$10.00
Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
30 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Sid Meier's Civilization: The Board Game» Forums » Variants

Subject: New Techs rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Henning
Sweden
flag msg tools
Hi all,

I need some feedback on three new techs I have made. There's a lot of combined experience and wisdom in these forums so I think posting this here is the right thing to do.

Example of questions I would like to discuss are:

* Are they balanced compared to other techs in the same level?
* Will they strongly favour or punish a certain nation or combination of great persons etc.?
* Will they mess up game balance in general?


Disclaimer 1: I haven't done any play testing at all so some abilities might be off.

Disclaimer 2: They are designed with FaF expansion in mind but I guess they could be used with the base game as well.

Disclaimer 3: If you recognize some of the tech abilities, it's probably stolen from another thread. I frequently take inspiration from these forums.


All comments are welcome except "Why are you trying to fix the game, it's perfect as it is!" type of comments.







Some clarifications about Warrior Code:

If both players have Warrior Code, the attacking player decides first which unit to replace. The defending player may not choose to replace this replacement unit. Replacement units are drawn from the same deck as the unit they replace.

Depending on where the battle is fought different unit types will have an advantage. The terrain type in parenthesis determines which terrain type the different units are associated with. Units of the certain type from both the player and his opponent can use this ability (cannot be trumped in this battle).
If the resource ability is used, Cavalry cannot be trumped when the battle is fought in grasslands and deserts, Artillery cannot be trumped when the battle is fought on water or in city centers, and Infantry cannot be trumped in any other type of terrain (including mountains, forests, buildings, wonders and great people). Villages counts as being of the terrain type of the square under the village token.


What am I trying to achieve here?

Well, a little more variation isn't going to hurt, is it? (just as if there aren't enough options already!)

I felt that the player striving for tech victory needed more means to take fate into his/her own hands (Scientific Theory).

I also am a great fan of Agriculture and wanted to create something similar, boosting the capital so that it will stand out amongst the other (normal) cities if you choose to (Guilds).

Warrior Code was created mainly because I wanted an level 1 tech (since I made a level 2 and 3 already), but also because I loved Vetinari's Simple Unit Upgrade variant and wanted to incorporate this into the game without any extra rules.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dragan Lujic
Denmark
flag msg tools
Hinnyboy wrote:


* Will they strongly favour or punish a certain nation or combination of great persons etc.?


Not really something you should worry about, if you ask me. Especially since techs are numerous and optional, and judging from previous discussions around here, different players have different "favourite starting techs" and whatnot already. If anything, seeing as how your ideas generally seem intelligent and distinguishable from FFG's, it's only good that your ideas will give players MORE options. For those whose love for this board game has roots in the PC version, the tech-aspect of FFG's version could seem undersized in comparison..


Hinnyboy wrote:


Disclaimer 3: If you recognize some of the tech abilities, it's probably stolen from another thread. I frequently take inspiration from these forums.


That's great, and I do the same when developing my own custom ideas. After all, it's always easy to like your own ideas.

As for the tech cards themselves:

Hinnyboy wrote:

If both players have Warrior Code, the attacking player decides first which unit to replace. The defending player may not choose to replace this replacement unit. Replacement units are drawn from the same deck as the unit they replace.



WARRIOR CODE:

In your example (above) and the phrasing of the card itself taken into consideration, I understand it as: No matter what, if the attacker selects one of the defender's units, he decides between:

a) Force defender to discard and replace
or
b) Force defender to keep that particular unit

But isn't it so that both these options affect a defender without Warrior Code anyways? So the Warrior Code hasn't much value, especially when it applies to one unit per battle.

I like the core idea, but I suggest re-defining the ability to reward military SUCCESS instead of just AGGRESSION and perhaps tying it to coins, to make it a little progressive:

"Each time you win a battle, you may replace 1 surviving unit (either your or opponent's) for every 4 coins you have on the dial (max. 3). Winner may not use alle three replacements on same player. If battle loser also has Warrior Code he may immunize 1 unit for every 5 coins on the dial, when he has 2+ surviving units. When both winner and loser have their respective replacement-abilities, they switch turns for every "replacement/immnunization" with defender going first when he has 2+ surviving units."

The resource ability is really cool, perhaps you could make it more flexible by making it iron/silk optionable?


GUILDS:

Really neat first ability. I suppose it's great for unusually drawn out games (where one might build a lot) or just plain old civ-maniacs!

