.

Maybe England should be strong in those periods? The age of commerce (frigates and setting up an over sea empire) and in the industrial age (with the gatling and machine gun). Seems to make sense to me. I also dont see it being to overpowered. Machine guns will soon get superceded by tanks.

I don't see Liz invading the world. Maybe in human hands it is a bit more unbalanced.
 
Ok, re-reading my post I come across as quite rude, even though it wasn't my intention, so sorry for that. I never meant to convey that you were stupid.:blush:

No problem at all. Looking back what I wrote, maybe I should of rephrased what I said.
 
Fair enough, as long as you’ll just note that I never said anything about finding “true balance”.

Fair enough, "true balance" was a term I used, and I meant it to be synonymous with "effective balance". I merely meant that I never even implied removing units to maintain proper/effective game balance.

I still stand by what I said, though. It seems like the only effective balancing would be to make sure that every empire has the same exact units and same exact abilities. To do otherwise would be to introduce (potential) imbalance.

That's really the issue that you bring up, yes? That some Unique Units have promotions/abilities that are both persistent (don't go away on the unit being upgraded) and unavailable to other empires, which some consider to be poor balance.

How would you propose having empires that have distinctions beyond those of mere graphics or different city names? I daresay that any inherent gameplay advantage that one empire has that another empire does not could be similarly considered to be poor balancing.
 
Altough I find for my part ''Sun Never Set'' an incredible bonus on the right maps, apparently many people find England somewhat underpowered.

In addition the James Bond lampshading (one extra spy ), in Kings, something will change

Longbowen might keep their extra range as they evolve in gatling troopers and machine gunners.

The range bonus make the Longbowmen quite OP in their epoch. This advantage will now last to the end of the game (altough the speed of modern units might offset a bit the advantage of the extra range(1)


(1)At least for me, the biggest advantage of the range is that the infantry can't really close on longbowmen (the range being larger than their move speed) : usually, knights can't really close on them before.
 
@Aziantuntija

I, for myself, understand what you are saying perfectly. I just don't think it's a good idea, for many reasons which have already been listed above.

Having UUs which behave in different ways, some of which are weak at a given time, but are good when they upgrade; and others which are very strong but only for a certain amount of time is nice. Replacing all of this variety with, in effect, a military UA is just not my cup of tea.

Pretty heady thread but this sums it up very nicely. One of the greatest joys of Civ5 are the Unique Units and diversity they bring to the game (which previous versions lacked). Most of the time, I pchoose the civ that I want to play because of their UU, balancing an early one vs. a middle one vs. a late one for different gameplays.
 
I think one of the fundamental advantages of the current system is that it values quality (promotions) over quantity (Civ4). Fighting with only 7 highly-promoted Camel Archers (for example) was great fun and made me focus on keeping them alive, along with careful placement and not abusing insta-heal. It got to the point where each one was so valuable and unreplaceable that great care had to be taken. I understand that this is not inherent to Unique Units but I do like the "head start" (along with the civ-flavored uniqueness) that they provide in their quality.
 
With the improvements for the English there can be only one thing said:

Britannia rules the waves!
 
In this thread we had some discussion about UU's unique abilities and should they or should they not keep those UA's after upgrade. I said that the UA should not pass on after the upgrade because of couple of things, the AI being one of those reasons. Well, how does the G&K handle this "problem"?
 
I wont have it until tomorrow, but I'd guess that losing indirect fire will go SOME way towards keeping MG-Longbows under control.
 
With the improvements for the English there can be only one thing said:

Britannia rules the waves!
Until you face a three times as large Ottoman navy.
Which he dont need to either build or pay gold in upkeep for btw (well, 1/3 tbh). :lol:

Basically he can faceroll the keyboard and your world famous English navy is at the bottom of the sea.

Nice balancing there, Firaxis. :crazyeye:
 
In this thread we had some discussion about UU's unique abilities and should they or should they not keep those UA's after upgrade. I said that the UA should not pass on after the upgrade because of couple of things, the AI being one of those reasons. Well, how does the G&K handle this "problem"?
im almost 100% positive the +1 range transfers since i've had rifles with +1 range pre-GK
 
Until you face a three times as large Ottoman navy.
Which he dont need to either build or pay gold in upkeep for btw (well, 1/3 tbh). :lol:

Basically he can faceroll the keyboard and your world famous English navy is at the bottom of the sea.

Nice balancing there, Firaxis. :crazyeye:
disagree the british navy with ship of the lines faceroll anything that steps on a blue tile. melee ships (with the exception of privateers) seem 100% outclassed by ranged ships as melee ships dont have the damage to be a serious threat to ranged ships or cities. Ranged ships include the frigate and battleship while the melee versions are a caravel(LOL?) and the destroyer. The ottomans only outperform the british ships pre-Gallass.
 
disagree the british navy with ship of the lines faceroll anything that steps on a blue tile. melee ships (with the exception of privateers) seem 100% outclassed by ranged ships as melee ships dont have the damage to be a serious threat to ranged ships or cities. Ranged ships include the frigate and battleship while the melee versions are a caravel(LOL?) and the destroyer. The ottomans only outperform the british ships pre-Gallass.
I think you miss the fact that a Ship of the Line is in fact not much better (2 measly points in range strenght) at all than a standard frigate. Its just 20 hammers cheaper.

I HOPE this have changed now in G&Ks? But if not, the Ottomans will easily rule the sea with three times bigger navy.
Oh, and did i mention that the Ottomans will have that navy WAY before you and that he dont even have to build them? The ships are for free! :p
Not only are they free, he actually gets gold for getting them...! :crazyeye:

... omg
 
im almost 100% positive the +1 range transfers since i've had rifles with +1 range pre-GK

Yes, the range transfers.

Yes, England is a powerhouse. Gatling + Machine Guns can act as modern archers, mowing down infantry, Ship of the Line + Battleship will completely obliterate coastal cities and units (Battleships have 3 range, FYI), and the extra spy will keep you in the tech race more.
 
I like G + K because England is now more than just navy + longbowman. The extra spy, while not OP, is certainly nice for counter-espionage, and a nice nod to Elizabeth's spymaster, Walsingham.

Longbowmen keeping their +1 range upgrade is really cool. Playing Elizabeth with privateers and Ships of the Line against Korean turtle ships is pretty fun.
 
Back
Top Bottom