[NFP] April Update Video

[Guynemer]

No panzers. Never again. Russia should get the tank UU if some civ must have one.

Panzers are exclusively associated with the bad time in Germany. U-boats at least have an origin prior to then. Germany is fine as-is. It does not need a strong or stronger UU.

To be fair, a tank UU for Russia wouldn't exactly be associated with a good time in Russia either.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

No panzers. Never again. Russia should get the tank UU if some civ must have one.

Panzers are exclusively associated with the bad time in Germany. U-boats at least have an origin prior to then. Germany is fine as-is. It does not need a strong or stronger UU.

I wouldn't say that the Panzer should never show up again. Just as long as they don't come with the associated leader.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

To be fair, a tank UU for Russia wouldn't exactly be associated with a good time in Russia either.

Fine, then load up a Char 1B for France.

 

[Aurelesk]

Having Tank as Unique Unit for Russia means:

• Acknowledge the existence of the Soviet Union / Communist phase of Russia, and the tyranical Stalin.
• Acknowledge that Russia managed to go from medieval era to the atomic era in less than 15 turns through that revolution; with the use of well made 5-turns-plans, the third one focusing on Tank production.

I don't know what to think. Russia is the most legitimate candidate to have Tanks, but the ghost Stalin / Soviet Russia is still remaining and haunting people living today.

But they are also other civilization that used Tank, like France and his famous Char B1, which means having a whole new leader as Charles de Gaulle?! As if we didn't have enough french leaders! Let's have Vercingétorix for Gaul, and Philip Augustus, Louis XIV, and Napoléon as leaders of France!

 

[João III]

No panzers. Never again. Russia should get the tank UU if some civ must have one.

Panzers are exclusively associated with the bad time in Germany. U-boats at least have an origin prior to then. Germany is fine as-is. It does not need a strong or stronger UU.

I don't think anything you've said is unfair, but it's not like U-Boats have a particularly heroic history either

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

I don't think anything you've said is unfair, but it's not like U-Boats have a particularly heroic history either

The whole point is you are not supposed to see them. USA could be given a tank UU and british perhaps even more so since they was basically the inventors of the tank.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Having Tank as Unique Unit for Russia means:

• Acknowledge the existence of the Soviet Union / Communist phase of Russia, and the tyranical Stalin.
• Acknowledge that Russia managed to go from medieval era to the atomic era in less than 15 turns through that revolution; with the use of well made 5-turns-plans, the third one focusing on Tank production.

I don't know what to think. Russia is the most legitimate candidate to have Tanks, but the ghost Stalin / Soviet Russia is still remaining and haunting people living today.

But they are also other civilization that used Tank, like France and his famous Char B1, which means having a whole new leader as Charles de Gaulle?! As if we didn't have enough french leaders! Let's have Vercingétorix for Gaul, and Philip Augustus, Louis XIV, and Napoléon as leaders of France!

Russian tank is fine to me. USSR civ would be silly imo

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Stalin have however been in previous civ games, but the civ have always been Russia.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Yeah, I just think that a separate civ is what people have had issue with here, not representation from that era inside Russia

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Yeah, I just think that a separate civ is what people have had issue with here, not representation from that era inside Russia

It could be worse, for example Norway is just treated as the vikings, basically teh same as Denmark in Civ V.

 

[Earl Grey - hot]

No panzers. Never again. Russia should get the tank UU if some civ must have one.

Panzers are exclusively associated with the bad time in Germany. U-boats at least have an origin prior to then. Germany is fine as-is. It does not need a strong or stronger UU.

I thought it was weird to have U-boats instead of Panzers as the modern German unit when Vanilla was first released, but I've come around to this line of thought. Panzers are and have been strongly associated with Germany due in part to the long-standing fixation people have with Nazi Germany (see the "History Channel" programming of ... the last twenty years?). U-boats, however much they seem to not match up or synergize with the rest of Germany's bonuses, have a much longer period of use and significance. Are they MORE significant? That I can't say for sure, but I would much rather have U-boats in the game.

I don't think anything you've said is unfair, but it's not like U-Boats have a particularly heroic history either

Also true - there's nothing especially heroic about sinking merchant shipping and preying on troop transports when they could find them. But again I think that U-boats were significant for a much longer period of time and can be identified with the Germany that existed shortly before WWI, during the war and Interwar Period, and obviously up through WWII, rather than the Panzer which I'm fairly certain is exclusively identified with WWII. The U-boat as a 'naval raider' unit also has a loooooong history of use (and related appearances in Civ games - see Sea Dog, Barbary Corsair, etc.) that for the most part served the same function - raiding trade routes and pillaging/extorting coastal settlements.

Now, I'll admit - this last point sort of maps to tanks. Tanks existed before Panzers, alongside them, and continue to be used today. My thought is that Panzers themselves correspond with Blitzkrieg, which itself has strong associations with the atrocities of Nazi Germany. U-boats don't have that same association in my mind, but obviously that's my personal (and subjective) opinion.

TL;DR - basically said what @Eagle Pursuit said, just in an obnoxious amount of words.

 

[Arianrhod]

I don't mind Panzers taking a vacation considering how often they're used, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to me to avoid significant combat units just because they're associated with a bad leader. We're talking about military units here - they exist to threaten or kill people, not to shower them with rainbows and friendship. Drawing a line at that point just seems silly; this is a game that lets you play as a fascist, betray your allies, and send dozens of tanks to pillage everything in sight as an optimal gameplay strategy. You aren't any better than the people you're trying to avoid referencing at that point; putting historic evils onto a pedestal of badness only makes it easier for it to happen, because it creates the illusion that these evils are somehow unique to them.

