GEM: Leaders

[Ahriman]

I'd like to find a civ for the theme of lightning warfare -- moving an entire combined arms force at high speed

I don't think this is a good idea. Moving an entire combined force at high speed is incredibly powerful. It breaks multiple game mechanics: that infantry have 2 moves (and so ranged units are safe from infantry if they have rough terrain in front of them), that siege units can't move, set up and shoot in the same turn, etc,

We already had something like this in the Persian +1 movement during golden age, and it was very powerful indeed.

It also doesn't really make you play differently in terms of unit selection or playstyle, it's just a fairly generic good-at-war ability. The only thing it does is devalue mounted units, because you can get mobility on your infantry and ranged units.

Think of it this way: +1 movement on all units is like a free promotion on all units (and a free hard-to-get promotion at that). That is more powerful than UAs tend to be.

I do like the effect of improving alliances, one of the most radically unique effects in the game.

I'm not so keen on this, because of how little control the player has over whether you can get an alliance or not. But if we do do it, then it should be the main part of the UA, not some fairly trivial 10% bonus, and it should probably benefit just you, not both you and your ally.
The problem with picking a civ that this fits for is that most of the historic alliance-brokering civs were otherwise fairly minor powers directly, that's why they always used alliances.
The Papal states, Venice, and Prussia were all fairly diplomatically oriented. But it is hard to think of any major powers where diplomatic acumen was the main part of their power.

I like the idea of a high risk, high reward type UA for Sweden

We have to be careful that "high risk" doesn't mean "useless in the hands of the AI" though.

However, I could reduce the maintenance of barbarian ships, since that is probably the main issue.

This sounds like a good compromise.
I'm not sure that the free Lilburna is really a good idea, it makes early game conquest of a coastal city very very easy - and Liburnas are a classical era unit so it feels weird.

Military costs are high because conquest is an easier path to victory than peace

I think part of the problem is that the maintenance costs feel too high relative to the production costs. Overall production is very high, it is very easy to produce lots and lots of buildings and units. Basically I'm finding maintenance costs outweigh production costs, which I find to be not fun.
Much of this may be from the Liberty Specialist boost issue though; I don't think I can get a good feel for the overall economy balance until this is fixed.

What if all Japanese melee units start with Blitz

Worth testing. Might be a bit strong though.

I'll play an Iroquois game at some point and see how they play. Does the Longhouse still lose the 10% production bonus that Smithy has? Returning that might be enough.

I think part of my problem with early-rush advantage is: captured cities in the early game just don't give you nearly as much benefit as a city you found yourself. Courthouses require significant tech and are expensive relative to early game production and cost you a lot of unhappiness in the meantime, and puppet cities just aren't that valuable.

I find Washington one of my favorite leaders to play. It's important to remember these things do depend on our playstyle.

What is it that you find useful or fun about the UA?

What are some defining unique characteristics of the US?

Massive economic dominance of the last 100 years. Everything else is based on this. The US is one of the most dominant superpowers the world has ever seen (only possible exception being Imperial Britain). That's what is so frustrating to see about the current design of the US, is that it totally misses the most defining characteristic.
Space travel, modern cultural dominance, continued immigration, all of these are just a function of the colossal economic success.
Some of the dominant features of the US are: the invention of mass production (think Model T production line), the expansion of banking and capture and dominance in international finance, the early adoption of liberal political institutions, the mass expansion of state education (particularly universities), the adoption of superhighways and suburbs and auto-oriented urban patterns, etc. etc.

I don't think the pioneer fort captures US-style immigration very well; what would do better would be a very powerful hospital UB or similar; something that encourages an industrial era population explosion would have far better American flavor than faster growth in the ancient and classical eras.

 

[mystikx21]

The problem with using it for the germans was twofold
1) They already have panzers that can represent the tank warfare tactics involved
2) It would apply to all kinds of land units providing additional movement. I'm not sure that Teutonic Knights or Landknechts or Prussian troops were reknowned for speed, and the proposal in any case was to provide additional moves to ranged troops and siege weapons. It's possible it could apply to airplanes and mobile units (as the Mongol UA did/does) instead but for some reason that's seen as a weaker UA. I also don't think it would be very flavorful at all for Germany at that point.

There's also a case that some kind of Prussian or HRE component to the Germans would be more interesting. I'd rather see a science/engineering/philosophy contribution with them and Japan being something like a quality over quantity in warfare.

 

[mystikx21]

@Ahriman, the Longhouse has the same value as the Smithy + the forest/jungle effect.

