Germany

[InkAxis]

So, you get a bonus if you vote in a resolution and you vote "correctly"? That is, if you vote for it and it passes, and you vote against it and it fails.
What happens if you don't vote? You don't get anything?
I feel like for 75% of the time I don't vote for every option so this would change things a bit, but in most cases I would just put one vote in because it's pretty predictable.
In the WC I only vote to win in most cases anyway.
So I am not against this ability but also might need a bit more thought.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

Nothing of these suggestions directly help Germany in the earlier game, nor do it really help in get alliances with CS.
You are still locked in always the same manner, pick statecraft and send all trade routes to CS. Even if those CS are far away and have a high risk to get pillaged or give you only +4 gold, while sending trade routes to other civs could give you +14gold +6 science + 4 cultuer etc. There is absolutly no flexibility, and no real help in getting allied with the CS, except more production to generate diplomats. (but even with that modifier, AI in higher difficulties simply have to pay less for them and it ends equal)
I dont see a reason why Germanies UA have to be Realpolitik, there are enough options to pick from the long history of Germany.

Productivity and Propaganda - is based around Germanies ability in the two world wars to be an industrial powerhouse even with a heavy trade blockade, air bombardments and sabotage missions. Also to be able to call a lot of kingdoms/nations for their support while beeing in the holy roman empire of german nations, cause those nations hat obligations to the leader of the HRE.
Noble prize catcher - is based around the fact, that extremly many famous people, especially with economical or scientifical background, came from Germany. There was a period, when every third noble prize was going to Germany. And the second part, a focus on villages is based around the highly innovative middle class economy, which created big companies out of only small manufacturies. (I also think, that villaged didnt get much love in the game and should get someone who likes to spam them)
Ruhr industry boom - This secures, that Germany is always able to construct many industrial infrastructures, like was thanks to the giant amount of coal deposits in its territory. Germany was also able to transform its big amount of coal into oil and then to fuel for its modern vehicles in the second world war. Trade routes which cant get pillaged also a reference to the both world wars, where blockade and bombardment didnt stop Germany from producing tons of products.
Military industrial complex - Playing with the supply cap represents Germanies ability to field a lot of motivated people into the battle, like it already was in prussian times and was going till 1945.

 

[InkAxis]

Noble prize catcher - is based around the fact, that extremly many famous people, especially with economical or scientifical background, came from Germany. There was a period, when every third noble prize was going to Germany. And the second part, a focus on villages is based around the highly innovative middle class economy, which created big companies out of only small manufacturies. (I also think, that villaged didnt get much love in the game and should get someone who likes to spam them)

The nobel prize is kinda just.. an organization? It's like in civ 6, where sweden's entire thing is the fact that they made nobel prizes. Like is that all that sweden has achieved as a civilization? It would be like giving a country a UA around the Olympics. Like, I guess, but it's not really about that country.

Productivity and Propaganda - is based around Germanies ability in the two world wars to be an industrial powerhouse even with a heavy trade blockade, air bombardments and sabotage missions. Also to be able to call a lot of kingdoms/nations for their support while beeing in the holy roman empire of german nations, cause those nations hat obligations to the leader of the HRE.
...
Ruhr industry boom - This secures, that Germany is always able to construct many industrial infrastructures, like was thanks to the giant amount of coal deposits in its territory. Germany was also able to transform its big amount of coal into oil and then to fuel for its modern vehicles in the second world war. Trade routes which cant get pillaged also a reference to the both world wars, where blockade and bombardment didnt stop Germany from producing tons of products.
Military industrial complex - Playing with the supply cap represents Germanies ability to field a lot of motivated people into the battle, like it already was in prussian times and was going till 1945.

These might work but would need a better name.
But, what stops them is that we probably don't want a complete rework of Germany.
If the leader is Bismark then the most obvious focus is Realpolitik, and we can stay with that.
The hard part is that realpolitik represents something that either you are already doing (playing strategically and sometimes brutally - though only roleplaying players would realize that), or something the AI would have trouble with.
However, the voting thing could be possible as a Realpolitik thing that the AI can handle. I'm not sure how historical voting in the World Congress is for Bismark though..