 

[ferretbacon]

Stalin have however been in previous civ games, but the civ have always been Russia.

Exactly this. Soviet Russia is no impediment in the Civ series if Stalin has been in the franchise already. A tank UU is nothing. Not to mention they've habitually done a tank UU for Germany, which, between the two, is way more of a problematic nod.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

If they want to give germany a tank, why not Leopard/Leopard II which is post ww2. For Russia, they could give one of the post Stalin tanks if they wanted to avoid connection with Stalin.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

It could be worse, for example Norway is just treated as the vikings, basically teh same as Denmark in Civ V.

I don't see Norway getting in the game any other way except as the Viking civ, which I'm okay with. Denmark however has a chance under Margeret.

Also true - there's nothing especially heroic about sinking merchant shipping and preying on troop transports when they could find them. But again I think that U-boats were significant for a much longer period of time and can be identified with the Germany that existed shortly before WWI, during the war and Interwar Period, and obviously up through WWII, rather than the Panzer which I'm fairly certain is exclusively identified with WWII. The U-boat as a 'naval raider' unit also has a loooooong history of use (and related appearances in Civ games - see Sea Dog, Barbary Corsair, etc.) that for the most part served the same function - raiding trade routes and pillaging/extorting coastal settlements.

Now, I'll admit - this last point sort of maps to tanks. Tanks existed before Panzers, alongside them, and continue to be used today. My thought is that Panzers themselves correspond with Blitzkrieg, which itself has strong associations with the atrocities of Nazi Germany. U-boats don't have that same association in my mind, but obviously that's my personal (and subjective) opinion.

Not to mention that the Austro-Hungarian Empire's submarines were identified as U-boats as well during WWI, so yes they aren't specifically tied to WWII.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

I don't see Norway getting in the game any other way except as the Viking civ, which I'm okay with. Denmark however has a chance under Margeret.

Still Sweden have gotten in twice without being treated as just a viking civ, it have not even been treated as a viking civ at all. Denmark under Margeret seems like a decent possibility.

Not to mention that the Austro-Hungarian Empire's submarines were identified as U-boats as well during WWI, so yes they aren't specifically tied to WWII.

Well I think U-boat basically mean submarine in germany, similar to in swedish submarines are called ubåt.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Still Sweden have gotten in twice without being treated as just a viking civ, it have not even been treated as a viking civ at all. Denmark under Margeret seems like a decent possibility.

Right but my point is I don't see any other good way of getting Norway into the game, unless they designed it as Viking Civ. Sweden became a great power after the Viking period, thanks to Gustavus Adolphus, so it's quite easier to make them the non-Viking Scandinavian civ. Not to mention Norway from the Kalmar Union to the early 1900s was in a union with either Denmark, Sweden, or both.

 

[João III]

I thought it was weird to have U-boats instead of Panzers as the modern German unit when Vanilla was first released, but I've come around to this line of thought. Panzers are and have been strongly associated with Germany due in part to the long-standing fixation people have with Nazi Germany (see the "History Channel" programming of ... the last twenty years?). U-boats, however much they seem to not match up or synergize with the rest of Germany's bonuses, have a much longer period of use and significance. Are they MORE significant? That I can't say for sure, but I would much rather have U-boats in the game.

[…]

Now, I'll admit - this last point sort of maps to tanks. Tanks existed before Panzers, alongside them, and continue to be used today. My thought is that Panzers themselves correspond with Blitzkrieg, which itself has strong associations with the atrocities of Nazi Germany. U-boats don't have that same association in my mind, but obviously that's my personal (and subjective) opinion.

TL;DR - basically said what @Eagle Pursuit said, just in an obnoxious amount of words.

I actually thought it was weird to have the U-Boat because of the association with unrestricted submarine warfare in both World Wars. I think either both should be acceptable or neither. I don't think one should be acceptable because the other is "worse". Both were involved in war crimes and it feels wrong to say the U-Boat was involved in an "acceptable" amount of war crimes, but not the Panzer went "too far". But, like you said, I guess it comes down to subjective perception of the U-Boat and I, personally, unambiguously associate it with the Lusitania and unrestricted submarine warfare.

If we had neither, I wouldn't mind seeing a building/district representing pre-WWI Germany's industrial might. Like say, re-name the current Hanse into "Ruhr Valley" (or whatever) and then replace U-Boat with Teutonic Knight. Then we have modern and Medieval Germany represented without a problematic modern unit, although I'd still prefer my original idea

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

If we had neither, I wouldn't mind seeing a building/district representing pre-WWI Germany's industrial might. Like say, re-name the current Hanse into "Ruhr Valley" (or whatever) and then replace U-Boat with Teutonic Knight. Then we have modern and Medieval Germany represented without a problematic modern unit, although I'd still prefer my original idea

In such case it make more sense that they get a unique factory or powerplant rather than district, in Civ IV they got a factory as their unique building.

For unit, you could give them a better line infantry since atleast Prussia infantry was known to be well drilled and could maintain high rate of fire. An artillery unit could also work. Teutonic knight/crusader unit feels like it could be something a city state could give, like a religious order city state.

 

[Caprikel]

People have mentioned that the Georgia change doesn't help them get a religion, but technically any early source of faith can help get a religion faster through GP faith purchasing. You would just need to do the usual of building a holy site and shrine for the GPP, but the extra faith you could get from killing barbarians would help you purchase a Great Prophet a little bit quicker than you would otherwise.