Austria

[mitsho]

I'm not worried it will be unbalanced. I'm worried about Austria being made into something they shouldn't be.
You wouldn't, for example, want Nepal (if they were in the game) to have a unique ability which allows them to build an awesome navy, would you?
Sure, it might be a good ability, and a good reason to play as them if it's balanced, but it wouldn't make any sense right?

Another example would be: Give the Huns the ability to spend gold to complete a Wonder. Might be balanced, might be nice from gameplay point of view. However, it would undermine Egypt and make no sense at all, considering the flavour of the Huns as a barbaric warmongering civ.

Likewise, with Austria. Nice UA, balanced, good gameplay. But used inappropriately with no limit to acquiring city-states overseas, this would turn them into a colonial power undermining the English, Spaniards, and Dutch.
I'm not going to say the same thing again and again, so will stop here.

I do see your point, but I do think it's a nonissue. Yes I can see how that would have been a good UA for say the Portuguese, but it works as well for Austria. I don't believe forcing them to play "contiental" every time would be a good idea. Options is what makes the game fun. Even if you can play the Austrians as warmongers on different continents (and btw. the UA allows you to neglect a navy or ever building a port !), you can play them also differently as continental behemoths, if you want to. We only know 1/3 of the civ so far anyways.

And btw. your hun example shows that you can never go around that problem. Their production bonus and tech advantage basically means that they are the fastest in building a wonder, if they want to. Wonder rushing will be a strategy for them, not really historical. Their UA which was designed for early rushes can be used totally different.

Also the Ethiopian Turtle UA basically allows them to conquer the world more easily if they ruthlessly burn down everything but the capitals...

We can do that in vanilla as well if you want. Historical "Realism" is a goal but minor offenses like the Austrian Colonial Empire aren't that bad. Oh, and btw. I present you Maximilian I. of Mexico, eh Austria.

 

[King Kalmah]

We can do that in vanilla as well if you want. Historical "Realism" is a goal but minor offenses like the Austrian Colonial Empire aren't that bad. Oh, and btw. I present you Maximilian I. of Mexico, eh Austria.

I love historical realism as much as the next Civ fan,but we ogt to admit stuff like Mexico being ruled almost by an Austrian naval captain...that right there sounds like something that could only happen in a game of CIV...yet there it is...

plus I keep mentioning maintenance costs...it might be fun,but the more i think it...

the Royal Marriages should have been the UA of England since they married their girls off to alot of monarchies around Europe for Alliances...

historically speaking of course...

 

[Dragonflow]

Nah, Germans/Austrians married their girls to distant monarchs more effectively than the English(there's a reason why the House of Windsor were called House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha before WW1).

 

[GenjiKhan]

Oh, and btw. I present you Maximilian I. of Mexico, eh Austria.

Mexico wasn't the only one whose monarch had blood ties with Habsburg dinasty. Brazil's Emperor Pedro II,is the Great-Grand Son of Maria theresa .

 

[anandus]

Nah, Germans/Austrians married their girls to distant monarchs more effectively than the English(there's a reason why the House of Windsor were called House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha before WW1).

And from Battenberg to Mountbatten for Prince Philip

 

[fuzzatron717]

Ok remember you have to spend gold and probably a lot so you can only do city-states around you and for the coloniel powers everyone forgot france.

 

[zyx]

I don't believe distance to Austrian borders will make buying CS cheaper or more expensive. That is much too complicated, in a very simple programmed game like Civ V - in all(?) other civs distance to the capital was a factor to think of, not so in Civ V.

And I don't understand the colonies discussion. If you are playing tiny islands or archipelago you have lots of colonies, and if you play pangea, you conquer your neighbours first and not the far away civs.

And I think that the CS will lose their vote, as it says: spend gold to annex or puppet a CS.

I would have liked to see Maria Theresia in a "Schönbrunn"- like environment, the mountain range in the back irritates me a little as Maria Theresia lived in Vienna, which is not an alpine region.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Actually, the calculation isn't as complex as you think, they already did it with Ethiophia's UU, which becomes stronger the closer it is to the capital.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

While realistically, it should be a factor, I don't think distance will be a factor for the Austria UA in game. It removes some of what little strategic value the ability has.

 

[Uberfrog]

Actually, the calculation isn't as complex as you think, they already did it with Ethiophia's UU, which becomes stronger the closer it is to the capital.

I think that's more likely to be a bonus within so many tiles of the city (say, +50% within 4 tiles of capital) rather than a scaling factor across the whole map.

The latter would seem like a huge over-complication, especially since the difference would be negligible past a certain distance.

 

[Calouste]

I think practically it will be harder to marry remote city states, because it is easier to win influence with city states that are close to you, and we already know it will be harder to just buy influence with city states with cash. Religion helps with influence, but only spreads to cities within 10 tiles of your own. There will be more city state quests to win influence, and a number of the existing ones (kill barbs, build road) are also a lot easier with city states that are close to you. It might be possible to marry city states far away from you, but it just might not be worth the effort.

The following looks like a useful combo for an Austrian religion:
Papal Primacy: +15 to Influence resting point with City-States following this religion
Religious Unity: Religion spreads to friendly city-states at double rate

 

[fuzzatron717]

that is very true.

 

[Heinage]

I think practically it will be harder to marry remote city states, because it is easier to win influence with city states that are close to you...

I think you're completely right about this. I do hope that you are right in any case!
With gold playing less of a role you will be completing quests and there are likely to be many quests that are easier to do for civs that are close to the relevant city-state.

On top of this, it would be cool if - as mentioned earlier in this thread - city-states give bonus influence for completing quests to civs that are closer to them.
Though, bonus influence for close-by civs may already be implemented through other factors like killing off barbs near city-states (which is easier to do for city-states that are close to you).

In any case, I might drop my pleas for there to be a mechanic that makes it harder to ally city-states far away from your capital because it's quite probable that it already is naturally harder to ally far away city-states through the workings of the quest system and the way you gather influence with city-states.

 

[Calouste]

I think you're completely right about this. I do hope that you are right in any case!
With gold playing less of a role you will be completing quests and there are likely to be many quests that are easier to do for civs that are close to the relevant city-state.

On top of this, it would be cool if - as mentioned earlier in this thread - city-states give bonus influence for completing quests to civs that are closer to them.
Though, bonus influence for close-by civs may already be implemented through other factors like killing off barbs near city-states (which is easier to do for city-states that are close to you).

In any case, I might drop my pleas for there to be a mechanic that makes it harder to ally city-states far away from your capital because it's quite probable that it already is naturally harder to ally far away city-states through the workings of the quest system and the way you gather influence with city-states.

It also works the other way around, not only is it harder for you to get influence with a far away city state, it is also easier for civs near that city state to gain influence with them, and to marry a CS, you first need to make the CS an ally, which I assume still means you need to have more influence on them than everybody else. I can imagine that there will be some cases where a far away city state has a combination of resources, ability and location that makes it worth to spend a lot more gold and time on it than you would need to do on a city state closer to home, but I can also imagine that those cases would be fairly rare.