Leaders: Part 2

I believe each leader should fundamentally change gameplay in some interesting and unique way. This is my main goal for leader design. For example, Suleiman starts with a melee ship, and his melee ships can capture other ships. This "ship capture" theme dramatically changes Ottoman gameplay.

Here are other things I believe are important for good leader design:

• Theme
  Does the leader have a coherent theme which adds new ways of playing the game?
  .
• History
  Do the bonuses represent the most important historical points of the civilization?
  .
• Complexity
  Intricate strategies are more fun than simple ones.
  .
• Active
  Active bonuses are more exciting than passive effects.
  .
• Uniqueness
  Are the bonuses different from other things we can get in the game?
  .
• Time
  How early does the bonus appear, and how long does it last?
  .
• Generality
  Leaders should be useful for a wide variety of strategies and map types.
  .
• Ease of implementation
  Most things require either hours to complete (creating new effects) or minutes to complete (copying & tweaking existing effects).

Here are the leaders, themes, and bonuses, with ideas for ways to improve the leaders marked with ► arrows. Completed ideas are marked with a ✓ checkmark. Should we change some themes? How can we improve the leader uniques to fit their theme? What does each bonus represent from history?

Thanks for getting back to this. There are some really good ideas that I'm looking forward to seeing implemented.

In terms of the various changes proposed, I like the proposed changes for the Byzantines, for Ethiopia, for the Dutch (I like the polder, I don't really like the UA), Carthage (though I worry it might be OP and I dislike the mountain crossing as hollywood history), America (+1 happy per city is a good idea, though the combination of all these might make them too strong), France, India (though I worry that there still isn't much value from Tall/religious, but maybe that can be changed other than through leaders),

I think Huns, Arabia, China, England, Iroquois, Mongols, Siam, are generally good as is.

I think Babylon, Danes (I dislike unique national wonders, and conquest/raiding are different playstyles with only modest synergy), Greece, Inca, Japan, Persia are mostly ok but may need a mild boost.

I don't really like the proposed Germany change. Free military units still supports a swarm/conquest approach, and puts Germany's power height into the early game. German engineering and scientific achievement is not well represented by free military units. And Gutenberg press feels a bit weird as a UB that is copied in every city. Yes, the first presses were Germanic, but they spread pretty fast, and it isn't like the Germans really had any sustained advantage in literature or book/newspaper publication that I am aware of.

I don't really like the Ottoman change; I agree the Sipahi isn't that interesting, but giving the prize ships bonus only to ships built in a warehouse city pushes that bonus really late, and in fact discourages you from building melee ships early, because upgraded ships won't get the bonus.

I don't like the Rome change; the existing Roman UA mostly works fine, the stats can be tweaked as necessary. Forum sounds good though. If we do want them to be conquest oriented with the new UA, then should the legion get a city attack bonus? The road building is not that useful, though it provides some mild flavor.

I don't like the proposed Russia changes. I really liked that they had Cossacks that upgraded (in my mind) into T-34s. Switching the UA/Krepost are ok though.

I am still unconvinced on faster ranged units for Askia. It just feels weird.

Sweden allotment system sounds too strong.

I guess in general I worry about too many bonuses being about on-city-conquest. Those are really hard to balance, and can easily risk being very weak. I might only capture 5-6 cities all game.

I'll think about some specific proposals to fill some of the gaps.

First, you've cut off a bit of the right side of the chart. I'm guessing the full chart is available in the download, but I didn't get around to test the newest version yet.

I'm really curious what the "bonus" at Germany refers to, since I'm guessing that 1 of each unit line is weak per se. It also puts the bonus early as Ahriman pointed out. Guttenberg Press is not really a building, but then again, Paper Maker isn't as well... Giving the Book Printer (sic!) however would push Germany more into the military/science nexus.

Don't have time for other comments right now, but one question: What's the difference between the Roman UA and the Danish Jelling Stones? I'd guess we can make the Vikings total warmongers with two Unique Units that upgrade into each other (Huscarl->Berserker or Berserker -> Ski Infantry)

My general take:

Maria - Good
Theodora - Good
Dido - Good
Boudicca - I'm not a big fan of the small faith bonus from forests, but it works.
Haile - I like the ideas here.
Attila - Good
Pascal - Good, and needed no change anyway
William - Not quite sure how the UA works. Polders might be too strong now we will see.
Gustavus - UA does seem pretty strong at first glance.
Washington - Strong UA, the NASA center seems interesting.
Harun - Good as is.
Monte - Good and Fun. My only beef is that jaguars don't compete that well against mass archer, so I don't feel that early early conquest is really viable.
Nebu - N/A
Harald - N/A
Wu - Seems fine.
Napolean - This one is interesting I like the UA and the UUs currently.
Bismark - I actually like your ealier UA idea better (+2 sci for eng, +2 prod for scientists). The panzer idea of being earlier is neat, how would that work?
Elizabeth - Good
Ramesses - He's okay as is but I always found Egypt a little bland myself.
Alex - I personally would drop C Calvary in favor of a UB. Two uniques at the same timeperiods just dilutes both of them, and people think of Greek hoplites more than they think of their horses. A unique library I think would make sense for them. Also I think they should start with a hoplite.
Pachacuti - N/A
Gandhi - The fire altar I could take or leave, but the rest of Gandhi I really like, he has a distinctive playstyle currently.
Hiawatha - I gave this one another chance after my previous dissent and realized that the early sword does provide a very distinct playstyle, so he's good.
Nobunaga - Good
Sejong - N/A
Genghis - My favorite conquest civ, just unique and fun.
Ottomans - Still looks like a work in progress.
Darius - I love Darius, but I see he doesn't start with an immortal any more. Is that intentional?
Kame - N/A
Augustus - Moving in the right direction.
Catherine - UA depends on how large the borders are, else its a pretty weak UA.
Ramkham - Good
Askia - Nothing particularly interesting here to me.
Isabella - Looks like it will have an interesting playstyle.

Now I'll summarize a different way. These are the leaders I feel are truly unique in their playstyle.

Dido - Really focuses on naval power to the point that even on land maps I would want to push to the sea.

Boudicca - A conquest style faith generation is very different.

Attila - Probably the only civ currently capable of very early conquest.

Monte - culture from kills creates a unique style.

Gandhi - Very unique focus on tall empires through rapid population and infrastructure growth.

Hiawatha - The immediate sword powered unit (that you get one of) creates a different early game than many other civs.

Genghis - Redefines mobile combat.

Darius - Takes GA from a side benefit to a main focus of your gameplay.

Ramkham - Provides a strong enough bonus to really focus on CS, even in the early game.

Pretty sure the Legion gets a city attack as a swords unit. Or is supposed to. The road/fort building is faster, so you need fewer workers to support the military. I think it's okay but shouldn't supplant other regular bonuses.

Persia looks like they're still supposed to start with an immortal. I'd agree Greece with a hoplite would be better.

Greek "Academy" might be interesting (not the UI, but a unique library).

I'd prefer the Cossack stay as cavalry as well. Lancer UUs are available already but not very powerful because of the upgrade paths.

I'm not sure about the faster ranged units myself.

I presumed Germany would be the interchangeable +2 science/hammer scientists/engineers rather than these prototypes. I don't think it's necessary they have an earlier tank. You could get to it earlier already from having extra sources of science that way.

I like that India and the US have no UUs. Though I think an argument is available for India to keep elephants, they are of a pretty common UU line at the moment.

I don't much like the Jelling Stones. Ski Infantry was very situational though.

Allotment with both gold and production does sound too powerful. One of those would be sufficient in the same way that Korea's science on farms is useful (and probably too powerful at +2 default).

Are there only two available slots for UUs/UBs/UIs? I feel like many civs would benefit in uniqueness from having a third slot. Four or more would be too many though. Not sure how possible this is to mod in the game's code though.

Some civs have excellent impacts on their gameplay from their three bonuses - other civs seem like they need one more unique factor to really get them over that cliff.

The most intriguing changes are to America and France, IMO.