Second ability: Not too sure if the incremental cost is worth it, especially compared to other cards that store coins. My suggestion: Keep the cost at 14, but just that and max. 4 coins.

Suggestions (third/alternative abilities):
- Gain a coin/investment marker each time one of your cities meets the following condition: 2 starred buildings and/or 2 wonders.

- All city outskirt squares that give 1 production give 2 instead.


SCIENTIFIC THEORY:

Best one out of the three, though I feel the first ability would be even cooler if it was 2 production for 1 trade and appplicable as well when you spend less production than available in a city.



1 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
MC BP
Denmark
flag msg tools
Hmm, that guild tech is quite interesting! And seeing as I feel like it's something I'd like to take sometimes, but definitely not every time, it seems well-balanced.

I also like how scientific theory makes a tech victory a more viable strategy for non-russians.

I might try those once I get a few more games under my belt, to add extra variety to the game
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dragan Lujic
Denmark
flag msg tools
BP90 wrote:
Hmm, that guild tech is quite interesting! And seeing as I feel like it's something I'd like to take sometimes, but definitely not every time, it seems well-balanced.

I also like how scientific theory makes a tech victory a more viable strategy for non-russians.

I might try those once I get a few more games under my belt, to add extra variety to the game


Mener du Henning eller mig? whistle
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henning
Sweden
flag msg tools
First of all, thanks for the feedback! You have some good ideas there, it made me think a lot.


UbikValis wrote:

Hinnyboy wrote:

If both players have Warrior Code, the attacking player decides first which unit to replace. The defending player may not choose to replace this replacement unit. Replacement units are drawn from the same deck as the unit they replace.



WARRIOR CODE:

In your example (above) and the phrasing of the card itself taken into consideration, I understand it as: No matter what, if the attacker selects one of the defender's units, he decides between:

a) Force defender to discard and replace
or
b) Force defender to keep that particular unit

But isn't it so that both these options affect a defender without Warrior Code anyways? So the Warrior Code hasn't much value, especially when it applies to one unit per battle.


I'm sorry I don't understand what you mean.

Just to clarify the ability:
A player with Warrior Code may replace one of his surviving units after a battle. The idea is that he may discard a weak unit (strength 1) and replace it with a fresh unit of the same type (artillery, cavalry, infantry or aircraft) this new unit is a random draw so you may draw another weak (strength 1) unit or most probably a medium strength unit (strength 2) and if your are really lucky you might end up with a strong unit (strength 3). This represents the units getting more experience and veteran status. Of course there is nothing that will stop you from discarding a medium strength unit (strength 2) and hoping to draw a strong unit (strength 3), but you might instead end up with a weak unit (strength 1) so this is not always a good idea.

Alternatively you may force your opponent to discard one of his surviving units after a battle. You would be wise to choose one of his strong units. He must then draw a replacement and chances are that it will have lower strength than the discarded one. This represents wounds or casualties that will weaken the enemy unit.

The thing is, I thought it would be a good idea to prevent you from choosing the same unit as your opponent chose just before. But on second thoughts it seams putting in such a restriction only confuse. So I think I will strike that part.


UbikValis wrote:

I like the core idea, but I suggest re-defining the ability to reward military SUCCESS instead of just AGGRESSION


Hmm, your suggestion would certainly simplify the clarification part, the looser cannot use this ability, period.
Although I do kind of like the idea that even if one doesn't manage to defeat a single unit one were still able to weaken ones opponent. A military underdog should perhaps also make use of this ability in my opinion. I have to give it some more thought.

UbikValis wrote:

"Each time you win a battle, you may replace 1 surviving unit (either your or opponent's) for every 4 coins you have on the dial (max. 3). Winner may not use alle three replacements on same player. If battle loser also has Warrior Code he may immunize 1 unit for every 5 coins on the dial, when he has 2+ surviving units. When both winner and loser have their respective replacement-abilities, they switch turns for every "replacement/immnunization" with defender going first when he has 2+ surviving units."

While I am a fan of the coin related abilities, I find it really hard to put all this text into one card. In addition, this ability will only be useful to the winner. I feel the looser really gets punished enough already as it is.

UbikValis wrote:

The resource ability is really cool, perhaps you could make it more flexible by making it iron/silk optionable?

Thanks!