 

[pineappledan]

Being active and angling for advantage in global forums is very Bismarck. He organized the Berlin conference that instigated the scramble for Africa, and his various diplomatic and military maneuvers thwarted France and isolated Austria while pulling the various German city-states into the Prussian orbit.

To historian Eric Hobsbawm, Bismarck "remained undisputed world champion at the game of multilateral diplomatic chess for almost twenty years after 1871

Nothing of these suggestions directly help Germany in the earlier game, nor do it really help in get alliances with CS.
You are still locked in always the same manner, pick statecraft and send all trade routes to CS. Even if those CS are far away and have a high risk to get pillaged or give you only +4 gold, while sending trade routes to other civs could give you +14gold +6 science + 4 cultuer etc. There is absolutly no flexibility, and no real help in getting allied with the CS, except more production to generate diplomats. (but even with that modifier, AI in higher difficulties simply have to pay less for them and it ends equal)
I dont see a reason why Germanies UA have to be Realpolitik, there are enough options to pick from the long history of Germany.

Productivity and Propaganda - is based around Germanies ability in the two world wars to be an industrial powerhouse even with a heavy trade blockade, air bombardments and sabotage missions. Also to be able to call a lot of kingdoms/nations for their support while beeing in the holy roman empire of german nations, cause those nations hat obligations to the leader of the HRE.
Noble prize catcher - is based around the fact, that extremly many famous people, especially with economical or scientifical background, came from Germany. There was a period, when every third noble prize was going to Germany. And the second part, a focus on villages is based around the highly innovative middle class economy, which created big companies out of only small manufacturies. (I also think, that villaged didnt get much love in the game and should get someone who likes to spam them)
Ruhr industry boom - This secures, that Germany is always able to construct many industrial infrastructures, like was thanks to the giant amount of coal deposits in its territory. Germany was also able to transform its big amount of coal into oil and then to fuel for its modern vehicles in the second world war. Trade routes which cant get pillaged also a reference to the both world wars, where blockade and bombardment didnt stop Germany from producing tons of products.
Military industrial complex - Playing with the supply cap represents Germanies ability to field a lot of motivated people into the battle, like it already was in prussian times and was going till 1945.

The names are a non-starter for me. Realpolitik is a fine concept to emphasize; it's something typified by Bismarck, but wasn't invented or named by him.

The earlier UU helps address your concerns at least somewhat.

 

[InkAxis]

He organized the Berlin conference that instigated the scramble for Africa

That's true, though perhaps for Germany slightly less important.

and his various diplomatic and military maneuvers thwarted France and isolated Austria while pulling the various German city-states into the Prussian orbit.

I have an idea.
The Franco-Prussian war famously led to unification as southern Germany joined Prussia.
This could be very well represented, with CS quests for war/capturing a city/ taking tribute, as CS are literally joining you for declaring war. The German UA could make it so that such quests appear much more often and give culture/science or maybe even a WC vote.
It very well fits realpolitik, you are often turning on people for big benefits for yourself and other allies. Especially as it is war focused it better fits German unification which Bismark is most famous for.

 

[pineappledan]

That's true, though perhaps for Germany slightly less important.

It was a very important win for German interests.

It very well fits realpolitik, you are often turning on people for big benefits for yourself and other allies. Especially as it is war focused it better fits German unification which Bismark is most famous for.

Giving a reward for specific CS quests sounds a bit random, and it doesn't sound pragmatic to instigate wars with other major civs on the basis of CS quests. There's also another civ that gets double bonus for those kinds of quests: Austria. So 1 Germanic diplomacy civ would be giving +100% rewards for All CS quests, and the other Germanic diplomacy civ would be giving additional rewards for specific kinds of CS quests?

Despite winning the Franco-Prussian war, Bismarck's legacy is his adept use of balance of power diplomacy to protect German interests without the use of armed conflict.
Focusing on 6 months of war over the course of his 30 year long career as Minister President diminishes his greatest achievement, which was a long period of peace in the European continent, where he managed to divert military adventures to the colonial continents, allowing him to focus his attentions on domestic politics in the new German state.

 

[Hinin]

Despite winning the Franco-Prussian war, Bismarck's legacy is his adept use of balance of power diplomacy to protect German interests without the use of armed conflict.
Focusing on 6 months of war over the course of his 30 year long career as Minister President diminishes his greatest achievement, which was a long period of peace in the European continent, where he managed to divert military adventures to the colonial continents, allowing him to focus his attentions on domestic politics in the new German state.