--

I think America would be frighteningly good once you tech the NASA Center if you keep the free instant tech. Washington would be able to clear out the entire remainder of the tech tree in several turns via gold buying Research Labs. Giving instant science might be better, but infringes upon China's UB.

Currently we don't have an explicitly wide empire (compare Ethiopia being explicitly tall). If you want to press America's expansionist power, why not give them unique Settlers? Isabella's Conquistador in the base game shows that you can give the "Settle City" ability to military units if you wanted to do something like give American Scouts the ability to settle cities.

UU Settler - "Pioneer" - 3 movement, ignores terrain, reduced cost, can defend itself. America has a storied history of westward and Frontier expansion, committed by settlers who were brutal towards the resident natives and wildlife and capable of defending themselves.

--

Allottment is very strong. I wouldn't build any other improvement except on strategical/luxury resources.

Persia needs another look, I think. Golden Ages are just a "You get more of everything" for them - does it really explicitly affect their gameplay? Satrap Courts are fairly passive as they go. I suppose you'd want to get into early military combat to make the most use of your Immortals, but beyond that Persia is about as generic as they come in terms of gameplay. I guess that's not necessarily a bad thing - you don't know if Persia will go conquest, science, or culture. Flexibility is an asset.

Lower maintenance costs for Ottomans UA? Lower production/gold purchase costs?

Inca and Polynesia seem a bit underwhelming.

I was disappointed to see few bonuses to Specialists, especially now that Prussian Values has seemingly been scrapped. I think specialists are an underexplored mechanic - although the Freedom tree and Cristo Redentor makes them very attractive still.

Askia - the change just feels strange and doesn't have good synergy with his other uniques. What was wrong with his old passive? It really encouraged active play (aggressive barb hunting and a nice gold bonus from cities).

Germany - I don't really like the Guttenberg Press idea. In my mind "Germany" represents the Prussian and especially the German Empire from 1871 to 1918. What about a unique military academy with more XP, +2 national happiness and no prerequisites (baracks, armory)? This would go along well with the theme of late(-ish) game military power with elite units. Keep the scientist/engineer passive.

Denmark - I don't really care. Ski Infantry and Jelling Stones are both fine.

Washington - How much science would the NASA center give? Could become to powerful in a wide empire.

Otherwise you should be careful to not use UBs to much. Imo most civs should have UU + either UI or UB, some should have UU + UU and only very few UB + UB.

Suleiman said:

Good to see that the ottomans got the new governance UA.

As i like to futher discuss them, after some ideas, how about the governance UA be something like this

Ignore malus whem drop below , get free courthouse whem capture enemys capitals.

And another ideia, after some reseach more about the barbary corsairs, i find that they did alot of raidings for capture of slaves. So maybe the Prize Ship promotion could spawn a worker whem a city is conquer?

Them the promotion could be renamed to Piracy. Not just prize ship.

Click to expand...

Willian said:

The coastline pouder, is accurate? I mean, in real life. If is, then dont change, but if not, i dont want to see all holands beach with pink and blue colors. Make it as grassland rivers or something along rivers and marshes.

Click to expand...

Dido said:

There is some realy good ideas here, the civian early enbarkation is a good trade-off as in the early game some island be colonized early could be economic good, but the barbarians ships is a treat.
The rest of the civ is prety good.

Click to expand...

Alexander said:

And about alexander, starting with a hoplite is not a good idea, as the hoplite would simple rape every barbarian they meet. I still like the 2 UU for greece but a sort of library would be good too, a free hoplite whem build a barracks for me is the best to go. This way the greek player could have some sort of a powerful army in the early game, as every one prefer to build units before the barracks to attack early.

This would represent the spartans in a way, some skilled soldiers in the early game could dominate their neighbohours.

The UA is good, the hellenization of ancient history could be represented with this culture bonus and the military bonus form CS feels fine.

Click to expand...

I still think it would be better to have a topic dedicated to every leader, so we can brainstorm better and focus our ideas

Pretty sure the Legion gets a city attack as a swords unit.

Click to expand...

