Assyria

[Funak]

Okay after mentioning it countless times and trying to pass the responsibility over to others, being less successful in both tasks, I've finally managed to play half a game as Ashurbanipal. Yes, half a game, it wasn't really my thing at all as I expected but I managed to at least make use of all their uniques, luckily most of them being available in the ancient era . (Yes, writing is ancient era now, sue me)

Since I don't really remember how I usually do this, not to mention that people usually get tired by my rambling rather quickly and just skip to the part where they tell me that I'm wrong. I'm just going to go ahead and explain each unique quickly and tell you what I think is wrong with them.

First of all, Assyria isn't terrible by any means, a player can probably make pretty good use out of them, and the AI is random enough that they don't seem to fall behind. However I think some of the ideas behind their uniquess are rather flawed so here it goes anyways.

Unique Unit - Siege Tower

• Catapult replacement
• Melee unit with 12 CS
• Boosts the attack vs cities of nearby units by 50% (if next to an enemy city?)
• Starts with 2 extra sight compared to catapults
• Available much earlier, and doesn't cost any iron.
• Can only attack cities.

I actually got a lot of good use out of this unit It is rather sturdy compared to the pre-buff battering-ram(no idea how that one works now however ).
Turns out that a unit with more strength than a spearman, free cover 1 and no negative modifiers(other than no defense-bonuses) can actually take a few hits before falling over.
Anyways I wasn't really attacking much with the unit, I mostly piled up archers behind them and used the 50% siege-bonus to chip away at the enemy defenses.
However the unit falls off really quickly, the bonus for attacking cities is still totally great but having to be in melee range with the city pretty much kills your chances of using the bonus once enemy longswords show up. (I had a few weird situations where I got the bonus without the tower in melee-range, but I think those were bugs)

The unit loses everything on upgrade, including the extra sight range.


Unique Building - Royal Library

• Library replacement
• +1 science/turn
• +1 science/20 citizens
• +2 great writing slots

This building is really a mid/late game monster. every great work slot filled gives units produced in the city 15 extra experience, that's 30 extra experience with both slots filled, that's equal to two extra barracks buildings in the city, crazy.
However this comes at a cost, the building really does nothing before you get those great works, and even after you've gotten them the bonus is only really relevant in one city (the one you use to produce). Technically you could just move the great works around and build in all cities, but realistically you're way too lazy to do that.

The building is also reliable on the writers guild to get great works, and that building is located on the wrong side of the tech-tree compared to where you actually want to go.



Unique Ability - Treasures of Nineveh
Gives you a tech of your rival every time you capture one of his cities. If no tech is available you get some points of science instead.
This ability is really hard to classify, in theory it is a way for a warmonger to stay relevant in tech while focusing more on army and less on research. The tech-tree have changed quite a bit from vanilla however, and is a lot more connected than it used to, so the old strategy of beelining military techs and grabbing the rest from the AI for free doesn't really work anymore. I might just be unlucky, but most of the time I ended up getting the tech I was already researching. Actually, most of the time I ended up getting science-boosts, but that's beside the point.
All in all I really don't have enough experience with this UA to make a valid statement about balance concerning it.
I do feel like you could add more effects to it without it feeling cluttered, which might be needed if my ideas for the other uniques go through.


Suggestions

Siege Tower
My main thought while trying to shift around my siege-towers to provide the attackbuff to as many units as possible, like some-kinda ghetto-greatgeneral was 'Why isn't this just a great general replacement?'.
The unit already clashes like crazy with the battering-ram, it's only unique feature is the boost to nearby units vs cities. So why just not let that be all it does? It also solves upgrading issues.


Royal Library
I'm not going to claim to be an expert in Assyrian history, but was the Royal library really something that was built in every new city? I was under the impression that the Royal library would be a library that's specifically royal, in this case referring to the one in Nineveh. I mean the whole thing with the UA and the treasures of Nineveh is because of this thing, and the knowledge 'Ashurbanipal and friends' raided, plundered and stored there.
I mean I know that Assyrian history is pretty limited, but surely we don't need to have two uniques from the same thing referring to the same building (and one of them doing it badly?).

My initial idea was just to replace this unique building with a unique national wonder(yes I still dislike them, but honestly this was a wonder, not a building), probably the school of philosophy, having it available earlier, giving it the great work of writing-slots as well as some interaction with captured cities, or whatnot (maybe extra science for every captured cities in the empire?), but while writing this thing I realized that the existing UA should probably be the unique effect of the wonder, as that would make a lot more sense. However that kinda leaves the UA slot completely empty.

