UA/UU/UB/UI system

[Crazyflyinpanda]

Would anyone prefer a system where you have either two UUs, 1 UU and 1 UB, or 1 UU with 1 UI, with a system where every civ has there own uu, ub, and ui? I'm curious to hear peoples opinion on this. I think this system would be useful in someways especially since I would love every civ having a UI since I find it looks cool how Dutch and Incan lands have their own "flavour" not to mention how useful ui can be with a good starting position.

 

[Princeofnigeria]

Not really. I love the current system, and feel it very appropriate for flavoring. If attilla had to lose one of his UU for a UB, or if Rome had to surrendur its ballista, france its Musketeer, or gemany its panzer, I would be miffed. Some sides just need two UU to get the most out of them. As well, some sides, like the maya, the spaniards, or the ottomans would likely have a difficult time finding a UI that suits them or is unique enough to work. I have no issues with the current "trade off" system at all.

 

[Colmar]

I would like some more UIs, so that an empire and its former cities can be more distinct. I'd also prefer if 2 UUs was more uncommon, as buildings are more useful.

 

[Arachnofiend]

The problem with this is that some civs simply don't have good options for non-UU's. What improvements would the Huns have? They weren't exactly known for improving things.

 

[Princeofnigeria]

The problem with this is that some civs simply don't have good options for non-UU's. What improvements would the Huns have? They weren't exactly known for improving things.

Exactly. Plus with the +1 to pastures already in effect... Yeah.

 

[Sabrina]

I like it the way it is right now, at least you know what to expect from civs like Germany and Japan. If every one had one of each "unique" things, I fear thing would get messy or worse, extremely unbalanced in higher difficulty levels.

 

[Aaron90495]

I'll echo the thoughts of most others and say that the current system works better for both gameplay diversity and realism (see: a Hunnic UI?). I would agree that I'd like fewer Civs with 2 UU's and more with a UI, but fixing that seems to be a focus in BNW. IIRC, there are 3 Civs with UI's and none with 2 UU's.

 

[Princeofnigeria]

I'll echo the thoughts of most others and say that the current system works better for both gameplay diversity and realism (see: a Hunnic UI?). I would agree that I'd like fewer Civs with 2 UU's and more with a UI, but fixing that seems to be a focus in BNW. IIRC, there are 3 Civs with UI's and none with 2 UU's.

Yet...

 

[otaman1]

A UU from each era (except for some civs of course), a UB and UI

 

[Princeofnigeria]

A UU from each era (except for some civs of course), a UB and UI

.............. That would be impossible for literally every civilization in this game except for MAYBE (stretching required) China, Babylon, and Egypt. As well, that would simply lead to player overload and far too much to keep track of. Also if some of the promotions carried someone could end the game with very broken units. You also wouldn't have enough workable tiles for 8 improvements. Lastly they would run out of unique things to do if they had to make 8 eras worth of UU/UB/UI's for 34 civs (816 items total) and a LOT would have to be reskins simply because they would run out of useful/ not broken U/B/I

 

[pilot00]

.............. That would be impossible for literally every civilization in this game except for MAYBE (stretching required) China, Babylon, and Egypt.

And Greece, and Korea and Japan

It can be done but it would be too complex for the game CiV 5 is. I would welcome it but it will never happen.
What I would like to see is some uniqueness in the UUs most of them are a beefed up version of a specific unit. Too many similarities.

 

[Plumfairy]

Would anyone prefer a system where you have either two UUs, 1 UU and 1 UB, or 1 UU with 1 UI, with a system where every civ has there own uu, ub, and ui? I'm curious to hear peoples opinion on this. I think this system would be useful in someways especially since I would love every civ having a UI since I find it looks cool how Dutch and Incan lands have their own "flavour" not to mention how useful ui can be with a good starting position.

The current UA/UU/UB/UI system gives the developers a lot of freedom to create radically different civilizations. They can create a civ with awesome UUs balanced with a lackluster UA (e.g. Mongolia), a civ with a really good UA balanced by very poor UUs/UBs (e.g. Babylon), or anything in between.

If the game design had locked the devs into creating 1 UU, 1 UB, and 1 UA for every civ, then we couldn't have civs with 2 complementary (and cool) UUs like Greece has.
Basically, creating a rigid system would accomplish nothing good, and would add in rigidity to the game design for no reason.