King Jason
Fleece-bearer
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 2,040
Can someone explain why they voted for saka horse archers? I mean, I like Scythia, but not saka horse archers.
Because, as others have mentioned, people can't separate the UU from the civ. Saka units aren't really all that great but people can't seem to assess their value without including the fact that the civ ability allows players to produce two UU's at a time. This is an especially potent example of the bias that comes with associating the UUs specifically with the civs that host them due to the fact that the double unit feature is not specifically a trait of the saka horse archer itself, but rather the civ that hosts it.
One might say it's splitting hairs, but it's a bias nonetheless. After all, if assessing UU strength doesn't stop at the UU, then in reality you're just back to assessing overall Civ strength.
As a different example, I wouldn't argue that the Redcoat is a strong UU by including the fact that you get one for free whenever you settle or conquer a city that isn't on your home continent purely on the basis of the fact that that is not a feature of the Redcoat, but a feature of playing as England.
Last edited: