is Morocco's UA a joke?

That's why you only use the UA to attract other civs' trade routes. The gold isn't so great (though it's hardly insignificant- I frequently produce 100-200 GPT via trades in the mid to late stages), it's the science.


All you should care about is the beakers. You can either get it through internal food routes (although a lot of people like these, I don't think they're worth it in most cases) if you don't have good trade partners, or from more advanced civs. Everyone that says Morocco's UA is worthless has argued it based on the GPT/CPT. Completely misses the point of the UA- your trade partners benefit from your UA. Why did Firaxis do this? Because Morocco is meant to be played diplomatically via trade.

everyone gets extra science from trade routes though. I haven't seen any evidence that I get more incoming trade routes as Morocco than I did with other civs.

You make 100-200 GPT from incoming trade routes?? I've never been anywhere close to that. My outgoing trade routes form the vast majority of trade income.

Ok, but does everyone have Morocco's UA which gives incentive for other civs to choose you to trade with over other civs? Not really.

Therefore, if I am trading with everyone, and many of them are sending trade routes back to me, who is getting the most gain, in the end? And when each of those routes provides a bit of science/ incoming or outgoing (usually- can't speak for difficulties below Emp), it really adds up.


And no, they wont always get equal science boni from you. They're in fact bound to be giving you more science in the early stages of the game with the AI's tech advantage.

I suppose that 2 extra gold for the AI is a small incentive, but at that early point in the game, trade seems to be much more dependent on physical proximity. I just don't see them getting many extra routes out of it.

I have only played one game though as Morocco, I'll come back to this once I've played a couple more and have a better feel.

*shrug* If you're not playing with InfoAddict, pick it up. It makes it very easy to see what's going on.

To the AI, +2 is a numerical advantage, and thus it's likely to grab it. They don't think like humans do (haha, they don't really think at all), which is the important part. If I saw that a civ would give me +10 GPT and +1 BPT, but I would be giving them +2 BPT, regardless of the quantity of gold, I wouldn't intentionally trade with them. Not much I can do if they send routes to me, but I definitely wouldn't be handing them free science. The AI doesn't see it that way and, as far as I'm aware, calculates almost entirely based on the GPT portion of the deal.


Idk, I guess it's just one of those things you have to experience a few times. I've seen my science/gold explode past the AI for three games now as Morocco, two Emp and one King. I don't think I suddely came up with a strat to stomp the AI better than with any other civ. I think the UA is just that influential over time.

Teholb said:

The gold/culture is good in the early game, but I'm telling you, the main benefit is the early free science. When you start at 8 or 10, I don't recall off the top of my head, +1 is a lot. And considering that the amount of incoming trade routes is unlimited . . . you can really make a lot out of something that at first seems weak. All that free science gives you tech earlier, which allow you to reap their benefits sooner, and so on until you've got a nice tech lead over the AI if you've played your cards right. And, of course, if you had the fortune to have a major civ trading partner asap.

Click to expand...

I don't even consider abilities that are dependent on the AI to do something for you to get the benefit.

Suit yourself.

I enjoy bribing neighboring AI to war with eachother, forcing them to send even more trade routes to me. Their economies stagnate and I actually derive real benefit from it. I think that's a really interesting and fun playstyle. You can think as you like, but it's a bit silly to ignore such a potentially valuable tool just because you have to cooperate a little. As I said, suit yourself.

All I know is that my first game with Morocco made me crazy rich... like rich enough to own alliances with all the city states on my Standard Map with 180 to nearly 400 influence with each. Right before each WC vote I'd have about 5000 gold to spend on any CS that might have been grabbed by another civ.

I also was never DOWed, but that was probably more because I got lucky and ended up on my own continent. Made early trading a pain, but once I could cross oceans, I made tons of gold and had an easy Culture victory a couple turns before I was about to be elected world leader.

Teholb said:

*shrug* If you're not playing with InfoAddict, pick it up. It makes it very easy to see what's going on.

To the AI, +2 is a numerical advantage, and thus it's likely to grab it. They don't think like humans do (haha, they don't really think at all), which is the important part. If I saw that a civ would give me +10 GPT and +1 BPT, but I would be giving them +2 BPT, regardless of the quantity of gold, I wouldn't intentionally trade with them. Not much I can do if they send routes to me, but I definitely wouldn't be handing them free science. The AI doesn't see it that way and, as far as I'm aware, calculates almost entirely based on the GPT portion of the deal.

Click to expand...

I don't see it that way either. The 1 or 2 points science is a pitiance, except perhaps at the very, very early game stages. It's barely there at all (unless you start going nuts with trade routes), and only reflects that civ is losing the science game, and two beakers isn't likely to bring him back. Far better to send him gold than someone who's currently a tech rival and threat.

Of course, that's all purely a matter of preference.

In the early game is when +1-3 matters the most. Because you're only producing 10-20.

The whole point of the UA is to get your civ out early. The AI always starts with a tech lead at King+, I believe, so I don't see how that part of your argument is valid. You're also only considering it from the view point of 1 v 1. I never play CiV 1v1, and if you do, I guess that makes this moot. The point is to gather science from many different civs and thereby gain an edge on them all. Get your Library/NC out before them or at a competitive time with them, and you're good to go.