I am reluctant to introduce a new mechanic to the game so I think it is better not to have "either of two resources" option. Maybe it would work if I changed it to "any resource" (question mark) instead. But than again I'm not sure this ability isn't over powered as it is already.

UbikValis wrote:

GUILDS:
Really neat first ability. I suppose it's great for unusually drawn out games (where one might build a lot) or just plain old civ-maniacs!

Second ability: Not too sure if the incremental cost is worth it, especially compared to other cards that store coins. My suggestion: Keep the cost at 14, but just that and max. 4 coins.

Thanks again!

Funny thing is that your suggestion was my first iteration of the card almost exactly. But then I figured that if one had one's city developed enough to manage 14 production it is probably really easy to do it again the next turn as well. This would cause 3 really easy coins without just a minor cost (a city action, and perhaps a grain resource), after the first coin. I didn't want this card to just add to the existing coin creating cards so that it would make economic victory that much faster. I wanted to create a different route to take when choosing "the way of the coin". I purposely made the curve quite steep so that a typical player wouldn't get more than one or two coins, but if you had some serious production capabilities you could at last use it for something useful.

UbikValis wrote:

Suggestions (third/alternative abilities):
- Gain a coin/investment marker each time one of your cities meets the following condition: 2 starred buildings and/or 2 wonders.


What would be the purpose to this? I feel that having 2 wonders and 2 starred buildings at the same time could potentially be very powerful already, I don't think we will need to encourage players any further.

UbikValis wrote:

- All city outskirt squares that give 1 production give 2 instead.


That's a cool ability. Problem is that the card is really crammed as it is. This could perhaps be a base for another tech card! Fertilizer perhaps (already a civ 5 tech)?


UbikValis wrote:

SCIENTIFIC THEORY:

Best one out of the three, though I feel the first ability would be even cooler if it was 2 production for 1 trade and appplicable as well when you spend less production than available in a city.


You are probably right, maybe 3 to 1 ratio is a bit weak. I will probably change to your suggestion in my next iteration. Thanks!

I am not sure of your other suggestion though, I have to give it a bit more thought...


Thanks again for your comments, they are really appreciated!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henning
Sweden
flag msg tools
Sid Meier's Civilization: The Board Game » Forums » Variants
Re: New Techs
BP90 wrote:
Hmm, that guild tech is quite interesting! And seeing as I feel like it's something I'd like to take sometimes, but definitely not every time, it seems well-balanced.

I also like how scientific theory makes a tech victory a more viable strategy for non-russians.

I might try those once I get a few more games under my belt, to add extra variety to the game


Thank you!

Pleas let me know if you give them a try.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Iron James Rackham
msg tools
mbmbmb
Quote:
Alternatively you may force your opponent to discard one of his surviving units after a battle. You would be wise to choose one of his strong units. He must then draw a replacement and chances are that it will have lower strength than the discarded one. This represents wounds or casualties that will weaken the enemy unit.

I think the ability needs to be reworded. In its current state it sounds like you get the new unit, regardless of whose unit was discarded.

Quote:
The thing is, I thought it would be a good idea to prevent you from choosing the same unit as your opponent chose just before. But on second thoughts it seams putting in such a restriction only confuse. So I think I will strike that part.

I would have assumed you draw the replacement directly to your hand (standing forces). If that was the case, you wouldn't have that problem.

All in all, cool techs!
1 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Everett Scheer
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Before my critique, I just wanted to say that I enjoy the spirit behind these techs, as they address strategic decision space that are not yet available in the game.

IMO Warrior code being able to switch out your opponents units (at tech lvl 1) is a bit too strong. Having terrain specific abilities are interesting, but combersome IMO. My reworking of Warrior Code would be:

After the winner of a battle has been decided, you may destroy one of your remaining units to draw one of the same type from the supply.

(Iron) Battle: When playing a unit from hand, remove its type for the remainder of the battle.

Guilds seems balanced to me. I agree that the increasing cost on the coins is probably too steep. It's quite difficult to get 14 hammers in a city early enough to "break" the coin generation. In addition, 14 hammers could go towards wonders that do more. Put a once per turn and limit 4 on it, and it will be balanced.

SM's first ability could be too strong if not changed to once city per turn. In doing so, you could reduce the cost to 2H per T.

The resource ability of SM needs to be clearer on how you split the trade to purchase 2 techs. Is it 6 per level 1, 11 per lvl 2, etc.?

