Furor Teutonicus = Poor choice

I think Germany is a fun Civ to play. They are very flexible and good at many situations. The furor teutonics is supposed to represent the fact that Germany is a militaristic civ, they have always been militaristic ever since ancient times. Although they do get cheaper maintenance costs which also reflect that. I think that the UU is supposed to show that the Germanic tribes was the "pinnacle" of the barbarians, or at least the most ferocious warriors out of all the barbarians (barbarians as defined by the Romans). So according to civ V, the Germanic tribes had an advantage when fighting other northern European tribes, and the other tribes of northern Europe would defect to the Germans and integrate with their civilization.

But at the same time, the "Germanic tribes" are not really the same thing as the German civilization. The tribes where the ancestors to the civilization, but to the civilization itself. I think that the true German civilization started sometime around the Holy Roman Empire. The nation of Germany didn't exist until 1871, but I feel their civilization started long before that. The modern day nation is just another expression of the civilization which is about 1,000 years old. So if we look at Germany from that perspective, anything that happened during tribal times is pretty much irrelevant.

I like Germany the way it is, but if the UU did change, I would like to see something related to science/engineering/production. It would be cool to somehow integrate the 3 together into one UU. Somebody else was saying that Germany is a cultural civ, and I agree. Look at all the classical music that came from Germany for example. But I think that other civs are better known for culture, civs like France, and maybe even America with Hollywood and everything. The science/engineering/production would be perfect for Germany, because German scientists and engineers are probably the best in the world.

aluelkdf said:

I think Germany is a fun Civ to play. They are very flexible and good at many situations. The furor teutonics is supposed to represent the fact that Germany is a militaristic civ, they have always been militaristic ever since ancient times. Although they do get cheaper maintenance costs which also reflect that. I think that the UU is supposed to show that the Germanic tribes was the "pinnacle" of the barbarians, or at least the most ferocious warriors out of all the barbarians (barbarians as defined by the Romans). So according to civ V, the Germanic tribes had an advantage when fighting other northern European tribes, and the other tribes of northern Europe would defect to the Germans and integrate with their civilization.

But at the same time, the "Germanic tribes" are not really the same thing as the German civilization. The tribes where the ancestors to the civilization, but to the civilization itself. I think that the true German civilization started sometime around the Holy Roman Empire. The nation of Germany didn't exist until 1871, but I feel their civilization started long before that. The modern day nation is just another expression of the civilization which is about 1,000 years old. So if we look at Germany from that perspective, anything that happened during tribal times is pretty much irrelevant.

Click to expand...

I really don't believe that the Furor Teutonics has anything to do with the German tribes that existed in the Roman era. They are supposed to represent the way the Teutonic Knights operated from the 13th up until the 19th century. They were spread too thin to maintain a large standing army, instead they recruited volunteers and mercenaries when the needed to field a larger army. Since the game doesn't feature any historical mercenary armies offering themselves to the world leaders, they had to come up with a clever way of making it appear the Germans are recruiting conquered barbarians as mercenaries. The only red herring I feel in this approach is that the barbarians seem to be paying the Germans 25 gold each time this happens, which seems a little silly to me

Also the tribes that inhabited the non-Roman parts of Europe in those times tended to move around a lot, especially during the period of the great migration. So it is really hard to tell which tribe any Caucasian European is descendant from.

guten Tag!

I don't think it has anything to do with the Teutonic Knights.

The Teutons, like the Suebi, Germani, or Alemanni, were tribal names as decribed by several Romans, including Julius Caesar.

"Furor Teutonicus" means "Teutonic Fury" and more generally describes the ferocity of the Germanic tribes and "barbarians."

germans kept trying and failing for a domination victory so they gave up finally and went instead for a diplomatic victory, buying up all the city states around them. i hope they dont win the game.

Furor Teutonicus + Raging Barbarians = WIN

woodshadows said:

germans kept trying and failing for a domination victory so they gave up finally and went instead for a diplomatic victory, buying up all the city states around them. i hope they dont win the game.

Click to expand...

Hah hah! Epic.

Considering nobody has really tried to disprove my argumentation about the reasoning behind Furor Teutonicus... while repeating their own opinion once more... I will choose to make an attempt at a graceful exit from this thread.

Veltemaster said:

Considering nobody has really tried to disprove my argumentation about the reasoning behind Furor Teutonicus... while repeating their own opinion once more... I will choose to make an attempt at a graceful exit from this thread.

Click to expand...

