Are you really in favour of uniques ?

shaglio said:

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you seem to be hung up on this notion that Civ players only want to play their own country. I can assure you that I've played hundreds of games of Civ 5 and I've only played America maybe half a dozen times. I like variety and I try out all the different civs (including well over 200 modded civs in the Creation & Customization forum).

Click to expand...

I do that too, except that I also choose random sometimes. When I choose random, I never knew what civilization I could get but when I finally find out, I try to use that civilization to the best of my abilities and to the best of the local terrain.

Naokaukodem said:

Well it's not about my opinion if you understand well what i said : people submitted to uniques will fail to see the roleplay of their own country marvels, because uniques drive them to choose civs according to gameplay elements aka uniques.

No, it was about logic too. I was deliberating about a statement about the contradiction of two things in my argumentation. Solution = illusions.

Click to expand...

That is why people are telling you this is going nowhere. It's not that they don't understand, it's that they don't agree with the assessments you make. Simply repeating your opinion, saying people are blind and it's just logic won't convince anybody.

Acken said:

That is why people are telling you this is going nowhere. It's not that they don't understand, it's that they don't agree with the assessments you make. Simply repeating your opinion, saying people are blind and it's just logic won't convince anybody.

Click to expand...

That does make sense, but sometimes the skill of a player is a lot more important than being unique because once a skilled player knows how to use its own civilizations successfully, than one skilled player would be able to use any other civilization successfully. It almost seems too personal but it isn't because the uniques look like they could provide a good path of success but they don't always succeed particularly when there's a large quantity of resources->military->dominance->whatever->good player skills.

Acken said:

That is why people are telling you this is going nowhere. It's not that they don't understand, it's that they don't agree with the assessments you make. Simply repeating your opinion, saying people are blind and it's just logic won't convince anybody.

Click to expand...

I don't think that you have to agree or disagree with my assessments, IMO they are all true, it's all about how you will find faults in them (answered definitely), or find other assessments that will completely obliterate mines.

I don't think replayability obliterates completely the fact to roleplay its own country, as said specifically. Not only uniques are not all replayability, far from it as I showed it (someone said 95% of it, LOL), but no uniques would also allow replayability. (do I play my country ? Do I play another one ? If it changes only city names and CLSL, that doesn't affect gameplay, I will at least be free to roleplay any country within my own ideas, not according to a gameplay scheme that may dictate me how to profit from its uniques within some game systems that are far to constitute a creditable scenery)

Naokaukodem said:

I don't think that you have to agree or disagree with my assessments, IMO they are all true

Click to expand...

This is getting funny.

Naokaukodem said:

I don't think replayability obliterates completely the fact to roleplay its own country, as said specifically. Not only uniques are not all replayability, far from it as I showed it (someone said 95% of it, LOL), but no uniques would also allow replayability. (do I play my country ? Do I play another one ? If it changes only city names and CLSL, that doesn't affect gameplay, I will at least be free to roleplay any country within my own ideas, not according to a gameplay scheme that may dictate me how to profit from its uniques within some game systems that are far to constitute a creditable scenery)

Click to expand...

What I hear you saying is that you would like to roleplay as your favorite civilization (possibly one that is not one of the default choices), but you feel prohibited from doing that. You feel that because unique attributes exist, you must choose the one that you feel is most advantageous from a gameplay perspective, and this limits your ability to role-play.

The problem, then, seems to be a limitation not in the game, but in your approach to the problem. Earlier, you mentioned feeling the need to always take Egypt for their happiness bonuses. There are many alternatives, including taking a faith-based civ such as the Celts and using religion to generate happiness.

Very few of the unique attributes are objectively better in every circumstance. If you try, you can find a way to play and win with any given civilization. You can then use a mod, or simply rename the cities and units in-game, to match the civilization you want to play as.

If that isn't good enough, you could also download a total conversion mod that will remove unique attributes.

Frankly, I myself, and many other players, would get bored if all three civilizations were visually distinct but functionally identical. If I want to play a game with those conditions, I could play Risk, or Stratego, or Monopoly, or Catan, or chess, or any of a hundred other strategy games. Those are all great games with a fun social aspect, but I play Civilization because I could play for years and not exhaust the possible combinations of unique attributes and strategies. If all civilizations were identical, I could play maybe 5-6 games at most before it gets stale. That is why I and many others contend that unique attributes add replayability.

I understand and agree with most arguments for uniques.

But it would be nice if uniques are not decided in the beginning by choosing your civ but while gaming.
So e.g. everybody could develop steel and bushido do build samurai. Or decide to delve into mystique powers to build Kris swordmen.
That is the fun of Civ to have an alternate history. To build royal libraries as the Vikings, strike fear into the hearts of our enemies with our Swedish camel archers, flee from Brazilian impi.

Wonders are not restricted to their historical builder nation and a lot of fun for that reason.

Uniques can complicate modding quite a bit if you have to change not just one building or unit but have to consider all the uniques too.

I don't know what a good solution would be since I now understand that uniques can add quite a bit of variety and replay ability. But I don't like to be forced down one way that might not fit the circumstances (map, neighbours, ..) at all. And I do like to be able to build Samurais, Elephants, or .. as any nation if circumstances are right. ..

Biologist said:

What I hear you saying is that you would like to roleplay as your favorite civilization (possibly one that is not one of the default choices), but you feel prohibited from doing that. You feel that because unique attributes exist, you must choose the one that you feel is most advantageous from a gameplay perspective, and this limits your ability to role-play.

The problem, then, seems to be a limitation not in the game, but in your approach to the problem.

Click to expand...

Yep, but that's not only about me and also CLSL (which I value as v important to roleplay) have been taken out since uniques made their apparition in the series, and i can see the logic.

Biologist said:

Earlier, you mentioned feeling the need to always take Egypt for their happiness bonuses. There are many alternatives, including taking a faith-based civ such as the Celts and using religion to generate happiness.

Click to expand...

It's rather off topic but i would never count on religion in order to get happiness, personally.

Biologist said:

Frankly, I myself, and many other players, would get bored if all three civilizations were visually distinct but functionally identical. If I want to play a game with those conditions, I could play Risk, or Stratego, or Monopoly, or Catan, or chess, or any of a hundred other strategy games. Those are all great games with a fun social aspect, but I play Civilization because I could play for years and not exhaust the possible combinations of unique attributes and strategies. If all civilizations were identical, I could play maybe 5-6 games at most before it gets stale. That is why I and many others contend that unique attributes add replayability.

Click to expand...

5-6 games ? I don't think so. I played Civ2 without uniques, I quitted playing only when i beat the highest difficulty level. It made still hundreds of hours and frankly was so much fun.

Acken > welln it's your opinion.

lefuet > this is what i referred to in the OP.

you seem to be upset that your country is either not playable in Civ5 or it exists but it isn't top tier