3rd and 4th Unique Components for VP - Official thread 88.10

[amateurgamer88]

I think it's a good alternative to what I proposed : a sort of two-step UU which combines the bonus of the Eagle and the Jaguar will redistributing them in a manner that makes them more relevant (I particularly like the idea of swapping the "Captive of war" promotion with "forest/jungle combat bonus).
The only thing that I dislike is that it will indeed make the Spearman more relevant, since it's a UU, but the Pikeman will be the new victime, sort of. This is to avoid that kind of situation (and for the idea of an ironless army in the early game) that I proposed to put out the Swordsman : maybe we could do something similar with your proposition (make the Eagle an early cheap/weaker Pikeman replacement) ?

If we make Eagle a Pikeman replacement, do we have to make it earlier? We can just make it available at Steel with changes like the following (values can be adjusted):

Eagle (Pikeman replacement):
Available at Steel

+3 Combat Strength. Bonus against Mounted.

+33% Combat Strength when battling in Jungles or Forests. (Lost upon upgrades)

Heals 25 HP when it kills enemy units. (Keep during upgrades)

Starts with the Woodsman Promotion. (Keep during upgrades)

"Sentry" (Keep during upgrades)

 

[Kim Dong Un]

Regardless of what changes may occur, the "Captive of War" promotion can't be discarded (at least on the Jag), as it was the central thematic element to the Aztec's purpose for warring.

*Edit - I also think the thematic promotions for Eagle (flying = +1 sight / ignore terrain cost) should stay

 

[pineappledan]

Is it possible (for Eagles) to learn this power?

not from a Jedi.

Regardless of what changes may occur, the "Captive of War" promotion can't be discarded (at least on the Jag), as it was the central thematic element to the Aztec's purpose for warring.

If this is true then it makes me want to keep it where it is.

If you give the captives of war promotion to jaguars, whatever probability you set on the chance to spawn a worker, it’s still getting a unit 3x the value of the jaguar itself, and that’s ridiculous. People seem to insist that longswords spawning workers in medieval is useless because you will have expanded and improved all your infrastructure forever by medieval and won’t need workers. Which is... well okay, I have used workers in the medieval so I don’t know what to say to that. And if you don’t need them you can just sell them for the gold.

So the best solution to me seems to be to keep eagles where they are, where the unit cost is at a sane ratio, relative to a worker, and where you will be looking to get a 3rd/4th worker for you burgeoning empire anyways.

 

[Bhawb]

That still doesn't solve the problem of Aztecs being literally the only civ in 4UC that has two units of the same type that don't upgrade into each other. Even though Eagles are worth their production, they don't feel good to build except for muh thematics (which I like don't get me wrong).

 

[pineappledan]

That still doesn't solve the problem of Aztecs being literally the only civ in 4UC that has two units of the same type that don't upgrade into each other.

you say that like that’s a bad thing, and not exactly as it was intended. We tried are darndest to have as few instances of units upgrading into themselves as possible.

 

[Bhawb]

you say that like that’s a bad thing, and not exactly as it was intended. We tried are darndest to have as few instances of units upgrading into themselves as possible.

It is a bad thing. I totally understand not having units upgrade into each other, but that doesn't mean you slap two UUs into the same class and make them not upgrade into each other and call it "fixed". You could do that to the other 2 civs that have two UUs of the same class and call it working as intended. I mean if we're not going to change it then nothing I can do except change the mod for myself if I want to bother, but let's not pretend like it is good design to force one civ to have to decide which UU to build because they actively compete with each other at a point in the game where you have extremely limited supply cap. I've not played any other 4UC where I didn't bother building more than a handful of my UU because it wasn't worth it.

 

[FoxOfWar]

Pretty much what Bhawb said. I shall ask once more: what is the purpose of the Eagle? The incidental workers are good, but is that a reason to build more melee units when you likely have half-a-carpet of Jaguars-upgraded-to-Spearmen, and probably want diversity in your army as cities start having Walls.

