Denmark - Completely useless or...?

Haven't been on the forums much in the past few months. Saw this thread and wondered "What happened?" Vikings/Denmark was a fearsome civ in previous editions of Civilization. I've played a couple of games as Denmark to see for myself if this civ is as weak as people said. I must agree with the Original Poster and others that Denmark has been neutered to the point of being a bottom-tier civ.

What to do about it?

I agree that the Norwegian Ski Infantry should be replaced by something else. It comes too late in the game to help.

We're 6 pages into this thread and no one has yet mentioned the Lego Factory as a Denmark UB. It could generate a luxury resource unique to Denmark, that would generate happiness and could be sold to other civs for cash.

On a more serious note, perhaps the answer lies in the opening description for the Denmark civ. Harald Bluetooth's ringed fortresses could be a Denmark UB in place of walls or castles. The Ringed Fortress would both increase happiness and perhaps have a lesser version of the citadel ability to take HP away from any enemy unit that ended its turn adjacent to the city.

While the Berserker is historically accurate, I'm still thinking that the UU should be a boat. A Viking Longboat that could cross oceans and was available earlier than the caravel (say, at the same time as the galleass) would enable Denmark to cross the seas and explore hundreds of years before their European neighbors, as the Vikings did historically.

Pondering ended, you have my two cents.

The Danish should just get a Legoland building, which replaces the Castle and damages all enemy units that move through the city's sphere of influence.

(Alternatively it could provide gold depending on your tourism output, but that is far less funny)

Well the longships are represented by the UA, and I think it's a lot better to have them done this way than with a naval UU. Denmark isn't very powerful precisely because it succeeds so well at reproducing the Vikings' modus operandi, which was to raid and pillage while armies were away, and then move on to somewhere else to get more spoils. It just so happens that this isn't a very effective strategy in general in CiV, so Denmark is weak.

And yeah, Norwegian Ski Infantry is meh, I guess they could have done something better there (although it's not that bad, the bonus works on hills which makes it decent).

Speaking of Denmark, I tried the scenario "Scramble of Africa" (I'm not a big fan of scenarios, but this one is pretty good) and I picked Italy. Funny thing, they have the Denmark UA, and even the "longships-style" embarked units. When attacking Egypt, I send Fusiliers to the coast, pillage coastals caravans, then re-embark on the same turn, the units being protected by the ironclads. Next turn, same thing to pillage the improvments.
I just realized with this scenario how powerful is the UA, and in a game with Harald, combined with the Bersekers. They can litteraly wreck a coastal civ whitout taking any damage. I agree they don't need a naval UU, the UA is strong enough and depicts the "coastal raiders" side of this civ.

George Abitbol said:

Speaking of Denmark, I tried the scenario "Scramble of Africa" (I'm not a big fan of scenarios, but this one is pretty good) and I picked Italy. Funny thing, they have the Denmark UA, and even the "longships-style" embarked units. When attacking Egypt, I send Fusiliers to the coast, pillage coastals caravans, then re-embark on the same turn, the units being protected by the ironclads. Next turn, same thing to pillage the improvments.
I just realized with this scenario how powerful is the UA, and in a game with Harald, combined with the Bersekers. They can litteraly wreck a coastal civ whitout taking any damage. I agree they don't need a naval UU, the UA is strong enough and depicts the "coastal raiders" side of this civ.

Click to expand...

I like the Italy UA because it gets 5/5 movement which converts into 4/2 movement on the ground upon disembarking. They cover a ton of ground on railroads.

Resipsa said:

I think they're situationally good, unfortunately in those situations other civs are better. Frankly now that I think of it they are the worst

Click to expand...

I take it back the Iroquois are worst; at least with Denmark I can go Liberty Pyramids and Free Pillage with Berzerkers and then attack so the AI focus on my melee units and not siege units.

Resipsa said:

I take it back the Iroquois are worst; at least with Denmark I can go Liberty Pyramids and Free Pillage with Berzerkers and then attack so the AI focus on my melee units and not siege units.