I wholeheartedly agree.The four UCs are not direcly related to Bismarck (Hanseatic League, Germanic tribes, Teutonic Order) or show the failings of following generations of German statesmen to uphold (or the will to go against) the equilibrium Bismarck wanted for Germany to strengthen its power before a new conflict arose (the Panzer). Because of this, I think the UA should be all about Bismarck, and the way he led German foreign policy was surely not about waging war to please German states : it was about isolating his opponents while not appearing too strong, distracting them and maintaining the status quo when needed, and striking with decisive force if a war is required. Is was diplomatic manipulation supported by a deep knowledge of the European balance of power and an army powerful enough to quickly win what was needed before other powers began to intervene : a double-front war or a war of coalitions was exactly what he didn't want.

To go back to the UA itself, maybe there is a way to make the bonus scale with the number of votes you put in a resolution : that would make the repartition of votes more interesting and avoid cases where you simply put one vote for resolutions you're pretty sure about.

That could make something like this (with some of my own ideas)

UA - Realpolitik

+3 Science per Friendly City-State and +3 Culture and +1 Supply per Allied City-State, scaling with Era. When helping pass or defeat a Resolution in the World Congress, gain Production and Gold, scaling with Era and the number of Votes invested in those Resolutions, in addition to Influence with all known City-States.

• The supply per Allied CS is symbolizing Bismarck's efforts to unify Germany militarily and makes the UA's bonus about more than just influence and yields
  
• Since there is already science and culture passively thanks to CS friends/allies, I changed the yields from voting success toward some that allow immediate actions if used well (you can rush particular buildings / wonders / units production or upgrades with these). => it gives this "decisiveness" aspect to the kit, since you can surprise your opponents with sudden bursts of power.
• I separated the Yields from Influence for the voting part : production and gold would scale with era for each vote invested in successful choices (and with era) while the Influence part naturally grows stronger toward the end of the game (you know more CStates, the WCongress become more frequent), and so would simply scale with the number of successful choices you made.

=> Basically : Yields from voting successfully scale with Era + Number of Votes invested ; Influence from voting successfully scales with Number of successful choice (from 0 to 3).
=> This means than, whatever the situation, you can still win something from your votes : all-in your votes on one successful resolution to gain a lot of yields if needed, but less Influence, or play the diplomatic game more carefully to gain more benefits in the long term through CState alliances.

However, the voting thing could be possible as a Realpolitik thing that the AI can handle. I'm not sure how historical voting in the World Congress is for Bismark though..

The AI already has clear preferences for the way they vote, and trade votes with other players frequently. Plus, I actually think that "per vote" scaling would make things easier for the AI.

 

[Txurce]

Despite winning the Franco-Prussian war, Bismarck's legacy is his adept use of balance of power diplomacy to protect German interests without the use of armed conflict.

Bismarck's primary legacy was unifying Germany, with Prusssia rather than Austria at its center. Everything following was gilding the lily.

 

[Drakle]

I don't like the extra WC vote. It's too similar to Austria's and the world congress is already too much a snowball of votes.

UA - Realpolitik

+3 Science per Friendly City-State and +3 Culture and +1 Supply per Allied City-State, scaling with Era. When helping pass or defeat a Resolution in the World Congress, gain Production and Gold, scaling with Era and the number of Votes invested in those Resolutions, in addition to Influence with all known City-States.

This I like.

The only issue I have is the production. Where is the production going? Capital? Germany already has a Production heavy UB, and this could make it too easier to complete world congress projects if Germany can dump a ton of production on Turn 1 of the project. Production burst yields are already something that can be gamed very easy.

 

[Hinin]

Bismarck's primary legacy was unifying Germany, with Prusssia rather than Austria at its center. Everything following was gilding the lily.

If that was only about that, he would have lost everything in a few years (and that basically happened rapidly after he was dismissed and his ideas rejected) : the apparition of such a powerful force in the middle of Europe was usually sure to lead to a coalition against it (aka France throughout the 17th-19th centuries). Bismarck's legacy was to allow such a force to survive long enough to make it accepted in the European balance of power, through a variety of diplomatic and military means. What his successors did with it though is another story.

