Leaders: Part 2

Disclaimer:
Before I continue my review of the Leader changes: Thal, you do an awesome job! If my review sounds a bit harsh, then only because continuously exclaiming how cool all those ideas are wouldn't help much in improving the game So sorry if I focus a bit on the open questions and possible pitfalls!


Japan
Fully focused on combat, but the bonuses can be used for defense just as well. Good for players who want "pure", unchanged economic gameplay. Overall strong, and versatile/interesting enough.

Korea
Very similar to Sweden, forced to focus on one improvement (although all other civs use mostly Villages, so it's okay). Sweden gets mixed yield bonuses while Korea is purely about science, however - which one is better can only be said by testing. Overall, I find the extreme science boost very strong and also interesting (long research times and nothing interesting left to build is a very frustrating combination). If the bonuses on the Hwacha stay on upgrade, it might be very strong, since archers lose their range when upgraded.

Mongolia
The two UU were always consider very strong and interesting, nothing changed here. The new UU sure sounds more interesting than vanilla, so no doubt this is going to be a favourite again!

Ottomans
A wide economy bonus that can easily be balanced and is a bit more interesting/unique than usual - cool. The Janissary doesn't seem overly special (just having 2 free promotions), but the barbary port is surely the better version of the Sea Beggar. The polder is stronger than the Janissary, however. Overall also a bit comparable to Carthage, which might be the more well-rounded Civ.

Persia
I like how golden ages change your movement speed, so we "feel" the different "seasons" better. Otherwise, golden ages just improve a few numbers and turn counters, which is not as emotional. It might help the uniqueness of the Civ if we increased the difference between golden age and standard gameplay for them. Maybe an additional combat bonus or extra sight for units? Or a triggered opportunity at the beginning of each golden age?

Polynesia
"THE" naval civ before mid/lategame. However, they're more about avoiding and invulnerability than anything else. A human player can surely pull of a few crazy things, like creating unattackable overseas colonies or hit&run tactics with his navy. Not sure if the AI will use the UA well. I still don't think they're oerpowered (except on terra maps), since naval exploration still takes a lot of ressources and we can't remove our capital from the mainland where it'll still be vulnerable. Their UI helps both tall and wide empires, and early UU are always strong. With more social policies than many other civs and very creative settling patterns, they should be a lot of fun to play!

Rome
I have to say, I'm a bit disappointed that Rome has become so offensive now. I used to play them semi-peacefully a few times before, which would be a waste of the UA now. Then again, the forum is of way more use during peacetime than the ballista was, so they remain somewhat of an allrounder. Overall (considering all player types), they are more active, more focused and more interesting now, so I fully approve to the changes. They're only a bit less interesting for me personally now.

Russia
I think the switch of UA and UB effects was a very smart idea! Good job! I also think they've more than decent combat potential due to the UB. The UU is not as special, however.

Siam
The only CS-ally-oriented Civ remaining due to the reinvention of Greece, so they are definitively unique. Their UU and UB should maybe support the UA a bit more, however. The extra culture from the Wat is probably only good to fill the Patronage tree a bit faster. What about an UU that fights better on the territory of allied CS's?

Songhai
I like how their units play a bit differently than others. Mongolia is maybe even more interesting, but only during the age of Keshiks, while the Songhai bonus lasts longer. I'd change their UB to heal units - it would further change the combat experience and it would surely be more unique.

Spain
Very similar to Rome, but the Romans appear more versatile, and their UU/UB combo comes earlier than the Spanish UU's. Spain might need a bit better numbers on their UA to be competitive.





Summary of proposed changes:

1. Songhia mosques should heal units or give extra XP - more focused civ, more unique combat gameplay
   
2. More "emotional" effect during golden ages for Persia - think how WC3 nightelf units are invisible during night - extra move is a good start
   
3. More early faith for Byzantium - to assure they can regurarly found a religion and use their UA
   
4. Later free Great general for China - to avoid that he's always coverted into a citadel for the yields

I had an odd idea for a UA. Would it be possible to make the first settler capable of permanently consuming/destroying a food resource (wheat/banana/etc) in order to duplicate the first settler? You could balance the power of it by having the first settler pop their city in the process, so you can only ever have one free settler at a time, and it limits your choice of city placement. Happiness would also limit overdoing it, plus the need to guard the settler.