Right, but it just gets the basic bonus, and the IIRC legion doesn't really get much of a strength bonus (though I haven't checked lately so I might be out of date), so Rome still can't really manage to take cities very effectively as the human player. So I was arguing for an additional city attack bonus to help them as a conquest/annex playstyle, and this could last into upgrades too so that Rome had a heavy infantry theme throughout the game.

I like the idea of Greece starting with the hoplite. Basically I feel that they have the same problem Rome had, with two different military UUs that are similar era but different tech paths. I'd suggest removing the Companion Cavalry (they're a bit of a Hollywood unit; the strength of Alexander's and Hellenic armies in general were phalanxes of spears and pikes, not the cavalry which were relatively few in number - it was the Persians that had the heavy cavalry) and giving a UB. If we want them to have a culture theme, then how about an Odeon, as either a Colosseum/Arena or Ampitheater/Theater replacement?

Also, arguably this means their AI would probably do better with an Expansionist playstyle, where they colonize lots of cities.

A Gymnasium as a library UU also sounds interesting.

I agree that Germany doesn't need the Panzer to come early, just being a super-good tank UU is sufficient.

I agree that +2 science on farms for Korea is too strong, and +1 gold/+1 production would be even worse.

Maybe US should be free great scientist on the NASA Center - does a free scientist bulb give less than a tech at that stage of the game?

Currently we don't have an explicitly wide empire (compare Ethiopia being explicitly tall). If you want to press America's expansionist power, why not give them unique Settlers? I

Click to expand...

I think we have many empires that are explicitly wide, because they give +X per city bonuses.
The old France/proposed Greece, for example, or the new America.

As discussed in previous threads, a UU settler is very weak, because it only ever lasts a few turns, and defending settlers is not really that big a burden.

Golden Ages are just a "You get more of everything" for them - does it really explicitly affect their gameplay?

Click to expand...

I think it does, because it explicitly encourages you to float large amounts of excess happiness, and so to limit your expansion to really push the culture.

starting with a hoplite is not a good idea, as the hoplite would simple rape every barbarian they meet

Click to expand...

Note that Iroquois already start with a free Mohawk warrior, which IIRC is tougher than the hoplite.

Brannock said:

Are there only two available slots for UUs/UBs/UIs? I feel like many civs would benefit in uniqueness from having a third slot. Four or more would be too many though. Not sure how possible this is to mod in the game's code though.

Click to expand...

Having more than two destroys the compability with customized modded civs who are most often designed to the "standard" of basic civ. The idea has been discussed and I did like the idea. The Advantages are clear: You can give land or air unique units (since one part may be more specialized when you got 2/3 others), you can spread the bonuses more over time and you can depict nearly all aspects of a civ.

However, the compability....

UU Settler - "Pioneer" - 3 movement, ignores terrain, reduced cost, can defend itself. America has a storied history of westward and Frontier expansion, committed by settlers who were brutal towards the resident natives and wildlife and capable of defending themselves.

Click to expand...

It's funny because this was the first proposal instead of the pioneer fort. (with more sight, no defense but a free wall on building the city). The idea got mostly negative feedback, "not enough fun" and "not good enough". I'd say America is fine as a wide civ with the bonusses above.

pthmix said:

Germany - I don't really like the Guttenberg Press idea. In my mind "Germany" represents the Prussian and especially the German Empire from 1871 to 1918.

Click to expand...

I'm offended, sir. Just like England ends with Cromwell, right? And anything past 1805 is naturally British/United Kingdom. So actually, we would not be allowed to have the Steam Mill as a bonus since you know, it's more British than English!

Of course Germany includes the whole history of Germany, and not only 50 odd years... Just because it was not unified doesn't mean it's not a nation? The whole idea of Germany being founded in 1871 is ludicrous since there have been German states before.

bagas12 said:

I still think it would be better to have a topic dedicated to every leader, so we can brainstorm better and focus our ideas

Click to expand...

Well, the thread would certainly be a bit more visible. I guess the alternative is to not try to discuss all of them at once but concentrate on a few ones, say 3-5 at a time.

