It seems the Portuguese will get the first naval UU of Civ 4. In theory I have nothing against it (I bet it will be a caravel able to carry settlers), except from the fact that there are maps with no sea at all (like higlands). That will make the Portuguese a very poor choice to play on those maps...

On the other hand, there are already UBs that are not useful at all on such maps, like the Carthaginian and Viking ones. :rolleyes:

If Firaxis changes its mind and decides to create a portuguese land UU, it could be based on musketeers, like the "bandeirantes" that explored and extended Brazil's territory...

Cheers!

Mad Hab

Well, the Carrack is confirmed, so a land UU is out for sure...

As you said, there are already quite a few UUs (and UBs) that don't work well on certain maps. What good is the trading post or cothon if you have no oceans?

For that matter, what good is the Navy Seal on a marathon game? You're likely to win long, long before it becomes available (unless you play like I do, but that's an entirely different matter...)

Anyways, I'm quite happy to see the Carrack make a comeback, and I hope it carries settlers also. Combined with the expansive/imperialistic traits, this could actually make the Portuguese one of the stronger civs in most games. I guess being totally worthless on certain maps is the price you pay for success most of the time. ;)

Makes me sad that England has rubbish redcoats instead of Man-o-Wars, with which it could really have ruled the oceans.

Let's see.
Viking UB and Carthaginian UB aren't good on non-water maps, Celtic UB not good on lowland maps (well, fairly bad on all), Berserker only does what it should on water maps (amphibious attacks ! :viking:) and Celtic UU hill-bonus is uselss on lowland map.

A naval UU might prove to be interesting..:D

i think each civ should have a unique land unit and unique marine unit but then how do the upcoming Sioux tribe in BtW have a marine unit?

Portugal,Holland,Vikings and England all deserves a naval UU.
In any case I hope also Netherlands get a naval UU.
About units balancement i agree that a land unit is always better but a naval UU can be made really powerful.A Carrack which can transport instead of 3 units, 5 units and has +1 movement wouldn't be so weak IMO.

Portugal,Holland,Vikings and England all deserves a naval UU.
In any case I hope also Netherlands get a naval UU.
About units balancement i agree that a land unit is always better but a naval UU can be made really powerful.A Carrack which can transport instead of 3 units, 5 units and has +1 movement wouldn't be so weak IMO.

Yes, maybe everyone should get a Unique ship a long with a Unique Land unit..

I actually sat down and thought through a bunch of Unique ships for all but a few civs, quite an interesting list.

I actually sat down and thought through a bunch of Unique ships for all but a few civs, quite an interesting list.

Post it then, i'm interested.

I actually sat down and thought through a bunch of Unique ships for all but a few civs, quite an interesting list.

I bet you had a tough time with Mongolian Unique Boat :lol:

Yes, I would like to see the list, too.

the cheap chinese boats that they gave the mongolians to conquer japan?

Well they were cheap sucky boats i don't know what's unique about them in a good way.

Here's GeneralMatt's list:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=223188

i think each civ should have a unique land unit and unique marine unit but then how do the upcoming Sioux tribe in BtW have a marine unit?

Easy. War Canoe. Replaces galley. +1 movement, +1 strength (gives it a 50-50 chance vs. trireme).
What would be worse is Zulu or Mali. :rolleyes:

I support the idea of 1 naval UU and 1 land-based UU :)

I'm sure Mali had something, after all they had a coastline.

i have a list of UU's zulus i have six names

I support the idea of 1 naval UU and 2 land-based UU's

Giving every civ a land UU and a naval UU wouldn't make sense IMO.There are some civs which haven't really accomplished anything on the sea, other civs which had also huge fleets but had nothing to distinguish themselves from other civs.Except for Portugal,Netherlands,Vikings,England i can't see any other civ which could get a naval UU.Afterall UU are meant to be units which are representative of a civ.

It seems the Portuguese will get the first naval UU of Civ 4. In theory I have nothing against it (I bet it will be a caravel able to carry settlers

I hope it can carry defenders too.

I've no problem with a Naval UU but I sure hope they don't give it a naval oriented UB as well.

i think each civ should have a unique land unit and unique marine unit but then how do the upcoming Sioux tribe in BtW have a marine unit?

Is it really going to be the Sioux, or is it generic Native American with a Sioux leader ?
How about a canoe unit - sort of a river going galley ?

Giving every civ a land UU and a naval UU wouldn't make sense IMO.There are some civs which haven't really accomplished anything on the sea, other civs which had also huge fleets but had nothing to distinguish themselves from other civs.Except for Portugal,Netherlands,Vikings,England i can't see any other civ which could get a naval UU.Afterall UU are meant to be units which are representative of a civ.

How about Nuclear aircraft carriers for America? That's how we project power globally. Or Heavy frigates of the Early 1800's that beat the British? For that matter, the fuel-oil powered aircraft carriers distinguished themselves in WWII in the Pacific.

How about Nuclear aircraft carriers for America? That's how we project power globally. Or Heavy frigates of the Early 1800's that beat the British? For that matter, the fuel-oil powered aircraft carriers distinguished themselves in WWII in the Pacific.

Nuclear carriers would be something too much specialized.
I would rather like to see AEGIS Cruiser and Cruiser

I do hope that Portugal doesn't get an naval based UB so that they would be somewhat useful on landlocked maps.

Post it then, i'm interested.

I bet you had a tough time with Mongolian Unique Boat :lol:

Yes, I would like to see the list, too.

Sorry guys for not replying. :blush: Forgot to check here again..

the cheap chinese boats that they gave the mongolians to conquer japan?

Well they were cheap sucky boats i don't know what's unique about them in a good way.

Well they were cheaper, and what else would you give them? I mean they were not really a seafaring people..

Here's GeneralMatt's list:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=223188

Thanks for posting it in my absence. :)

Ian Toll's Six Frigates: The Epic History of the Founding of the US Navy is a great book on the early US navy frigates...they were called "large frigates", if I recall. Those 44-gun ships could beat the stuffing out of anything smaller than a ship of the line during their time.

I guess I really don't have anything specific to contribute to the thread. I would guess still 1 UU per civ, naval or land, and 1 UB. I do agree they shouldn't both be land-based or sea-based, but that rule has already been broken by the Vikings. Although the Berserker still gets +10% city attack and is a macemen replacement.

Makes me sad that England has rubbish redcoats instead of Man-o-Wars, with which it could really have ruled the oceans.

Rubbish redcoats!!!!!!??????? There so much better than man o war, they destroy anything in their era!!!! 25% against caverly and gunpowder, if anything they are over powered!

Nuclear carriers would be something too much specialized.
I would rather like to see AEGIS Cruiser and Cruiser

I'm sorry. I guess I inferred that in your opinion, the US navy is unaccomplished and undistinguished in history.

I don't honestly think that a UU on land and on sea is good for every civilization. I'd rather see a larger VARIETY of UU's. For instance more peaceful UU's than just Indias fast worker.

I'd also like to see more powerful and game altering UU's and Buildings in the late game. With all the new stuff for that time period it would be nice if some major power players appeared for the late game, somebody actually able to shake up a "Balance of Power" that's lasted a few thousand years.

So . . . I'd like Military UU's, Seafaring UU's, Peaceful UU's, and Modern UU's. But not one of each for every civilization.

Maybe instead of Seagoing AND Land you could have two UU's be Modern and Ancient, but what modern unit would sumeria have? LOL

Modern Sumerian unit... RPG infantry? :lol:

I agree, I hope they've framed the game so somebody can actually shake up everything in the last few ages, instead of the usual "the most powerful civ in ancient times will be the most powerful in modern times," barring any dog-pile war instituted by the human player (using Montezuma of course).

I'm guessing a land UU and a naval UU for all civs would be an appropriate balance.

Korea could have a unique ship -- Turtle Ship. These were the earliest ironclad warships, powered solely by oars. It would have a very high strength, require iron and saltpeter, but be quite slow.

Easy. War Canoe. Replaces galley. +1 movement, +1 strength (gives it a 50-50 chance vs. trireme).
Doesn't really work- how could a small canoe, shallow water canoe be compared to a real ship like a galley? Even the biggest canoes were runts compared to a Norse longship, let alone a galley.
That's the problem with the Sioux- they never actually developed enough to have any military worth noting. Best they had was cavalry archers, something which the Arabs, Chinese, Mongols, Japanese, Huns, Byzantines, Huns, Turks, etc. all had by the boatload.

They could balance it by giving some civs both a land and naval UU, but more tightly limit their superiority over the base unit, so that it averages out.

Giving every civ a land UU and a naval UU wouldn't make sense IMO.There are some civs which haven't really accomplished anything on the sea, other civs which had also huge fleets but had nothing to distinguish themselves from other civs.Except for Portugal,Netherlands,Vikings,England i can't see any other civ which could get a naval UU.Afterall UU are meant to be units which are representative of a civ.

Portugal,Netherlands,Vikings,England

That list should be expanded to include Korea, America, Germany, and Japan.

-Korea had some mean ironclads as early as the 1400's. That's early (they were, obviously, not steam powered).

-The USA was actually a British ship factory prior to the revolutionary war. A whole motherload of British shipwrights came to the US to design and build Frigates for the Royal navy. As a result, the USA had some pretty hotsy-totsy merchant ships right from the start. We also had some very nice facilities with which to build a military fleet soon after independence.
Enter: USS United States, USS Constellation, and USS Constitution.
These were fine, strong, double decker 44 gunners that were as proud as any in the Royal Navy. I think the US navy has more than earned a place in the annals of naval history. That's not even taking account the "Second to None" policy that we have today.
"Don't give up the ship" -James Lawrence

-Germany.
Don't ever forget the U-Boats. They raised hell in the waters all around Europe, nearly starving London. In fact, it really wasn't until US Destroyer Division 8 arrived in Queenstown, Ireland that the U-boats were tamed at all.

-Japan
I shouldn't even have to elaborate on this one. The japanese battleships of WWII were colossal and quite powerful. (Yamato, anyone?)
[Yamoto is actually a class of battleship, of which there were three, I believe]

Korea could have a unique ship -- Turtle Ship. These were the earliest ironclad warships, powered solely by oars. It would have a very high strength, require iron and saltpeter, but be quite slow.
Whoops, Nice nice. You beat me to it but yes.

That's still only 8 civs. What about the Incas? What naval units can be drawn from their mountainous empire? The Mongols, who never even bordered an ocean until they conquered China? The Babylonians, who never sailed out of sight of the coast, if they even had cause to leave a river in the first place?
Universal naval civs doesn't work, in my opinion. At best, you'll end up with a few flavour units, like a Chinese junk identical to a galley in everything but graphics.

Korea could have a unique ship -- Turtle Ship. These were the earliest ironclad warships, powered solely by oars. It would have a very high strength, require iron and saltpeter, but be quite slow.
They could simply receive the ironclad (as a turtle ship) earlier...

Korea could have a unique ship -- Turtle Ship. These were the earliest ironclad warships, powered solely by oars. It would have a very high strength, require iron and saltpeter, but be quite slow.

Saltpeter? Your still playing to much Civ3.

the cheap chinese boats that they gave the mongolians to conquer japan?

Well they were cheap sucky boats i don't know what's unique about them in a good way.

Well, they sink with a high degree of efficiency.. ;)

Seriously though.. I'm not really keen on the idea of a naval UU for every civ. Not unless you seriously expanded the naval exploration/trade/warfare part of the game.. Maybe that's something for Civ V. It would certainly reflect the vast importance of navies historically.

That being said I still hold that the vikings should have gotten the longboat as their UU instead of the berserker.. Granted they would have to change the UB (a bit overpowered with both of them..), but a market with a bonus to production (to signify slave markets) or something like that would be historically accurate.

EDIT:
Portugal,Netherlands,Vikings,England

That list should be expanded to include Korea, America, Germany, and Japan.


..and probably spain. The Galleon or Manila Galleon..

I haven't played Civ III in a long time, but I haven't played Vanilla Civ IV or Warlords lately either. They all blend together in my mind since they are more similar to each other than Vanilla is to FfH II.

Turtle ships looked to different than modern ironclads to warrant using the same unit (if it is even possible to let different civs build the same unit at different with different technologies)

The Incas actually had some very nice, very unique boats which were woven out of cotton. I don't remember what they were called, but they were actually about equal to caravels in both size and seaworthiness although the technologies used to build them were very different.

The boats used by Kublai to invade Japan weren't necessarily that bad, he just had the horrible fortune to invade during the 2 of the largest storms in Japanese history (Kamakazi, the divine wind)

The boats used by Kublai to invade Japan weren't necessarily that bad, he just had the horrible fortune to invade during the 2 of the largest storms in Japanese history (Kamakazi, the divine wind)

New research has apparently shown that a large part of the boats used in the invasion were converted flatbottomed river junks, very vulnerable to storms..

Yes, maybe everyone should get a Unique ship a long with a Unique Land unit..

What does Mongol unique ship do? Sink when it meets a storm?

Giving every civ a land UU and a naval UU wouldn't make sense IMO.

It should rather be two UU, and one of them could be naval for naval-based civilizations like Portuguese, Netherlands, Vikings and England. Maybe also Japan, not sure if they actually had a good naval in earlier times, but they sure did in modern times.

Oh, and of course Arabia - they completely dominated the Red Sea and Indian Ocean before the Portuguese came around Africa. I can't remember the name of the galley they used in early times, but it is mentioned by Ibn Battuta, the Arabian Marco Polo, who wrote text about boat journeys down African east coast to Mogadishu and Kilwa.

Personally, I would rather see a UU per leader rather then each civ having a land and sea based UU. As already mentioned, some civs just didn't have suitable sea UU's to warrant giving them a sea UU.

As for the Portugese UU. I think it sounds very interesting. It's sounds like it the unit is going to be based around expansion and not naval battles, so it will fit perfectly with Jaoa's leader traits, and not be rendered useless as a UU by the deficencies that are currently seen in naval warfare. There is the case that if you are landlocked, or on a Pangea map then it won't have a use, but, UU's such as the Praetorian, Keshik and Immortal, that all require resources, can't be built if you don't have access to it. Personally, I don't see this as too much of a problem.

Not unless you seriously expanded the naval exploration/trade/warfare part of the game.. Maybe that's something for Civ V. It would certainly reflect the vast importance of navies historically.

Got nothing to do with UU's, but I would really like more realistic trading - ie. trading units. Today we have worker, explorers and military - trading has been just as important as those other factors. Just like you need a work boat to hook up sea-based resources, I think there should be a trading galley to hook up trade routes and even be able to trade certain resources, and horse/camels could be used to make land-based caravans. Would make this part of the game more interesting, and some peaceful civilizations could also have trading UU, just like India got the fast worker.

And what about some air based UU´s? Now that they don´t triger golden ages, the US could really need a P-51 or B-17.

You guys have made a list of civs that could boast a naval UU.
Those are:
Vikings, Portugal, England, Spain, Netherlands, Arabia, America, Korea, Carthage, Germany and Japan. I'd like to add the Ottoman empire to that list. They raided Iceland once..I was playing Age of Empires III the other day and their ships aren't weak :lol: And don't forget France, Byzantine Empire (wouldn't even be surprised with a Naval UU for them!) and Greece (The Athenian navy was and is famous). Rome could easily have a naval UU, and Egypt too (it would have to be a medieval ship, though) and of course Russia and China..

That leaves us with: Mali, Inca, Aztecs, Mongols, Persians, Babylonians, Sioux and some others.

I'm sure Firaxis could sort that out..

But it's not a good idea, though. Those "extremely naval" civs; Vikings, Carthaginians and now Portugal all have something naval. I think that the Byzantine Empire could have a naval UU; Dromon and Spain should get something naval. England and The Netherlands as well. But I think that's all. To be honest, I don't see the Turtle ship as Korea's UU. Or Germany having a Submarine UU. :)

True. Ottomans had a great navy, and that is often forgotten.

Portugal,Holland,Vikings and England all deserves a naval UU.
In any case I hope also Netherlands get a naval UU.
About units balancement i agree that a land unit is always better but a naval UU can be made really powerful.A Carrack which can transport instead of 3 units, 5 units and has +1 movement wouldn't be so weak IMO.

Extra movement, extra cargo, extra line of sight, bombard capability and earlier availability.
2 of these would make it a strong UU in... water maps.

I just hope the UB is good in pangea, giving funds or hapiness to support the settlers boom possible by the traits!!!


PS: Have you consider all civs having 2 UUs. 1 terrestrial and other to the seas or the air?

Extra movement, extra cargo, extra line of sight, bombard capability and earlier availability.
2 of these would make it a strong UU in... water maps.

I just hope the UB is good in pangea, giving funds or hapiness to support the settlers boom possible by the traits!!!


PS: Have you consider all civs having 2 UUs. 1 terrestrial and other to the seas or the air?

yes but i'd prefer 2 on land and 1 of land

Why don't give every civilization 2 UUs without any resrictions: one civilization could have 2 UUs on land, another 1 on land and 1 in the sea, another 1 one land and 1 in the air etc.

i personally think that Atl's idea is perfect. also remember in civ 3 that ships could bombard to a degree as 2 shell cities destroying pop, buildings and improvements? sorry bout the run on

I was disappointed to see coastal bombardment all but disappear from Civ4 (you can still hit cities). I shelled production mines and luxury resources all the time in Civ3 from the coasts. It gave the small navy I had a purpose. Now, they just pillage fishing boats. Still useful, I guess, but not nearly as much.

^^^I know, seriously, what was Firaxis thinking?

Don't forget that the portugese can still get a great UB :)

I was disappointed to see coastal bombardment all but disappear from Civ4 (you can still hit cities). I shelled production mines and luxury resources all the time in Civ3 from the coasts. It gave the small navy I had a purpose. Now, they just pillage fishing boats. Still useful, I guess, but not nearly as much.

cough dromon cough :p

Chinese treasure fleet anyone?

cough dromon cough :p

I admit it, the Byzantines were one of my favorites in Civ3. The Scientific trait fit my playing style, and you can guess what I used that UU for... :rolleyes:

That leaves us with: Mali, Inca, Aztecs, Mongols, Persians, Babylonians, Sioux and some others.

I figure they are wide open to military units that haven't been seen.
Plasma infantry. Submersible aircraft carriers. Hydrofoil cruisers. Laser anti-aircraft batteries. Remote control fighters .

I figure they are wide open to military units that haven't been seen.
Plasma infantry. Submersible aircraft carriers. Hydrofoil cruisers. Laser anti-aircraft batteries. Remote control fighters .
Dude. You did not just suggest plasma remote-control hydrofoil cruisers as UU for the Babylonians. :beer:

Wodan

Dude. You did not just suggest plasma remote-control hydrofoil cruisers as UU for the Babylonians. :beer:

Wodan

They need something to hope for if they're going to survive that long:lol:

It would keep the late game interesting. Multi-players would want Babylon on their team just to build and gift....

Well, for civs that ceased to exist you could look to the modern civs that have later arisen in the region. Many of these believe themselves to just be modern continuations of their ancient roots (Saddam Husein was rebuilding Babylon, and actually claimed to be Nebuchadnezzar reincarnated. He had his name carved next to the king's on several ancient monuments which he was restoring). So for Babylon, you would use an Iraqi unit like the Republican Guard replacing Infantry. Of course, who would want a UU with a special ability like always loosing to any American troops. ;) Actually, I they would be pretty cool if disbanding them in a city just before an enemy captures it could greatly lengthen the time the city stays in resistance.

Personally I would love it if each civ had something like a UU for every other age, or perhaps an average of one per age (which would mean America might need about 2 per age from the renaissance up). When there are 2 per age, it would probably be best to make then very different types of units, perhaps 1 for land and one for sea.

Well, for civs that ceased to exist you could look to the modern civs that have later arisen in the region. Many of these believe themselves to just be modern continuations of their ancient roots (Saddam Husein was rebuilding Babylon, and actually claimed to be Nebuchadnezzar reincarnated. He had his name carved next to the king's on several ancient monuments which he was restoring). So for Babylon, you would use an Iraqi unit like the Republican Guard replacing Infantry. Of course, who would want a UU with a special ability like always loosing to any American troops. Actually, I they would be pretty cool if disbanding them in a city just before an enemy captures it could greatly lengthen the time the city stays in resistance.

Personally I would love it if each civ had something like a UU for every other age, or perhaps an average of one per age (which would mean America might need about 2 per age from the renaissance up). When there are 2 per age, it would probably be best to make then very different types of units, perhaps 1 for land and one for sea.

Holy thread resurrection Batman! :D

I think you may have had one too many threads opened! :p

Actually, I didn't have this one open. I was in the thread how would we feel about UU's for every age?, and was wondering where my post went. It didn't show up there, and I know I didn't try to put it here. Weird...this was probably the second most appropriate thread though.