As I was thinking about SM, I was thought of another way to accelerate tech purchasing. The below was what I came up with, which I assume is very similar to your resource ability on SM.

Whenever you research a technology, you no longer spend all your trade. Instead pay 6 T for a lvl 1, 11T Lvl 2, 16T for lvl 3, 21T for Lvl 4 and 26T for lvl 5.

(?)(?) research: You may research a second tech this turn.

eidt: minor rewording and typos
1 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dragan Lujic
Denmark
flag msg tools
Hinnyboy wrote:

Just to clarify the ability:
A player with Warrior Code may replace one of his surviving units after a battle. The idea is that he may discard a weak unit (strength 1) and replace it with a fresh unit of the same type (artillery, cavalry, infantry or aircraft) this new unit is a random draw so you may draw another weak (strength 1) unit or most probably a medium strength unit (strength 2) and if your are really lucky you might end up with a strong unit (strength 3). This represents the units getting more experience and veteran status. Of course there is nothing that will stop you from discarding a medium strength unit (strength 2) and hoping to draw a strong unit (strength 3), but you might instead end up with a weak unit (strength 1) so this is not always a good idea.

Alternatively you may force your opponent to discard one of his surviving units after a battle. You would be wise to choose one of his strong units. He must then draw a replacement and chances are that it will have lower strength than the discarded one. This represents wounds or casualties that will weaken the enemy unit.

The thing is, I thought it would be a good idea to prevent you from choosing the same unit as your opponent chose just before. But on second thoughts it seams putting in such a restriction only confuse. So I think I will strike that part.


UbikValis wrote:

The resource ability is really cool, perhaps you could make it more flexible by making it iron/silk optionable?

Thanks!

I am reluctant to introduce a new mechanic to the game so I think it is better not to have "either of two resources" option. Maybe it would work if I changed it to "any resource" (question mark) instead. But than again I'm not sure this ability isn't over powered as it is already.



Now that you've explained how the first Warrior Code ability works, I feel it doesn't need any changes. Disregard my blah-blah.

As for the extra resource option for the second ability: Your original definition is better than using "any resource" since this would make the ability too easy/overpowered. So either stick to your definition or use my suggestion of "X or Y resource"...


Hinnyboy wrote:

GUILDS...)

Funny thing is that your suggestion was my first iteration of the card almost exactly. But then I figured that if one had one's city developed enough to manage 14 production it is probably really easy to do it again the next turn as well. This would cause 3 really easy coins without just a minor cost (a city action, and perhaps a grain resource), after the first coin. I didn't want this card to just add to the existing coin creating cards so that it would make economic victory that much faster. I wanted to create a different route to take when choosing "the way of the coin". I purposely made the curve quite steep so that a typical player wouldn't get more than one or two coins, but if you had some serious production capabilities you could at last use it for something useful.

UbikValis wrote:

Suggestions (third/alternative abilities):
- Gain a coin/investment marker each time one of your cities meets the following condition: 2 starred buildings and/or 2 wonders.


What would be the purpose to this? I feel that having 2 wonders and 2 starred buildings at the same time could potentially be very powerful already, I don't think we will need to encourage players any further.


UbikValis wrote:

- All city outskirt squares that give 1 production give 2 instead.





First of all, my alternative suggestions for Guilds are based on two assumptions:

1) Your definition of the increasing cost is too steep. (Here, maybe a compromise between your original idea and suggestions in this thread are all that is needed...maybe an increasing cost of just 2 production per coin is enough. But even then, paying 20 production (or 26!) for one final coin on the card seems wasteful. Especially compared to what else you can get out of 20-26 production if you have Engineering!)

2) There are perhaps enough cards in the original game that allow you to gather and store coins. So my suggestion regarding the starred buildings and wonders, is merely an attempt to work around the standard "Do/achieve X, and put coin here" bonus.

But, now that I think of it, since your Guilds is a Level II tech, allowing the player to break the rules regarding starred buildings and wonders is quite powerful in and of itself. Maybe, this rule-breaking should be all that Guilds allows you to?


Hinnyboy wrote:

UbikValis wrote:

- All city outskirt squares that give 1 production give 2 instead.


That's a cool ability. Problem is that the card is really crammed as it is. This could perhaps be a base for another tech card! Fertilizer perhaps (already a civ 5 tech)?