Alternatively one could keep the UA effect on the UA and make up some other interesting empire-relevant effect for the UB, but I just think this makes way too much sense not to work on.

 

[Funak]

Opinions?

 

[Strec]

None, as UA force you to be warmonger it's not a civ for me

 

[Funak]

None, as UA force you to be warmonger it's not a civ for me

You need to try everything, to get some perspective

 

[Strec]

There are enough civilizations that I like to choose the ones to play and not play some.

And honestly, I won't try to transform a war-oriented civilization into a carebear one just to adapt to MY gameplay

Peace and love

 

[Funak]

There are enough civilizations that I like to choose the ones to play and not play some.

And honestly, I won't try to transform a war-oriented civilization into a carebear one just to adapt to MY gameplay :

No one is going to turn Assyria into a carebear civ, my ideas was mostly to expand them beyond warfare, I mean honestly full warfare civs just aren't very interesting, kinda like full anything civs, you need some variety to make choices, even if one choice is always going to be better.

 

[phantomaxl1207]

The best thing about Assyria is the Library. I wonder what the Theming bonus is. You can get Units out w/ +30 XP w/ just 2 Works of Writing when you bother to Micro.

How much is the Science boost? Free Techs aren't t too useful

I bet the UU is even hard to use against Swords, much less LongSwords. I wouldn't like the UU as a GG, it would be harder to fight against.

 

[void_genesis]

I reckon the siege tower should be the equivalent of a mobile citadel. It can't attack itself but units stacked on its tile get defence bonuses, and maybe also indirect fire. You could even make it a civilian unit with military buffing effects on stacked and/or adjacent units, meaning that they could also be captured by enemies and used to buff their units. This would also give the UU a longer effective use in the game if you can keep them safe during war.

 

[Funak]

The best thing about Assyria is the Library. I wonder what the Theming bonus is. You can get Units out w/ +30 XP w/ just 2 Works of Writing when you bother to Micro.

There is no theming-bonus.
And yes you're absolutely right, this is currently the most useful part of the civ. I just find it weird how it takes so long to come online, and how it isn't at all useful during your era of conquest.

How much is the Science boost? Free Techs aren't t too useful

I think I got around 200 science from capturing cities around late classical. Not really amazing but it is something.
Getting a free tech however is great.

I bet the UU is even hard to use against Swords, much less LongSwords. I wouldn't like the UU as a GG, it would be harder to fight against.

They can deal with swords okayish, 12 CS is fine, and they don't have that 25% penalty on defense that the battering-ram have.
The idea was to make the unit more versatile and useful, so naturally it would be harder to fight against . However keep in mind that you're not going to be swarmed by 6 siege-towers in ancient era anymore.

I reckon the siege tower should be the equivalent of a mobile citadel. It can't attack itself but units stacked on its tile get defence bonuses, and maybe also indirect fire. You could even make it a civilian unit with military buffing effects on stacked and/or adjacent units, meaning that they could also be captured by enemies and used to buff their units. This would also give the UU a longer effective use in the game if you can keep them safe during war.

This sounds pretty much like a great general replacement to me
If it gives defense or siege power doesn't really matter too much, it should be something that helps you capture cities.

 

[Gothic_Empire]

As a GG replacement, it would stop making sense into later eras.

However, I like the idea that the siege tower is merely providing an attack bonus and, perhaps, something like a Cover promotion to nearby units. Take away its ability to attack and let it stack with other units. Let the Assyrians also build catapults.

 

[Funak]

As a GG replacement, it would stop making sense into later eras.

Khan doesn't necessarily makes sense in later eras either, neither does most of the buildings.

However, I like the idea that the siege tower is merely providing an attack bonus and, perhaps, something like a Cover promotion to nearby units. Take away its ability to attack and let it stack with other units. Let the Assyrians also build catapults.

So it would be like a great general... but not a great general?

 

[void_genesis]

I meant give the siege tower the incremental damage effect for adjacent units as well, plus high defensive bonuses for units stacked on top of it. So kind of like a great general, but with higher defence just for the stacked unit, small damage for adjacent units, and throw in a city attack bonus for the stacked unit. So like a great general but focused more on the stacked and not adjacent units. This means you need to use it closer to the front lines, and can balance up risking a ranged unit on the front lines as well. If the unit kept its effects when captured by an enemy it would make fighting an AI assyria more interesting as well.