I don't know what you mean by "disprove." Numerous people have contributed reasons why they feel that Furor Teutonicus ought to be reworked, including myself, and they are all compelling and well-reasoned. It is rather obvious to see where the developers got their inspiration from and there is really no need to disprove anything.

ferretbacon said:

I don't know what you mean by "disprove." Numerous people have contributed reasons why they feel that Furor Teutonicus ought to be reworked, including myself, and they are all compelling and well-reasoned. It is rather obvious to see where the developers got their inspiration from and there is really no need to disprove anything.

Click to expand...

I think I owe you a response ferretbacon, for showing me how abstruse my last reply may have come across to other readers.

I wasn't trying to be rude and perhaps I should have chosen my words more carefully, instead of trying to be cheeky...

What I meant was, that the arguments provide by others, when I weighed them against my own, did not make me change my mind about this matter. I won't try to start the discussion all over again, so I will respectfully agree to disagree.

Maybe some day the game designers themselves will shed some light on this in some sort of public statement. Until then everybody deserves their right to form their own opinion. Which is perhaps better than trying to make more educated guesses than the other about something that, in retrospect, I don't think is such a big a deal to me anymore, as I perhaps made it appear when I chose to post my own thoughts in this thread.

Cheers!

Veltemaster said:

What I meant was, that the arguments provide by others, when I weighed them against my own, did not make me change my mind about this matter. I won't try to start the discussion all over again, so I will respectfully agree to disagree.

Click to expand...

However, just for the sake of proper research, I will provide those who are truly looking for a definite answer to the question:
"Which part of history is the German UA based on"
with some pages I discovered by doing a few brief searches, from which I have drawn my conclusions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Germanic_peoples


This is a list of the Germanic tribes the designers could have chosen a name from if they had wanted to make it sound like the UA had been based on one of them.

Instead they specifically named it after the Teutons, which in turn was the name the Teutonic Order had based their own on.

Below is a little information I came across on the following website:

http://www.imperialteutonicorder.com/id26.html


You will also learn much more about this military order here from which you may form your own judgements. They also speak of volunteers and other sources of fresh, easily acquired forces.

This is probably the last I will have to say about this, but I owe it to you and to myself to at least provide people here with the information upon which I had based my arguments.

Cheers!

One of the defining traits of Germany is it's industrious nature, and when focused towards military results in the ability to field impressive armies--which it has done so numerous times dating back well before the actual unification into a single nation.

The reduced unit maintenance cost finishes half the requirement. The other half is giving the Civ the ability to fill up that 25% bonus with ease. Barbarian camps are one way to do it. It encourages players to "get out and fight" but not necessarily focused on other civs, similar to actual history of Germanic tribes fighting among each other, but never focusing a combined effort upon other areas in Europe (until modern wars, that is). It is a roundabout way, but it gets the job done.

I think the ability is fine as is. Several Civs have quickly fading traits/units, so the issue of the ability going to waste after Barb camps are wiped off the map isn't overly troubling for me. You either take advantage of it, or you don't, much like any other of the ancient/classical civs.

Maybe this:
Units given by militaristic city states are given x% more frequently. Defeated barb encampments will always offer to join your civ for gold*. Save x% on land unit maintenance.

*This would be a yes or no pop-up and the price would depend on the type of unit.

Also add x% hammers for all cities connected to the capital by road (including the capital) if that doesn't make the UA too complicated or powerful. Or have that and remove the CS bonus.

Edit: I'm not a proponent of bonuses after conquering because in most (admittedly not all) cases you're doing well already if you're conquering. Of course, that could still be fun if done right.

headcase said:

Maybe this:
Units given by militaristic city states are given x% more frequently. Defeated barb encampments will always offer to join your civ for gold*. Save x% on land unit maintenance.

*This would be a yes or no pop-up and the price would depend on the type of unit.

Also add x% hammers for all cities connected to the capital by road (including the capital) if that doesn't make the UA too complicated or powerful. Or have that and remove the CS bonus.

Click to expand...

Hey, this is a great idea for applying only a slight change as opposed to a more drastic one.

This would allow you to get more useful units and incentivize the formation of relationships with certain city-states, which would roughly correlate to the historical situation in the German area (that is, the confederation of smaller kingdoms and provinces that formed the amalgamation that was the Holy Roman Empire).

@JohnBlack: I believe cities already get a hammer bonus when connected by railroad.

Also, the historical transition of Germany into the industrial age is already reflected in the Neuschwanstein Castle wonder, which requires railroad.

Finally, I would say Germany being cast as a militaristic Civ in the game in historically accurate.