Thanks you as well. I assume you're the one who gave me my first "geek gold tip" here, what an honour. cool

Regarding "Fertilizer":

Haven't tried Civ 5 yet (since I'm using a sh!tty old pc I can't afford replacing right now... ) but I have been trying to develop my own new techs for this game. Would it be alright if I posted them in your thread here, thereby making it a thread to discuss - as you so aptly titled it - NEW techs?

Maybe we could collaborate on making a custom tech pack? Or, if you could help me visualize my ideas, since you seem to know yoour way around photoshopping programs and the like....and I know jacksh!t in that department. (I will be able to pay you in geek gold in a few weeks' time.)
1 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henning
Sweden
flag msg tools
ironJames wrote:
Quote:
Alternatively you may force your opponent to discard one of his surviving units after a battle. You would be wise to choose one of his strong units. He must then draw a replacement and chances are that it will have lower strength than the discarded one. This represents wounds or casualties that will weaken the enemy unit.


I think the ability needs to be reworded. In its current state it sounds like you get the new unit, regardless of whose unit was discarded.


You are probably right about this. I will try to rephrase it in the next version. Thanks!

ironJames wrote:

Quote:
The thing is, I thought it would be a good idea to prevent you from choosing the same unit as your opponent chose just before. But on second thoughts it seams putting in such a restriction only confuse. So I think I will strike that part.

I would have assumed you draw the replacement directly to your hand (standing forces). If that was the case, you wouldn't have that problem.

Yes that is true!
ironJames wrote:

All in all, cool techs!

Thanks!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henning
Sweden
flag msg tools
Elgar wrote:
Before my critique, I just wanted to say that I enjoy the spirit behind these techs, as they address strategic decision space that are not yet available in the game.

I am happy you think so!

Elgar wrote:

IMO Warrior code being able to switch out your opponents units (at tech lvl 1) is a bit too strong. Having terrain specific abilities are interesting, but combersome IMO. My reworking of Warrior Code would be:

After the winner of a battle has been decided, you may destroy one of your remaining units to draw one of the same type from the supply.

(Iron) Battle: When playing a unit from hand, remove its type for the remainder of the battle.


Yes you have a point in it being too strong for a level 1 tech. Especially if combined with the second ability. Though I like both abilities, but maybe they shouldn't be on the same card. They are both also fairly complex. Maybe I should have them on two separate techs.

Perhaps the second is a bit cumbersome as you say. I wanted to give the terrain a little more purpose than just the number of production/trade/culture and determining the type of building that can be placed there. It also creates a tactical depth in choosing where to fight that I think is missing.

Elgar wrote:

Guilds seems balanced to me. I agree that the increasing cost on the coins is probably too steep. It's quite difficult to get 14 hammers in a city early enough to "break" the coin generation. In addition, 14 hammers could go towards wonders that do more. Put a once per turn and limit 4 on it, and it will be balanced.


I really disagree on this one, I meant it to be a steep cost increment otherwise will every player that have researched this tech end the game with either zero coins or four coins on the card. This card is designed to generate 1 or perhaps 2 coins. If a civilization really devotes a city to production can it generate 3, 4 or more coins.

Elgar wrote:

SM's first ability could be too strong if not changed to once city per turn. In doing so, you could reduce the cost to 2H per T.


Agreed. I'm going to change this. Thanks for the suggestion.

Elgar wrote:

The resource ability of SM needs to be clearer on how you split the trade to purchase 2 techs. Is it 6 per level 1, 11 per lvl 2, etc.?

As I was thinking about SM, I was thought of another way to accelerate tech purchasing. The below was what I came up with, which I assume is very similar to your resource ability on SM.

Whenever you research a technology, you no longer spend all your trade. Instead pay 6 T for a lvl 1, 11T Lvl 2, 16T for lvl 3, 21T for Lvl 4 and 26T for lvl 5.

(?)(?) research: You may research a second tech this turn.


This will eliminate the primary ability of coins and I am reluctant to do that. I think I will just add a clarification regarding this in the accompanying rules sheet. Maybe it is because I designed it myself, but I think it's pretty obvious regarding the tech costs.