This might be appropriate for the Huns, given their ability to spread like a plague across the landscape.

mitsho- Thank you. Sounds cool.

Just while I remember- did Thal mention a while ago bringing back the increased rate of experience as a UA/wonder/policy effect? Would this work for Sweden or Ethiopia if tailored for a tall/defensive style? Also any thoughts on a 4 tile radius of workable tiles for a super city effect?

I am playing a game through as Japan now, and what a fun civ they've become since the vanilla game.

The dojos flow well into getting very high exp samurai into the field immediately upon acquisition of the technology. And the samurai are such a powerful unit - unlike a lot of unique units that don't influence gameplay much, these easily are at the heart of Japan strategy. I was surprised how crucial they were. Very happy with how the civs are being spiced up. I'm looking forward to trying out others as soon as the next version rolls out.

I second what Tomice said about adding more unique golden age flavor to Persia. I've tossed out a few ideas, no doubt there's better ones, but I think they do lack a little something. But the movement bonus is a good start. Something that makes playing culturally have a little more incentive to also make war in golden ages, in one way or another, would work good for how Persia is set up now. Some benefit for taking a city, perhaps.

On a side note:

The starting Mohawk warrior is crazy strong. The thing can swallow more than a dozen shots from rough-terrain-promoted archers! (while in forest) Combined with its speed, it's a one-man army, capable of threatening a city with little support.

An idea for the netherlands UA- Is it possible to give them a bonus on monopolised luxury resources? Maybe double yields and price if they have the only copies of the luxury developed (to give a nice early boost) and maybe quadruple yields on luxuries where every copy is within their cultural borders. Coupled with a (cash/happy?) bonus for discovering new luxuries could make for focused but flexible strategies. It is also historically relevant based on the monopolies of the spice islands and de beers diamonds (luxembourg close enough?).

I had a small idea about Polynesia. Why not let their ships pick up coastal ruins, that would spice up their early game a bit.

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2

I would like to know what the rationale is behind the changes to the various FLAVORS the LEADERS have.

The vanilla values are really different across the various types and leaders whereas in GEM the values are generally 2, 4, 6, 8 (with some exceptions).

eg 1 in vanilla Montezuma and Genghis Khan have really high values yet GEM sets them to 4.

eg 2 the SPACESHIP flavor for some leaders was 7 or 8 now those leaders have values of 2

eg 3 the NAVAL flavor has been changed across the board to 4 with the exception of Dido, Theodora, Harald, Elizabeth and William who have 8s.

Vanilla values give the impression of variety in LEADERS across the board yet now they have a very similar feel, more along the lines of grouped personality rather than individualities.

The 2KGames wiki says this:

In Civilization 5 a flavor represents a particular goal an AI player can pursue. Leaders have preset flavor so that the AI plays Alexander (Offence 8, City Defense 5, Gold 3, etc) differently than Gandhi (Offense 4, City Defense 7, Gold 4, etc). Flavors are associated with anything the AI player has to make decisions around such as Units, Buildings and Policies so leaders with high flavor in a certain area are more likely to build units that have high values in that flavor.

Click to expand...

So what do we gain in the changes made to these values?

I've completed about two thirds of the list.

While implementing some of these things, I unfortunately discovered we cannot feasibly change the Carthaginian mountain-crossing due to three design flaws. In G&K they removed mountain-crossing as a standalone promotion effect for unknown reasons, the UA is a boolean flag hardcoded into the game core, and the attrition damage is hardcoded in the game core.

Tomice said:

Spain
Very similar to Rome, but the Romans appear more versatile, and their UU/UB combo comes earlier than the Spanish UU's. Spain might need a bit better numbers on their UA to be competitive.

Click to expand...

Good point. But we might need to practically test them before drawing any conclusion.

