You are wrong... their unique unit does not have a unique ability, it is a promotion available to any other civ!!
You are doing a great job in missing the whole point.
Well with specific unit ability for a civ would make UUs not that special.
..but at the same time it would make the whole time span of the civ (for every civ) more unique.
For example if all Aztec infantry gets 50% bonus in jungles then there will not be much point of creating large no. of jaguars as they will get obsolete quickly, u'll be wasting lots of hammers & gold as well as the newly created swords will be almost as good as jaguar -> swords.
You obviously arent thinking outside the box here. Even tough you would have civ specific unit ability, it would not mean that you cant have
unique units.
Also removing unique promos after upgrade would probably lead to boring UUs like they were in cIV where bland strength increase was much stronger & took away the careful planning of ur army.
First of all im not talking about giving UU’s just a strength increase, since civ specific unit ability would not mean that the UU's could not have these completely unique abilities. However, if you say that giving UU’s only strength increase takes away the planning of army, then you must be free from planning your army when playing as England and/or Rome.
Except in developer games even the Developers have shown they use this so called "exploit" in the past.
If that was designed as a feature from the start, then maybe they just completely forgot to add that said feature to England and Rome. Sounds like a highly unlikely screw up to me.
If they themselves nurture units over time... why would they change it?
Nurturing units in the game and giving unbalanced UU abilities to civs are two different things.
AI's incapability doesn't mean Firaxis agrees with you.
Oh man you are definetly correct! We have seen that many many times that Firaxis isn’t too bothered about the fact how the AI handles some specific features. So you truly are right about that, but that is actually one of the biggest problems of the series. You must realize that im not actually asking to remove anyhting from the game, im just asking to fix something.
You'll note that I never said "remove" in any form.
Fair enough, as long as you’ll just note that I never said anything about finding “true balance”.
6 warriors is complete overkill, not to mention impractical for defense, and a huge waste of hammers and gold (unit maintenance isn't linear...) if you don't intend to do something with them. The starting warrior, a scout and a couple archers is much more than enough to defend yourself. And a warrior rush is virtually impossible to pull off.
Your point being?
Thus, if jaguars don't keep their special promotions, they are pretty close to being useless.
When you look at the big picture what im been saying here lately, then you should propably realize that I have not said that civs should not have long lasting boosts to its units.
1:There are civs which would have no UU whatsoever worth mentioning if special promotions didn't carry over. Aztecs and Ottomans are the most extreme examples.
Same thing what I said abowe.
2:There are UUs which only get a strength bonus and are perfectly fine that way. Bowmen comes to mind. Sure, they become normal crossbowmen after upgrade, but they are so powerful during their age that they make up for it. Extra strength means that you will win fights with more ease (which means you will need a lower investment to invade a neighbour), and also means that most of your troops will survive (so that you are ready for the next war), and will get more promotions (so when you upgrade them, they are on average better than other standard units that have also been upgraded).
Sure,
IF you are at war at the moment, if not then that’s about it then. For example a ability that was available right from the start of the game and that will also last to the end of the game is much more powerful, when used in the right way of course. Btw I have already told you this.
3: If you will, special promotions spread the "military golden age" of a civ across a couple of eras, instead of just one unit. Your promoted units will inevitably die, so their uniqueness just takes longer to disappear than other UUs.
When you also take the AI into concider, I do not see how this current system would be so much better way of achieving things than the system that I have described, where you would have civ specific unit ability right from the start but also UU’s.
4: Recycling one of your arguments: They are Unique Units, they are supposed to be unique, thus different from each other. Some get fancy promotions, some get extra strength, some get a mix of the two, and some are completely changed from the base unit.
I agree, they should truly and only be unique
units! If you want to have long lasting unit effects (wich would actually be great), then why not give civs a specific unit ability + with UU’s?
5: Firaxis agrees with me. This isn't an exploit. It's such a big part of how you play some civs (that unfortunately you don't use), that it would have been fixed by now otherwise.
You have not yet answered to my question. If that is such a big part to the game, then why Firaxis denied this “big part of the game” from at least two civs, England and Rome? That just does not make any sense.