I didn't realize it had a jungle effect either. That's not flavorful, but it is effective.

I tend to use early rushes to weaken the enemy rather than finish them off. I burn almost all cities down until they start getting into the teens, are capitals/CS, or have wonders. During the early game, that's pretty much any city that you can capture successfully with an early rush.

 

[Dunkah]

Can you put a timer on Blitzkrieg?

Perhaps a 10 turn limit after the declaration of war or some other factor? Blitzkrieg was very powerful early on, as a surprise tactic but lost it's umph once they got dug in and ready for it.

Maybe a social policy or building that triggers it in the industrial era? You wouldn't have to limit it to Germany that way. The US pretty much Blitzed during the Iraq wars.

 

[Ahriman]

I tend to use early rushes to weaken the enemy rather than finish them off.

I guess, but what I find is that spending resources purely to weaken my neighbor won't help me in competing in the long run against that guy on the other continent. So rushing my neighbor doesn't really help me much.

 

[Ahriman]

Can you put a timer on Blitzkrieg?

Perhaps a 10 turn limit after the declaration of war or some other factor? Blitzkrieg was very powerful early on, as a surprise tactic but lost it's umph once they got dug in and ready for it.

Maybe a social policy or building that triggers it in the industrial era?

The Total War policy used to basically do this - 20% bonus on attack for 20 turns after taking it. But it wasn't very interesting.

 

[Dunkah]

The Total War wasn't interesting because timing it to when you were ready to strike was very difficult and it came very late in the game.

If there was a way to turn that on when you were ready to attack, that could be fun.

 

[mitsho]

I'd like to find a civ for the theme of lightning warfare -- moving an entire combined arms force at high speed. Since this idea appears to be unpopular for Germany, what civ could we give it to?

Why not give it to Sweden then? It does fit somehow with the shock tactics used by Caroleans, well if you ignore the fact that their last and major defeat was due to such a march (and scorched earth tactics, man, that should be somehow part of civ warfare ).

Otherwise, why not the US (Industrial Warfare Logistics all over the Globe), Greece (Alexander's conquest), Rome (Roman Roads and Legion Organization), Songhai (well...) or well really the Germans (Blitzkrieg). The unpopularity of the proposal was mainly due to it being a buff to ranged units. Make it across the board (but unlocked by medieval tech), and I guess we're fine.

@Ahriman
I agree that Sweden fits better as a militaristic civ historically and for gameplay. I do like the effect of improving alliances, one of the most radically unique effects in the game. I'd like to find a home for that bonus with a civ that fits better. What leader/civ makes sense for great people and alliances?

What I don't like about the alliance bonus is that it also benefits the other civs, though that may be necessary for balance/willingness to agree to alliances (mainly a problem of multiplayer though).

As for alliance bonusses: England (Commonwealth), France (Communauté Française), Siam (Father Governs Children - no, Siam is fine), Austria (or rather if we're with Europeans: Poland, but that's not in the game yet ), Ethiopia (needs allies to defend against Arabs, Italians, etc. ... Actually may be a good fit here for a tall gameplay style).

@mitsho
I really like the idea of a unique Carthaginian luxury resource! It's an active bonus, fits the naval trading theme, dramatically changes gameplay, and all the other good things for a leader bonus.

Would we include it as a bonus on the Cothon, replacing the harbor (and UA gives free Lighthouses)? Or would it be a UI buildable at the coast (one per city?)? Tyrian Purple

If we do something like this, I would love an option to gift a luxury ressource to City States to add some influence per turn (ideally the amount you lose with a neutral city state), and of course only one-per-city-state.

@mitsho
The vanilla Ottoman trait is ship capture + lower maintenance. I changed that to ship capture + free Liburna. I think running around with a Liburna at the start of the game is a lot more fun than getting some +X gold per turn. However, I could reduce the maintenance of barbarian ships, since that is probably the main issue. I think capturing major-civ ships is so powerful it needs a late-game counterbalance.

It's not gamebreaking, one can survive and the ability is strong by itself. It just leads you to suicide ships plenty of time (or gift them to cs) which doesn't sound like intended/historically . But all in all, it's not something that needs to be adressed quickly. I'd say, definately keep one civ that starts with a ship instead of a warrior. That is fun after all.

I like your ideas of farms providing some additional bonus. An easy one to implement would be adding production or gold to farms, similar to the Korean UA. It would turn the farm into a multipurpose improvement providing a little of every yield.

But, wouldn't that be too similar to the Koreans?

I'd be okay with buffing Japan and China, and we discussed earlier how the free spy for America seems like a good idea to boost its lategame potential. What if all Japanese melee units start with Blitz, to combine with the no-damaged-penalty ability?