 

[Hinin]

The only issue I have is the production. Where is the production going? Capital? Germany already has a Production heavy UB, and this could make it too easier to complete world congress projects if Germany can dump a ton of production on Turn 1 of the project. Production burst yields are already something that can be gamed very easy.

So instead Science and Gold ? That way, you can still surprise your opponents (by rushing some techs and investing / upgrading).

 

[Drakle]

So instead Science and Gold ? That way, you can still surprise your opponents (by rushing some techs and investing / upgrading).

Well, they already have a per turn Science bonus. And while there are other offenders, I don't like all the big burst yields of science in the later game. It makes the end game wrap up way too fast, so there is no time to enjoy the era. But it does fit in the concept. Maybe it might be fine if the bonus is tilted more to the gold than the science.

Maybe a WLTKD? Maybe with a base of 5 turns, with more turns based upon the success of votes. WLTKDs are a tad underused vs Golden Ages though it has equalised a bit more recently.

 

[Txurce]

If that was only about that, he would have lost everything in a few years (and that basically happened rapidly after he was dismissed and his ideas rejected) : the apparition of such a powerful force in the middle of Europe was usually sure to lead to a coalition against it (aka France throughout the 17th-19th centuries). Bismarck's legacy was to allow such a force to survive long enough to make it accepted in the European balance of power, through a variety of diplomatic and military means. What his successors did with it though is another story.

You are saying that Bismarck putting up storm shutters on his house, to protect against a storm that may or may not have come, is a greater legacy than building the house in the first place.

As I look at that house, largely still standing today on land where there had only been a bunch of sheds for centuries, I have to disagree.

 

[Hinin]

You are saying that Bismarck putting up storm shutters on his house, to protect against a storm that may or may not have come, is a greater legacy than building the house in the first place.

As I look at that house, largely still standing today on land where there had only been a bunch of sheds for centuries, I have to disagree.

It is only my vision of this period, but I think that the accumulation of factors leading to a more and more united German political landscape throughout the 19th century made a union of some kind a very strong possibility (with or without the south, under prussian or austrian leadership). The reaction of nearby powers, though, was in the end the main possible counter to such an endeavour, especially from France (who had enough problems with the UK already). What Bismarck did was turn this French hostility into the lever that helped the political unification, and then maintain a status quo for long enough that the resulting state could sustain itself against another possible threat (by using the European balance of power against itself to allow the rise of Germany without having a coalition against it). The resulting national body, despite what his successors did (which nearly destroyed the whole thing), is still present today, and that I think is a testament to Bismarck's work (whatever my personal opinion of Bismarck on a moral or ideological standpoint is, that's not the matter here).

So yeah, I think more highly of Bismarck's efforts to support Germany's survival as a state than to make it appear in the first place.

 

[pineappledan]

It is only my vision of this period, but I think that the accumulation of factors leading to a more and more united German political landscape throughout the 19th century made a union of some kind a very strong possibility (with or without the south, under prussian or austrian leadership). The reaction of nearby powers, though, was in the end the main possible counter to such an endeavour, especially from France (who had enough problems with the UK already). What Bismarck did was turn this French hostility into the lever that helped the political unification, and then maintain a status quo for long enough that the resulting state could sustain itself against another possible threat (by using the European balance of power against itself to allow the rise of Germany without having a coalition against it). The resulting national body, despite what his successors did (which nearly destroyed the whole thing), is still present today, and that I think is a testament to Bismarck's work (whatever my personal opinion of Bismarck on a moral or ideological standpoint is, that's not the matter here).

Better said than what I could manage, but these are my thoughts as well. Building the house in an era of popular house-building is less impressive than building the biggest, nicest house on the block and protecting it from arsonists for 20 years. It isn't particularly impressive that you built a house only for it to be burned to the ground immediately afterwards.

I would only add "and with or without an independent Bavaria".

UA - Realpolitik

+3 Science per Friendly City-State and +3 Culture and +1 Supply per Allied City-State, scaling with Era. When helping pass or defeat a Resolution in the World Congress, gain Production and Gold, scaling with Era and the number of Votes invested in those Resolutions, in addition to Influence with all known City-States.

As you can imagine, I am biased towards my own formulation, and so I will try to defend it.