Thank you for some great ideas and for your effort on commenting this!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Everett Scheer
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hinnyboy wrote:

Elgar wrote:

Guilds seems balanced to me. I agree that the increasing cost on the coins is probably too steep. It's quite difficult to get 14 hammers in a city early enough to "break" the coin generation. In addition, 14 hammers could go towards wonders that do more. Put a once per turn and limit 4 on it, and it will be balanced.


I really disagree on this one, I meant it to be a steep cost increment otherwise will every player that have researched this tech end the game with either zero coins or four coins on the card. This card is designed to generate 1 or perhaps 2 coins. If a civilization really devotes a city to production can it generate 3, 4 or more coins.


As it is, at least in my games, even the 14 hammers are better off as buildings/units. IMO with the incresing cost, this tech will always have 0 or 1 coins, as the alternative uses for the hammers are significantly more useful. Take a look at democracy and Printing press (techs at the same level); both of their costs for coins are significantly less (and don't have to come from one city).

We may have to agree to disagree on this one.
1 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henning
Sweden
flag msg tools
UbikValis wrote:

1) Your definition of the increasing cost is too steep. (Here, maybe a compromise between your original idea and suggestions in this thread are all that is needed...maybe an increasing cost of just 2 production per coin is enough. But even then, paying 20 production (or 26!) for one final coin on the card seems wasteful. Especially compared to what else you can get out of 20-26 production if you have Engineering!)


If this final coin would lead you to an economic victory it's not wasteful

UbikValis wrote:

2) There are perhaps enough cards in the original game that allow you to gather and store coins. So my suggestion regarding the starred buildings and wonders, is merely an attempt to work around the standard "Do/achieve X, and put coin here" bonus.


Fair enough! But to be really fair your suggestion is also a kind of "Do/achieve X, and put coin here".

UbikValis wrote:

But, now that I think of it, since your Guilds is a Level II tech, allowing the player to break the rules regarding starred buildings and wonders is quite powerful in and of itself. Maybe, this rule-breaking should be all that Guilds allows you to?


I kind of agree with this one, I think of the coin generating ability as an secondary ability, that is why it should not be as powerful as the coin generating one of Pottery or Democracy - you already get a powerful ability! However I find it more interesting to present a little alternative for players looking for some extra coins than to remove it altogether. I think it's more interesting this way. But it not my final word in the matter so feel free to continue the discussion

UbikValis wrote:

Thanks you as well. I assume you're the one who gave me my first "geek gold tip" here, what an honour. cool


(you can click on the yellow number to see who gave the tips)

UbikValis wrote:

Regarding "Fertilizer":

Haven't tried Civ 5 yet (since I'm using a sh!tty old pc I can't afford replacing right now... ) but I have been trying to develop my own new techs for this game. Would it be alright if I posted them in your thread here, thereby making it a thread to discuss - as you so aptly titled it - NEW techs?

Sure thing! As long as you try to bring something new into the game with each of the techs I welcome such an idea.

UbikValis wrote:
Maybe we could collaborate on making a custom tech pack? Or, if you could help me visualize my ideas, since you seem to know yoour way around photoshopping programs and the like....and I know jacksh!t in that department. (I will be able to pay you in geek gold in a few weeks' time.)

Absolutely! One condition is that we should try to make just a few quality techs instead of a lot, less thought-through ones. Agreed?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henning
Sweden
flag msg tools
Elgar wrote:

As it is, at least in my games, even the 14 hammers are better off as buildings/units. IMO with the incresing cost, this tech will always have 0 or 1 coins, as the alternative uses for the hammers are significantly more useful. Take a look at democracy and Printing press (techs at the same level); both of their costs for coins are significantly less (and don't have to come from one city).


Well it's better that it will have 0 or 1 coins on it in the end than 4, in my opinion.

The other coin generating techs still exists, so it's not beyond imagination that a player gets all 5 of them, and if my new tech would generate four coins just as easy as the others it would seriously imbalance the economic victory path in my opinion. Though mind that this is only what I think will happen, as I have not play-tested the new techs yet.

Anyway I decided to change to a starting cost of 12 instead of 14. Maybe that is a little bit better.

Elgar wrote:

We may have to agree to disagree on this one.

Or we could just continue discussing
Something good almost always comes out from such discussions.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henning
Sweden
flag msg tools
Updated versions:




I decided to skip the more complex second ability of the Warrior Code and replaced it with something simpler. Think of it as a forced march kind of thing.

