A new mod enters the ring - Introducing "Close to Home"

[Charriu]

Be careful about which way the causation goes there.  Does MoM make you successful enough to win the game, or do you manage to build MoM when you're already successful enough to win the game?

And switching those effects doesn't sound "close to home" to me.  Tweak the length numbers if that's what the balance needs.

True, true about the causation. Unfortunately it is a lot more work to find out if those players were already winning before MoM or only after. But what remains true is that it definitely helped the winners win more.

Switching the effects is already off the table for me.

I finished my analysis of the past games to evaluate the MoM nerf. I went through all past BtS and CtH PBs and PBEMs and looked up who built MoM and how that game turned out for that person. Here are the numbers:

Games looked at = 95

MoM builder won game = 35
MoM builder was in a strong position, but didn't win = 20
MoM builder lost game = 18
MoM builder was eliminated = 8
MoM builder unknown = 13
MoM banned = 1

So as you can see and what most already expected. Those who built MoM also were in a very good position most of the time. I therefore will implement the "Obsolete at nationalism" nerf with the next version.

Very interisting statistic and how you show it, but practicaly what is saying  won 35 and lost 59 .Now go and check about mids, or Taj Mahal and I think even Colosus  might score very near or same(i dint check just from the feeling). I would change just requirements to build.  Requires calendar and Machinery  so if you wanna have a full GA with mom to wait  alot, and make it without resources.

First of all you can't count the unknown builders towards the loosing side, because I literally could not find any information if the winner or others built it or if it was built at all. So instead of 59 you would only have 46.
Now you can read it like you did as 35 vs 46. But if you count the strong position together with the winners you have 55 vs 26. I should also clarify what I understand with strong position. With this I mean that the player was in a good position to win the game themself, which is amplified by MoM.
I think adding requirements doesn't really solve the main issue people have with MoM that is chaining multiple GAs together to give a large advantage. Additional requirements, removing the production bonus or changing the cost of the wonder does not change this, it just delays it.
The only things that do really weaken the wonder are reducing the effect or obsoleting the wonder. I can't test it right now but both should be possible. I feel like reducing the effect to 2 additional GA turns is the softer nerf compared to obsoleting.

[Old Harry]

Removing the production boost for marble would make mom more expensive. But if the interaction between Taj and mom is the issue then obsolescence seems the better option to me.

[Jowy]

I think snowballing is just how Civ4 is. Generally tech leader is also game leader, so the one most ahead will get even more ahead. If that wasn't the case, then MoM would really be something people not in the first place would build to catch up on the leader.

[mackoti]

I read here since pb1 and pbem 1 so i can tell you MoM was builded in more 95 % of the games. Even i builded in 1 and I lost the game.  I dont remeber if I reported i build the thing. The games werent banned dont count at all.
So the fact you dont know if was build doesnt mean wasnt, and i know people have 2 wonders in target Mids and  MoM. from the games were i played I think i managed to build in last then 30 % and still I won  90% and was build in all games i played.  As i see i t right now realy makes you decide between curency and calendar , investing in more setler or build an expensive wornder. 
For example i won all games were i build colosus. As well  won all were i build taj. All were i build Glib and i think lost 2 were i build MoM, Is that relevant or not?

For example in turn 90 if you put me to pick between Mids and MoM i would  pick mids. Do like krill get multiplier out , cancel at nationalism and for sure will get build later from someone which can get near same benefit , becasue they didnt had to invest earlier. You are just eliminate some decision people can take.

[Gaspar]

Yeah, what mackoti said.

A lot of the problem comes from not enough wonders being desirable. If you look at competitive games - i.e. games where there are two or more civs with a legitimate chance to win - nothing gets built between MoM and Taj. You basically have GLH, Colossus, Mids, MoM as wonders that are game changing, then Oracle and Stonehenge as good wonders, then there's basically nothing worth the cost in a competitive game. Like Parthenon is ok, but a couple Knights is better. Etc etc. I do think MoM is too good, but I also think I'd rather see it fixed by boosting other stuff and making more decisions than nerfing everything and making it worse.

[superdeath]

Make Temple of Artimis great again!

[Lewwyn]

So as you can see and what most already expected. Those who built MoM also were in a very good position most of the time. I therefore will implement the "Obsolete at nationalism" nerf with the next version.

Charriu is this change in the 2.0 version of the mod for PB 59? I really think in a 25 player game with a lot of land the value of GAs and therefore the value of MoM will increase exponentially if unnerfed. So if it isn't in the 2.0 version, I suggest making that change since its already planned and could have a large impact on PB59.

[Charriu]

No it isn't in there, because I'm pretty torn apart between nerfing MoM or not after the recent postings here. But you may be right that it is too strong on a big map like for PB59.

[Charriu]

Yeah, what mackoti said.

A lot of the problem comes from not enough wonders being desirable.  If you look at competitive games - i.e. games where there are two or more civs with a legitimate chance to win - nothing gets built between MoM and Taj.  You basically have GLH, Colossus, Mids, MoM as wonders that are game changing, then Oracle and Stonehenge as good wonders, then there's basically nothing worth the cost in a competitive game.  Like Parthenon is ok, but a couple Knights is better. Etc etc.  I do think MoM is too good, but I also think I'd rather see it fixed by boosting other stuff and making more decisions than nerfing everything and making it worse.

I understand the general idea to lift everything on the same level as those mentioned wonders, by buffing them. The problem for this particular mod is that this requires a lot of changes to a lot of wonders. There's also the danger of going to far from home with some changes. Buffing elements available to everybody also runs the danger of changing the general pace of the game. Lastly I fear that doing mostly buffs instead of nerfs runs into the dangers of power creep

[Lewwyn]

BTW I think nerfing MoM by having it obsolete at Nationalism is actually not a bad nerf and is actually adding an interesting gameplay decision. If you go for MoM you have a choice of trying to chain multiple GAs early or avoiding Nat and trying to chain more GAs later. Also how late do you leave Nationalism as a result? It's an interesting question that changes the way people will play MoM and I think while being a nerf is also a good change in general.