Tomice said:

1. Songhia mosques should heal units or give extra XP - more focused civ, more unique combat gameplay
   
2. More "emotional" effect during golden ages for Persia - think how WC3 nightelf units are invisible during night - extra move is a good start
   
3. More early faith for Byzantium - to assure they can regurarly found a religion and use their UA
   
4. Later free Great general for China - to avoid that he's always coverted into a citadel for the yields

Click to expand...

Its a place of worship, not a battle ground. I think it is quite fine, an economical boost could be more fitting if it ever needs to be changed. We already have enough fully war oriented civs.

Regarding China, is there simply a way to make China's start GG not make citadels? A similar thing has been done in Aoe3 where Iroquois starting travious cannot make war huts for balance reasons.

Cool to hear that it goes forward with the list Any updates on the Celtic unique or other last changes proposed here?

Too bad about the Carthaginian UA. It seems really strange that they removed the mountain going option in G&K. It was a very popular feature in many vanilla mods (and aren't there some of those around still? Do they work or not? not sure...). So does that mean the Gebirgsjaeger is not possible with Austria as well in the form proposed in the first post? Hmm, not sure what better effect's possible here...

@Babri Do you feel a starting Citadel is too strong? I don't really feel that way, but okay. Before removing that unique and distinct feature, I'd rather reduce the base yields of the tile and move it back up with say bronze working or construction (any tile from the military side of the tree).

With Songhai, I just feel that a Unique building replacing a religious building is very restricting regarding gameplay choices, but it's rather minor.

@Expired_Reign As far as I remember, the priorities got redesigned a while ago to get better gameplay results (instead of just being a mirror of the supposed personalities of the historical figuers). This lead to the 2-4-6-8 stages you observed. I'd look for the exact post, but I guess Thal knows better where to find that

For some reason I'm unsurprised that Firaxis would hack in an ability instead of coding it properly

If we conclude that a starting citadel isn't too strong, I'm also very fine with it. I merely wanted to point out that it would very often be used this way, which could have unitended consequences.

I like the huge sight range and combat benefits more in the early game than constructing a citadel, though the citadel might be better for players who want to focus on wonders. I think the options have approximately equal value.

I tend to prefer the big combat bonus and sight for exploring and fighting barbarians myself too. If I need another GG for citadels, I can always get one from the honor tree and early combat.

China sure is one of the most powerful and interesting civs now:

• Turn-1 bonus that can be used in 3 different ways (General/Citadel/Golden Age!)
• Combat bonus during the whole game (through GG)
• One of the most popular UU's
• UB that offers extra gold and science, arguably the most versatile/useful yields
• All bonuses available until midgame
• Many bonuses available throughout the whole game
• No forced playstile, many options

I guess they'll be the next civ I play after the new Carthage

mystikx21 said:

I tend to prefer the big combat bonus and sight for exploring and fighting barbarians myself too. If I need another GG for citadels, I can always get one from the honor tree and early combat.

Click to expand...

What do you guys think about using the first GG for a Golden Age? It should clearly be the weakest option as far as I can tell, but I'd like someone to confirm this.

I love China. Definitely one of my favorite civs.

Quote from pthmix: Denmark - I don't really care. Ski Infantry and Jelling Stones are both fine.

Why oh why do Denmark have NORWEGIAN ski infanteri

Dosent really have anything to do with Denmark at all.

Either change to a Viking Nation " as I do" when I play and have the "Stavkirke http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stavkirke" and berserkers/longboat.

or split into two; Norway(A modern nation with focus on oil and sea) & Denmark(Same as before only without the ski infanteri, maybe jelling stones+berserkers)

@Tomice, I tend to use golden ages only once I've got my cities up and running. I suspect it would help early to pop one, but I find they're much more powerful with wide empires by the mid-game where 20% to all yields is hitting a lot of productive capacity versus the very small capacities early on from one city.

That said, if you have a lot of good tiles around and quickly improve them, a quick golden age could net you a wonder or a couple of policies or some surplus gold without too much.