I'd make that unlock with a medieval civ (Chivalry?) to avoid making early rushes too easy. China can just gain a small bonus (instant?) on the Paper Maker.

I find Washington one of my favorite leaders to play. It's important to remember these things do depend on our playstyle. I find the Minuteman rather bland, however, so why don't we replace it? What are some defining unique characteristics of the US?

I like the Minuteman as it's the only vanguard unique unit, (right?). But maybe we can just move some other infantry unique unit to a vanguard? Of your suggestions, I like the Open Air Stadium the best, Modern Rock (Pop) Music is really something very American dominated. I'm not sure how much a boost a late game luxury is though, if you play peacefully, you may sell them, but the amount isn't that much late in the game. (Now, if you could also use them to keep city states on your side which works well together with the extra spy.... that would work well together).

But - and I find that very ironic - the US would now be the only civ with two UB's (unless you go with the old idea of making a modmod that keeps the third unique ).

So, scrap the Pioneer Fort (though it is very topical and nice to play, I agree), but move the Minuteman a tier earlier (since it excels best when there's still some terrain undeveloped/unexplored left? But add the extra spy, yes.

EDIT:

The problem with using it for the germans was twofold
1) They already have panzers that can represent the tank warfare tactics involved
2) It would apply to all kinds of land units providing additional movement. I'm not sure that Teutonic Knights or Landknechts or Prussian troops were reknowned for speed, and the proposal in any case was to provide additional moves to ranged troops and siege weapons. It's possible it could apply to airplanes and mobile units (as the Mongol UA did/does) instead but for some reason that's seen as a weaker UA. I also don't think it would be very flavorful at all for Germany at that point.

There's also a case that some kind of Prussian or HRE component to the Germans would be more interesting. I'd rather see a science/engineering/philosophy contribution with them and Japan being something like a quality over quantity in warfare.

For Teutonic Knights, you're probably (I'm certainly) thinking of Age of Empires 2 where they were basically really slow, but hard to kill Longswords. I have no idea how they actually worked in real life .

Yes, I do see the points that it doesn't really fit the Germans, but what other civ does it fit more? My first answer would be the Zulu (from past civ experience...), but that's not really a case in point.

And I do agree, my first idea for Germany was special specialists: Scientists and Engineer are the same, so you get more hammers and beakers for using the same number of specialists.

EDIT2:

The Papal states, Venice, and Prussia were all fairly diplomatically oriented. But it is hard to think of any major powers where diplomatic acumen was the main part of their power.

Actually, if you put it like this, Austria's Metternich (Congress of Vienna) and Austria's motto (Bella gerant alia, tu, felix Austria, nube) as well. There's been also a Austrian UN Secretary I think... But in the end, it'd be ironic again, as the alliance system that lead to the first world war, was their downfall...

You do however have good points about why a bonus is not a good warfare UA.

 

[Naeven]

@Naeven
Thanks for the information. Based on your feedback I'll make sure to keep the Caroleans, whatever we do. I think we need to come up with a theme for Sweden. If it's going to be a militaristic empire, what kind of military? What sets it apart, in a broad sense, from other armies in history? You mentioned the allotment system, which sounds interesting, based on what I'm reading about it.

I like your ideas of farms providing some additional bonus. An easy one to implement would be adding production or gold to farms, similar to the Korean UA. It would turn the farm into a multipurpose improvement providing a little of every yield.

I do agree that a militaristic Swedish empire would be more fitting. But I also think we could use some more specialists leaders, and the current Swedish welfare system is perfect for such.

The Allotment system allowed Sweden to field a highly effiecent/elite army (The Caroleans) eventho Sweden had a huge lack of manpower compared the other empires of Europe.
And it did so very cheaply, as it was pretty much supplied by the farmers themselves.
If we go militaristic, this is should be the theme IMO

The only little thing I don't like about improving farms is it leads to ahistorical behavior, clearing forest and lots of population. I'm not saying Sweden don't clear forest, just not massively. Even today Sweden is 65% Forest. And Sweden always had a very low population.
--EDIT--
Maybe the swedish farms shouldn't get the civil service/fertilizer uppgrade, but instead a unqiue +(1-2) & +(1-2) at civil service. This would also encourage them to go late game Freedom (+1 farms) which is very historical.

 

[mystikx21]

Can you put a timer on Blitzkrieg?

Perhaps a 10 turn limit after the declaration of war or some other factor? Blitzkrieg was very powerful early on, as a surprise tactic but lost it's umph once they got dug in and ready for it.