I am wary of unique scaling methods, and I try to avoid them unless I feel they are absolutely necessary. Gaining yields per vote in a successful vote seems like a complication without gain, and it's my opinion that it would undercut the Realpolitik theme. The scaling based mainly of votes rewards me better and more consistently if I just dump all my votes into a single resolution, which is what I do normally. Per-vote yields doesn't make me vote any different from if I were playing any other civ. I prefer the all-or-nothing mechanic, influencing what you can, and siding with the majority on what you cannot. That feels more pragmatic, but it also rewards you for splitting your vote, which normally a sub-optimal way of voting in the WC.

The +1 per ally is a bonus above-and-beyond the bonus for friendship, which was something I specifically wanted to avoid doing. Having only a / difference in kind, with no additional bonuses for allying helps Germany keep that pragmatism. With no additional benefits for ally-ship, it also makes Germany the king of Open Door policies, which I like.

I prefer the / instant yields. Germany has a ton of %production off the Hanse, and decent gold generation as well. Instant production bonuses are hard to balance, and that would be especially true for Germany, which has an enormous global production modifier.
Keeping the UA strictly to keeps the UA slimmer and more focused, the Hanse has the / bonuses to round the civ out, and the new Landsknecht is cheaper, and has full XP, movement on purchase, and no cooldown like a mercenary unit. The UB/UU combination both present / bonuses in their own way then.

I don't like the extra WC vote. It's too similar to Austria's and the world congress is already too much a snowball of votes.

Precisely my thoughts as well.

What I want to focus on is enhancing the dichotomy between Austria and Germany more. Austria gets more votes, while Germany is rewarded more for voting well. It's like the Win-Easier vs Win-More military civs (eg. Zulu vs Rome), but for Diplomatic civs. Austria wins WC resolutions easier with more votes while Germany wins more from WC resolutions that it voted on "correctly".

Well, they already have a per turn Science bonus. And while there are other offenders, I don't like all the big burst yields of science in the later game. It makes the end game wrap up way too fast, so there is no time to enjoy the era. But it does fit in the concept. Maybe it might be fine if the bonus is tilted more to the gold than the science.

Maybe a WLTKD? Maybe with a base of 5 turns, with more turns based upon the success of votes. WLTKDs are a tad underused vs Golden Ages though it has equalised a bit more recently.

While I don't necessarily agree that this is even a problem to begin with, Removing the GAP from Germany's Friend/Ally per-turn yields levels that WLTKD/GA unique component balance even more. I don't think Germany is the right pick for a WLTKD civ though.

The other civs that have instant yields are Russia, Assyria, and maybe Ethiopia(?). To the degree that instant science yields hasten the end game, they are coming from Policies, wonders, and Great Scientist Bulbs. It's actually per-science yields that make the largest impact here, because GScience bulbs scale off that, so a bit more instant science mainly helps Germany in the mid-game, and impacts the late game relatively little.

 

[InkAxis]

Despite winning the Franco-Prussian war, Bismarck's legacy is his adept use of balance of power diplomacy to protect German interests without the use of armed conflict.
Focusing on 6 months of war over the course of his 30 year long career as Minister President diminishes his greatest achievement, which was a long period of peace in the European continent, where he managed to divert military adventures to the colonial continents, allowing him to focus his attentions on domestic politics in the new German state.

I agree, but I think I didn't make something clear - this is very difficult to represent.
Bismark instituted many policies to advance the German state during this time, including the first welfare system (to please the socialists) and kept the German parliament under control. I would think this is represented by gaining culture, which helps you get policies. It's an abstraction but it works.
Meanwhile controlling the web of alliances (which after his dismissal led to a disaster in german foreign policy) and keeping stability on the continent - how do you represent that in civ? The closest thing I can think of is defensive pacts, but any idea is too difficult not only for the AI but also for the player.
So, I don't think a focus on unification is unwarranted, it's a much better representation.
Voting in the WC? I guess that does represent the idea of Realpolitik the way you have presented it. It could also be said the WC represents international Diplomacy so that kinda represents what Bismark was doing but it's a bit of a stretch.
I don't have any other ideas so I'll take this but it's not free of issues.

 

[Txurce]

It is only my vision of this period, but I think that the accumulation of factors leading to a more and more united German political landscape throughout the 19th century made a union of some kind a very strong possibility (with or without the south, under prussian or austrian leadership).

