France/Japan discussion (patch 3.6)

[pineappledan]

As much as this rework of France works well and is elegant, the +1 per city on military units does not make much sense to me. Most French rulers with major military victories also contributed massively to the creation and/or modernization of the French state in all domains, not just culture, so maybe the UA could reflect this a bit more.
A few examples:

Culture in civ 5 unlocks policies, which do basically everything you describe.
“Culture” in civ 5 also doubles as “state capacity”

 

[Pretentious Username]

As much as this rework of France works well and is elegant, the +1 per city on military units does not make much sense to me. Most French rulers with major military victories also contributed massively to the creation and/or modernization of the French state in all domains, not just culture, so maybe the UA could reflect this a bit more.
A few examples:
- Philippe II Auguste substantially expanded French territory, and also created French bureaucracy and many existing monuments;
- François Ier went to war with Italy and the empire of Carolus Quintus, but also started the French Renaissance and invited many artists and scientists;
- Louis XIV waged many wars, fortified cities with Vauban, created many economic guilds and fostered arts and science;
- Napoleon I himself also created the Code Civil and many institutions of modern France which stand to this day;
- Napoleon III, although not so successful militarily, implemented massive economic reforms, industrialized France, and transformed Paris.

If I may propose an alternative to the culture per 10 units, we could have Great Generals and Citadels increase Great People generation, or increase the potency of Great People (counting as extra Great Works, Academies, etc.), or give a bonus for a few turns ( / / ) upon spawning - that would be a way to recycle the current UA's 40% bonus.


I agree with Gwennog, enlistment upon defeat is not really a historical French characteristic, regardless of time period. I do like the idea of increased supply from population proposed by Pineappledan and Enginseer, as France has historically been fielding massive armies compared to its population (not just under Napoleon).

To complement the increased supply, France can go a few routes which are more fitting of its history:
- The Foreign Legion/enlistment bit can have France gain units on city capture (which is the same reward system as Ashurbanipal) or on peace treaties (which is quite similar to Montezuma). Alternatively, you could have other civilizations "gift" units (similar to military city states) depending on France's tourism with them. The last idea creates a positive feedback loop between war and culture in France's toolkit which ties it together, but I don't know if it can be coded (NB: it also makes this part of the UA weak until the later eras, which reflects history but incurs balance issues).
- If the UA is really about Napoleon's France, it could be giving bonuses to artillery, of which Napoleon was an absolute master (maybe a free Range promotion). Overall movement bonuses would overlap too much with other civs.

While I wouldn't say that I can discuss balance on the level of anyone here (especially since I haven't played VP in a hot minute), I would like to expound on this with a few points:

Part of the problem with designing a French civilization is how old and well-documented France is as a civilization if taken from the Merovingians to present day - you could justifiably ascribe any strength/specialization to it for a kit. The biggest constant throughout French history is, however, warfare, and the French have a pretty good record at it. But because of how much France has accomplished, it can't *just* be a warfare civ. Earlier in the thread, someone made a very interesting point about Japan's design that I think was very salient: the Japanese historically did not conquer a massive empire like most warmonger civs, but nonetheless established a strong military tradition and were able to consistently punch above their weight, and their design enables them to win by warring without needing to conquer. The original French design of capturing works of art to fill up the metropole was the inverse of this; a cultural victory would go hand-in-hand with a domination victory. But historically most of the wars France won only gained them small territories, if any; the periods where it did conquer notable swathes of land are often synonymous with a golden age, and many of those conquests were often rolled back while the core of France slowly redefined itself outwards (the RFC Europe mod for Civ 4 even reflected this by having the French special ability being more stability so that it is at less risk of losing its territory over time).

While France does have a celebrated history of foreign regiments (more than most countries - I'd say only Egypt really surpasses it), most of that enlistment was the result of France's prestige, and not, barring Napoleon's reorganizations, done at bayonet-point. Similarly, France was not just fielding large armies relative to its population throughout most of its history, it had the largest population in Europe for most of its history and was arguably the center of western civilization for it. That's a major reason why everything about its design feels incoherent to Napoleon - Napoleon was as much a disruptive element to French history (to the point that Napoleon III left more of a positive legacy for France) as he was one of its golden ages. I don't think the UA/UB/UI focusing on eras outside of him and Napoleonic France is the problem, I think the issue comes from trying to force them into a Napoleonic framework.