 

[Funak]

I meant give the siege tower the incremental damage effect for adjacent units as well, plus high defensive bonuses for units stacked on top of it. So kind of like a great general, but with higher defence just for the stacked unit, small damage for adjacent units, and throw in a city attack bonus for the stacked unit. So like a great general but focused more on the stacked and not adjacent units. This means you need to use it closer to the front lines, and can balance up risking a ranged unit on the front lines as well. If the unit kept its effects when captured by an enemy it would make fighting an AI assyria more interesting as well.

And these would be build-able like any other unit? Sounds kinda powerful.

By the way, there is nothing stopping us from making a great general replacement that specifically affects the unit it is stationed on (I think), I mean it has been done before.

I'm not really a fan of the ability to capture units, it seems like it would favor a player way too much, as the AI is generally terrible at keeping their things alive.

 

[Der_Zorn_gottes]

The siege tower should be left alone.
I would never build it if it would only buff you units - since it is a unit itself, it would take up a hex, and those are precious, especially at sieges. If it isn`t a unit - should it be a civilian? A buildable great person? Also, who would like to spend resources on a unit that does nothing by itself?
It overlaps with the Battering ram, but that is fine. As efficient melee city attacker they are unique enough that two of that kind in the whole game are still interesting enough.

 

[Strigvir]

Wikipedia says siege towers were used up to medieval era, so it will be better fit as a trebuchet replacement with cranked up stats to counter medieval infantry.

 

[Funak]

The siege tower should be left alone.
I would never build it if it would only buff you units - since it is a unit itself, it would take up a hex, and those are precious, especially at sieges. If it isn`t a unit - should it be a civilian? A buildable great person? Also, who would like to spend resources on a unit that does nothing by itself?
It overlaps with the Battering ram, but that is fine. As efficient melee city attacker they are unique enough that two of that kind in the whole game are still interesting enough.

Again, my suggestion was a great general replacement, not buildable. It would have the existing great general bonuses plus something that helps with sieges (kinda like how Khan have extra movement and medic).
Naturally if it was a GG it wouldn't take up a tile, it wouldn't take any resources for you to build and it would stay relevant beyond the ancient era.
It would however get worse as eras progress, because of how bonuses stacks, and the amount of extra experience available in later eras(Great general suffers from this as well, but it is fine)

As I was trying to point out, the unit itself really isn't that fantastic for attacking cities, meleeunits still take way too much damage from that. It works vs un-defended satellite cities, but capital still require the normal ranged unit cheese.

Wikipedia says siege towers were used up to medieval era, so it will be better fit as a trebuchet replacement with cranked up stats to counter medieval infantry.

Assyria didn't exist in the medieval era

 

[Funak]

By the way I haven't heard any options of the UA/UB thing, no need to get stuck on the UU.

Also any suggestions for a new UA would be awesome, not necessarily warfocused (2 out of 3 really is enough warfocus)

 

[Der_Zorn_gottes]

Ok, as a GG replacement it would make more sense.

For UA and UB - let`s brainstorm here. What does Assyria stand for? I know very little, the only thing is the Wikipedia article I read once. The only thing that still stands out to me is that Assyria conquered quickliy the middle east up to Egypt, but then imploded equally fast, probably because their economy was based on looting. Which real world, peaceful Assyrian achievements are known?

 

[Funak]

Ok, as a GG replacement it would make more sense.

That was my suggestion anyways.

For UA and UB - let`s brainstorm here. What does Assyria stand for? I know very little, the only thing is the Wikipedia article I read once. The only thing that still stands out to me is that Assyria conquered quickliy the middle east up to Egypt, but then imploded equally fast, probably because their economy was based on looting. Which real world, peaceful Assyrian achievements are known?

From what I remember they were really the 'iron fist' type of empire, their religion was based around staving off apocalypse by conquering or something like that.
They did the standard iron fist empiring stuff, deporting people, destroying cultures, spreading propaganda and so on. Actually thinking about it, they might possibly have invented that.
Anyways 'peaceful' probably isn't the right word, the right word would be 'not-warful' . Something not directly based around fighting, but more about stability or something like that.

Honestly the reason why I'm not coming with a suggestion is because I just don't know enough about Assyria.

 

[Strigvir]

The closest thing to "non-warfare" aggression in civ5 is tourism.
So something related to the newly added tourism procs? 100-150% instead of 50%?