Click to expand...

Iroquois have 2 decent economic uniques. That alone makes them better than Denmark's no economic uniques.

azzaman333 said:

Iroquois have 2 decent economic uniques. That alone makes them better than Denmark's no economic uniques.

Click to expand...

2 ? The Great Warpath is alright, although more clunky than it looks like because of the "in friendly territory" part.

Longhouses are not decent. They're awful. I mean, if you're playing on Arborea, good for you, but they need very specific conditions to be better than Workshops. The only Iroquois game where I haven't found them to be a downgrade from Workshops is a TSL Earth map with a billion furs and deer in North America, and even then they weren't that insane.

And Denmark has a strong economic unique : pillage costs no movement.

azzaman333 said:

Iroquois have 2 decent economic uniques. That alone makes them better than Denmark's no economic uniques.

Click to expand...

Longhouses are superior for approximately 30-40 turns in game and then they start to be inferior. Warpath only works for forest tiles in your territory that amounts to two maybe three gold per city.

Norway is the worst civ in the game, I agree and as azzaman said, the norweigan ski infantry is without doubt a huge part of the problem. I consider them to be the most useless UU in the game. They should either get a serious nerf so they no longer suck, or just replace them with something else entirely (viking warship? idk)

caketastydelish said:

Norway is the worst civ in the game, I agree and as azzaman said, the norweigan ski infantry is without doubt a huge part of the problem. I consider them to be the most useless UU in the game. They should either get a serious nerf so they no longer suck, or just replace them with something else entirely (viking warship? idk)

Click to expand...

They aren't actively worse though Korean Turtle Ships which are worse than caravels

Teproc said:

2 ? The Great Warpath is alright, although more clunky than it looks like because of the "in friendly territory" part.

Longhouses are not decent. They're awful. I mean, if you're playing on Arborea, good for you, but they need very specific conditions to be better than Workshops. The only Iroquois game where I haven't found them to be a downgrade from Workshops is a TSL Earth map with a billion furs and deer in North America, and even then they weren't that insane.

Click to expand...

Resipsa said:

Longhouses are superior for approximately 30-40 turns in game anpd then they start to be inferior. Warpath only works for forest tiles in your territory that amounts to two maybe three gold per city.

Click to expand...

Iroquois bonuses are geared toward playing wide. Longhouses are generally better for smaller cities because the percent bonus is worth less, and Great Warpath obviously gives more gpt with more cities. Definitely not top tier, but better than Denmark nonetheless.

azzaman333 said:

Iroquois bonuses are geared toward playing wide. Longhouses are generally better for smaller cities because the percent bonus is worth less, and Great Warpath obviously gives more gpt with more cities. Definitely not top tier, but better than Denmark nonetheless.

Click to expand...

Its still better to open 3-4 city and then conquer in the mid game than to spam out 8-10 cities to get +1/+2 hammers per city in the midgame. Thats the thing you actually have to invest the hammers in the small cities to get the longhouse. I'd genuinely prefer to use a three movement point UU that can pillage twice and attack all in the same turn.

Denmark is not great but is definitely better than the Iroquois.

The free disembark and extra movement gives warfare a whole new dimension, you can land, set up and fire siege in the same turn. That is a massive force multiplier.

The berserkers come much earlier and are beasts when they first arrive. They also have extra movement to open up warfare. When you get them they will be way stronger than anything else at the time and will let you take what you want.

The Nordic infantry are not very good but they are on the same upgrade path as your berserkers and extra movement opens up warfare options. It is better than the base unit that is for sure. Korea has caravels that can't enter deep water and trebuchet that are not good at taking cities.

What do the Iroquois have? Free roads in forests in friendly territory, that is pretty damn restrictive. On a normal map that gets you a free road tile or two per city that you will need to add railroads to get the production bonus.