Essentially what I'm getting at is that I think the idea of France being a Golden Age civ should be revisited; have the warfare help facilitate a golden age (the opposite of Persia basically, where golden ages help facilitate warfare), and either increase the potency of Great People or their generation during a golden age. I agree the Supply bonus from population is very fitting and works well with the Chateau. If this route is considered, rather than +1 Culture from Military units, maybe a +1 Food/Culture from Villages (Le Pays), with Chateaus further improving the output of adjacent Villages as well, or something to that effect? If foreign units are a must for a France kit, maybe have them be generated when a Golden Age starts?

Since artillery has been brought up I should also mention that the Musketeer is another oddity for France, and not just in the sense that it would make more sense as a Musketman instead of a Tercio. French infantry, typically, has not been as impactful as the infantry of its neighbors (re: Tercio), and what the Musketeers are supposed to represent was historically a unit of cavalry - a branch of arms that France historically has been known to excel in throughout virtually every age it has fielded it. Artillery too, from Bureau, Gribeauval, de Bange, the 75 mm, etc. with France often being at the forefront of artillery throughout its history. Drawing from either would be a more fitting UU thematically for France than infantry.

 

[gwennog]

Brilliant analysis of French history and the strengths that should appear in the design and especially not.

 

[Ulcsa]

This is kind of why it is +1 Culture. Social Policies in the base game are not as impactful compared to VP-equivalent. VP policies pretty much change how your empire grows through time. Your examples could all fit into your getting an earlier introduction to all of the social policy branches.

Think we have a misunderstanding here. The problem is not being granted, it is culture being granted through the military size while I'd find it more fitting to be granted through GG instead. That also makes the bonus design more flexible, and gameplay-wise incentivizes Authority slightly less than Enginseer's iteration (which I am currently playing with in the Wholesome Tweaks modmod).

A few simple ideas could be:
- Have GG and GA grant a lump sum of either or points upon spawning (proportional to their cost?);
- Gain +1 per turn in all cities per active GG/GA or Citadel (scaling with era?) - does have the benefit of increasing tourism later on.

 

[Pretentious Username]

Brilliant analysis of French history and the strengths that should appear in the design and especially not.

Thank you!

 

[pineappledan]

Where were you guys 2 months ago?

On a more serious note, the change isn’t just about France, it’s about what every other civ in the game is not, and where France could fit with the rest. We have 4 dedicated Golden age civs: Persia, Brazil, Korea, and Aztecs. Aztecs in particular does that “war facilitates Golden Ages” idea. Getting free units from the start of Golden ages would be more like Persia GAs facilitating war.

The fact France had nothing particularly geared at Golden ages was one of my criticisms of the to-be-replaced kit, actually. The global % on conquest bonus seemed like it was begging to be paired with a golden age trigger, but France had nothing else pushing that way. I built another civ around that global conquest bonus with its own GA trigger. I also converted Macedon for VP, so there is 2 more War facilitating GA civs.

Re: the unique unit, that was a decision made 12 years ago, and I don’t think replacing it is in the cards. VP isn’t in the habit of scrapping UUs except to make room for a UB or UI if the civ didn’t have one. One of the problems with France is that most of the default units from the medieval to the industrial era are basically modelled on French ones. IMO the chateau is a worse offender than the musketeer tho. The unit might be a paper-thin pop culture reference, but At least it isn’t an anachronism.

 

[Caesar of Bread]

Hi. I don’t play Civ V nor am I in the community patch, but I like the Sakoku idea. Maybe you could change one of the leaders, but that’s probably too hard. Sorry!

 

[pineappledan]

Levee en Masse
+15% war supply from Population
+1 Culture in all Cities for every 10 Military units on Empire
When you trigger a Historic Event, a copy of the best available unit with a Strategic Resource requirement appears in your Capital.

