Ghandi- what is he good for, now?

Moriarte said:
If that was the case i would have four 15+ cities by turn 100 every time i play, each one producing a wonder every 10 turns.
Click to expand...

That's nonsense. There's a big gap between "happiness is hard to get" and "I can build 15+ cities by turn 100, each one producing a wonder every 10 turns".

Happiness is too easy to get with mercantile city-states and religion. I really don't understand why you don't see this.

Anyway, I don't have any ideas to fix Gandhi. I've always thought that his UA was one of the more creative ones, if not exactly one of the more enjoyable ones for me to play. But as long as going tall is so easy (because food caps way before happiness if you're not bad or incredibly unlucky), Gandhi's UA is indeed pretty useless. :(

Nerf religion! :)
 
I useto love playing Gandhi, but post G&K his UA is definitely less useful. Its not just the new city-states, but the distribution of them in maps. Before G&K you could easily befriend all five/six maritime cs (standard size - 16 city-states) which could easily push your pop up to 60, but post G&K, you would be lucky to have four maritime (usually avg 3 cs'es of each type in standard) cs'es and would be hard-pressed to really get pop up to 40+. So there's less happiness 'saved' from Gandhi's UA in the late game and seeing as how his early game has always been atrocious its hard to make a case of Gandhi's UA being useful.

Also after the G&K patch, the courthouse fix prevents Gandhi from doing the wide-domination strat.

Honestly the only way to 'fix' India as a civ is to buff his UU or UB, as with other civs a weaker UA often means a stronger UU or UB to make up for it.
 
I haven't played Ghandi with GnK yet. But I would assume that less unhappiness is more population is more scientific output, a least if you are building libraries and schools. The difficulty of getting a 40+ or a productive ( just grassland ) city could be overcome by religious traits.
To overcome difficulties at the beginning, The UA could be changed to > pop 6 cities change to 1/2 unhappiness per citizen and double unhappiness per city as 3 cityunhappiness + 6 pop unhappiness equals 6 cityunhappiness + 3 pop unhappiness.

Why I never liked going tall in vanilla was that each new city provides another (luxury) resource, so restricting yourself to 4 cities didn't give you all the luxury and strategic resources.

I never liked Indias UB as it equals the castle. As I hardly ever buiild citywalls, building citywalls and a fort, ... ?!? If the fort was a citywall replacement it would definitely better, one useless building less to build.

But I will Ghandi definitely give a try.
 
Kwami said:
Nerf religion! :)
Click to expand...

I don't think they need to nerf religion so much as make the AI more competitive. I'm often able to get all non-founder civs to have my religion so I've got half the world supporting me.
 
Minor Annoyance said:
I don't think they need to nerf religion so much as make the AI more competitive. I'm often able to get all non-founder civs to have my religion so I've got half the world supporting me.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but...

1. AI is hard to write.
2. That wouldn't solve the happiness problem (and thus the Gandhi problem).
 
I don't really see the problem. Religion and mercantile city states have indeed made happiness easier to get hold of, but that doesn't take away from Gandhi's bonus. Where other civs might have to take Pagodas and Ceremonial burial to stay happy Gandhi can instead take economic or cultural religious boons. Similarly he can focus his CS efforts on Maritime and Cultural CSs.
 
Kwami said:
That's nonsense. There's a big gap between "happiness is hard to get" and "I can build 15+ cities by turn 100, each one producing a wonder every 10 turns".

Happiness is too easy to get with mercantile city-states and religion. I really don't understand why you don't see this.

Anyway, I don't have any ideas to fix Gandhi. I've always thought that his UA was one of the more creative ones, if not exactly one of the more enjoyable ones for me to play. But as long as going tall is so easy (because food caps way before happiness if you're not bad or incredibly unlucky), Gandhi's UA is indeed pretty useless. :(

Nerf religion! :)
Click to expand...

Perhaps you always pop up on a map near a mercantile CS with a guaranteed alliance before turn 50. I get it. Not my story though. I usually start with four cities @ turns 40-50. That means 3-4 luxes on a decent map. 4 luxes = 16 happiness. Four cities take away 12 happiness. So, after i connect all luxes to my network i can grow each city by 1 pop before i run out of happiness again. OK. Here comes the Mercantile CS. +4 happiness. Now i have 4 cities at turn 60 with population of 3 each. Happiness = 0. What next?

I think you overreact by shouting 'Nerf' without considering different strategies and difficulty levels, some of which will keep you at happiness 0 for the entire game. Religion on Immortal is a completely different story too. And that is only half of the story, since you won't be able to keep Mercantile alliances for long with rich AIs buying them out en masse.

So, yes, lower difficulties give you tons of happiness, fair enough.
 
Truronian said:
I don't really see the problem. Religion and mercantile city states have indeed made happiness easier to get hold of, but that doesn't take away from Gandhi's bonus. Where other civs might have to take Pagodas and Ceremonial burial to stay happy Gandhi can instead take economic or cultural religious boons. Similarly he can focus his CS efforts on Maritime and Cultural CSs.
Click to expand...

Gandhi's UA suggests a tall empire instead of a wide one. However, tall empires already have far less trouble with happiness than wide empires. Tall empires generally already don't need Pagodas or Ceremonial Burial. All Gandhi's UA does if you play tall is add a few more happiness to an already overwhelming number. Why bother?
 
