Simply put captilism (3v) is way stronger than distributism (2.5v) which is way stronger than colbertism (1.5v??). These trcikles should be rebalances so that all trickles are at 2.5vilss. Many civs are carry way too much momentum with 2 cards in age 1 due to TP and high XP treasure/guardians map meta.
tldr nerf capitalism, buff colbertism.
What about the ## ## Spain?? that they nerfed the war dogs, Spanish gold and the experience 3 times? They nerf capitalism and hinder its beginning since it is practically one of the cards that it uses the most, if you are going to nerf capitalism it reverses all those stupid nerfs, especially the war dogs
I’d say just buff the food trickle to ~2.5 vills. Others are probably fine
THat would buff french by a lot because they have Quiche. Decks with 2 trickle cards are pretty dangerous in supremacy that is…But for dutch its fine.
We are talkin food trickle of course.
For others like Capitalism and distributism. Those cards are decent tempo cards and civs with less eco cards need them, For example ottoman only has 2 estate cards and has no coin source late game except estates and they need it to have a decent age 2 and age 3 fight too. Even worse as well is Spain which doesnt have eco theory and it kinda takes time for their eco to take shape even with Spanish Gold.
Any reduction done to those 2 trickles would damage overall game balance.
Exactly, in my opinion Colbertism in any case should not be improved because it could give a push to pass through civilizations more quickly. Also the case of China is even more shocking since the civilization can access the
3 drips with the German consulate
Trickles should just be 1.5 res value as a benchmark, and then we can adjust it to 2 vils worth (2.5 if streching it) if its under I think.
It should be worse then a 3 vil shipment at first glance.
we can just not change it for china, they are seperate techs they dont need to be the same
Simply put captilism (3v) is way stronger than distributism (2.5v)
its not because wood is a finite resource.
if you think nerfing the 80% HP increase from age 2 to age 3 was a “poor” balance decision then please go seek help from your local doctor xD
dont worry about that, the costs would change to acomodate, i.e. food becomes more expensive, wood remains the same and coin gets cheaper? I cant rememebr if ger consulate still has access to capitalism or if its the generic 1.3g/s gold trickle (which is terrible). Ger consulate is not really in the china play book these days.
again not related. If we are consideirng wood being finite then we assume we have age 4 / age 5 eco with upgrade vills and facxtories which makes the benefit of these cards even less. considering vills can definitlyy reach 1.1w/s with all techs + teco theroy your age 1 card is now 1 vill worth of eco. Just No impact late game
That nerf was not bad, on its own it was the accumulation of the 3, the unit to fight in age 2 is horrible, practically it is only a little decent in age 3 because Spain almost always does FF, so you fight with statistical units in age 3 vs units with age 2 statistics, but getting to the point, does anyone complain about capitalism besides you? Capitalism was improved in the patch that the US arrived as a playable civ, the truth is that no one complained, my suspicions are that this buff was to improve the BO with the US at that time, with capitalism and Dutch immigrants,
It indirectly benefited Spain in its BO, but later Spain got its respective nerf, without using the card I feel like it’s shit, Ottomans also got its nerf, Germany never used it, anyway the card doesn’t have a tremendous impact either and there are not 3 villagers, I don’t know why there is any need to exaggerate, the card is more or less 2.6 anyway if you make improvements from the market in gold it drops to fewer villagers, so it drips at a certain point in medium or high long games , it is a garbage economic card, there is its punishment for me, you are just exaggerating for having a bad game against a player who used it
come on man, its not just the one game ahaha xD
I’ve made my piece. Ottomans need way more nerfs but thats a different convo.
What if Spain gets an early game buff in exchange ?
What if France loses Corbatism ?
But it shouldnt make a big difference for China if the one tickle gets nerfed (gold) while another one gets buffed (food).
Then maybe the other resource generation systems could be balanced to match that ?
Currently, the european factories, the japanese shrines, and the chinese porcelaine tower wonder all provide the same tickles of coin and wood.
why?
most people are going to put their factories on wood anyhow, i dont see why the game should encourage other choices by say buffing food income from factories, it is without doubt going to cause some edge cases like fur trade being too strong if you do it. factories as they are are simple, a passive income of a resource of your choosing.
Why not ?
I am not saying it should absolutely be done, I am just challenging the consistency of your argumentation.
I read your comment as “it is fair that the woid tickle is worth less vil/s than the coin tickle because wood is scarse”. Then I see no reason why the same wouldnt be valid for other resourse generation.
If your argument were for instance “I am conservative and dont like balance changes overall”, this would be a totally valid argument. But this is not what your point is about
well because a useless option is useless. Then why buffing a useless unit or nerfing an OP civ at all ? Just let people play OP units… Similar principle…
I dont see the “fur trade” exploit as a big deal… And if it is, then I dont see why keeping the status quo would be better than removing this card from french or nerfing their (very strong) late game.
This argument if yours sounds like “we shouldnt fix this one problem becauae otherwise we would have to fix minoe exploits as well”… It shouldnt be that hard and time comsuming to recognize exploits (especiqlly with multiple patches per year) and do what I would call " improve the overall game experience"…
Simple for you, a experimented player, not for beginners.
Adjusting the incomes would keep the same principle “choose the resource you want”, but beginners wouldnt be mislead than this is not an actual choice and anything but wood is a mistake…
It may be a lot of small work to to to keep balance while updating the tickles value, but we already got way bigger balance patches that altered the balance way much…
They already have that, dont they ?
PichulaJr seemed to be complaing that a nerf to the coin tickle would make Spain too weak, right ?
I never heard that coin tickle was popular as a (2nd ?) shipment.
If this recently became the norm, I wouldnt see a problem in giving Spain a minor buff to compensate…
If not, well then no buff needed.
Anyways, reveiving 3 vils earlier isnt enough by itseld to make the civ top tier… Just like, for example, slow shipmemts of 3 settler wagons age 1 and Uhlans per shipments starting from age 2 isnt enough by itself to make Germans top tier…
Plus Sumptuary Laws please
my argument is more that the wood trickle is valuable as is, and probably the only one of the 3 i will consistently take.
i think it is completely fine game design wise that some choices are better than others as long as civs overall are balanced. likewise im completely fine with the game having fun but unoptimal cards, or even “noob trap” cards.
in some cases its not useless, its just that in the majority of cases you want to produce wood as food is significantly easier to gather in industrial age, back when the game came out i used food and coin more often on factions like sweden in treaty because i would use the coin to trade and then only get food from my houses+factories post trade.
there are other trades in the game, like ottomans food to wood.
its not a problem, the mechanic as is easy to understand, its just that some resources are usually worth more than others.
this is a self invented issue.
which is why we shouldnt make the values different making the mechanic harder for newer players to use. factories are fairly straight forward.
should we also bar people from making more than 5 mills so they dont make an unoptimal amount of mills?
this is again a self invented issue. new players will simply choose the resource they need the most, which is the point.
a civilização tem a conversão rapida demais, muito quebrada, o cara consegue te rushar e avançar de era bem cedo no jogo , sem ate ai não vejo problemas oque acho desequilibrado é o fato deles converterem undiades rapido demais,eu tenho o rec game mas não sei como enviar para o pessoal analisar a partida
what does this have to do with the thread?