- “best unit” is determined by highest cost
- will not gift you units above your Strategic Resource limit
- does not default to 2nd best unit if the best has reached resource cap. Eg. if you are capped on horses, but not on iron, it will not gift you a longsword instead of a knight.

 

[Rekk]

- “best unit” is determined by highest cost
- will not gift you units above your Strategic Resource limit
- does not default to 2nd best unit if the best has reached resource cap. Eg. if you are capped on horses, but not on iron, it will not gift you a longsword instead of a knight.

I enjoy understand your second point. If you don't have an available resource for the highest production unit, your historic event doesn't give you any unit at all?

We already have a function for the best unit to give a player, based on combat strength, whether you have enough strategic for it, whether you allow ranged/naval, either best or random from top 5. I would rather use that than remake another function that does almost the same thing but with heavy restrictions.

 

[gwennog]

- “best unit” is determined by highest cost
- will not gift you units above your Strategic Resource limit
- does not default to 2nd best unit if the best has reached resource cap. Eg. if you are capped on horses, but not on iron, it will not gift you a longsword instead of a knight.

It's a good lead, I continue to think that the UA of France was not voted, it is that of the Huns who was chosen.

 

[pineappledan]

If you don't have an available resource for the highest production unit, your historic event doesn't give you any unit at all?

That’s the idea, yeah. It’s already a lot of free production if you can manage to keep the churn of units going.

We already have a function for the best unit to give a player, based on combat strength, whether you have enough strategic for it, whether you allow ranged/naval, either best or random from top 5. I would rather use that than remake another function that does almost the same thing but with heavy restrictions.

But with that you would never see an artillery unit.

 

[Rekk]

That’s the idea, yeah. It’s already a lot of free production if you can manage to keep the churn of units going.

But with that you would never see an artillery unit.

Artillery should be among the top 5, no?

 

[Pretentious Username]

Where were you guys 2 months ago?

On a more serious note, the change isn’t just about France, it’s about what every other civ in the game is not, and where France could fit with the rest. We have 4 dedicated Golden age civs: Persia, Brazil, Korea, and Aztecs. Aztecs in particular does that “war facilitates Golden Ages” idea. Getting free units from the start of Golden ages would be more like Persia GAs facilitating war.

The fact France had nothing particularly geared at Golden ages was one of my criticisms of the to-be-replaced kit, actually. The global % on conquest bonus seemed like it was begging to be paired with a golden age trigger, but France had nothing else pushing that way. I built another civ around that global conquest bonus with its own GA trigger. I also converted Macedon for VP, so there is 2 more War facilitating GA civs.

Re: the unique unit, that was a decision made 12 years ago, and I don’t think replacing it is in the cards. VP isn’t in the habit of scrapping UUs except to make room for a UB or UI if the civ didn’t have one. One of the problems with France is that most of the default units from the medieval to the industrial era are basically modelled on French ones. IMO the chateau is a worse offender than the musketeer tho. The unit might be a paper-thin pop culture reference, but At least it isn’t an anachronism.

Realism Invictus

While it is true that there are already a few GA civs, they're not even a tenth of the total number of vanilla civs, and because of that I think there is enough wiggle room that a niche for France could be found. Aztec Golden Ages are almost incidental to the more consistent aspect of their kit, which is faith and gold from kills, and the only point a GA really interacts with the Aztec kit again is a further bonus to food from its UB during a GA. Brazil is obviously a cultural GA civ but has virtually nothing for warfare, and is instead geared more towards happiness. Korea is obviously scientific, with a feedback loop for Golden Ages and GP, and while an upgraded Hwacha can be very good offensively it is more conventional playing defensive. Persia finances its GA through interest and its GAs are longer and improve its military, which allows it to build more Satrap Courts to get more gold/GA points/happiness, creating the most direct GA loop.

