Adjusted UA's for BNW- No New UU's

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Rajjah, Jun 15, 2013.

  1. Talcove

    Talcove Slayer of Spies

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Messages:
    792
    Location:
    Mississauga
    Canada: Gets 10 nuclear missiles for every tech it discovers, starting in the Ancient Era. Yeah, that seems about right. ;)
     
  2. Rajjah

    Rajjah PUG

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2013
    Messages:
    59
    Location:
    Dallas
    I'll admit I have some national pride behind my desire for America to have an improved UA, but I'd don't need it to be in the top tier of competitive civs......I just want it to be less bland and boring ¬_¬
    And for every suggestion from an overzealous American about some overpowered New unit or ability, you get the rest of the world proposing some terrible stereotype like McDonalds or some snide comment about blackwater mercenaries >_<

    I don't see what's wrong with giving America a slight bonus to workers or Settlers, especially if it cuts maintenance so they have more money to actually use the tile UA
     
  3. Fluxx

    Fluxx Mr. Almost There

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2009
    Messages:
    635
    I am dutch, and absolutely 0 ties to the states, I just want all civ's to be on relative even footing.

    The civ's I listed got imho the most issues, aside from the vikings, which imho is just beyond hope :p
     
  4. Arachnofiend

    Arachnofiend Perturbed Pugilist

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,950
    You say you picked the civs with the most issues and yet you didn't include India? :lol:

    America is a mid-tier civ; nowhere near as strong as the Maya or Inca but still a perfectly viable choice with the ability to come out on top with strong play in most situations.
     
  5. BBMorti

    BBMorti Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2012
    Messages:
    143
    I had to go back and check if you had made a change to the Dutch civ after reading this post.

    Lo and behold.

    Clearly the dutch is one of the four weakest civs, eh? :p
     
  6. JokerJace

    JokerJace Prince

    Joined:
    May 23, 2013
    Messages:
    492
    Inca is considered top tier?! That can only be for the UA. Hills adjacent to mountains are just too inconsistent and the UU is irrelevant, like most very early ones. Is fast hill movement really that powerful?
     
  7. Rajjah

    Rajjah PUG

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2013
    Messages:
    59
    Location:
    Dallas
    Being able to build free winding roads through the hills saves large quantities of cash not to mention allows for extremely fast movement of forces. Thier UI allows for them to take land that would be mediocre for other civs and turn it into highly efficient cities. And while their UU itself isn't amazing, caring a good number of them over into the future allows for a highly annoying force that it is hard to hunt down and kill. They are defiantly one of my favorites
     
  8. Crafty Bison

    Crafty Bison King

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2012
    Messages:
    756
    Yea, they're top tier. They don't look it from reading them, but when you play them they're really strong. Every other civ has to sacrifice a lot of population if they want to be able to build observatories, and hence the science balances out. Not the Inca. Also, with the heavy prouction that also comes in these kind of cities, they're very strong tall at 5 or so cities. The UA is also a very very good ability for military, and also for workers. Occasionally you get a start on 1 hill in the middle of nowhere, but even then you scout and find the best land for you. TF's don't require a river, so there's no need to look for absolutely perfect spots.
     
  9. Heinage

    Heinage Khan

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    568
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Auckland, NZ
    Hungary is not a Balkan state
     
  10. azzaman333

    azzaman333 meh

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    22,877
    Location:
    Melbourne, AUS Reputation:131^(9/2)
    The Indian UA is definitely the worst, and the Mongolian UA is worse than America's too. Boring =/= Bad
     
  11. Fluxx

    Fluxx Mr. Almost There

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2009
    Messages:
    635
    Ok let me rephrase, the 3 others are the ones with the most issues.

    The dutch UA does get hit pretty hard with the gold changes + lump sum changes they made. Also it makes alot more sense to change the dutch UA to a trade focused one.

    I also disagree with the mongol and Indian statement.

