Will Japan be changed?

[Gali]

With Japan its the sum of the whole though. It has a mediocre and nerfed UA, a mediocre first UU and the worst UU in the game. Add in the fact that its bonus to war is quite weak below Emperor, with this AI war is just sad, and I never play Japan. Considering I have a great interest in Japanese culture and history that is just sad. They are a horribly put together civ.

The samurai is a pile of junk. Great Generals are rarely useful beyond 3. Add in no strength bonus, instant obsolescence and weak unit path and the unit is just sad. The only good thing about it is the free shock promotion which requires you to build it, not upgrade, and have a large iron supply.

 

[Hans Castorp]

The bonuses of a Samurai are fine. But it's placement in Steel is what kills it. The best(read: strategist players/min-maxers/etc...) strategies involve beelining to Education->Scientific Theory->Plastics while using archers/artillery to take cities. Longswords and Swordsmen have long been discussed in other threads because they require iron and they're outside of the optimal tech path. Since you don't need to research steel until you go for Plastics, you end up researching Steel very late. Not to mention the fact that LS have a very short shelf-life because muskets are so soon after Steel. So you'd have to take a detour to steel and then not get the musket research in order to effectively use Samurai.

Certainly I agree about shelf-life, but demanding that all UU's fit into an optimal strategy seems likely to condemn about half the UUs in the game to redundancy: Roman legions, Kris swordsmen, Danish Berserkers. Efficient it may be - I may actually go and give it a go now - but you must lose something of the local colour along the way...

 

[Loaf Warden]

I wouldn't mind seeing the Zero replaced with some kind of cultural building, like a tea garden or something. Other than that, I think Japan is just fine.

(Well, I'd like Oda Nobunaga replaced with Tokugawa Ieyasu, but that's not going to happen. Given all the extra work to prepare and record new dialogue, I don't think leaders are ever going to get replaced.)

 

[Cissnei]

wow so many people who hate Japan here.
I just wish they cared about Japan, and not like now.
I really wish to play and build Japan culturally, and be strong all game and not invisible late game T－T. And i really wish there was female leader option. There were many women in Japanese history who could be leaders

 

[SnowKomodo]

I wouldn't mind seeing the Zero replaced with some kind of cultural building, like a tea garden or something. Other than that, I think Japan is just fine.

(Well, I'd like Oda Nobunaga replaced with Tokugawa Ieyasu, but that's not going to happen. Given all the extra work to prepare and record new dialogue, I don't think leaders are ever going to get replaced.)

What's wrong with Oda?

 

[Unresolved]

Certainly I agree about shelf-life, but demanding that all UU's fit into an optimal strategy seems likely to condemn about half the UUs in the game to redundancy: Roman legions, Kris swordsmen, Danish Berserkers. Efficient it may be - I may actually go and give it a go now - but you must lose something of the local colour along the way...

But when you start putting civilizations into tiers, you're organizing them by how well they play the game. If you need to do something that ultimately results in a less effective game, the civilization can't be considered 'decent' or 'good' because they're competing against other civilizations who don't need to handicap themselves. And a Samurai rush is most definitely less effective than a crossbow rush or beelining to artillery/GW bombers. And yes, I considered the Roman Legion very weak. I haven't played the Danes yet(one of 3 civs I have to play before BNW), so I have no comment on the Berserker.

Now, if we were talking about flavors and realism(I probably wouldn't be in the conversation if that were the case), then I'd have no beef with Japan. But when you start talking about strategy(which falls into the competitive strategist domain), then I think you have to consider how a civilization plays compared to the most optimal strategies. And Japan(and the Samurai) don't hold up very well against tried-and-true approaches like CB rushes, x-bow rushes, etc...

 

[Matsume]

wow so many people who hate Japan here.

We ( i think i talk for the most here ) dont hate japan, we hate the actual poor implementation of it in CIV V.

As a japanese culture and history lover i was so sad when i played japan in the vanilla that never more wanted to do so, someday i will create balls (and time) and mod some nice changes to it...

 

[Loaf Warden]

What's wrong with Oda?

He never ruled Japan.

 

[Loaf Warden]

And i really wish there was female leader option.

None of the civs have leader "options". In Civ V there is one leader per civ, and that's all.

There were many women in Japanese history who could be leaders

Name one that was important and iconic enough to be chosen over Tokugawa Ieyasu, the Meiji Emperor, or even Oda Nobunaga.

 

[SnowKomodo]

He never ruled Japan.

But wasn't he a legendary leader? I only know about him from random internet sources and Civilopedia, but he seems to me as very deserving.

What do other people think? Japanese preferably

 

[Loaf Warden]

But wasn't he a legendary leader? I only know about him from random internet sources and Civilopedia, but he seems to me as very deserving.

He was a regional lord during a time when nobody (except the emperor, who was a figurehead with no political power) could be said to rule Japan. He laid the groundwork that made it possible for Tokugawa Ieyasu to unite the country and become the true ruler of Japan. I have nothing against Oda Nobunaga; he's a fascinating figure, and of vital importance to Japanese history. I just don't like when they use people who never ruled when there are actual rulers that would be as good or better, that's all. I don't like that India has always been led by Gandhi, I didn't like that Joan of Arc was the leader of the French in Civ III, and if this Sacagawea thing turns out to be true I really won't like it. They've always used Tokugawa for Japan before, and if they had to drop him, I'd have preferred it to be in favor of the Meiji Emperor rather than someone who never actually ruled the country.

Edited to add: To get a sense of why he was an odd choice, just look at his in-game map:

"Oda Nobunaga's Japan" is just a blotch in the middle of the country. The rest of it was still Japan, but ruled by other lords. Tokugawa Ieyasu's Japan would have at least colored the whole country in.

 

[whyidie]

He was a regional lord during a time when nobody (except the emperor, who was a figurehead with no political power) could be said to rule Japan. He laid the groundwork that made it possible for Tokugawa Ieyasu to unite the country and become the true ruler of Japan. I have nothing against Oda Nobunaga; he's a fascinating figure, and of vital importance to Japanese history. I just don't like when they use people who never ruled when there are actual rulers that would be as good or better, that's all. I don't like that India has always been led by Gandhi, I didn't like that Joan of Arc was the leader of the French in Civ III, and if this Sacagawea thing turns out to be true I really won't like it. They've always used Tokugawa for Japan before, and if they had to drop him, I'd have preferred it to be in favor of the Meiji Emperor rather than someone who never actually ruled the country.

I have nothing against Gandhi or non-rulers (he was a leader of the people) being the Civ leader. But having Ashoka in the game (don't recall which) was awesome.

 

[JokerJace]

OPs Feminism is laudable, but I can not think of one Japanese Female Leader that is noteworthy. And why do we hate Japan!? I didn't read one single comment that is directed against Japan. Maybe you should keep an argumentative level here.

 

[SnowKomodo]

He was a regional lord during a time when nobody (except the emperor, who was a figurehead with no political power) could be said to rule Japan. He laid the groundwork that made it possible for Tokugawa Ieyasu to unite the country and become the true ruler of Japan. I have nothing against Oda Nobunaga; he's a fascinating figure, and of vital importance to Japanese history. I just don't like when they use people who never ruled when there are actual rulers that would be as good or better, that's all. I don't like that India has always been led by Gandhi, I didn't like that Joan of Arc was the leader of the French in Civ III, and if this Sacagawea thing turns out to be true I really won't like it. They've always used Tokugawa for Japan before, and if they had to drop him, I'd have preferred it to be in favor of the Meiji Emperor rather than someone who never actually ruled the country.

But isn't that essentially ruling the country in essence? Aren't those accomplishments just as necessary and important to Japan's history?

Gajah Mada was never a ruler, but I don't hear anybody complaining about that

 

[Gali]

Well Oda Nobunaga was the first of the three leaders who united Japan. He built a large powerbase in central Japan starting southeast of Kyoto, in Owari Province. He was killed by a rebellious general, Akechi Mitsuhide, and succeeded by Toyotomi Hideyoshi. Hideyoshi, who rose from very low rank, actually unified Japan and launched the invasion of Korea. Tokugawa Ieyasu, a longtime ally/vassal of Oda and Hideyoshi then took power since Hideyoshi died with a child heir.

Reasons to argue against Oda are the fact that he never ruled a unified Japan and his brutality. He famously burned the sacred Mount Hiei and massacred anyone who attempted to flee. He also was famous for brutal punishments, and ruthlessness.

 

[slowmotion7]

I already came up with a new unique set for Japan:


Unique Ability: Pokedex: Any animal resource controlled by this civ gives an accumulative military bonus to units.
Unique Unit: Pokemon Trainer: Replaces Paratrooper unit (fly) or Marine Unit (surf). Gets an extra bonus to number of animal resources controlled.
Unique Building: Pokemon Gym: Replaces Zoo. All animal resources worked by the city increases city defense.

Oda can even stay the leader, as he has been in a pokemon game.

 

[Loaf Warden]

Gajah Mada was never a ruler, but I don't hear anybody complaining about that

He wasn't a monarch, but he still held political power over the country. "Ruled" is an awkward term, but what I mean is that Oda was the political leader only of a portion of the country. Tokugawa Ieyasu was the political leader of the whole thing.

 

[bcaiko]

Bushido did get an indirect nerf in G&K, but I don't think that's the end of the world. If Japan does indeed get any kind of change, that change will likely come to the Zero, which is widely derided by the players. A general buff to Fighters (giving them more utility, for instance), would set Japan up nicely to continue to dominate air space.

I also think Bushido is a very poor ability. It works good to defend and attack in early game but is useless later on.

Uhhh....no. Bushido truly shines in Japan's AIRFORCE, which is definitively late game. The fact that your great war bombers continue to trounce cities even after they've been at it for a while is thanks to Bushido. Bushido is not at all useless in the late game. (But it's not as useful as in Vanilla.)

You also mentioned that Japan should get a technological bonus, but that is a very modern view of Japan. Japan historically was behind the times technologically, leading to Comdr. Perry of the United States cowing the Japanese government by using his advanced cannon ships in the mid 1800s. The Japanese Shogun realized Japan was so far behind in technology that they were no match for western powers, and even after a reactionary revolt restored the Emperor, even THAT government realized Japan needed to make up that ground. Japan rapidly industrialized (i.e., caught up) in the very late 1800s, leading to their surprising victory over Russia in 1905. Japan has only been a remarkable production civilization for about a century of its existence, and has only been a world technological leader since the mid 20th century.

tl:dr: A long view of history says a militaristic Japan makes more sense.

Well, there were some ruling empresses, hundreds and hundreds of years ago. They're hardly notable compared to Tokugawa Ieyasu or the Meiji Emperor, though. (Of course, they didn't go with either of those for Civ V. They went with Oda Nobunaga, who never ruled the country. )

Reading your posts, you have knowledge of Japanese history - but I think you're very much underselling Oda Nobunaga, who is easily one of Japan's most notable and greatest leaders. Oda, along with his mentee, Toyotomi Hideyoshi, and his rival/ally Tokugawa Ieyasu, are known as the "Three Unifiers" of Japan are viewed as the fathers of the county. Were it not for the unification war launched by Oda to centralize power in Japan, Japan would have likely remained fractured between rival warlords for decades, if not centuries. Given how fractured Japan was during the warring states era, the expansion shown by Civ5's intro screen before his death is truly impressive.

The power of the Tokugawa Shogunate was fostered on the strong foundations laid by Oda's unifcation the warring clans under his control. Tokugawa could never have completed the unification of Japan is Oda and Toyotomi had not left him the tools to do so.

tl;dr: I love Japanese history. Oda's a fine choice as leader.

 

[SnowKomodo]

He wasn't a monarch, but he still held political power over the country. "Ruled" is an awkward term, but what I mean is that Oda was the political leader only of a portion of the country. Tokugawa Ieyasu was the political leader of the whole thing.

K gotcha.

Tokugawa has already been in Civ like what? Three or four times? Pretty sure the devs just said "hey, everybody knows who this Tokugawa fella is, let's change it up." For this reason I believe this to be a non-issue. It doesn't make sense to have the same Japanese leader every Civ game

 

[Gali]

Well Hideyoshi actually ruled the whole thing as well Loaf and was the one who united it. They probably didn't want to put him since he was the one who invaded Korea over heavy objections. I doubt he's popular in Korea and Firaxis likes to avoid controversy. They added him in the Korea scenario, but then the Koreans could at least play as Korea to defend.