At the moment they feel like consolation prize UU to build once you hit Steel (and then probably curse your lack of Iron to upgrade them with if you're like me).

 

[ChefGuevara]

Hi, first time posting here (I am on the CBP discord tho)
My two cents on the eagle is that they're in a hard spot along with the other mesoamerican civs because your only replacement options are infantry and recon troops, and only from ancient to medieval, really. I was wondering about making Eagles scout or ranged troop replacements, but there's already overlap there with Maya and Inca, and there's already another scout replacement with the Koa, so that's kind of overdone already. Maybe if Polynesia got a new replacement eagles would be alright as a scout/explorer replacement, but that's obviously kind of a tall order. Next best thing would certainly be making them a longsword replacement though, iron-less swords are already a thing with mohawks.

 

[Hinin]

Next best thing would certainly be making them a longsword replacement though, iron-less swords are already a thing with mohawks.

Hi. Welcome.

As it stands, the Eagle, being an Ironless Swordsman replacement, is even more redundant compared to the Mohawk Warrior. Because of this, the idea of making it a Longswordman replacement (with all the modifications to tech, cost and combat strength I already talked about) would be interesting (although it would be redundant, this time with the Berserker... but we can't have everything, and there is still the possibility of putting the tech requirement elsewhere than Metal Casting).

 

[Bhawb]

My two cents on the eagle is that they're in a hard spot along with the other mesoamerican civs because your only replacement options are infantry and recon troops, and only from ancient to medieval, really.

Strictly speaking, plenty of the native American civs are completely misrepresented time-wise in Civ 5. Though you are correct that it is difficult to have a proper set of UUs when none had significant military navies and only the two North American native civs had any mounted military units. The Aztecs descended from people who migrated in the 1200s and then the empire reigned from early 1400s till early 1500s, placing them in Medieval, definitely not Ancient. Incan is also largely misrepresented, their empire was largely concurrent with the Aztecs, although they descended from earlier civilizations as early as 300; still they should be at least Classic through Medieval, not Ancient. Iroquois should be Medieval through Renaissance.

Maya, Polynesia, and Shoshone are all well-enough represented as far as time periods go.

So really if we wanted historical accuracy we should have:
Polynesia spanning Ancient through Medieval
Maya spanning Ancient through Renaissance with a focus on Classic
Shoshone focused on Renaissance with some earlier since we don't exactly know when they started
Aztecs Medieval
Incan Classic through Medieval with a focus on Medieval
Iroquois Medieval through Renaissance

So really we have plenty of space for these civs, especially since we have Polynesia on its own, Shoshone and Iroquois in North America, Inca in South America, and Maya and Aztec in mesoamerica. The only thing that is really awkward is Aztec because base Civ 5 stole Atlatlist, so if we want Aztecs to technically be historically accurate with their 4UC UU, it should be a Medieval ironless longswordsman. That is the time period that the Aztec Empire was dominant, and represents the lack of anti-cavalry but also ironless melee infantry.

As for what they should do, creating workers is fine, you can always sell them and this is roughly the time period you'd likely go crazy with offensive wars since you just got the Huey and also have realistic options to capture cities now that you have strong siege units and an infantry to protect them. And new cities means you need workers. Though I did like the idea that the captured workers work at full strength I can take or leave it.

 

[pineappledan]

The next version will have eagles as longswords replacements, with all the same promotions they currently have and 21CS. That resolves the most salient points that other gave brought up and unstacks them from mohawk warriors, which is nice.

I will consider the matter closed until the next version, and after people have tried it out.

