more powerful. Not only that but when I think about expansionist I think about exploration and settlement, mostly a non-domestic phenomenon.

3) I like this idea. Perhaps their triremes only have a 10% (or so) chance of sinking as opposed to 50%. Maybe they should get some sort of oceanic scout unit that can explore but is non-combat.

[kring]

The main problem with Scouts in my experience is they die. I like Raging Barb lvl. to increase the experience of my troops, and maybe even take out one or two of the AI troops; sometimes I lose the troops or gold.

I don't build Scouts much, I build Warriors and send them out as Scouts. I may build a couple of Scouts, but not more than that. U can get the same speed with Aztec Jag Warriors, buildable immediately, or Zulu Impi. They can both defend themselves.

I am not impressed with the Expansionist trait, and agree it tends to be superpowerful or superweak. A lot will depend on how many goody huts are near your start position/on your island or continent. Once you learn all the early age techs, not much use for the trait.

[MiloMilo]

Pythagoras, I forgot to comment on the 2-move settler idea. I actually like it - you could not build more cities, just get them where they need to go faster, and thus choose better city sites. So, in effect you would not expand faster or more, you would expand better. Which is what they should do.

I see the problem with combining scouts and workers: you'd need to give up a pop point to make a scout.

Yes, for ships, you could just tweak the chances for sinking. I think this should be changed anyway. For most civs it should be 66% or 75%, but for expansionist civs it could be 33% or so. That would work nicely. Do we know if this can be done in the editor?

I agree with Kring that scouts should be 0/1/2, not 0/0/2.

[Pythagoras]

Originally posted by MiloMilo
Pythagoras, I forgot to comment on the 2-move settler idea. I actually like it - you could not build more cities, just get them where they need to go faster, and thus choose better city sites. So, in effect you would not expand faster or more, you would expand better. Which is what they should do.

I see the problem with combining scouts and workers: you'd need to give up a pop point to make a scout.

Yes, for ships, you could just tweak the chances for sinking. I think this should be changed anyway. For most civs it should be 66% or 75%, but for expansionist civs it could be 33% or so. That would work nicely. Do we know if this can be done in the editor?

I agree with Kring that scouts should be 0/1/2, not 0/0/2.

How about a pioneer: settler w/ 2 movement and worker skills and 1 defence separate from the scout unit.

I think the ship idea might be hard to do, maybe if you created a seperate unit.