Maybe his UA could be instead: "plus 1 happiness and 1 culture for every 4 population in citys with more than 5 inhabitants - doubble unhappines from number of cities"

or something like doubble "we live the king day" growth bonus, plus 10% cilture during we love the king day.

our something else
 
Moriarte said:
Perhaps you always pop up on a map near a mercantile CS with a guaranteed alliance before turn 50. I get it. Not my story though. I usually start with four cities @ turns 40-50. That means 3-4 luxes on a decent map. 4 luxes = 16 happiness. Four cities take away 12 happiness. So, after i connect all luxes to my network i can grow each city by 1 pop before i run out of happiness again. OK. Here comes the Mercantile CS. +4 happiness. Now i have 4 cities at turn 60 with population of 3 each. Happiness = 0. What next?
Click to expand...

Circuses and Colliseums?
 
India should have some religious UA like suggested before. I still think Mughal Fort are like the most useless UB since I rarely waste my hammers on building castles in the first place. Their current UA is very lackluster because tall empires often don't face happiness issues anyways from the midgame and on (either vanilla or G&K). However in the early run it's often a severe cripple for you to get the 4 cities without going under.
 
Tachii said:
However in the early run it's often a severe cripple for you to get the 4 cities without going under.
Click to expand...

And India hurts you here, not helps you. India would probably be the hardest civ to put 4 cities up by turn 50 and be happy doing it.
 
Kwami said:
Gandhi's UA suggests a tall empire instead of a wide one. However, tall empires already have far less trouble with happiness than wide empires. Tall empires generally already don't need Pagodas or Ceremonial Burial. All Gandhi's UA does if you play tall is add a few more happiness to an already overwhelming number. Why bother?
Click to expand...

In that case I don't see what has changed for him in G&K...
 
Truronian said:
In that case I don't see what has changed for him in G&K...
Click to expand...

The only thing that's changed for him in G&K, is that his previously mildly useful UA is now mostly superfluous. Combined with the yawn-worthy UU and UB's, there just isn't much draw to playing him, at all. Many other civs have much more interesting small/tall cultural/science path benefits.
 
Smokeybear said:
The only thing that's changed for him in G&K, is that his previously mildly useful UA is now mostly superfluous. Combined with the yawn-worthy UU and UB's, there just isn't much draw to playing him, at all. Many other civs have much more interesting small/tall cultural/science path benefits.
Click to expand...

Why is it superfluous? Sure, mercantile CSs and religious happiness boons exist now, but Gandhi doesn't need to go for them. I agree that it's not the most powerful UA but I don't see how G&Ks makes it worse.
 
Truronian said:
Why is it superfluous? Sure, mercantile CSs and religious happiness boons exist now, but Gandhi doesn't need to go for them. I agree that it's not the most powerful UA but I don't see how G&Ks makes it worse.
Click to expand...

Maybe not 'worse'... you still get the same benefit from it as before... it's just that the need for that benefit is much reduced. In vanilla, I'd look at the happiness boost to my planned small/tall cultural empire, and think "yeah, it would sure be nice to get Ghandi's UA for this playthrough". Now, I never think that. Because while his UA may still be mildly helpful to the cause in the long run, it is far from being necessary, and there are far better ones out there for that situation. It used to be "wow, that would help a lot!". Now, it's "is that UA really all that helpful, over xxxx or xxxx? Nah."
 
I kinda forgot about it too but I'm surprised no one has mentioned it but are golden ages not considered useful? Because extra happiness isn't necessarily wasted.

BTW, if anyone is wondering India's UA and Democracy SP don't stack. Adding Democracy slightly decreases :c5angry: but I think it might be that the UA rounds :c5angry: up and Democracy rounds down. I was wondering if a half and half reduction make it 0 but it didn't, which is different from Greece where same religion + Patronage + UA make influence decay 0.
 
Minor Annoyance said:
I kinda forgot about it too but I'm surprised no one has mentioned it but are golden ages not considered useful? Because extra happiness isn't necessarily wasted.
Click to expand...

The amount of happiness needed for each Golden Age grows rather quickly (probably exponentially!). At some point, you're just not going to get another natural Golden Age. Gandhi's UA doesn't appear to give enough happiness to get an additional Golden Age. Anyway, Golden Ages are better when you can control them (Great Artists, social policies, wonders).

BTW, if anyone is wondering India's UA and Democracy SP don't stack. Adding Democracy slightly decreases :c5angry: but I think it might be that the UA rounds :c5angry: up and Democracy rounds down. I was wondering if a half and half reduction make it 0 but it didn't, which is different from Greece where same religion + Patronage + UA make influence decay 0.
Click to expand...

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying, here. Could you clarify?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Legen
(7-30b) Alternative Carthage adjustments
2
Replies
39
Views
1K
Legen
Legen
ThermobaricPunch
Multiplayer desyncs (loading screen between turns) and weird bugs
Replies
1
Views
791
coolhandluke11
C
S
Is it Possible to Set Up Civ-V to play like Civ-III...?
Replies
5
Views
1K
aieeegrunt
aieeegrunt
A
Thinking about bailing on Civ V for VI...
Replies
17
Views
3K
Licentia
Licentia
pineappledan
(7-58a) Songhai UA change
Replies
0
Views
169
pineappledan
pineappledan
Top Bottom