Maybe a social policy or building that triggers it in the industrial era? You wouldn't have to limit it to Germany that way. The US pretty much Blitzed during the Iraq wars.

I'm not sure that it did lose its umph. The Ardennes offensive on the Western front had surprise and worked quite well until they started running out of fuel. The strategic problem for that offensive wasn't the strategy for carrying it out but that having an offensive at that time and on that front was suicidally dumb. Kursk wasn't so much the Soviets sitting there taking the beating to stop the advance but having months to plan a counter attack and use a large strategic reserve (because they had intel where the attack was coming). Kursk was a textbook attempt to stop such an offensive, but it succeeded largely because the offensive had no strategic surprise. Operational surprise was a big part of the blitz's power.

The other problem for it wasn't so much that the Russians/Americans were dug in and ready for it. The problem was that the Russians/Americans now had good equipment to carry it out themselves and operational doctrine had to adapt to a mobile defence instead. Patton's attack and rush across France could be viewed in the same lights as Guderain's in France 4 years prior.

I also dislike timer-based bonuses for combat. For the same reason that the Total War policy was pretty useless in vanilla.

 

[123john321]

BUG: I'm playing England right now and I just noticed that I'm not getting any extra XP for naval units. Want me to upload the save?

 

[sukritact]

The problem with picking a civ that this fits for is that most of the historic alliance-brokering civs were otherwise fairly minor powers directly, that's why they always used alliances.

If and only if this alliance UA is really wanted, Siam would definitely be appropriate. The Ayutthaya period was full of contact and trade with other major powers (The Dutch, Japanese and Portuguese, French, the Persians, England, China, etc.), and some of them had settlements in the kingdom at various points. The fact that Thailand has never been colonised is often attributed to shrewd diplomacy by the kings in the current dynasty playing the major western powers off each other; using alliances and concessions to maintain sovereignty whist also using them to modernise the country.

Still, Siam doesn't really need to be changed.

 

[Ahriman]

Make it across the board (but unlocked by medieval tech), and I guess we're fine.

Well, not quite, I still think an across the board increase to military movement is a mistake.

Would we include it as a bonus on the Cothon, replacing the harbor (and UA gives free Lighthouses)?

I think a free luxury resource has to be part of a UA, I can't see how it would work as a UB or UI without scaling issues. But even so I still don't quite see how it would work.
Adding happiness to a harbor UB would probably be easier.

I'd say, definately keep one civ that starts with a ship instead of a warrior. That is fun after all.

Then perhaps it should start with a weaker, barbarian ship? A galley? The Liburna is well into the tech tree, very powerful for a starting unit.

But, wouldn't that be too similar to the Koreans?

Can you remind me of the current effect of Korea? I never bought that DLC.

China can just gain a small bonus (instant?) on the Paper Maker.

How about an extra +1 or +2 science? It seems the paper maker is supposed to be representing the early scientific advances of China, particularly the "Four Great Inventions"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Great_Inventions

I'd make that unlock with a medieval civ (Chivalry?) to avoid making early rushes too easy.

Chivalry has a nice ring in that it goes well with Bushido, but of course it works terribly in gameplay terms because it gives mounted units rather than melee.

I like the Minuteman as it's the only vanguard unique unit, (right?)

I do think a UU vanguard is interesting. But vanguards are already mobile, so more mobility isn't much help. Is there some other bonus we could give, particularly one that would then stay on and help boost American Airborne?

Of your suggestions, I like the Open Air Stadium the best, Modern Rock (Pop) Music is really something very American dominated.

I guess I could see a stadium UB, but I still think that should fall way behind a stock exchange UB or something representing production lines or superhighways.

or Teutonic Knights, you're probably (I'm certainly) thinking of Age of Empires 2 where they were basically really slow, but hard to kill Longswords.

Pretty much every game representation of Teutonic Knights has had them as heavily armored heavy infantry type guys, as opposed to the much more lightly armored and mobile lithuanian/baltic types they were fighting.

The Allotment system allowed Sweden to field a highly effiecent/elite army (The Caroleans) eventho Sweden had a huge lack of manpower compared the other empires of Europe.

Reduced military upkeep costs could represent efficiency, but it tends to encourage a quantity/horde approach that I think doesn't fit Sweden well.

Whould be nice if you could build road to the forest and then hook it up to the "forest grid".

I thought you could do this?

I also dislike timer-based bonuses for combat.

Agreed.

