I don't get the reasoning behind such posts, if you don't like it then don't do it: Nobody forces you to pick exactly those tags that get a lot of CCR. Nobody forces you to use the buffs that give CCR if you have access to them (nobody forces you to pick Shiva, nobody forces you to invest masses of ducats to upgrade the momument that gives CCR, ...) you can invest that into alternatives. Nobody forces you to do a million culture, religion and tag switches to stack CCR. Nobody forces you to pick Admin ideas.
You can also play on VH where it might be useful (at least as QoL) to take a military idea thus creating some additional reason to not pick Admin.
I also don't see that much CCR creep particularly recently. Byzantium is not a good example, their starting position was made deliberately harder than it already is, giving that as a reward makes sense, especially as they probably are one of the most logical proponents of having CCR.
And regarding a binary game play between SP and MP? Why is that an issue, playing the campaign in StarCraft or WarCraft is also very different than playing 1v1 online, playing PvE or PvP in MMORPG is also totally different, requiring different gear, different specializiations and different playstyles and skills. For those who play both modes, it creates more variability, and for the other it does not affect them.
Finally, I think CCR is an overrated modifier in SP outside of World Conquest attempts (and in how many games are you actually going for that?). I also tend to go for it out of habit, but often enough I notice it is an overkill and I could have better picked something else (I learned and pick them less / later than before). Usually other things, in particular AE, limit expansion more than Admin/OE until you get Admin Efficiency.
I also think Admin Efficiency is better than CCR, because it directly allows you to take bigger chunks of land with no extra cost whatsover (War Score, AE, OE, ...) with the exception of Unjustified Demands IIRC. In particular it tends to solve any AE problems because you fully annex tags much faster before they accumulate masses of AE.
You can also play on VH where it might be useful (at least as QoL) to take a military idea thus creating some additional reason to not pick Admin.
I also don't see that much CCR creep particularly recently. Byzantium is not a good example, their starting position was made deliberately harder than it already is, giving that as a reward makes sense, especially as they probably are one of the most logical proponents of having CCR.
And regarding a binary game play between SP and MP? Why is that an issue, playing the campaign in StarCraft or WarCraft is also very different than playing 1v1 online, playing PvE or PvP in MMORPG is also totally different, requiring different gear, different specializiations and different playstyles and skills. For those who play both modes, it creates more variability, and for the other it does not affect them.
Finally, I think CCR is an overrated modifier in SP outside of World Conquest attempts (and in how many games are you actually going for that?). I also tend to go for it out of habit, but often enough I notice it is an overkill and I could have better picked something else (I learned and pick them less / later than before). Usually other things, in particular AE, limit expansion more than Admin/OE until you get Admin Efficiency.
I also think Admin Efficiency is better than CCR, because it directly allows you to take bigger chunks of land with no extra cost whatsover (War Score, AE, OE, ...) with the exception of Unjustified Demands IIRC. In particular it tends to solve any AE problems because you fully annex tags much faster before they accumulate masses of AE.
- 4
- 2