For example the Ottomans. The idea of no malus due to Unhappiness is interesting, but it's also passive to a degree, it doesn't give you anything, it makes you lose less. Doesn't seem fun to me. Also, promotions should be kept simple imho and the prize ship promo is good enough as it is. The Warehouse caveat for these promotion does seem a bit restricting though. As for Governance, I could see a cumulative effect for Specialists: First specialist in each city gives 1 additional point, second 2, third 4, fourth 8, etc. ... This may be too strong, but the idea is to create a UA that benefits from amassing specialists. Though not sure how that fits with Janissaries and Pirats...

As for India, I dislike Fire Altar as a name. Also, India should benefit from tolerance between religion, not promoting the own one... I agree on kicking the Elephant though, there are quite a few other such UU's around already.

EDIT: I'm guessing it's hard to know where exactly the free tech for the NASA centre will fall for the Americans. Need to try it out Free Scientists add to the tech you're currently researching, so I don't think they give you a whole one for free in the late game. Might also be less annoying, though you then could forget using your excess for scientists or getting a Great Scientist the natural way But as long as we're content with the direction we are fine on this stage.

I like the earlier tank since it pushes you to conquer and otherwise if you don't beeline it's a worthless one? The Gymnasium or Agora or Odeon for Greece sounds like a good idea, though I'm not sure for an effect that goes well together with wide culture and peaceful (=military city states bonus).

The Farms bonusses (science, gold, production) are very specialized in that they change the way you play heavily, but they also make another aspect of the game redundant (villages and connected techs/policies), which is bad again. Is it possible to make an Improvement give the tiles around a bonus? Allotment for example could provide every tile adjacent to a farm a gold bonus, simulating these tile "upkeeps" being paid by the farmers. That would result in a mix of farms and villages, if you want to.

Agree on more specialist bonuses as well

Ahriman said:

I'd suggest removing the Companion Cavalry (they're a bit of a Hollywood unit; the strength of Alexander's and Hellenic armies in general were phalanxes of spears and pikes, not the cavalry which were relatively few in number - it was the Persians that had the heavy cavalry) and giving a UB. If we want them to have a culture theme, then how about an Odeon, as either a Colosseum/Arena or Ampitheater/Theater replacement?

Click to expand...

Actually no, Alexander real fighting machine was the Companions, or better the hetairoi, it did win the batles of Gaugamela and Granicus with their decisive charges, they often too saved Alexander life in the batlefield and beat the persians cavalary every time.

They are too the fist shock cavalary of history and was responsible for the new macedonian warfare after the death of alexander.

Well we cant say the phanlax and hypaspists dont do their part, but sayng the Companions was not Alexander strenght is wrong.
Still i vote to change them to some sort o UB like you said, culture or early beakers are good to me

Ahriman said:

Note that Iroquois already start with a free Mohawk warrior, which IIRC is tougher than the hoplite.

Click to expand...

Yes i completely forgot about them. Well maybe it can work

Hey,

i'd like to say a few things about Germany and Bismarck. I don't think he's a simple minded guy who favored war over everything else and so making Germany a mainly combat based Civ. I think it should be more cultural focused.

If we look at Bismarck, he was a advocate of the balance of power-theory who is never afraid and will pursuit the needs of his people against all odds. (see his action while the German unification here (wikipedia) ). But Bismarck isn't the type of guy, who puts war and violence first. He implemented the world's first welfare state in the 1880s like the Health Insurance, Accident Insurance, Old Age and Disability Insurance. These Bills could be translated with Social Policies. Germans have a long history of culture and art. And it's a shame we don't see more of that in the game. Yes, Germans are great at building stuff (like cars and buildings) but this a modern thing. After that period of time, Germany had great scientists which did unbelievable work.

So after all that, i think Germany is a Civilization which did a few big
u-turns. And that your idea would represent that. I'm a big fan of the Mayan mechanic. But a little bit different.

Reforms (link)
At the start of each new Era, you can choose a temporary bonus from a list. But each bonus has a drawback. And you can't choose the same bonus for a set period of time, like 3 eras.

