It strikes me as a bizarre design choice to have wild animals as "units" roaming the landscape and able to attack your units. In Civ, a single unit (for example a warrior) does not actually represent one guy with an axe obviously - it represents a unit of perhaps a hundred or more individuals. Therefore an animal "unit" would have to represent a coherent force of hundreds of animals, all moving in unison to attack an encroaching enemy. Now i don't know about you, but to my knowledge animals don't possess this kind of intelligence. Even if you make another assumption...that a bear unit just represents "an area with a high bear population", i still don't believe that would be any threat to a group of trained warriors. Even a settler unit would be unthreatened really...most settlers would be able to use their hunting skills effectively. The only possibility of defeat would occur if every bear within a 200 km radius decided to come and attack you simultaneously...in which case i'd still bet my house on the warriors/settlers.
Luckily it will be easy to mod them to either not exist, or have an attack and defence of zero, but i believe it was a fundamentally stupid decision to put them there in the first place.
Luckily it will be easy to mod them to either not exist, or have an attack and defence of zero, but i believe it was a fundamentally stupid decision to put them there in the first place.