Please feel free to comment!
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dragan Lujic
Denmark
flag msg tools
Hinnyboy wrote:


Fair enough! But to be really fair your suggestion is also a kind of "Do/achieve X, and put coin here".



You're right. I should have been more clear about my comment being in regards to coin-harvest-techs that require some form of resource spending to gain that coin. Which is why my suggestion is indirect and progressive as well as vulnerable, since you might lose 1 or more coins if a city gets nuked, or an opponent harasses you with Combustion. More risky arrrh


Hinnyboy wrote:


Sure thing! As long as you try to bring something new into the game with each of the techs I welcome such an idea.

Absolutely! One condition is that we should try to make just a few quality techs instead of a lot, less thought-through ones. Agreed?


Definitely agree with the quality-over-quantity principle!

Don't know how much "newness" my suggestions bring to the game, and I don't think they all do to be honest, but I did have thematics in mind when developing them. Also, since they are meant as a custom PACK of cards, several of them are related in the sense that they are intended as "booster" cards for various conditions and at various levels, but you'll see that for yourself. Comments, ideas, feedback and suggestions are more than welcome!

And your new version of the three cards are nice and concise!


CUSTOM TECH IDEAS:

Crafting (I):
- All city markers count as a 1 trade, 1 production and 1 culture marker.
- Immediately gain 1 trade and culture each time you: build a city, wonder and/or starred building

Cartography (I):
- Immediately gain 1 trade and production per city for each map tile you discover and every village conquered
- Claim all huts when stepping onto map tile with no enemy figures

Smelting (II):
- Once per battle (Before laying first card!) user decides which unit type will have +1 attack for the remainder of battle
- IRON: Once per turn, all building types cost 1/4th less (round down). All unused production from this turn may be stocked for use in any city/cities during the next turn.

Drama (II):
- Gain 1 culture each time you: build a city, wonder, starred building, battle against human opponent or place G. P. marker
- When using culture cards you regain: 1 culture for Level I cards, 1 trade and 1 culture for Level II and 3 of either for Level III cards.

Military Strategy (III):
- Figures may move one square diagonally for every 2 movement allowed (max. 3!). Diagonal move may not be an attack on army figures and cities (so villages, huts and scouts are "fair game")
- ? = (Before Battle) Reinforce any army stack with any other single army available on map.

Machinery (III):
- All units cost 1 less.
- +1 movement

Assembly Line (IV):
- City Management: gain 1 production for every 2 Mine/Workshop, Library/University, Market/Bank and Harbor on board. This "special" production stock may be spread out across your cities as you wish.
- 3 x ? = Replace 1 of each unit type (max. 3!) by drawing two and discarding one.

Corporation (IV):
- Gain 1 coin/investment for every 3 city, starred building, wonder and G. P. markers on board
- 3 x coin/investment: Gain 2 free unlocked units, regardless of city actions


Chemistry (IV):
- WHEAT/INCENSE: Once per battle, all ground units are +1 strength ("health") for remainder of battle
- Once per turn, when harvesting a resource with city action, you get another one of the same resource.

Electricity (IV):
- WHEAT/IRON (once per turn): +2 movement
- Start of Turn: Gain 1 culture, 1 trade and 1 production for every 2 city, wonder, starred building and G. P. marker on board

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
bli bla
msg tools
mbmb
Nice job done here !

The best tech is clearly "Scientif theory" ! Nicely balanced and make the tech vic reachable ! It's clearly a tech that the game needed !

Warrior code ressource ability is too strong. I explain :
Since FaF, military vic and culture vic are too strong. And a bonus of 2 mouvement (even for one turn) at the start of the game (lvl 1 tech) can decide the whole game. The player who believes he's safe from the other strong military player, will be attacked by surpise, and will lose all his troops... Then it's too late to recover and the agressive player will kill him softly (like 3 turns after).

"Guild" seems fine. The coin ability is a good idea as econ vic as been nerfed. For the purpose of 2 wonders and 2 stared building, i dunno if it will be too strong, but as it is only for the capital, i think it's balanced. Need to test it ^^
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
bli bla
msg tools
mbmb
Just one question about scientific theory. How does it work combined with "porcelain pagoda" (because on the wonder card it's stipulated : you still only can make one and only one research per turn) ?

