Thank you for your thoughtful reply. It helped me understand that we evaluate strength of RI nations a bit differently, which is why we fundamentally disagree on China (as well as America and Celts, for example). I'll expand on that in the end but firstly want to address your other points (sorry for the long post ahead):
- "who use them in that situation anyway?" - me
. But okay, to be serious - I agree, in most cases you don't want to use generic 5+25%(Att) axemen in city defense. Because that's impractical. But the Northern Chinese axeman is not generic! They effectively get 5+25%(Def) without any perks (since the primary city offender of that time is Melee, and they have 10% vs Melee). That is comparable with 4+50%(Def) of bowmen, and you get them 2-3 techs earlier! Also, these axemen have better chances against civs with some of the 5 strength Melee UUs - or vs axemen generally, including roman legionaries.
And the key thing I forgot to mention in previous reply is their ability to counter-attack. Meaning: A)if Chinese defends with just bowmen - they're good on defense but they can't use bowmen for counter-attacking the opponent; they need some time/resources to build an offensive B)if Chinese defends with bowmen+axemen – they can almost momentarily pick healed axemen for retaliation wave. Ultimately, that way you're saving a bit of production/time (for example, bulding 2 bowmen + 2 axemen instead of 4 bowmen)
- "spearman itself is odd unit. ... skimisher will defense your unit" - I generally agree, though I think you underestimate the power of early rush with spears. It works with most nations (just timely build 1-2 spears for protection/clearup and a bunch of freshmeat shortswords) but obviously better with Agg/Conq leaders, Persia and civs with strong spears/shortswords. Since Chinese spears are good and they have both Agg and Conq leaders, they are well suited for this. Better than, say, non-Conq Mongolian/Zulu/Russian/Polish/etc. (if I remember their bonuses correctly)
As for defense - what about stacks 10+ units high?
You can build 10-15 skirmishers and 0 spears, sure. But I find it impractical since skirmishers are meh for any city warfare, while spears can be used there (as a last defender/clearup unit). So I'd say it is better to fortify your stack and use 4-6 skirmishers and cavalry units for attacks every couple of turns. And Chinese Spears are very useful when fortifying (and in City Defense, too)
P.S. just a note on defense as Chinese - they also have slightly stronger 3s Archers, weaker but present Horse Archers, and defensive 6s swords, right? I'd say that paints itself as an easier Classical defense in general. If you use combinations of Chinese units (archer, spear, axeman, horse archer, sword, recon/cavalry) right, you have a chance at defending from anybody pre-Medieval, including Celts/Greeks/Romans/Hindi/etc. And there are some production-saving capabilities for counter-attack as well, even if more difficult due to attacking stats
- on Chinese UUs in general - I agree, UUs should feel game-changing. The only counterpoint I have is that not every UU in this mod is busted. British Royal Marines is one of a kind that comes to mind - extremely powerful in its era, obliterating anything except some cavalry/recon UUs of its era (and those pose a threat only outside cities, useless on defense). But not every UU is like that, aren't they? Many are either situationally useful or simply underwhelming (like Northern Chinese). I wouldn't say Japanese Wako projects the same kind of power as Marines in its era, for example (and Wako is one of the stronger UUs)
But yeah, I'd definitely appreciate small buffs of all "weaker" UUs, including Northern Chinese.
P.S. City Defense Grenadiers are a meme, for sure
but even that may become useful - when just captured a city and there's enemy army nearby, for example
- And the last one is a point about Courthouse and weaker/stronger civs in general. I consider economy bonuses in RI much more valuable than warfare ones (generally - unless war bonus resembles Royal Marines, Sreni Pattiyodaha, Jaguar or smth like that). And that's why I think Chinese is not the weakest civ. Their Pagan Temples and Courthouses make them "pass the test" for me. I totally disagree with a point that Great Library and Cheomseongdae are "required" for their courthouses to be useful. These Wonders are valuable, appreciated, desired - but not required. If anything, food and happiness resources are much more of a deal breaker if you want to use a bunch of specialists in all your cities. But the nice thing is that combo of Chinese paganism + courthouse boosts the existing growth, so that's partially resolved. And Chinese Courthouses work THROUGHOUT the game, compared to, say, Berber Baths or Roman Barracks. That's something
P.S. Canals can be useful in early game, too. A saver of a weaker-production spot. Not a lot of civs have that in their pocket
As for the Celts and Americans mentioned in the beginning of the post, I value them opposite to you. Meaning - I think Celts are kinda OP due to early&powerful UI, early&powerful UU + army compared to German/English roster. While Americans (for me personally) are one of the weaker nations due to majority of the bonuses being lategame-ish. Except some Nordic units and occasional Ranches, I guess. Other "weaker" ones... Well, it depends on the leaders, too
But generally, nations alone - German, French and Ethiopians all seem weak to me (exclusively due to their early game - I know they can & do bloom later). Berbers have early game bonuses but not for long (all Pagan temples get obsolete, & their UB is short-lived and only moderately impactful), so maybe them too. Something like that