    People tend to hate alot on the indian UA, while it is in fact pretty decent.
    The obvious downside is initial settling happyness, but people forget that with tradition your capital does not cost a single happyness per pop, plus any other city with 6+ pop already is on par happyness wise.

    Think about that for a second, if your capital is 4+ pop, your 2nd city will have cost you the same happyness, as without the UA. When its 8, your 3rd city, etc.

    Also abusing 5 movement speed cavalry units as the Mongols is kinda easy, especially ranged cavalry units.
     
  12. Navelgazer

    Navelgazer King

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2012
    Messages:
    780
    Gender:
    Male
    Inca is, indeed, absolutely top-tier. The slinger may be a little "meh" (though if you spam a lot of them and keep them around to do, which is easy because the slinger survives stuff that other archers don't) you can have a ball.

    Terrace farms are also highly productive and play very, very nicely with the UA. Having all of the extra money is nice too. But the unheralded beauty of Inca is the hill start-bias, which almost guarantees you the best starting productivity, and then the terrace farm makes up for the attendant food loss. They're basically right there with the Netherlands in terms of "super-powered sleeper civs."
     
  13. Birdism

    Birdism Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    39
    Great ideas, ferretbacon. I particularly like these:

    I really hope Firaxis is looking at this thread! Rome would be a much more engaging civ to play (even without the free Colisseums).

    I noticed that they haven't recycled the Autocracy Opener in any capacity, which is strange because as far as I can tell, they recycled all the other Industrial SPs for the ideologies. I'm wondering if any of the existing civs with lackluster abilities will get this. My suggestion is the following:

    Mongolia – Mongol Terror
    All mounted units have +1 :c5moves: Movement. Receive 10 :c5culture: Culture as plunder for each point of :c5culture: Culture produced in the captured city.
     
  14. Worlds_Crossing

    Worlds_Crossing Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Messages:
    52
    I agree. I'm actually not American. I just want the American UA to not feel like a jumbled mess of minor bonuses.

    In games, both MP and SP, the ability to rapidly respond to threats is key to survival. Combine this with their bias towards land that is suitable only for them, and is dang near impenetrable for anyone else when properly positioned, and you have a top-tier civ.

    Yes, the Dutch will likely get an addition to their UA. I suppose increased trade route distances would do nicely.

    The Indian UA is hated because the game is all about early bonuses that tend to snowball in effect. By doubling the initial happiness hit during the early settling process, you've effectively crippled your capacity to expand during the most pivotal point in the game. You also seem to have a few number mixed up. Cities become happiness neutral in comparison to other civs at 6 (Normal civ: 3+6=0, India: 6+3=9). When your cap is 12+, then it would have paid off for the initial hit to your 2nd city from your UA (Normal civ: 3+12=15 India: 6+6=12). Your 3rd city is paid for when the combined totals of your first two cities is 18 (Normal civ: 3+3+18=24 India: 6+6+9=21).

    Now, with Tradition, the numbers are skewed drastically, with every two pop being neutralized, but even then you have to remember that you must first neutralize the initial happiness hit. You numbers are correct when counting in Monarchy, but you fail to negate the initial happiness hit when you founded your first city. You will need 6 population to pay off your first city, and 9 to pay off your third.

    India would be fine if by the point wherein you reach the settling phase you have a pop 9 capital. The question is, do you have a pop 6/9 capital to pay off your UA? If not, you're playing with a happiness deficit in the period where happiness is most vital. There's also the matter of initial happiness. With India, you must get your first luxury resource up and running or else you stagnate at 3 population, unlike other civs that would normally stagnate at 6 or 6 population for India with Monarchy and 12 population for everyone else with Monarchy meaning even with Monarchy, you must improve a luxury tile. The problem with India is its UA is so limiting in the early-game, which seems to be about 50% of the whole game, though BNW aims to change that by making the late-game more interesting.

    And then there's the unfortunate connotations of the UA. India, the home of three religions, one of the most culturally diverse nations in the world, and the topic for their UA is Population Growth. I can imagine a few Indians were insulted by that when the game first came out.

