Looking at these changes again, I think "a total of five" in the civil war drawbacks is not clear enough.

There should be mentioned in the rulebook that this is not cummulative.

Once you have read this once, or once you have understood this (looked it up), it might be clear, but for any new player it's still confusing when you don't clearly state it. I don't think it should be clearified on the card though.




We were thinking of lowering the cost of Provincial Empire before from 260 to 240.

How about that? Maybe changing that too is too much. Maybe it is needed...

Concerning Provincial Empire, I would like to state that it is never really needed to improve a single card. A card with a good ability that happens to be expensive may simply be not a very good card, where a card with a good ability that is cheap might be a spoiler card.

In this particular case, I am afraid that reducing the costs of this card to 240 might be too powerful. I once played this card and enjoyed it very much, even at the cost of 260.

No it's never needed in the first place, but in view of some finetuning on the red side. But I think you are right. Let's first playtest our current options.



but...
There's still some discussion about the power of Anatomy. (http://www.civproject.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=511)
Let's continue this here.


Fact is opinions vary about the power of the card. Before deciding to change anything, first we have to get this clear.

Opinions are:

- Adrian experienced that when the card is bought soon, it becomes a spoiler card. You pay 270 and get 30 green credits and 5 VP's, and you are well protected against medicine.

- Paul experienced that once you have enought to buy it, you already have all those cheap greens so that this ability is useless and therefore the card in not interesting enough for 270

- Gerart thinks that the cards is fine the way it is. 270 for this ability is the right price. better buy it soon and you get the benefits.

- Myself I along with Paul think that the card is hard to buy soon, therefore to build up credits you both get to buy the cheaper first and and side-effect you don;t get to buy it early in the game. If you buy it late in the game I agree that the ability becomes obsolete.


- Adrian suggested to make medicine a prerequisite.
- Paul suggested to change it into 'gives two 0-100 sciences or one 100-200 science'
- Gerart suggested to not change it at all.



To solve one thing:
I think make a card a prerequisite is off anyway, as that was one of the purposes of this project and the change in the advances system.
Besides Medicine is regularly bought before anatomy is bought, so I guess there is no real need for that.



Maybe the card Anatomy is a card that can only be good when you buy it early in the game and it takes some experince to see that.
Imagine what an early Provincial Empire, Monotheism or Trade Empire does. If you manage to buy cards like these early in the game without credits, these cards should change too, and I don;t think that's right.
(like written in the previous two replies. ProvEmp is 270 because of it's power)

Though this is still your own strategy. You have to go blind for this card!
To get 270 points in an earlygame also gives you disadvantage in other cards. You have to save a while and you are well procted against medicine, but not against Superstition, Civil war Flood or Cyclone or what you will.
This is a choice you make.



Therefore I think the card is not overpowered.

Like Flo, I am of the opinion that Anatomy currently is not overpowered. Someone who can spend 270 relatively early in the game can buy any card and therefore choose any strategy he wishes. This may be buying Anatomy, but may also be something completely different. Besides, having one player buying Anatomy early will not prevent any other player from doing the same if he wishes, since this card does not have any nasty special abilities.

Nevertheless, I am still of the opinion that Anatomy will be too powerful if it allows a buyer to get one Science card under 200 for free, rather than (up to) two cards under 100. For example, buying Anatomy and Calender would seriously reduce the impact of three calamities (Famine, Cyclone and Epidemic), where buying Anatomy and Medicine would make the buyer directly immune to Epidemic.

Perhaps a playtest can be performed with a slightly lower cost (260), although I still prefer to keep the card as it currently is.

What if there was another clause like this:

Upon purchase the holder immediately
acquire two Science (or dual-Science)
advances with a face value of less than
100 points each.

OR

Discounts the cost of one other
science (or dual-Science) card by 100, provided that the
card is purchased simultaneously with
Anatomy.


Certainly the advantage is to get two <100 Science cards, but if they aren't available, it doesn't make the card useless. It also doesn't allow for a "free" <200, just a discounted one.

That's a creative thought!


These are the sciences we are talking about:

Astronavigation (80) (10 green)
Coinage (90) (10 green)
Empiricism (60) (10 green) (10 to Medicine)
Written Record (60) (5 green + 5-10 optional*)

Calendar (180) (10 green)
Medicine (140) (10 green) (20 to Anatomy)
Engineering (160) (5 green)
Cartography (160) (10 green)


(* I'm counting 5 or 10 depending on the possible change of Written Record which raises the optional credits by five)
(http://www.civproject.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3641#3641)


When you want to add this ability it will be because of Paul's opinion.
that means, you already have at least three of the lowranges otherwise you could take two 0-100 sciences

That makes the following calculation:
(25-30 green credits and a 100 discount to the midranges)
(Not couting an optional 5-10 green credits for Written Record)

Calendar (50-55) (10 green)
Medicine (10-15) (10 green) (20 to Anatomy)
Engineering (30-35) (5 green)
Cartography (30-35) (10 green)


If you count Medicine with that, it makes this calculation:
(35-40 green credits and a 100 discount to the midranges)
(Not couting an optional 5-10 green credits for Written Record)

Calendar (40-45) (10 green)
Engineering (20-25) (5 green)
Cartography (20-25) (10 green)


If you regard you already have all four cheap sciences
it becomes this:
(35 green credits and a 100 discount to the midranges)
(Not couting an optional 5-10 green credits for Written Record)

Calendar (45) (10 green)
Engineering (25) (5 green)
Cartography (25) (10 green)


If you regard you already have all four cheap sciences
AND medicine: it becomes this:
(45 green credits and a 100 discount to the midranges)
(Not couting an optional 5-10 green credits for Written Record)

Calendar (35) (10 green)
Engineering (15) (5 green)
Cartography (15) (10 green)






That also gives away the three sciences left almost for free.