Blood and Iron (link): +25% of Military Units but -10%

Unification of German (link): +25% but -10% of Military Units

Königgrätzer Marsch (link) or Blitzkrieg (link): +15% of Military Units in a melee battle but -10% of non-militaristic buildings

Balance of Power (link): +25% with City-States but additional fee of 10% for Military Unit maintenance.

Kleinstaaterei (link): +35% but -10%

Industrialisation (link): +15% for buildings and wonder but -10%

Scientific revolution (link): +15% but -10%

Currency union (link): Declaration of Friendship adds 3% of combined gross income of both players per turn but -10% with City-States.

Cross of Honor of the German Mother (link): +15% but -10% of Military Units in a melee battle

These points are just off the top of my head. I like numbers but i don't have any sense of balance right now so take them just as an example and not for granted. Other ideas could be Propaganda (link) as an happiness-releated event and i think there could be found more of different events.

Legion is 18 (+2) and they also get a cover 1 promo to help fight off archers. I'm not sure they require additional anti-city power over and above what swords get naturally. If so, they could be buffed more on (Samurai is presently +7 over longsword, for comparison). Legions also cost more right now than regular swords. I think it's fine to leave them at 180 cost but raise them to 20.

Agreed that a UU settler is a bad idea, for all the reasons previously listed. The UB walls for growth are fine coupled with a national happiness effect. I think we should stick to 3 total unique bonuses.

I wouldn't mind a Guttenberg Printing Press effect. Germany largely kick-started the Reformation and various philosophical movements. This can be represented easily enough with effects on universities.

I don't like any idea of pairing advantages with disadvantages as a UA. This approach is too constricting toward a particular play style rather than offering a particular advantage to one.

Agreed a no malus UA on Ottomans is too passive and offers nothing if you manage your happiness properly, or would be overpowered if you just went crazy settling and conquering and ran up enormous negatives. Essentially being able to ignore an entire game feature is not a good idea for a UA.

These are really great ideas, and help some of the weaker civs to become much more interesting. Love all the changes

The only thing I can think of is that Monte (who I LOVE) fells a bit weak nowadays. In Vanilla I can use his UU to launch an early rush against a close AI. This is not possible in GEM, so his early UU can only be used against barbarians. It would be nice if the Aztec had two early UUs - a warrior UU that could upgrade to a swordman UU (basicly the same advantages as the jaguar but buildable in the classical era too). Not sure if possible.

mitsho said:

...

I'm offended, sir. Just like England ends with Cromwell, right? And anything past 1805 is naturally British/United Kingdom. So actually, we would not be allowed to have the Steam Mill as a bonus since you know, it's more British than English!

Of course Germany includes the whole history of Germany, and not only 50 odd years... Just because it was not unified doesn't mean it's not a nation? The whole idea of Germany being founded in 1871 is ludicrous since there have been German states before.

...

Click to expand...

I know... But we can't represent every aspect of german history in Civ. We need to pick one and the military one seems like the most obvious. Of course if you want we can make Germany specialize in pretty much anything and find a justification.



I just think from an gameplay point of view focusing on the German Empire rather than the HRE, 3rd Reich or the federal republic fits best and is the most interesting and unique. A lot of civs have their unique units and unique buildings early (ancient, classical, medieval). That is actually one of the reasons why early game is more interesting than late game. Having a few civs like the US and Germany which have late uniques seems like a good way to balance this out a bit.

I envision some kind of tall -> war playstyle for Germany. Basically you would play the first half of the game peacefully and use your specialist bonus (of course you do not have to) and then when your strong military boni kick in (unique acadamy and Panzer) you start some Blitzkriegs and go conquering.

Actually no, Alexander real fighting machine was the Companions, or better the hetairoi, it did win the batles of Gaugamela and Granicus with their decisive charges,

Click to expand...

I think it's a bit too easy to claim that the outcome of battles was due to the final charge that tipped the outcome; it's like attributing everything to the straw that broke the camel's back rather than the rest of the load it was carrying.

A decisive charge is romantic, but doesn't work by itself, it succeeds because of the yeoman's work of the foot infantry in phalanxes holding the line against the Persian assaults. The Companion Cavalry were maybe 2,000-3,000 guys in an army of ~40,000.