So, to summarize what is on the table regarding other GA Civs:

The Aztecs will get an instantaneous GA upon a good enough warscore, but otherwise does not have as much that interacts with/benefits from GAs as the others.
Brazil, Korea and Persia all accrue GA passively, and not through warfare. Brazil through excess happiness with Brazilwood and the Carnival, Korea through Great People, and Persia through gold.
Korea's GAs benefit the quantity of their GP, but not their quality, and it does not interact with Great Generals either.
Brazil's GAs are more focused around paying out lump sums instead of improving the GA qualitatively/passively - the Carnival is instead the qualitative improvement.
Persian GAs are qualitative, and while warfare can help them generate more through looting/peace treaty payments and getting to build more satrap courts, GAs generate wars for Persia, not the other way around - its kit also emphasizes Gold instead of culture.
Essentially, a GA civ that mixes culture and warfare is available in terms of a niche.

And to summarize France's situation:

Of the current proposals to rework its UA, I think the one that appeals the most to everyone is the supply buff from population. High population fits France thematically, helps better integrate the Chateau with its food bonuses and high population also enables more specialists, but will also affect happiness, which means it may lean more towards GP instead of GAs.
Similarly, I do not believe it's good idea to have improvements directly give GA points, the Chateau is better off supporting the Supply aspect of France's UA through food, as well as culture through its culture/tourism.
The Musketeer is powerful and high-mobility, but loses out on much of the synergy it has with Esprit de Corp's successive attacks buff getting removed (the extra movement at least can be taken as a reference to its cavalry basis).

If having war directly contribute to a GA is the goal, then a possible solution would be to give the musketeer, a promotion similar to the minuteman where GA points are generated on kills (which, honestly, feels out of place on the minuteman). Alternatively, since Great Generals are not integrated into any of the prior GA Civs, they could instead either provide that as an aura (Marshal) to the units they command or other bonuses to GA generation (or vice-versa), which would also avoid stepping on Japan's toes by having them directly contribute to GWAM generation.
The qualitative improvement of Persia's Golden Age is that it improves military performance, while Korea's is a general buff to GP generation but doesn't improve other yields. A French golden age could improve only GWAM output, or improve the specialists that generate them. This admittedly is not as well thought out as the above, but I think the point that the Golden Age should be qualitative and provide passive cultural buffs for France, if this route is considered, is established enough.
This is less considered, but having the Chateau improve the output/benefit from the output of adjacent villages and farms similar to the Polder could also be a way to help better synergize the population supply and France's culture output.

I don't think the Chateau is an anachronism so much as it's just a broad descriptor that overlaps too much with the plantation ingame - a chateau can describe anything from a manor house to a fortress to a hotel, but the luxury requirement obviously has the terroir connotation most in mind, but I digress. While there are units that are generic enough that I think replacing them with something more specifically French could easy with (Knight or Lancer could easily be replaced with Gendarme, as the most obvious example) the bigger problem absolutely would be what to do with the Musketeer, since it would be a tragic waste of a model and couldn't really fit anywhere else (except maybe being shuffled off to a city state and being renamed, but that still would probably be more effort than it's worth this late in the game).

 

[azum4roll]

Actually we just voted to remove one "GA through war" component, the Colosseum.

 

[Ulcsa]

Where were you guys 2 months ago?

On a more serious note, the change isn’t just about France, it’s about what every other civ in the game is not, and where France could fit with the rest. We have 4 dedicated Golden age civs: Persia, Brazil, Korea, and Aztecs. Aztecs in particular does that “war facilitates Golden Ages” idea. Getting free units from the start of Golden ages would be more like Persia GAs facilitating war.

The fact France had nothing particularly geared at Golden ages was one of my criticisms of the to-be-replaced kit, actually. The global % on conquest bonus seemed like it was begging to be paired with a golden age trigger, but France had nothing else pushing that way. I built another civ around that global conquest bonus with its own GA trigger. I also converted Macedon for VP, so there is 2 more War facilitating GA civs.

Re: the unique unit, that was a decision made 12 years ago, and I don’t think replacing it is in the cards. VP isn’t in the habit of scrapping UUs except to make room for a UB or UI if the civ didn’t have one. One of the problems with France is that most of the default units from the medieval to the industrial era are basically modelled on French ones. IMO the chateau is a worse offender than the musketeer tho. The unit might be a paper-thin pop culture reference, but At least it isn’t an anachronism.