If we choose for this option it will be close to our first proposal (two 0-100's or one 100-200) which gerart rejected.



Besides the card might be close to Library this way.
(which gives 40 credits to any card)


I don't think this is the solution, but it might be a step to one.

I though of giving other cheap cards away (non-science)

These would be the options:

Crafts:
Cloth Making (50) (10 to Naval Warfare)
Masonry (60) (10 to Engineering)
Metalworking (90) (10 to Military)
Pottery (10 to Agriculture)

Religion
Deism (80 (10 to Fundamentalism)
Mythology (10 to Literacy)
Mysticism (60) (10 to Monument)
Theocracy (80) 910 to Universal Doctrine)

Arts:
Music (80) (10 to Enlightenment)
Drama & Poetry (80) (10 to Rhetoric)
Mysticism (60) (10 to Monument)
Sculpture (50) (10 toarchitecture)

Civics:
Monarchy (60) (10 to Law)
Urbanism (50) (10 to Diplomacy)
Theocracy (80) (10 to Universal Doctrine)


I doesn't make real sense though.

Anatomy should not give religions away, since it takes away some religious belief and creates rational solutions.

Anatomy has nothing to do with the cheap civics

If you leave Rembrandt van Rijn out, Anatomy has nothing to do with art.
(http://www.maitrise-orthop.com/corpusmaitri/orthopaedic/86_masquelet/masqueletus.shtml)

Anatomy and surgery could be interpreted as a craft so it could make a little sense giving a craft card for free.


In case you would give a craft fro free, Iwould only give one not two.
An option could be to change Anatomy in:


- gives two cheap (dual-)sciences or one cheap (dual-science) and one cheap craft.

I had kind of thought about that, but aren't you (likely) already using those green credits toward Anatomy anyway, and therefore wouldn't use them for another card? Unless I'm confused about how credits work--I thought you could only use a credit once per turn.

I might be wrong, but then I've always interpreted it wrongly.

The way we always play is:

When you have, say, Coinage that gives you 10 credits to green

If you purchase, in the next turn, both Engineering and Cartography you get to spend 10 credits on Engineering AND 10 credits on Cartography.

here's what the core rulebook says (v2.10)

Apparently I am mistaken. A quick review of the rules tells me that credits may be used more than once per turn, just not more than once on the same card.

Ok, lets assume the person has all the 100s and medicine, and chose 10 Green as their Written record (if you're loading it up). Now, lets look at the credits toward unowned green purchases (I think you were missing some)

Astronavigation (80) (10 green + 10 Calendar)
Coinage (90) (10 green)
Empiricism (60) (10 green)
Written Record (60) (15 green + 10 Cartography)
Medicine (140) (10 green) (20 to Anatomy)

Now, green credits are 55, with 10 extra to Calendar and Cartography and 20 to Anatomy. I was assuming that you could apply the discount to other >200s, too. Here's how much everything costs:

Anatomy (185)
Then one of:
Calendar (25)
Engineering (5) - minus any Civic credits
Cartography (-5) - Free
Mathematics (95) - minus any Art credits
Philosophy (95) - minus any Religion credits
Library - (75) - minus 30 more if you already have Cartography

This seems too powerful (as Flo was saying). I think it would be prudent to restrict this to pure Green cards, and reduce the discount to 60 (or 80). This would require some playtesting.

Although I also think it should be significant. I mean, Library grants an unrestricted discount of 40.

Also, on an unrelated note would it be possible to provide a thread that simply keeps a "this are the advancements that we have adopted" which has the changes in red (like the changes made on the previous page). Maybe include playtesting options. No justifications or anything, just a reference point - I've found it increasingly difficult to find all the different modifications (WoW, Written Record, Civic changes, etc.)

Regarding any card-adoptions:

Things are still in progress like you see in this particular thread.

Stating a list in any new topic might be obsolete during any new playtest-round. I've tried several times, but things keep changing.


For our group we accepted the change conceirning 'Wotw, Written Record & Monument'

It has not been changed officially yet, but that's not up to me. I'm just a forum member like you are. But I'm spending a lot of time finetuning stuff. Organizing playtest-rounds in several places in the netherlands to get data.

I can get you a list of what WE have changed and right now this topic is what is on the move.

(still, as long as Jonno doen'st change anything, I can't tell for sure.)

I just started a thread where people can post their current adoptions/playtests. I figured you'd be one to post there.

If we can get it made sticky, then it can be a good reference point (and also a good summary for newcomers to discussions).

That's here:

http://www.civproject.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=515

OK

We're doing a playtest again in december.

I think I won't change anything to Anatomy at the moment, due to the various opinion in the thread. Maybe if there's a real good option, I'll change my mind about that.

I will playtest these:



like in this thread:

http://www.civproject.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=515

In my group's experience, Agriculture is the most important card in the game. We find it to be overpowered compared to it's cost. Cheap Agriculture also discourages combat as after purchase, most civilizations have enough room to support 9 cities. I would be in support of nerfing this card slightly.

Having said that, we only just (last game) discovered the rule that says agriculture doesn't count after you have been the primary victim of Famine.



This is great rule that goes some way to nerfing agriculture. I would support the playtestign of a slight price increase too though.

DG.