 

[Dunkah]

If a Blitzkrieg was triggered by a DOW, then it would be able to be used by the AI. Assuming here that the AI would prepare for a war and launch when it was ready. Unlike Total War where you would not be likely to time it in such a way as to be ready when you were ready to choose the policy.

This would allow you/AI to use it when you were ready to declare war on someone. So the timing would almost always be optimal.

This would allow you to use it much earlier in the game. As early as you wanted to allow.

This would also allow you to use it more than once.

I would argue that in the Bulge they tried to use Blitz and again it worked for a short time and then petered out. Fuel was a very important factor but also the loss of several key bridges and crossroads.

Patton outran his supply lines and his race across France petered out, and Guderian was stopped so the Luftwaffe could finish off the Allies in the Dunkirk area.

Whatever reason the concept is just not sustainable for too long. In each Case... The Bulge, Patton, Guderian, Kursk... the event lasted more or less about a month or less...

 

[Ahriman]

If and only if this alliance UA is really wanted, Siam would definitely be appropriate. The Ayutthaya period was full of contact and trade with other major powers (The Dutch, Japanese and Portuguese, French, the Persians, England, China, etc.), and some of them had settlements in the kingdom at various points. The fact that Thailand has never been colonised is often attributed to shrewd diplomacy by the kings in the current dynasty playing the major western powers off each other; using alliances and concessions to maintain sovereignty whist also using them to modernise the country.

Still, Siam doesn't really need to be changed.

I agree with this on all counts; Siam makes sense as a diplomatic power, and it's precisely what I was talking about above, a relatively minor power that had to play off major powers to survive, and did so very well.
But Siam already "works" as a civ, so doesn't need a change.

On Blitzkrieg: I think it is way over-stated, and I tend to agree with the military historians who argue that it isn't really a coherent doctrine, it's just general exploitation of superior organization.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blitzkrieg#Controversy

 

[mystikx21]

Both Patton and Guderian were halted only by other strategic decisions rather than the lack of effectiveness of the strategy (Patton was stopped in part so Market-Garden could go forward just as Guderain was stopped so the Luftwaffe could attack). The concept has been heavily adapted in modern operational warfare rather than abandoned in the sense that there was a solid concept at all. I don't think the problem is sustainability of tactics and strategy but operational surprise and maintaining mobility and bypassing fixed positions. Probably the ultimate show of this (other than the first year of the German-Soviet war) is the US island hopping in the Pacific. The technology was much better in ww2 to exploit these effects and is even better now.

In any case, I still don't think anything that's timer based makes much sense here for combat, as a policy, a UA, or associated with a DOW. I'm also not sure what would be used here. Faster units is extremely imbalanced. What seems a capable representation of it is the panzer tank unit as it's largely a technological effect of mobile units and coordination or unit cohesion from better communication. Making it a UA doesn't make much sense either.

 

[sukritact]

How about an extra +1 or +2 science? It seems the paper maker is supposed to be representing the early scientific advances of China, particularly the "Four Great Inventions"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Great_Inventions

I agree with this; China's lack of representation as a major scientific and cultural power has always irked me.

I think a free luxury resource has to be part of a UA, I can't see how it would work as a UB or UI without scaling issues. But even so I still don't quite see how it would work.
Adding happiness to a harbor UB would probably be easier.

I think, as part of the UA, you can have Carthage start with one copy of the dyes, and then gain an extra copy for every age. That should prevent Carthage from getting too big an advantage too early.

 

[Ahriman]

Faster units is extremely imbalanced.

Right. So faster-everything I think is something we don't need.

Perhaps to incorporate some of what Thal wants: is there any way we could design something that would encourage use of combined arms?
I can't think of anything obvious, because I think the game already encourages combined arms, and because generic military boosts like Japan's barracks UB or the reduced military costs or more units from military city states are already across-the-board military benefits that encourage combined arms.

I think, as part of the UA, you can have Carthage start with one copy of the dyes, and then gain an extra copy for every age.

Interesting idea, it would need testing but I can see that working.
One thought: would this work better for the Dutch? I think there is widespread agreement that the Dutch UA is weak.

Also, on the alliances issue: the other faction that makes sense for is Austria. Austria was very much a diplomatic power stitching together alliances, and I think there are widespread complaints about the annexation effect, particularly since we aren't able to liberate the CSes afterwards.

 

[Naeven]

I thought you could do this?

Just tested this ingame, yes you can. Thank you for the info!
Pretty sure i tested this way back, oh well.

 

[mystikx21]

Tulips for the Dutch, ugh.

Makes more sense for them though than Carthage. Some other effect on the Cothon is fine.