Anyway, both were important, I can live with either being the UU, but I don't think we need both. And the Companions pretty mostly apply only to Alexander, whereas hoplites/phalangites represent the Hellenic world much more generally.

Legion is 18 (+2) and they also get a cover 1 promo to help fight off archers

Click to expand...

Ok, that's probably fine then, I didn't realize they got cover, I haven't played Rome in a while. Does cover also work vs city ranged attacks?

Germany largely kick-started the Reformation and various philosophical movements. This can be represented easily enough with effects on universities.

Click to expand...

Sure, but we already replaced Oxford with Heidelburg University. That seems enough.

But we can't represent every aspect of german history in Civ. We need to pick one and the military one seems like the most obvious.

Click to expand...

I don't really agree that a military-oriented Germany feels most obvious at all. I think we want Germany as a civ to represent HRE, Prussia, other Germanic states and modern Germany. I don't think it needs to represent gothic barbarians, which is what we end up getting from the vanilla Germany.

That was the idea when I proposed the specialist engineer/scientist UA some time ago. Germany should be a cross of a Science/Conquest Civ. There is none like that in the moment (because it can be quite a strong combination). However that doesn't mean we can't include Book Printing by Gutenberg, especially if it's a revamped :c5happiness: building.

(And you are perfectly right with pointing out that we can legitimize everything for every civ practically, it's just that Germany so very often gets reduced in the English speaking world to Post 1871 when f.e. Friedrich Barbarossa is more interesting to a child growing up than Bismarck )

@Anvari, that's a good display of possible ideas. However they are not very creative. We are looking for unique characteristics that lead you to play the game differently, i.e. the ranged knights of the Mongols or the Ship Capture of the Ottomans. Your proposals are just straight buffs and nerfs with the exception of the first one, the temporary bonuses at Era change. This is quite like the Maya and also not very active, since you will get the bonus anyways. You don't have to do anything for it. I wonder how one could make that more active?

Btw. we do want to go away from the barb bonus for Germany because it totally fails at representing anything of history...

Maybe debating the playstyle of each civ has its worth first? (like Tall Science/Conquest for Germany? I'm fine with Conquest being a part of Germany though)

A decisive charge is romantic, but doesn't work by itself, it succeeds because of the yeoman's work of the foot infantry in phalanxes holding the line against the Persian assaults.

Click to expand...

Of course, the phanlax was the finest infantary to alexander have in his campaign , but, the phanlax have many disvantages, its slow, it could only hold 1 flank or the front at one time. So if we put in tatics if Alexander dint have the best cavalary in his hands it would easely be outmanuver and defeated by the persians.
They had more cavalary, more infatary, chariots e etc.

And of course every battle need the mix of every soldier to be won. The infantary, the ranged , the cavalary , the auxiliary etc.
The reality was that alexander was a genious and had the best army he could wanted. But say if he have lost his flank in Gaugamela whem he was with the hetaroi or when he successd charged the 5,000 greeks hoplites at the center of the persian army, would he be remenbered today?
If his cavalary dont outmanuver the persians at Granicus and beat the larger persian cavalary them charge and rout the infantary, would he cross the river?

Ahriman said:

The Companion Cavalry were maybe 2,000-3,000 guys in an army of ~40,000.

Click to expand...

Once i wise man (lol watched this in spartacus) said each cavalary man is worth 10 infantary man, this only show how effective they are to be remenbered so much in history among so many soldiers.



Well of course alexander army was not just the companions, maybe I expressed myself wrong when i did say the companions were their fighting machine, english is not my native language. But it did win the battles.

Well lets stop here and go back to the topic, as the companions was indeed important to alexander, it is not so important for the greek nation so if they are replaced for a UB its perfect fine, as the hoplites is much more famous and important in history

Anvari said:

So after all that, i think Germany is a Civilization which did a few big
u-turns. And that your idea would represent that. I'm a big fan of the Mayan mechanic. But a little bit different.

Click to expand...

Um, no. You're putting like half the complexity in the game in one civilization