Noted - maybe isn't the answer in the case of France (particularly as it conflicts with Goths and Macedonians), but we can definitely bring in or for the UA.
There is a historical argument to be made for each of these ( referring to periods of intellectual progress, referring to the development of France made by military leaders), so we can really decide based on gameplay rather than history. Since no civilization generates through war, this is a route France could go for.

Also, it has been suggested to grant free units on Historical Events, which works well (overlaps with Arabia a bit) but would also spawn units from completing trade routes, which I'm not too fond of... I'll stick with my idea of units based on tourism for now, but feel free to amend.

All in all, the UA could look like this (just throwing ideas + needs balancing):

Pour la Patrie, les Sciences et la Gloire
+25% supply from Population. Periodically gain free military units depending on your tourism with other civilizations. When a Great General is born, gain +100% great person generation in all cities for 10 turns.

Some remarks:
- The name originates from the French flags during Napoleon's Egypt campaign and translates to: "For the Motherland, Sciences and Glory";
- For the Motherland = supply, Sciences = GP, Glory = Free units;
- We can use the unit generation function from Rekk for the free military units and set it to best unit (Foreign units were mainly front-line combatants);
- The idea about the GP bonus is it adds a bit of dynamic gameplay around GP generation which humans can take advantage of, counterbalancing the AI handicap xp bonuses (and higher GG generation) on higher difficulties;
- Tourism level could determine the rate of free unit spawn.

 

[Ulcsa]

Also there is some discussion around the Château as a UU - it isn't an anachronism save for the technology at which it is unlocked. Châteaus as they are portrayed in Civ 5 refer to the buildings made by French nobility made between the XVI and XVIII centuries (~250 years), but unlocking them at Chivalry is a bit weird (history-wise).

I do have a gripe with the Musketeer not really belonging with the rest of the French kit in its current form, but I understand the difficulties of replacing a UU so I won't ask for that. Maybe the Lightning Warfare promotion could be replaced by something else, for example Great Generals II.

 

[Rekk]

I'll stick with my idea of units based on tourism for now, but feel free to amend

Completing Trade Routes also gives tourism. All historic events give tourism.

When a Great General is born, gain +100% great person generation in all cities for 10 turns.

This is extremely close to the Japan UA.

Also there is some discussion around the Château as a UU - it isn't an anachronism save for the technology at which it is unlocked. Châteaus as they are portrayed in Civ 5 refer to the buildings made by French nobility made between the XVI and XVIII centuries (~250 years), but unlocking them at Chivalry is a bit weird (history-wise).

They are also all considered fortifications (bonus to defense, etc.), so every UI is specifically referring to a chateau that was originally a castle before being converted into a palace.

 

[Der_Zorn_gottes]

Just my 2 cents on France from my recent game:

I liked the GP generation, but I hated that it were artists/writers/musicians. These are usefull for a cultural victory, whereas the method of genearing them works diametrical against that. The aability is at odds with itself.
A simple solution would be to make it generate scientists/engeneers/merchants instead, helping you develop your economy while going for world domination.

 

[Ulcsa]

This is extremely close to the Japan UA.

This part of the UA is meant to reflect the "golden age" of arts and science France experienced around periods of war, without it being a civ 5 golden age. The burst in GP generation is maybe too similar to Japan though.

I do take notice of your remark on Historic Events.

How about this:

Pour la Patrie, les Sciences et la Gloire
+25% supply from population. Historic events grant a free military unit near the Capital. Specialists gain +1 generation for each Great General or Citadel you control.

 

[pineappledan]

Artillery should be among the top 5, no?

If people wanted specifically to highlight France’s area of greatest military efficacy through the ages strategic requirement + unit production cost as a combination fits the bill pretty well.

In classical era the Carolingians and Merovingians were actually a infantry force, so the swordsman being top here makes sense. Then in medieval the knight is on top. Then for renaissance to Modern the priority flips between the newest mounted/armor, artillery, or naval ranged unit until you hit flying units. This all makes sense to me as a reflection of French military history.

If siege units are top 5 you won’t see them, because they will always get snubbed in favor of infantry, even if that infantry unit is from the previous era.