Science is the ultimate key to victory. Early science wins games.


edit:
also, tech flow from trade routes doesn't work on an overall "who has more science" basis. It's the number of techs that each civ knows that their trade partners don't. If India knows how to sail and make pots, but I know how to mine and quarry stone, we'll both trade 2 beakers with eachother. So you'll almost always be getting science from other civs, even if you're ahead overall.

Yeah I was disappointed when I discovered the culture per turn was hilariously low, kinda crushing my hopes for a possible Morocco cultural victory.
While the gold bonus is nice, I think the culture per turn should be buffed somewhat.

The thing is, with that gold you can buy a lot of culture. That's what i did in my game as Morocco. Bought Cultural CSs, bought culture buildings, bought tons of gold/production buildings to make it easier to build culture buildings. It was pretty crazy how much gold I was making off of tons of deals with everyone.

Morocco's all about the early head start and being a preferred trade port for competitors. This is BNW, where being valuable to your neighbors keeps them from beating you up. Since your trade ties are going to be closest to your nearest neighbors, that keeps you on diplomatically happy ground with the civs that would be a big threat to you. Then, use the jump from your early tech and culture boosts to catch up with the AI earlier and slingshot ahead, while maintaining rock solid alliances.

My current Morocco game on Emperor, I went in intending to use my economic power to bully my neighbors, especially when Hiawatha and William kept expanding into me. I ended up with only 3 cities at the start, but they were solid and on the coast. So rather than run military, I ran Piety and Tradition first, followed by Rationalism. With Jesuit Education and a focus on peaceful development, I'm a religious, cultural, tech, and economic powerhouse (the entire continent is Muslim!). And now for further expansion, I'm part of a grand alliance with my neighbors to go out and take down enemies--currently sending my fleet to take Zulu's capital from the back while they stalemate at a land chokepoint with William. And when the AI urges you to war, you don't take the diplomacy hit. It's great. Civ finally has true, intangible soft power, and offers new subtle ways to play. Morocco is that kind of civ--powerful in a subtle way.

Edgehopper said:

Morocco's all about the early head start and being a preferred trade port for competitors. This is BNW, where being valuable to your neighbors keeps them from beating you up.

Click to expand...

While it appears that people have found parts of the code supporting this, in practice it seems meaningless in a game where you can play as any civ and have exactly the same experience of international peace. If I can rely on peaceful coexistence until the Industrial Era as Indonesia on a Pangea with Askia as my neighbour, or as Siam or Venice on continents and islands, what diplomatic value to I get from being Morocco (not least because I may have had that peace partly because Askia was busy spending his early game wiping out Morocco)?

Indeed, anecdotally, Morocco is the only civ I've seen as an AI that's been wiped out by another AI every time it's been in play.

That's due in part to what I said earlier in this thread: the AI doesn't take BPT into account oin trade routes. I've seen them send me 4 while they receive 1 just because they were getting more gold than any other civ could offer on trade routes. The AI cannot plan and play strategically in the same way that you, with your superior human intellect, can.

Something to keep in mind for late game is that if you want a faster Cultural Victory, then you'll want to have trade routes to other civs, even if it does mean they get beakers. The extra modifier for trade routes is too good to pass up, even if it does help others catch up with you science-wise.

PhilBowles said:

Indeed, anecdotally, Morocco is the only civ I've seen as an AI that's been wiped out by another AI every time it's been in play.

Click to expand...

Morocco AI has been really strong in game's I've played. As usual, anecdotal evidence shouldn't be taken too seriously.

My experiences playing as Morocco and Venice were both very peaceful. My experiences playing as France, Poland, and the Shoshone weren't warlike by G&K standards, but definitely moreso than with the two trading empires. But again, it's hard to make generalizations on the anecdotes from a few games.

Morocco is very underwhelming and disappointing. They sounded good on paper and I was excited to play as them, but once I played them I realized all of their bonuses aren't as useful as you'd think. Without Petra, the Kasbah is basically a glorified fort. Rarely are you ever going to want to work a tile that only provides 1 food, 1 hammer, and 1 gold. There'll certainly be better options than that. Their UU is just another bland cavalry unit that is really only good at defense at home, and you won't need to build many of them at all because they're not too useful. Their UA is disappointing because it doesn't end up making much of a difference in the long run. A few extra culture points and gold early game helps, but not enough to make up for a weak UU and UI.

I would definitely like to see Morocco get improved in the next patch.

Build Kasbah on desert hills or floodplains. I don't think it is weak at all.

UU's are all quite bland with a few exceptions, so hard for me to knock off points for "more of the same". At least there is some synergy with Morocco's UU with using Berber near Kasbah--many UU's are on their own with nothing.

UA I'm still on the fence. +1 culture is nothing to instantly reject; the early culture can and does snowball into more policies and bonuses. If you want proof try playing a game with half the monuments you normally would have; a loss of only a few culture points, but I guarantee you will notice it in the long run.

Like I mentioned earlier, I think they have enough to have a solid place as a mid-tier Civ. Not game-breakingly powerful, but certainly better than many other Civs.

The Kasbah can go on hills and flood plains too. 3/1/1 and 1/3/1 are better yields then you typically get out of ANY tile that doesn't have a special resource on it.