The unique districts no longer not counting towards the population cap seems like a bad change. It would make some sense if there was a unanimous conclusion that the bonus made civs with unique districts far superior to those that had other bonuses, and while there was some consensus that unique districts were better than unique buildings, the civs that had unique districts weren't far superior to those with other bonuses. Just about everyone's tier guides has Scythia and Sumeria at the top, and neither had a unique district. If those are the top two civs, most would consider Arabia, China, and Rome in the mix for filling out the top 5 or top 7 civs in the game, and none of them had a unique district (except Rome, but as their unique district replaces one that doesn't count towards the limit, it wasn't effected by the rule change.)
Further, it seems that the original design of the unique districts had accounted for the fact that not counting towards the limit was a big advantage, because the unique districts that replaced those that do count towards the limit don't have very good bonuses, other than being half-priced. Looking at them on a case-by-case basis:
-hanza a half priced industrial zone is a significant bonus, but the difference between a hanza and a normal IZ is only situationally better. You lose the 1Xbonus for adjacent mines and quarries in exchange for a 2X bonus next to CH and 1X bonus next to resources. Usually a normal IZ can be placed next to 3 or 4 mines and quarries, so the bonus is about the same, often worse. You can have cities overlap for multiple CH bonuses to the same hanza, but that can mean sacrificing bonuses to other districts. I'm not sure if the hanza doesn't count as an IZ in terms of appeal, and maybe that's something extra, but a very minor bonus if it is. Germany's defining characteristic before the patch was a civ that could build three districts in a size 1 city and six districts in a size 10 city, which made for incredible flexibility, and that's significantly downgraded now, and I think losing the free population cost moves Germany from one of the best and most versatile in the game to middle of the pack status.
-street carnival it adds 1 extra amenity. not too exciting. There's also the unique project aspect, but usually there's several more important things to be building at any given point in time. This is also a prime example of what I mentioned earlier - the unique districts that replace those that don't count towards the population limit have better bonuses than those that replace districts that do count, because they accounted for the fact that being able to build an extra specialty district is itself a huge bonus. Compare this to Rome's UD. which gives +1 amenity and +2 housing in a district that doesn't count towards the district cap (and consequently is easier to utilize; you don't have to sacrifice building a different district because of the limit) versus +1 amenity in a district that does count towards the limit, a reduced bonus in a less accessible district.
-acropolis probably the most significant case of needing to not count towards the limit. First off, needing to be built on a hill is quite detrimental. Second, the bonus (aside from being half priced) is very minor, it just gets extra adjacency bonuses. Japan gets a very similar bonus to their theater districts (extra adjacency from one of his bonuses, half priced from another bonus) but they get the same bonus towards two other district types as well. It also shoehorns Greece towards a culture victory where before they were very versatile because both leaders ALREADY HAVE a culture bonus. If you're not going for a culture victory, you'd probably try to leverage the leader bonus and use your limited district caps on others because theater squares are low priority districts for the other victory conditions.
Since districts increase in cost as you build more and more of them, not counting towards the limit is a mixed blessing, I think we all figured that out when we tried Germany for the first time with grandiose plans only to find districts soon taking longer to build than wonders. Still, it added a characteristic to each of the civs that had access to them, and removing this feature detracts from the civs that had them and the game as a whole.
Thoughts?
Further, it seems that the original design of the unique districts had accounted for the fact that not counting towards the limit was a big advantage, because the unique districts that replaced those that do count towards the limit don't have very good bonuses, other than being half-priced. Looking at them on a case-by-case basis:
-hanza a half priced industrial zone is a significant bonus, but the difference between a hanza and a normal IZ is only situationally better. You lose the 1Xbonus for adjacent mines and quarries in exchange for a 2X bonus next to CH and 1X bonus next to resources. Usually a normal IZ can be placed next to 3 or 4 mines and quarries, so the bonus is about the same, often worse. You can have cities overlap for multiple CH bonuses to the same hanza, but that can mean sacrificing bonuses to other districts. I'm not sure if the hanza doesn't count as an IZ in terms of appeal, and maybe that's something extra, but a very minor bonus if it is. Germany's defining characteristic before the patch was a civ that could build three districts in a size 1 city and six districts in a size 10 city, which made for incredible flexibility, and that's significantly downgraded now, and I think losing the free population cost moves Germany from one of the best and most versatile in the game to middle of the pack status.
-street carnival it adds 1 extra amenity. not too exciting. There's also the unique project aspect, but usually there's several more important things to be building at any given point in time. This is also a prime example of what I mentioned earlier - the unique districts that replace those that don't count towards the population limit have better bonuses than those that replace districts that do count, because they accounted for the fact that being able to build an extra specialty district is itself a huge bonus. Compare this to Rome's UD. which gives +1 amenity and +2 housing in a district that doesn't count towards the district cap (and consequently is easier to utilize; you don't have to sacrifice building a different district because of the limit) versus +1 amenity in a district that does count towards the limit, a reduced bonus in a less accessible district.
-acropolis probably the most significant case of needing to not count towards the limit. First off, needing to be built on a hill is quite detrimental. Second, the bonus (aside from being half priced) is very minor, it just gets extra adjacency bonuses. Japan gets a very similar bonus to their theater districts (extra adjacency from one of his bonuses, half priced from another bonus) but they get the same bonus towards two other district types as well. It also shoehorns Greece towards a culture victory where before they were very versatile because both leaders ALREADY HAVE a culture bonus. If you're not going for a culture victory, you'd probably try to leverage the leader bonus and use your limited district caps on others because theater squares are low priority districts for the other victory conditions.
Since districts increase in cost as you build more and more of them, not counting towards the limit is a mixed blessing, I think we all figured that out when we tried Germany for the first time with grandiose plans only to find districts soon taking longer to build than wonders. Still, it added a characteristic to each of the civs that had access to them, and removing this feature detracts from the civs that had them and the game as a whole.
Thoughts?