1) cannot combined those two things (like egyptain ability and engeenering)
2) Can combined but the pagoda ability only work on one research (so -5)
3) Can combined and works on the two research (so 2x -5 -> -10)

Thx for answer.
1 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
bli bla
msg tools
mbmb
Ha i forgot one more thing !

How does scientific theory work combined with the Greeks ability : "keep your trade after research if noone researched or already researched the same tech as you" ?

1) If one of the 2 techs you choose is similar to a (or some) player tech, you loose all your trade.

2) If one of the 2 techs you choose is similar to a (or some) player tech, you only loose that tech trade cost.

-> If both the tech you choose aren't chosen and/or already chosen by others players, you still keep all your trade (that's for sure !)

Best regards !
1 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henning
Sweden
flag msg tools
Itchi wrote:
Just one question about scientific theory. How does it work combined with "porcelain pagoda" (because on the wonder card it's stipulated : you still only can make one and only one research per turn) ?

1) cannot combined those two things (like egyptain ability and engeenering)
2) Can combined but the pagoda ability only work on one research (so -5)
3) Can combined and works on the two research (so 2x -5 -> -10)

Thx for answer.


If you have porcelain tower, only one tech gets discount.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Henning
Sweden
flag msg tools
Itchi wrote:
Ha i forgot one more thing !

How does scientific theory work combined with the Greeks ability : "keep your trade after research if noone researched or already researched the same tech as you" ?

1) If one of the 2 techs you choose is similar to a (or some) player tech, you loose all your trade.

2) If one of the 2 techs you choose is similar to a (or some) player tech, you only loose that tech trade cost.

-> If both the tech you choose aren't chosen and/or already chosen by others players, you still keep all your trade (that's for sure !)

Best regards !


You cannot combine the second ability of scientific theory with the Geek ability.

Thanks for the feedback!

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
bli bla
msg tools
mbmb
thx
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
bli bla
msg tools
mbmb
One more question about these new techs ^^ : How works guild and scientific theory combined with engeerning ?

If you have enough production (like 19), can you divide it into a coin on guild tech for 12 hammers and a market with the last 7 hammers ?

Same question with scientific theory. If you have enough hammers, can you build something and get trade with the remaining hammers ?

Same question with the 3 techs combined. Can you split your hammers to get a coin on guild and use the remaining hammers to get trade with scientific theory's ability ?

Thx

Answers will stand in the new civ new tech uFAQ.


PS : i have an idea of a new tech.

Spying (Lvl 4) :
Mouvement : Use a spy to steal a technology. (As tech victory is the hardest, it won't be abuse. Furthermore, it's a lvl 4 tech so the game will probably be over before.)
Mouvement : Use a uranium to destroy 2 GP on the board. (I think it's good to have another tech with an uranium ability. And it's a good thing to have something else than culture card that can kill GP. Of course nuking a city can kill the 2 GP + the city but Spying tech can be better if you want to steal some tech in the same turn of later in the game).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Olexus
United States
Philadelphia
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Just saw this thread with these new techs. Nice work Henning, as always!

I like Warrior code, especially the new Movement function.

Guilds took me a while to understand, English is not my first language. But still spending 12 production for a single coin seems a lot, I probably would rather build a wonder. Especially considering coins are destroyed easily.

Scientific Therory is nice as well. Converting hammers to trade can be convenient and double research certainly.

Will there be a jpg or pdf file for these 'cards'? Or should we just copy/paste the pictures in this thread?


Again thanks for putting the work into new stuff... the more the better.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
bli bla
msg tools
mbmb
Actually there isn't a pdf file.
You have to measure tech card dimension and use photoshop or something else to bring these new tech to the correct dimesion before print it.

About the tech themselves. Warrior code is great to trap another player (but picking this tech makes opponent cautious about your mouvement ^^)
I love guild for an eco victory. 2 banks on the capital and can get 2 coins with production. The third coin is hard to get at 20 but guild is not a main coin producer, it gives you the one or two last coins you need.

Scientific theory is great. Tech victory is now a real alternative. With Russia, babylonian, or english, you can reach it and tied some too easy culture victory. Another advantage is that scientific theory makes the investment in tech a good invest.
Last game i won by tech in 9 turn with babylonian. (could have won in 8 but i lost 2 of my coin just before invest it cause the culture player was at my rigth...)

For some problems that can occurs with new tech, i suggest you to check this thread (uFAQ new tech new civ) : http://boardgamegeek.com/article/11127226#11127226
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.