Mohawk warriors were great in vanilla when iron showed late and melee were tough, now iron showing earlier takes away some of their luster, you need ranged units to take a city, their increased combat in forests is pretty restrictive and they still need iron to promote to muskets and beyond. What exactly is their purpose?

Long houses are better only if you are working three or more forests and are worse late game when you would be better with the percentage bonus.

The AI Iroquois is good because he has a forest bias which he chops down for the bonus hammers, a high unit spam of melee that in a carpet are a threat, and a predilection for massive expanding which coupled with AI bonus production and happy leads to large and productive empires that make a lot of units and wonders.

If Denmark AI used their disembark and movement abilities properly they would be the scariest AI to meet near the coast.

Resipsa said:

They aren't actively worse though Korean Turtle Ships which are worse than caravels

Click to expand...

No, turtle ships just have a different purpose.

Turtle ships are meant specifically for war rather than travel, something you should factor in before choosing Korea, which regardless is a far better civ than Denmark even though Korea isn't particularly good.

NSI are exactly the same as what they replace, only they get a tundra/snow bonus which is almost completely worthless.

caketastydelish said:

No, turtle ships just have a different purpose.

Turtle ships are meant specifically for war rather than travel, something you should factor in before choosing Korea, which regardless is a far better civ than Denmark even though Korea isn't particularly good.

NSI are exactly the same as what they replace, only they get a tundra/snow bonus which is almost completely worthless.

Click to expand...

Well your point was worse UU, Caravels are for reaching CS and other trade across the globe across the globe and there isn't another unit in the same time period that lets you do this for Korea. At least NSI doesn't hamper you, heck slingers are pretty bad at protecting workers I'd say they are worse than NSI.

Resipsa said:

Its still better to open 3-4 city and then conquer in the mid game than to spam out 8-10 cities to get +1/+2 hammers per city in the midgame. Thats the thing you actually have to invest the hammers in the small cities to get the longhouse. I'd genuinely prefer to use a three movement point UU that can pillage twice and attack all in the same turn.

Click to expand...

So basically what you're saying is if you play to the sole strength of Denmark, they're better than not playing to the strengths of the Iroquois. Good logic.

Resipsa said:

Well your point was worse UU, Caravels are for reaching CS and other trade across the globe across the globe and there isn't another unit in the same time period that lets you do this for Korea. At least NSI doesn't hamper you, heck slingers are pretty bad at protecting workers I'd say they are worse than NSI.

Click to expand...

Whatever. At least Inca as a whole is better than Norway, and they aren't even particularly great. So is even Korea, and Korea sucks IMO, especially on higher difficulty settings.

If you're playing as Korea just understand it's a given you won't found the world congress. And after all that's ok, you (meaning people in general) usually don't anyway in most of their games.

At least in return for that rather small sacrifice you get a much better combat unit. The NSI is the worst in the game because where as things like the Jannisary (one of the best) are basically "+25" of average, the NSI is like "+.05". By that I mean their UU sucks. Even the musket men, which aren't that great, are lightyears ahead of the NSI.

On top of this Norway's UU is terrible. Granted not as bad as it used to be now that pillaging heals.

Personally I think giving their ocean tiles a production bonus could be a start.

edit: for whatever this is worth, I call Polynesia the second worst civ. I say that because none of their stuff seems particularly useful (still better than Denmark) and in all my games Polynesia does pathetic, never even surviving until the end of the game. Seriously, in every game I've played that I can remember, by the Industrial era or so Polynesia was gone. Same goes for Denmark of course. Difference being, at least with Polynesia you can maybe get the world congress by being the first to discover everybody else. But Denmark just sucks.

Korea sucks? Yeah, as well as Arabs, Babylon, Maya, Poland and the others. It's on a whole another power level from useless civs like Denmark, Polynesia and such.

The problem with the pillage bonus is that it has a rather narrow window of opportunity to be of a real help to your economy, while the bonus healing for free is rather limited and not particularly helpful in the artillery era and further.