 

[ChefGuevara]

Oh right, I forgot that berserkers don't need iron. I guess that particular overlap is an issue either way. I still like the idea of making them a ranged or recon unit, but again, lots of overlap there, and atlatls are already a Maya thing, so there's not a wealth of options there.
The only thing I can think of to add some variety would be to add some sort of guerilla-style cavalry (knight replacement?) to the Inca, ala Comanche Riders, since they did start using it after the Spanish invasion began, but that would feel weird (although, no weirder than Comanches already are, I suppose)

 

[pineappledan]

Just an FYI that horses reached the Comanche Shoshone before Europeans did. By the time Europeans made serious headway into the Great Plains region, horse culture had been there for more than a century. There’s evidence to suggest that Spanish introduction of horses, making a pastoral and nomadic life easier, had almost as much to do with the dissolution of the sedentary Mississippian river culture than the spread of disease did. Smallpox, measles and horses reached the North American interior much faster than Europeans did.

Re the berserkers, it’s an unfortunate overlap, but less egregious than the current Mohawk/eagle overlap, because they are both North American indigenous cultures and the unlock tech is the same. The similarities are much more glaring.

Edit: the Comanche were an offshoot of the southern Shoshoni. The introduction of horses actually predates the creation of the Comanche.

 

[ChefGuevara]

Oh, really? I didn’t know that, that’s pretty interesting.

 

[Kim Dong Un]

you say that like that’s a bad thing, and not exactly as it was intended. We tried are darndest to have as few instances of units upgrading into themselves as possible.

And you've done a tremendous job, although for this instance I've read that it's quite literally what happened in Aztec culture. Warriors were acknowledged as Jaguars by bringing a total of 4 captives back from battle. If they increased this number to 20, they would then be upgraded with the title of Eagle. Killing in battle was seen as clumsy, thus why their macuahuitl functioned as more of a club than sword. Warriors had the incentive because Jag/Eagle were bestowed most of the same perks that nobles received, and it put them essentially on par with the highest tier of their society.

I like that you've avoided stacking UU's for the majority, but this is one case were it just makes sense.

As a uniquely cool idea, would it even be possible to implement something like Jags auto upgrading into Eagles after they've killed x amount of units, or reach a certain amount of exp? Their CS could stay the same as Jags, but they would then receive the Eagle promotions (while still keeping the Jags). Now THAT would be a unique unit! You're right about the inevitable monster Pikes and Tercios you'd have at disposal though...

 

[FoxOfWar]

Yesh, I'm certainly happy to try out a Longswordsman Eagle, see where that goes.

 

[Titanium White]

Assyria doesn't seem to get their Lamassu Gate in the newest version. It doesn't show up in either the tech tree or the civilopedia.

 

[pineappledan]

Assyria doesn't seem to get their Lamassu Gate in the newest version. It doesn't show up in either the tech tree or the civilopedia.

Are you using a version of VP before 03-17? The new EmpireNeedsModifier added to Mongolian Yassa, Assyrian Lamassu, Indian Qila, and Austrian Schutzenstand will cause the building to fail if you try to use an old version of VP.
I just booted up my game with the 3-17-1a version and the UCs appeared just fine.

As a uniquely cool idea, would it even be possible to implement something like Jags auto upgrading into Eagles after they've killed x amount of units, or reach a certain amount of exp? Their CS could stay the same as Jags, but they would then receive the Eagle promotions (while still keeping the Jags). Now THAT would be a unique unit! You're right about the inevitable monster Pikes and Tercios you'd have at disposal though...

Having 4 kills on a single Jaguar cause a free upgrade actually sounds pretty rad, but I think we've missed the bus on that one.

 

[ChefGuevara]

Also, with regards to the captives promotion being important to reflecting Aztec military practices, I think the UA reflects that already, doesn’t it? If the free workers don’t feel effective enough in medieval, I don’t think it’d be that bad, in this specific regard at least, to lose that promotion.

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

I think putting the Eagle mostly as it is, but back to Longsword will make him even worse. The Workers are pretty helpful now in classical, but the current value of 50% conversion in medieval will make the unit pretty unappealing and weak if it's meant to be the meat of the thing. You'll still mostly be running upgraded Jaguars instead.

I suggest, if it's a Longsword, to have it give a guaranteed Worker per kill, not a possible one. If that's not enough to make them appealing, then give them something else for kills