I'm afraid I disagree right from the top. If, as you hypothesize, Germany had been united by Austria, Bismarck probably would not be a leaderhead in Civ today. But it wasn't. The reactionary, militaristic Bismarck did it it after becoming Prussia's effective leader in 1862, first fighting a tune-up war with Denmark in 1864, then knocking the Austrians from their pedestal in their 1866 war, and finally wiping the floor with France in 1870-1. This is the Bismarck in Civ today: the one that leads straight to the Panzer.

And that is my agenda in stressing it: I want to keep that Bismarck, and that UU.

You and Pineapple have a different agenda, so you're magnifying the effects of the 20 years following unification. I get it. And I agree that Bismarck's subsequent diplomatic maneuvering is impressive. But that maneuvering is just that: sustaining for a generation the Prussian-German prominence he created solely through war.

 

[Hinin]

And that is my agenda in stressing it: I want to keep that Bismarck, and that UU.

You want ? Well, lucky luck, we're talking about a change to Germany that would first appear in the tweak mod. It will be first tested there, and ultimately people, together, will decide. Simply saying "I want nothing to change" when change has already been decided on one level or another, but not without a period of test and discussion, won't do much in the context of the conversation.

You and Pineapple have a different agenda

We all have "agendas" it seems in your eyes. The goal at first was, for many people here, to discuss what changes (little or big, but certainly changes) could be made for the civ's kit, after it has appeared multiple times that it is in its current form fragile, redundant and not very rewarding (plus the fact that its unique unit will have to be changed one way or another, since the Tank will be nerfed in the near future, which means that the civ will become even weaker). I found something interesting in pineappledan's ideas and tried to show my support to it : if that, and defending this idea through historical presentation, is "having an agenda", then I don't think there is an interest in continuing this conversation with you.

Or maybe you don't know the subtext when throwing that kind of expression to someone talking about history ? If that's the case, then simply retract on that last part and we'll continue this conversation on a healthier basis.

 

[Hinin]

As you can imagine, I am biased towards my own formulation, and so I will try to defend it.

I am wary of unique scaling methods, and I try to avoid them unless I feel they are absolutely necessary. Gaining yields per vote in a successful vote seems like a complication without gain, and it's my opinion that it would undercut the Realpolitik theme. The scaling based mainly of votes rewards me better and more consistently if I just dump all my votes into a single resolution, which is what I do normally. Per-vote yields doesn't make me vote any different from if I were playing any other civ. I prefer the all-or-nothing mechanic, influencing what you can, and siding with the majority on what you cannot. That feels more pragmatic, but it also rewards you for splitting your vote, which normally a sub-optimal way of voting in the WC.

The +1 per ally is a bonus above-and-beyond the bonus for friendship, which was something I specifically wanted to avoid doing. Having only a / difference in kind, with no additional bonuses for allying helps Germany keep that pragmatism. With no additional benefits for ally-ship, it also makes Germany the king of Open Door policies, which I like.

I prefer the / instant yields. Germany has a ton of %production off the Hanse, and decent gold generation as well. Instant production bonuses are hard to balance, and that would be especially true for Germany, which has an enormous global production modifier.
Keeping the UA strictly to keeps the UA slimmer and more focused, the Hanse has the / bonuses to round the civ out, and the new Landsknecht is cheaper, and has full XP, movement on purchase, and no cooldown like a mercenary unit. The UB/UU combination both present / bonuses in their own way then.

I have a different vision for the details, but in the end I fear my idea will overcomplicate things anyway, so I'm ok with going with yours. As for the yields themselves, well, only testing will allow us to really see how it fares.

 

[Txurce]

I found something interesting in pineappledan's ideas and tried to show my support to it : if that, and defending this idea through historical presentation, is "having an agenda", then I don't think there is an interest in continuing this conversation with you.

Yes, that is having an agenda. You may want to look up the word's meaning. Nothing particularly nefarious about it, by the way, in my opinion.

Or maybe you don't know the subtext when throwing that kind of expression to someone talking about history ? If that's the case, then simply retract on that last part and we'll continue this conversation on a healthier basis.

I was done with this conversation as of my last post, so no need to educate me on what you consider to be a healthy conversation.