    Mongolia with a good UA would dominate everything. P.S. Ranged Cavalry count as ranged and not mounted so Mongolia does not confer +1 movement to them. Check the Keshik in the Civilopedia, its 5 move is intrinsic while the Horseman gets an outside +1 movement.
     
  15. jye42

    jye42 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2013
    Messages:
    40
    Location:
    Australia
    Germany
    Konzerne:All Production buildings cost 25% less to build/purchase & Manufactory improvements provide +5 Production instead of +3.

    Arabia
    Trade Caravans:Land trade routes have the same gold bonus as sea routes. x2 Oil Resource.

    Aztec
    Sacrificial Captives: Gain Faith whenever an enemy unit is killed.

    Ottomans
    Barbary Corsairs: More effective at raiding trade routes. Pay only one-third the usual cost for naval unit maintenance.

    Huns
    Scourge of God: Raze cities at double-speed. Cannot build Settlers. Free Courthouse in each city captured. Start with Animal Husbandry technology. +1 Production from Pasture.

    America
    Doctrine of Hegemony: America can bully city states to supply strategic resources or change ideology.
     
  16. Talcove

    Talcove Slayer of Spies

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Messages:
    792
    Location:
    Mississauga
    While the rest seem near perfect, this would essentially be a neutered Venice.
     
  17. Navelgazer

    Navelgazer King

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2012
    Messages:
    780
    Gender:
    Male
    I've been trying to come up with ideas for a "five boroughs"-type mod/scenario, and the only one I know for sure is essentially this combo for New Jersey with the title "Only the Strong Survive."
     
  18. Arachnofiend

    Arachnofiend Perturbed Pugilist

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,950
    As far as I'm aware city-states don't really have an ideology choice? Also I think Monroe Doctrine or Big Stick Diplomacy would be better names for a city-state based American UA.
     
  19. EricTheGreat12

    EricTheGreat12 King

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2013
    Messages:
    614
    Location:
    Canada, Montreal
    Actually, considering that the Huns nearly build tiny bases and villages and conquered enemy cities makes me think that the Huns should not be able to build settlers but that they can annex, puppet or raze cities
     
  20. Worlds_Crossing

    Worlds_Crossing Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Messages:
    52
    This has been stated before and I'll reiterate the flaw with this UA. It promotes bad play. Think about any rational play and imagine how often that second part of the UA will actually kick in. Are you ever going to rationally get a unit killed just to get some free culture? How often do units, especially Japanese units, get killed? If you are any position to win the game, the answer will be little to never. Even if you go out of your way to actually find some use of this UA, you'll find only a few opportunities that getting a unit killed will help you, namely faster Liberty finisher and Rationalism openers. If the UA will almost never kick in, why add it in anyway? Maybe, +1 :c5culture: for every unit below 50% health or something similar.

    Again, this feels like three tacked on abilities of three better UA's. What is so bad about buying enemy tiles for a high price? It meshes with both flavor and the other aspects of the UA, provides a tangible ability to use/work around and makes the Unique Ability feel like a Unique Ability. Selecting the tile to expand next not only feels intangible, but also requires micromanagement for a civ that has no tangible bonuses to speak of.

    Mongolia is fine. Keshiks are beastly. Do people really want to buff Mongolia that much? They have Keshiks and Khans for goodness sakes. You must see UA's as part of a civ, along with UU's and UB's, rather than just as a standalone.

    So you want to remove a UA that scales rather badly with a UA that scales even worse than the previous UA? Culture is fine. Gameplay trumps flavor wherever practicality is concerned.

    Fine, though I see nothing wrong with the current UA except for flavor.

    Horrible connotations, along with horrible practicality. If you're in any position to bully a city state for strategic resources, you're also in a position to take a puppeted city in the process, along with a few luxury resources. This UA would be even worse than Manifest Destiny.
     

Share This Page